SNAPSHOT OF INDICATORS
Summary of the sample design for PMA2015-16/Kinshasa, DRC-Round 4:
PMA2015/Kinshasa Round 4 used a two-stage cluster design to draw a representative urban sample. A sample of 58 enumeration areas (EAs) was drawn using probability proportional to size procedures from the total of approximately 350 in Kinshasa. For each EA, 30 households were selected, and a random start method was used to systematically select households. All women of reproductive age (15-49) within each selected household were contacted and consented for interviews. Up to six health service delivery points (SDP), three public and three private, were selected in each EA. The sample was powered to generate Kinshasa specific estimates of all woman mCPR with less than a 2% margin of error.
The table below provides a summary of key family planning indicators at the national level and their breakdown by background characteristics. To view the breakdown by background characteristics of the respondents, please click on the respective indicator link. Distribution of respondents by background characteristics is available here. Distribution of SDPs by background characteristics is available here.
Additional detail on sample design, data collection and processing, response rates, and standard errors are available below the indicator tables.
|All Women||Married Women|
|Contraceptive Prevalence Rate (CPR)||42.3||50.2|
|Modern Contraceptive Prevalence (mCPR)||20.9||23.8|
|Traditional Contraceptive Prevalence||21.4||26.4|
|Contraceptive Method Mix|
|Demand for Family Planning and Fertility Preferences:|
|Unmet need for family planning||16.0||25.6|
|Demand for family planning||58.3||75.8|
|Percent of all/married women with demand satisfied by modern contraception||35.9||31.4|
|Percent of recent births, by intention|
|Wanted no more||11.5||8.9|
|Access, Equity, Quality and Choice|
|Percent of users who chose their current method by themselves or jointly with a partner/provider||88.5||91.2|
|Percent of users who paid for family planning services||60.3||60.6|
|Method Information Index Components:|
|Percent of current users who were informed about other methods||36.0||43.2|
|Percent of current users who were informed about side effects||36.9||48.0|
|Percent of current users who were told what to do if they experienced side effects||72.7||78.9|
|Percent of current users who would return and/or refer others to their provider||54.7||51.7|
|Percent of women receiving family planning information in the past 12 months||5.4||6.8|
|Charging fees for family planning|
|Contraceptive choice: Availability of modern contraception, by method|
|Contraceptive stock-outs, by method|
|Number of new and continuing family planning visits, by method|
The PMA2015-16/Kinshasa, DRC-R4 Survey in Detail
Round 1 Sample Design
This first round of data collection occurred exclusively in Kinshasa. The project sampled 60 enumeration areas (EAs) to achieve a representative urban sample in Kinshasa. The EAs were selected systematically using probability proportional to size.
Before data collection, all households, private service delivery points (SDPs) and key landmarks in each EA were listed and mapped by trained resident enumerators (REs) to create a sampling frame for the second stage of sampling for households and private SDPs. The mapping and listing process took place the first week of data collection in each EA with the help of cartographers and supervisors. Once households had been listed, field supervisors selected 30 households per EA, and a random start method was used to systematically select households. All members of the selected households were enumerated by the interviewers when completing household questionnaires, and from this household roster, all eligible women (aged 15-49) were approached and asked to provide informed consent to participate in the study.
Round 4 Sample Update
Field supervisors randomly selected 30 households from the original household listing. A household roster was completed and all eligible women age 15-49 in selected households were approached and asked to provide informed consent to participate in the study.
The majority of SDPs are repeated in each round, forming a panel survey. If an EA had more than three private SDPs identified during the listing process, then three private SDPs are randomly selected in each round.
All PMA2020 questionnaires are administered using Open Data Kit (ODK) software installed on mobile phones (smartphones) using the Android operating system. In addition to French, key words from the PMA2015/Kinshasa questions appeared on the phones in the main local languages. REs in each EA administered the household and female questionnaires in the selected households and the private SDP questionnaires. Field supervisors administered questionnaires at public SDPs.
The household questionnaire gathers basic information about the household, such as ownership of durable goods, as well as characteristics of the dwelling unit, including wall, floor, and roof material, water sources and sanitation facilities. This information is used to construct a wealth quintile.
The first section of the household questionnaire, the household roster, lists basic demographic information about all usual members of the household and visitors who stayed with the household the night before the interview. This roster is used to identify eligible respondents for the female questionnaire. In addition to the roster, the household questionnaire also gathers data that are used to measure key water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) indicators, including regular sources and uses of WASH facilities and prevalence of open defecation by household members.
The female questionnaire is used to collect information from all women age 15 to 49 who were listed on the household roster at selected households. The female questionnaire gathers specific information on education; fertility and fertility preferences; family planning access, choice and use; quality of family planning services; and exposure to family planning messaging in the media.
