Different instruments, one method
Wherever an office runs a repeating survey alongside administrative data, the same reconstruct-and-compare approach applies. Below is the coverage model — what each programme measures, how often it runs, and what the platform checks.
| Programmes | Measures | Typical cadence | What the platform checks |
|---|---|---|---|
| Household income & expenditure / budget / consumption surveys | Income, expenditure, consumption, welfare | Every 3–5 years | Reported expenditure and income by category; divergence by collection unit and geography |
| Labour force surveys | Employment, unemployment, participation, earnings | Continuous, quarterly or annual | Reported earnings and status against demographic and administrative signals |
| Population & housing census | Complete enumeration of residents and dwellings | Roughly decennial | Coverage, consistency against registers and prior rounds |
| Health & demographic surveys | Fertility, mortality, nutrition, service access | Every 3–5 years | Internal consistency, cross-round plausibility |
| Agricultural census & production surveys | Holdings, area, yield, inputs | Census decennial; surveys annual | Area and yield reporting against consistency rules and prior rounds |
| Establishment & business surveys | Revenue, employment, expenditure, output | Annual, quarterly, or multi-year census | Reported values against sector patterns and register data |
| Price collection for the consumer price index | Price observations from outlets | Continuous, monthly | Outliers, gaps, collector effects, outlet substitution |
| Time use surveys | Hours on paid work, care, leisure | Periodic | Internal coherence, implausible time allocation |
| Housing, crime and victimization, ICT, tourism surveys | Various | Periodic | Consistency and reporting-pattern checks |
Household income & expenditure / budget / consumption surveys
- Measures
- Income, expenditure, consumption, welfare
- Typical cadence
- Every 3–5 years
- What the platform checks
- Reported expenditure and income by category; divergence by collection unit and geography
Labour force surveys
- Measures
- Employment, unemployment, participation, earnings
- Typical cadence
- Continuous, quarterly or annual
- What the platform checks
- Reported earnings and status against demographic and administrative signals
Population & housing census
- Measures
- Complete enumeration of residents and dwellings
- Typical cadence
- Roughly decennial
- What the platform checks
- Coverage, consistency against registers and prior rounds
Health & demographic surveys
- Measures
- Fertility, mortality, nutrition, service access
- Typical cadence
- Every 3–5 years
- What the platform checks
- Internal consistency, cross-round plausibility
Agricultural census & production surveys
- Measures
- Holdings, area, yield, inputs
- Typical cadence
- Census decennial; surveys annual
- What the platform checks
- Area and yield reporting against consistency rules and prior rounds
Establishment & business surveys
- Measures
- Revenue, employment, expenditure, output
- Typical cadence
- Annual, quarterly, or multi-year census
- What the platform checks
- Reported values against sector patterns and register data
Price collection for the consumer price index
- Measures
- Price observations from outlets
- Typical cadence
- Continuous, monthly
- What the platform checks
- Outliers, gaps, collector effects, outlet substitution
Time use surveys
- Measures
- Hours on paid work, care, leisure
- Typical cadence
- Periodic
- What the platform checks
- Internal coherence, implausible time allocation
Housing, crime and victimization, ICT, tourism surveys
- Measures
- Various
- Typical cadence
- Periodic
- What the platform checks
- Consistency and reporting-pattern checks
The output, in one view
Collected against reconstructed, row by row
Select a programme. The accent mark appears only where the reconstruction and the collected record disagree beyond the review threshold — that divergence is what the platform delivers for analyst review.
| Reported earnings band | Collected | Reconstructed | Gap | Flagged for review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Band 1 — lowest | 104.2 | 103.8 | -0.4 | Within threshold |
| Band 2 | 118.6 | 119.4 | +0.8 | Within threshold |
| Band 3 | 131.0 | 130.2 | -0.8 | Within threshold |
| Band 4 | 147.5 | 168.9 | +21.4 | Flagged for review |
| Band 5 | 162.3 | 161.1 | -1.2 | Within threshold |
| Band 6 — highest | 171.8 | 196.4 | +24.6 | Flagged for review |
What the pattern suggests
Divergence concentrates in the upper earnings bands — the pattern an office would expect from under-reporting at the top of the distribution, not from scattered enumerator error.
Rows are marked where the gap exceeds the review threshold your office sets. Nothing here is a correction — it is a question put to an analyst.
Every figure shown on this site is synthetic and for illustration only. It is not drawn from any survey, office, or country.
Why programme-wide matters
The instruments interlock
Expenditure surveys supply the weights for the consumer price index. The census supplies the sampling frame for nearly everything else. Labour force data feeds the national accounts. An undetected error in one instrument propagates into several published statistics — which is why an office-wide review instrument is worth more than a single-survey tool.
The method is not tied to a subject area. If your office runs a repeating instrument that sits alongside administrative or macroeconomic data, it is a candidate. Bring it to a briefing and we will say plainly whether it is.
Which of your programmes should be reviewed first?
A technical briefing works through your portfolio and identifies the round where an independent reading would tell you most.