Case Study 7

Case Study 7: Restricting access to data

SCENARIO

Policy officials in an organisation asked their statistician colleagues to cease publishing a particular dataset every month, and to, instead, concentrate their efforts (particularly regarding quality) on producing only a quarterly release.

The grounds for their request were that the monthly release generated a lot of public comment which tended to focus ´unhelpfully´ on the fluctuations in the figures from one month to the next.

Officials also asked the statisticians to cease their efforts to improve the quality of the monthly figures and to cease providing the data in PQ replies or other enquiries.

However the statisticians were asked to continue to provide the monthly figures for internal briefing purposes

QUESTION

Which principles and protocols of the Code of Practice are relevant to this scenario?

SUGGESTED RELEVANT PRINCIPLES

The following principles might be considered to be the most relevant to this scenario:

• Relevance
• Integrity
• Quality
• Accessibility
• Efficiency

SUGGESTED RELEVANT PROTOCOLS

The following protocols might be considered to be the most relevant to this scenario:

• Professional Competence Protocol
  Using Professional Judgement
  
• Release Practices Protocol
  Principle 1: Statistics should be made equally available to all, at the same time.
  Principle 2: Final responsibility for the content and format of releases lies with Heads of Profession.
  Principle 7: As much detail as is reliable and practicable will be made available.
  
• Presentation/Dissemination Protocol
  National Statistics will be made available to the widest possible community.

QUESTION

What would you advise policy colleagues to take into consideration? How has the Code of Practice influenced you?

SUGGESTED RECOMMENDATIONS

The organisation was advised to take the following into consideration in their response to their policy colleagues.

Integrity

• Is this request based on discomfort with the quality, or discomfort with the content of the release?
  
• Does the volatility of the monthly data distort the recognition of trends, so that confidence in the value of the statistics and, implicitly, confidence in policy based on the statistics, is at risk?

Quality

• To what extent are these monthly figures - which would continue to be given to officials - subject to quality concerns, and would their continued circulation compromise government decision-making?
  
• How far can the intuitive understanding of the volatility of the series, and the limitations that this brings, be conveyed to most users, and the media in particular?
  
• If the figures are sufficient for Ministers, are they good enough for publication (with qualifications)? If they are sufficiently reliable for Ministers, then their volatility is a presentational matter rather than a reason for their withdrawal.

Efficiency in costs

• Does the cost of  producing a monthly release outweigh the benefits? Costs and benefits will be monitored in the light of statistical priorities, and the National Statistician will report on them regularly.

Release Practices

• Withdrawal on the grounds of excessive volatility is reasonable in the case of time series, particularly when the instability of a monthly measure is inconsistent with the quality of the more aggregated series.  Withdrawal must be for all situations,  and there must be no intention to publish monthly series ´when it suits´.
  
• Is there some other form of smoothing relevant to making the information relevant? Users will need to be involved and aware of reasoning.
  
• Significant changes to releases must only be made after discussion with users. Can a withdrawal be justified to users?

 Case study as word document