The SDP questionnaire is used to collect information about the provision and quality of reproductive health services and products, integration of health services, and water and sanitation within the SDP.
Training, Data Collection & Processing
In the refresher training prior to Round 4, REs problem-solved challenges in the field from Round 3 with central staff and supervisors, reviewed particular issues noted in data quality, and gained additional practice with the research protocols Throughout the trainings, REs were evaluated based on their performance on several written and phone-based assessments and class participation. As all questionnaires were completed on project smartphones, the training also re-familiarized participants with Open Data Kit (ODK) and smartphone use in general. All responses were captured on project smartphones, and submitted to a practice cloud server—a centralized data storage system. The RE trainings were conducted primarily in French, with discussions about translation to local languages.
Data Collection & ProcessingData collection was conducted between October 2015 and January 2016. Unlike traditional paper-and-pencil surveys, PMA2020 uses Open Data Kit (ODK) Collect, an open-source software application, to collect data on mobile phones. All the questionnaires were programmed using this software and installed onto all project smartphones. The ODK questionnaire forms are programmed with automatic skip-patterns and built-in response constraints to reduce data entry errors.
The ODK application enabled REs and supervisors to collect and transfer survey data to a central ODK Aggregate cloud server. This instantaneous aggregation of data also allowed for concurrent data processing and course corrections while PMA2020 was still active in the field. Throughout data collection, central staff at the Kinshasa School of Public Health and the data manager at the Gates Institute at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore, Maryland routinely monitored the incoming data and notified field staff of any potential errors, missing data or problems found with form submissions on the central server. The use of mobile phones combined data collection and data entry into one step; therefore, data entry was completed when the last interview form was uploaded at the end of data collection in January.
Once all data were on the server, data analysts cleaned and de-identified the data, applied survey weights, and prepared the final data set for analysis using Stata software. Findings were shared with government and community stakeholders at a dissemination eovent in early 2016.
In the occupied households that provided an interview, a total of 2,830 eligible women aged 15 to 49 years were identified. Overall, 2,733 (96.6%) of the eligible women were available and consented to the interview. Only de facto females are included in the analyses; the final completed de facto female sample size was 2,733 (unweighted).
|Household response rate* (%)||96.3||--||96.3|
|Interviews with women age 15-49|
|Number of eligible women**||2,830||--||2,830|
|Number of eligible women interviewed||2,733||--||2,733|
|Eligible women response rate† (%)||96.6||--||96.6|
**Eligible women response rates include only women identified in completed household interviews
†Eligible women response rate = eligible women interviewed/eligible women
Sample Error Estimates
|Variable||Value[R]||Standard Error||Confidence Interval|
|All women age 15-49|
|Currently using a modern method||0.209||0.015||0.179||0.240|
|Currently using a traditional method||0.214||0.014||0.185||0.243|
|Currently using any contraceptive method||0.423||0.019||0.386||0.461|
|Currently using injectables||0.023||0.004||0.014||0.031|
|Currently using male condoms||0.103||0.009||0.084||0.122|
|Currently using implants||0.041||0.005||0.031||0.052|
|Chose method by self or jointly in past 12 months||0.885||0.019||0.846||0.923|
|Paid fees for family planning services in past 12 months||0.328||0.026||0.275||0.381|
|Informed by provider about other methods||0.318||0.031||0.256||0.380|
|Informed by provider about side effects||0.343||0.027||0.288||0.398|
|Satisfied with provider: Would return and refer friend/relative to provider||0.523||0.045||0.433||0.614|
|Visited by health worker who talked about family planning in past 12 months||0.054||0.011||0.033||0.075|
|Married women age 15 to 49|
|Currently using a modern method||0.238||0.018||0.201||0.274|
|Currently using a traditional method||0.264||0.020||0.225||0.304|
|Currently using any contraceptive method||0.502||0.026||0.450||0.554|
|Currently using injectables||0.041||0.007||0.027||0.056|
|Currently using condoms||0.075||0.009||0.057||0.093|
|Currently using implants||0.068||0.009||0.049||0.086|
|Chose method by self or jointly in past 12 months||0.912||0.018||0.876||0.949|
|Paid fees for family planning services in past 12 months||0.317||0.023||0.271/td>||0.363|
|Informed by provider about other methods||0.363||0.034||0.295||0.432|
|Informed by provider about side effects||0.450||0.033||0.384||0.516|
|Satisfied with provider: Would return and refer friend/relative to provider||0.503||0.045||0.395||0.574|
|Visited by health worker who talked about family planning in past 12 months||0.068||0.014||0.041||0.096|