2003 NSDUH Data Collection Final Report

3. Data Collection Staffing

The magnitude of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) required a field data collection management structure robust enough to support the interviewing staff and flexible enough to manage an ever-changing variety of issues. The basic management structure remained unchanged from prior surveys: field supervisors managed States and substate regions and reported to regional supervisors who then reported to regional directors who reported directly to the national field director. This chapter discusses the process of staffing the 2003 NSDUH data collection effort.

3.1 Regional Directors

Regional directors (RDs) managed data collection within defined territories of the nation. Reporting directly to the national field director, the RDs, working with the project director and the national field director, served as the management team for all data collection operations.

The nation was divided among 4 RDs for data collection for 2003. All RDs were survey managers with many years of experience at RTI and on NSDUH. Staff for three of the four RD positions for the 2003 NSDUH had served as RDs during previous surveys. An experienced and highly successful regional supervisor was promoted to the fourth RD position. Beginning with a transition time in the last quarter of 2002, she assumed full leadership in January, 2003.

Each of the RDs managed a staff of regional supervisors (RSs), who in turn managed a staff of four to six field supervisors (FSs) who managed the team of field interviewers (FIs) in their individual states or assigned areas. Each RD also managed a small staff of survey specialists at RTI who assisted the RD in a variety of functions, including monitoring various reports and measures of production and quality, and maintaining spreadsheets to monitor costs. In addition, each RD worked with one of two traveling field interviewer (TFI) managers who coordinated the work of TFIs within the RD's region.

RDs also had project-wide ancillary functions not specific to their region. These included coordinating counting and listing (C/L) activities and TFI manager work. The survey specialists assigned to the RDs assisted in these functional areas as well.

Exhibit 3.1 displays the RD regions and management task assignments at the end of the 2003 NSDUH. Listed under each RD is the structure containing the number of regional supervisors and field supervisors, geographic regions, and the ancillary management functions.

3.2 Regional Supervisors

Regional supervisors were the direct managers of four to six FSs. Reporting to an RD, RSs were responsible for all data collection activities in the state or states in their region. Each of the eight large states was supervised by a single RS. The 43 smaller States, including the District of Columbia, were clustered geographically to be managed by the RSs. Of the 10 RS positions on the supervisory team for 2003, all had served as RSs during the 2002 survey. See Exhibit 3.1 for the final groupings of States managed by each RS.

3.3 Field Supervisors

Field supervisors were the first-level supervisors of the interviewers conducting the data collection in each of the states. The FSs assigned work, monitored progress, resolved problems, and managed the day-to-day activities of the interviewers. Each FS reported directly to an RS. Each RS's team of FSs was available to substitute during vacations of primary FSs and to help with FI recruiting, problem resolution, and mentoring of new FIs as needed.

At the beginning of 2003 there were 55 FS positions. During the year, two staff left the FS position, one at the end of April and the other at the end of June. In each case, management realigned responsibilities so that current FSs absorbed the additional work. At the end of 2003, there were 53 FSs (see Exhibit 3.1).

3.4 Field Interviewers and Traveling Field Interviewers

One of the primary FS functions was the continuous recruiting and hiring of the FI staff needed to complete the data collection work each quarter. FSs used multiple recruiting approaches to identify candidates, including:

• identifying interviewers who worked on previous NSDUH surveys;
  
  
• reviewing the National Interviewer File that lists interviewers who have worked for RTI at any time during the past 10 years;
  
  
• networking;
  
  
• placing newspaper advertisements and posting informative job flyers;
  
  
• contacting job service agencies; and
  
  
• using Internet job advertising and search services.

Networking involved any or all of the following contacts:

• other field supervisors;
  
  
• RTI staff working on other surveys with potential FIs available;
  
  
• other survey research organizations; and
  
  
• other field interviewers (current NSDUH FIs recommending successful candidates received a recruiting bonus).

A competitive hourly wage was offered to attract a large pool of candidates. Those with general interviewing experience, and especially those with experience working on government surveys, were given preference in hiring. However, candidates with transferable skills and experience—such as contact with the public, attention to detail, and organizational skills—were considered.

The work of an interviewer requires a wide range of skills and abilities. Some of the characteristics/qualities FSs tried to identify in potential hires included:

• intelligence;
  
  
• dependability;
  
  
• sensitivity/objectivity;
  
  
• voice quality;
  
  
• reading ability;
  
  
• listening skills;
  
  
• motivation;
  
  
• availability; and
  
  
• flexibility.

It was essential that staff hired to serve as interviewers understood and were committed to the standards of confidentiality and excellence required by the NSDUH. To help ensure this, all individuals hired to serve as FIs were required to read and sign a Data Collection Agreement (see Exhibit 3.2). Failure to comply with the provisions of this agreement would have resulted in termination from the NSDUH.

