Conference on Data Quality for International
April 27-28, 2006, ONS, Newport, Wales, UK
Session 4: Peer Review Methodologies
Central Bureau of Statistics, Israel
Method & Process
Brief overview of paper
The Statistical system in Israel
Mandates responsibility to CBS
Ensuring data confidentiality
Sanctions for noncompliance
Assessment of macroeconomic statistics against
Assessment of data quality, based on DQAF, 2003.
These are to serve:
Internal coordination and harmonization, by using external standards.
Improvement of data quality, via recommended mechanisms.
Acceleration of development and improvement processes.
Recruitment of resources needed for generating qualitative official statistics, based on an objective and professional evaluation.
Examine definitions, processes and products, compare them against standards and evaluate them by key quality indicators.
Related activities :
Meetings with managers and specialists.
Review of documentation.
Review of the organizations’ web-sites.
Review of statistical publications.
Users’ survey to evaluate statistics quality.
Meetings with users.
Planning the activities and setting up the schedule;
Exposure of all agencies involved to the
Users’ survey, according to IMF’s instructions;
Joint consultation among Israeli officials involved;
Preparation of relevant documents by subject matter specialists;
Daily meetings of the reviewers with managers or specialists of the agencies involved. In addition to oral reports and discussions, websites were visited, documents and publications were checked.
Meetings with users’ groups.
Review of the DQAF.
Review of reports generated by the IMF officials.
Translation of legal and administrative documents from Hebrew to English.
Concluding Reports and Implementation
The IMF drafted two reports.
The Israeli authorities commented and wrote a response with regard to the recommendations (plans for implementation).
Gradual implementation of the recommendations.
Building trust among participants.
Commitment of senior management.
Participation of sectoral experts.
Interaction with users.
DQAF as a framework and an evaluation tool.
Evolving process while reviewing.
Better learning of mutual expectations.
Preparation of translation ahead of time.
In addition to macroeconomics, other statistics are to be reviewed.
Israel is generally in observance of the
SDDS with regard to coverage, periodicity, timeliness and dissemination of advance release calendars.
There have been some delays in the dissemination of monetary and financial statistics.
Israel does not fully manifest the intra- and inter-agency coordination and communication.
Israel’s macroeconomic statistics are of generally high quality and adequate to conduct effective surveillance.
Israel’s statistical managers are highly aware of all dimensions of data quality and are undertaking reforms to enhance data quality.
Shortcoming: Deficiencies in the timeliness, concepts and definitions, and classification of monetary statistics.
There is room to enhance source data for national accounts, producer prices, and government finance statistics.
The statistical system, especially the CBS, need adequate and sustained resources to cope with the substantial transformation of the Israeli economy.
Improved coordination within the statistical system.
Better understanding of the needs, regarding budget and manpower, for generating statistics.
Enhanced understanding of users’ needs.
Acceleration of processes, which serve the production of additional statistics and the improvement of data quality.
Follow up on recommendations (for example enhanced resources).
Finding the delicate balance between burden on the national statistical system and the needs for international standards, harmonization and quality improvement.
My humble suggestion: continue to improve coordination among international bodies example: Medstat review process immediately following the IMF review on similar issues.