This is a brief overview of how the Agency’s Second European Union Minorities and Discrimination Survey (EU-MIDIS II) was carried out.
The selected findings in this report are based on a survey interviews of Roma in nine EU Member States. It was part of the Agency’s EU-MIDIS II survey, which collected data on immigrants and ethnic minorities’ experiences and opinions in all 28 EU Member States. The survey methodology builds on the Agency’s first survey on immigrants and ethnic minorities in 2008 (EU-MIDIS I) and the Roma survey in 2011. The set of questions was extended and the coverage of the survey’s target groups was improved through advanced sampling approaches. The full results on Roma and a comprehensive technical report will be published in 2017.
EU-MIDIS II applied this umbrella term interviewing people who self-identified as ‘Roma’. The survey does not include ‘Roma’ who have moved from one EU Member State to another.
Although Roma are the largest ethnic minority in Europe, there is no systematic data collection on Roma in the EU Member States. The Agency fills this data gap with its surveys on ethnic minorities and Roma.
Together with the Agency, Ipsos MORI designed an interviewer training programme and trained the national trainers in 2015. The national trainers trained interviewer teams in each country. FRA participated in a number of training sessions to monitor the quality of the training and its content.
The survey questionnaire for Roma was translated into nine EU languages, which were used to interview respondents.
FRA carried out the analysis for the current report.
The survey data set is anonymised and does not contain any personal information, which would enable respondents to be identified. Care was taken during the data analysis so that nobody can be recognised from the results.
After contacting a household the interviewer asked a screening question (‘Is there anyone aged 16 or over living in this household who is Roma?’) to determine whether there were eligible Roma in the household to survey. In some countries, the term ‘Roma’ was replaced with a showcard listing all relevant terms commonly used in the country and included under the umbrella term ‘Roma’.
Only one randomly selected person per household was interviewed, while some survey questions asked about the situation of each household member.
While all three surveys collected data on issues such as discrimination and rights awareness, results concerning living conditions such as poverty, educational 4 attainment and housing were only collected in the 2011 Roma survey and EUMIDIS II.
In some instances, the wording of questions changed slightly between surveys, which may limit the comparability of results.
EU-MIDIS I, the 2011 Roma survey, and EU-MIDIS II all used a similar methodology, applying a multistage selection of respondents. To optimise the sampling approach, EU-MIDIS II further developed the methodology applied in 2011. Despite similar methodological approaches used in the surveys, there are some limitations, which need to be considered when comparing the results.
The 2016 EU-MIDIS II survey data were adjusted, taking into account selection probabilities. In 2011 only household size was adjusted when analysing results for respondents. This means that even if the sample in a country is similar, the 2016 data would yield more accurate results.
Where possible, and to allow for analytical comparison, the results use same or similar indicators as those in standard European surveys, such as the EU Statistics on Income and Living Condition survey or the EU Labour Force Survey.
Comparisons with the 2011 Roma survey and EU-MIDIS I are only reported when larger differences are observed. Any comparison should consider the methodological caveats and statistical variation as indicated in the notes to the tables and footnotes.