FI candidates were interviewed by the FS using behavior-based questions which required the candidates to provide examples about how they had handled specific situations in the past. For example, an FS might say "Tell me about the last time you were in a situation where you had to approach a stranger to extract some sort of information. How did you do it?" Also during the interview, the FS fully explained the requirements and responsibilities of the NSDUH interviewer's job, described the project expectations, and defined the required time commitment. The FS then probed the candidate's job and interviewing history. At the conclusion of the interview, if the FS still considered the person a viable FI candidate, the FS conducted reference checks. If the reference checks were satisfactory, the FS then recommended the candidate for hire. Criminal background and driving history checks were then completed before the candidate attended a training session.

FSs attempted to hire bilingual interviewers who spoke Spanish fluently in those sample areas with large populations of Hispanics. Before an FS hired a bilingual candidate, each applicant was screened by a bilingual staff member to assess the applicant's Spanish-language abilities. The assessment involved reading and speaking in Spanish. The bilingual candidate had to meet these assessment requirements satisfactorily before he/she could be hired and trained as an RTI-Certified bilingual interviewer.

Another subset of specialized interviewers was the TFIs. Each RD region had access to a team of TFIs with proven interviewing experience. These TFIs were hired at an out-of-pattern pay rate to recognize their experience and proficiency levels and to compensate for potential periods of low hours. Each TFI was asked to commit to at least two 12-day trips each quarter. TFI teams were used to fill the unmet needs in areas with staffing shortfalls or where special needs arose (such as covering long-term illnesses in the staff). In addition, several TFIs were certified bilingual interviewers and were assigned to areas where no bilingual interviewer was available.

Exhibit 3.3 displays a flow chart that presents all of the steps in the FI recruiting and hiring process.

During the entire data collection period, a total of 818 FIs completed training and worked on the study. The following are demographic characteristics of the interviewing staff:

• Of the total 818 FIs, 650 (79.5 percent) were veteran interviewers who had worked on the 2002 NSDUH, while 168 (20.5 percent) were newly hired and trained during 2003.
  
  
• Of the total 818 FIs, 102 (12.5 percent) were Black or African-American and 46 (5.6 percent) identified themselves as "Other" (including Asian, American Indian, Pacific Islander, etc); 91 (11.1 percent) were bilingual in Spanish.

Table  3.1 provides a distribution of interviewers by race and gender for the veteran interviewers; Table  3.2 for the interviewers hired and trained during 2003; and Table  3.3 for the total. Table  3.4 provides a distribution of veteran interviewers by bilingual skill and gender; Table  3.5 for the newly trained staff; and Table  3.6 for the total.

3.5 Problems Encountered

3.5.1 Continued Staffing Shortfall in Certain Areas

In certain areas, the number of staff working continued to be less than the targeted number of interviewers needed. This targeted number was based on:

• the allocation of the sample across the FI Regions each quarter;
  
  
• the number of hours that an average FI would work each week, based on recent experience;
  
  
• the average length of time to complete each screening;
  
  
• the average length of time to complete each interview; and
  
  
• the number of weeks that the interviewing staff would work in the quarter based on recent experience.

As each quarter's sample was provided by the statisticians, the process to estimate the number of needed interviewers was repeated. The assumptions were refined based on the most recent experience, including the cash incentive's effect on the flow of work. Staff needed from quarter to quarter varied, so FSs had to review staff assignments throughout the quarter and continually recruit and hire additional staff.

While most areas were close to the targeted number, some areas struggled. To compensate for these problem areas, TFIs were used to perform the work. Supervisors also borrowed FIs from other areas to complete the work. These borrowed interviewers had completed their initial assignment and were willing to travel and take on additional work.

3.5.2 Attrition

The attrition rate among the interviewing staff was 22.6 percent, a decrease from the rate of 27.8 percent in 2002. Although fewer FIs left the project, the continuing attrition meant FSs had to continually recruit new staff and juggle assignments to ensure that all of the assigned work was completed appropriately. There were significant costs associated with continuous recruiting efforts. These included not only the time of the FSs and the RTI office staff, but the costs of placing additional newspaper ads, preparing and shipping recruiting material, traveling to conduct interviews with candidates, and eventually training the newly hired staff. Additional costs were also incurred when TFIs had to be sent to work in areas where no interviewer was available.

Exhibit 3.1 NSDUH Management Chart

Exhibit 3.2 Data Collection Agreement

Exhibit 3.3 Flow of FI Recruiting Activity

	Click to Return to OAS Home Page   Click to Email OAS Data Questions    Click For Non-frames / text version of site
This page was last updated on May 20, 2008 . SAMHSA, an agency in the Department of Health and Human Services, is the Federal Government's lead agency for improving the quality and availability of substance abuse prevention, addiction treatment, and mental health services in the United States.     Privacy Statement  |  Site Disclaimer  |   Accessibility What's New Highlights Topics Data Drugs Pubs Short Reports Treatment Help Mail OAS