M&E StudioTools

Sampling Frame Quality

Sampling Frame Quality: Your prompt

You are an expert M&E sampling specialist. Score the sampling frame description in the document I have attached or pasted using the rubric below.

SCORING RUBRIC - Sampling Frame Quality

Score each dimension 1-5 using these criteria:

DIMENSION 1: Frame Source Documentation

5All four elements present. Source named specifically (e.g., "national household registry maintained by the Ministry of Social Affairs, 2024 version," "program beneficiary database extracted on 12 March 2026," "village listing exercise conducted in February 2026"), source custodian or maintainer named, version or extraction date specified, and access pathway documented (how the frame was obtained and who has copies).
4At least three of four elements present. Source and custodian named; version date or access pathway partial.
3At least two of four elements present. Source named but custodian or date generic.
2Source named only generically (e.g., "program records," "government data") without custodian or version.
1No frame source documented, OR source is unverifiable.

DIMENSION 2: Frame Coverage

5All four elements present. Frame's relationship to the target population stated (does the frame match, undercoverage, overcoverage), known systematic exclusions identified (e.g., unregistered households, mobile populations, those without phones in a phone-based frame), coverage assessed quantitatively where possible (e.g., "frame covers approximately 92% of target population based on 2023 census comparison"), and implications for inference noted.
4At least three of four elements present. Frame-population relationship and exclusions stated; coverage assessment or implications partial.
3At least two of four elements present. Relationship to target population stated but exclusions or coverage assessment generic.
2Frame coverage referenced without examination of exclusions.
1No coverage assessment, OR frame obviously excludes large segments of target population without acknowledgment.

DIMENSION 3: Frame Currency

5All four elements present. Frame construction date stated, time elapsed between construction and sampling stated (e.g., "frame is 18 months old at point of sampling"), population dynamics considered (migration, births, deaths, program entry/exit since frame construction), and a judgment on whether the frame remains valid is made with rationale.
4At least three of four elements present. Date and elapsed time stated; population dynamics or validity judgment partial.
3At least two of four elements present. Date stated but population dynamics not addressed.
2Frame currency referenced without dates or dynamics.
1No currency information, OR frame is clearly outdated for population dynamics without acknowledgment.

DIMENSION 4: Duplication and Cleaning

5All four elements present. Duplicate identification procedure documented (matching variables used, manual review process), ineligible entries removed with criteria stated (e.g., "households that have exited the program since the frame was constructed"), missing data on key sampling variables addressed (imputed, flagged, or excluded with rationale), and post-cleaning frame size reported alongside original frame size.
4At least three of four elements present. Duplicate and ineligible handling documented; missing data or size reporting partial.
3At least two of four elements present. Some cleaning steps documented but procedures generic.
2Cleaning referenced as a checkbox without procedures.
1No cleaning documented, OR cleaning would leave the frame unsuitable.

DIMENSION 5: Frame Limitations Disclosure

5All four elements present. Known frame limitations stated explicitly (not buried), each limitation's likely direction of bias assessed (over- or under-representation), mitigation steps where feasible named (e.g., post-stratification weights, supplementary sampling from a second frame), and limitations explicitly tied to inference statements in subsequent analysis.
4At least three of four elements present. Limitations and bias direction assessed; mitigation or inference linkage partial.
3At least two of four elements present. Limitations stated but bias direction or mitigation absent.
2Limitations referenced generically ("the frame has limitations") without specificity.
1No limitations disclosed.

OUTPUT FORMAT:

Return your assessment as a table followed by a summary:

DimensionScore (1-5)Evidence from Frame DescriptionPriority Revision
Frame Source Documentation
Frame Coverage
Frame Currency
Duplication and Cleaning
Frame Limitations Disclosure

Total: X/25 Band: Strong (22-25) / Adequate (17-21) / Needs Revision (11-16) / Substantial Revision (5-10) Single Most Important Revision: [One specific sentence]

For any dimension scored 1 or 2, add a brief explanation and a concrete revision example.

SAMPLING FRAME DESCRIPTION TO SCORE:

(See the attached or pasted document.)

Document to review: Attached, or pasted below. Base everything above on it and do not invent details that are not in it.

Rubric · Review a Document · about 787 words

Score the sampling frame itself (the list or source from which the sample is drawn) for completeness, currency, and coverage.

You'll Need

Your sampling frame description

You Get Back

A score from 1 to 5 for each of the 5 criteria, a total out of 25 and the one revision that matters most

Criteria