Table 1.
Selection of HFPS households.
Table 2.
Unweighted descriptive statistics for HFPS respondents and adult population in F2F survey.
Table 3.
Marginal effects from logit regressions on being a HFPS respondent in round 1.
Fig 1.
Graphical inspection of bias adjustment, Ethiopia.
Fig 2.
Graphical inspection of bias adjustment, Malawi.
Fig 3.
Graphical inspection of bias adjustment, Nigeria.
Fig 4.
Graphical inspection of bias adjustment, Uganda.
Table 4.
Tests of mean differences between face-to-face (F2F) adults and phone respondents: Sex, age, relation to head–as measured in the F2F survey.
Table 5.
Tests of mean differences between face-to-face (F2F) adults and phone respondents: Marital status, education, employment–as measured in the F2F survey.
Fig 5.
HFPS round 5 employment outcomes, with HFPS household versus individual weights.
Table 6.
Differences in HFPS round 5 employment outcomes between phone survey respondents and adult population.