Quality Datasheet: Encuesta sobre la sociedad de la información. Empresas
Operation Details
 Name of the Operation:
 Encuesta sobre la sociedad de la información. Empresas
 Code:
 223002
 Operation Type:
 Encuesta por muestreo
 Frequency:
 Anual
 Methodology datasheet:
 ESI
Quality Indicators
Section 
Indicator + 
Period 
Real value 
Reference value 
    
Accessibility and clarity

Click to access information

2017

4

4


Methodological documents

2017

4

3


Distribution formats

2017

6

6

    
Comparability

Comparable periods

2017

8 años

10 Years of more


Comparability rate

2017

82 %

100 %

    
Cost

Total cost

2017

5

1  5

    
Timeliness and appropriateness

Adherence to schedule

2017

100 %

100 %


Discrepancy

2017

7 meses

12 Months

    
Pertinence

Geographic disaggregation

2017

4

1  6


Impacts

2017

2

1  5


Satisfaction index

2017

3,99

1  5


Level of importance

2017

4,27

1  5


Website visits

2017

1

1  5

    
Precision and reliability

Coefficient of variation  % establishments with email (Basque Country)

2017

0,8%

<= 15 %


Coefficient of variation  % establishments with Internet (Basque Country)

2017

0,8%

<= 15 %


Coefficient of variation  % establishments with computer (Basque Country)

2017

0,7%

<= 15 %


Coefficient of variation  % establishments with website (Basque Country)

2017

1,8%

<= 15 %


(Annual) Response rate

2017

82,5%

100 %


Overcoverage rate

2017

0,36%

0 %

Objectives
The quality datasheet seeks to establish a list of quantitative indicators that reflect the quality of a specific statistical operation, for each of the quality dimensions or factors established by EUROSTAT. This quality datasheet has been prepared based on the standard quality indicators recommended by the European authority and on others based on the procedures for the EUSTAT statistical operations.
Along with the real value of each indicator, a benchmark value, whose mission is to facilitate the interpretation of the “soundness” of the given indicator, shall be added wherever possible. And in general, it shall be expressed by a minimum or maximum benchmark value of the indicator.
Indicator Descriptions
 Accessibility and clarity
 Click to access information
The real value of this indicator measures the minimum number of clicks necessary to access the data tables of the statistical operation published on the website. The benchmark value taken into account was the 4 clicks needed to access the data tables of the statistical operation data.
 Methodological documents
The real value of this indicator shows the number of documents (reports, files, tables,...) available in the “Methodology and Quality” section of the website for each statistical operation. This indicator will also include definitions in a separate document, providing the definitions are the ones published in the appropriate section via the website. Three documents are established for reference purposes: the quality file, the methodology file and the definictions.
 Distribution formats
This indicator measures the number of distinct formats in which the statistical operation data are distributed. (Data tables, Press releases, Analysis of results, Databanks, Graph indicators and Yearbook). The benchmark value taken into account was the total number of distribution formats, 6, used to disseminate statistical operation data.
 Comparability
 Comparable periods
This indicator measures the number of periods from the data series of the operation that appear free of “gaps”, attributable to the specific features of a certain reference period or the methodology of the operation, amongst other factors. The benchmark value proposed is the value of 10 or more years for structural operations and 15 years or more for conjectured operations.
 Comparability rate
The real value of this indicators is given by percentage of aspects of the metadata that are comparable to each of the Institutions or Bodies of reference. The benchmark value taken into account is the total number of aspects that can be compared with each of the Institutions or Bodies of reference, that is, 100%.
 Timeliness and appropriateness
 Adherence to schedule
This indicator measures the number of periods in which the schedule has been respected. The benchmark value is 100%.
 Discrepancy
This indicator measures the time elapsed between the end of the reference period and the date of the publication of results. The benchmark value is the number of days, weeks, months or years elapsed between the end of the reference period and the date on which the results established in the Annual Statistics Programme become available.
 Pertinence
 Geographic disaggregation
Indicates the level of maximum geographical disaggregation for the data deriving from the statistics operation. It take the following values: 1 – CAE (Autonomous Community of the Basque Country) 2Province 3District 4Capitals 5 Municipalities of more than 10,000 inhabitants. 6.Municipality The benchmark value includes the value based on rank, minimum and maximum taken by the indicator (1  6).
 Impacts
Indicates the number of press and digital media reports measured on a scale of 1 to 5. Where 1 is the minimum and 5 is the maximum. The benchmark value is the value based on rank, minimum and maximum taken by these indicators (1  5).
 Satisfaction index
Indicates the assessment of user satisfaction with regards to operation groups, measured on a scale of 1 to 5. The benchmark value includes the value based on rank, minimum and maximum taken by these indicators (1  5).
 Level of importance
Indicates the importance that the user places on operation groups, measured on a scale of 1 to 5. Subject to the periodicity of the survey. The benchmark value includes the value based on rank, minimum and maximum taken by these indicators (1  5).
 Website visits
Indicates the number of web visits per operation measured on a scale of 1 to 5. Where 1 is the minimum and 5 is the maximum. The benchmark value is the value based on rank, minimum and maximum taken by this indicator (1  5).
 Precision and reliability
 Coefficient of variation  % establishments with email (Basque Country)
This indicator measures the percentage of errors that are committed when estimating the population parameters from the information provided by an objective population sample. It is measured via variation coefficients that allow the comparison of precision amongst different estimations. The benchmark value was the maximum allowable values for variation coefficients: 10%  15%
 Coefficient of variation  % establishments with Internet (Basque Country)
This indicator measures the percentage of errors that are committed when estimating the population parameters from the information provided by an objective population sample. It is measured via variation coefficients that allow the comparison of precision amongst different estimations. The benchmark value was the maximum allowable values for variation coefficients: 10%  15%
 Coefficient of variation  % establishments with computer (Basque Country)
This indicator measures the percentage of errors that are committed when estimating the population parameters from the information provided by an objective population sample. It is measured via variation coefficients that allow the comparison of precision amongst different estimations. The benchmark value was the maximum allowable values for variation coefficients: 10%  15%
 Coefficient of variation  % establishments with website (Basque Country)
This indicator measures the percentage of errors that are committed when estimating the population parameters from the information provided by an objective population sample. It is measured via variation coefficients that allow the comparison of precision amongst different estimations. The benchmark value was the maximum allowable values for variation coefficients: 10%  15%
 (Annual) Response rate
Reflects the percentage of surveys carried out on the total eligible units. The benchmark value taken was the maximum percentage of responses, that is, 100%.
 Overcoverage rate
This indicator is the percentage of units included within the survey frame that do not belong to it (frame overcoverage), mainly owing to uncorrected classification errors in the original frame. The benchmark value taken was the minimum overcoverage, that is, 0%.