DATA.2009.Liberia - Dhs.report - Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey 2009

2009
Malaria Indicator
Liberia
Survey
Liberia 2009 Malaria Indicator Survey

Liberia
Malaria Indicator Survey
2009
National Malaria Control Program

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare
Monrovia, Liberia
Liberia Institute of Statistics and

Geo-Information Services
Monrovia, Liberia
ICF Macro
Calverton, Maryland, USA
September 2009
This report summarizes the findings of the 2009 Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey (LMIS) carried out by
the National Malaria Control Program of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOHSW), in
collaboration with the Liberia Institute for Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS). The
Government of Liberia provided financial assistance in terms of in-kind contribution of personnel, office
space, and logistical support. Financial support for the survey was provided by the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) from PMI funds through ICF Macro, an ICF International Company.
ICF Macro also provided technical assistance and medical supplies and equipment for the survey through
the MEASURE DHS program, which is funded by the USAID and is designed to assist developing
countries to collect data on fertility, family planning, and maternal and child health. The opinions
expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.
Additional information about the survey may be obtained from the National Malaria Control Program,
Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Capitol By-Pass, P.O. Box 10-9009, 1000 Monrovia 10, Liberia
(Telephone: 231-651-6577 or 231-652-8010; E-mail: [email protected]).
Information about the DHS program may be obtained from MEASURE DHS, ICF Macro, 11785
Beltsville Drive, Suite 300, Calverton, MD 20705, U.S.A. (Telephone: 1-301-572-0200; Fax: 1-301-572-
0999; E-mail: [email protected]).
Suggested citation:
National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) [Liberia], Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Liberia
Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS), and ICF Macro. 2009. Liberia Malaria
Indicator Survey 2009. Monrovia, Liberia: NMCP, LISGIS, and ICF Macro.
CONTENTS
Page
TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................................................ vii

FOREWORD ......................................................................................................................xi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................................................................................xiii
ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................................... xv
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ........................................................................................................ xvii
MAP OF LIBERIA .......................................................................................................................... xx
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Country Profile.......................................................................................................1

1.2 Background on Malaria in Liberia...........................................................................1
1.3 Objectives of the Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey..................................................2
1.4 Methodology of the 2009 Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey.....................................3
1.4.1 Survey Organization ...................................................................................3
1.4.2 Sample Design............................................................................................4
1.4.3 Questionnaires ...........................................................................................5
1.4.4 Anemia and Malaria Testing........................................................................5
1.4.5 Training ......................................................................................................6
1.4.6 Fieldwork ...................................................................................................7
1.4.7 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................7
1.4.8 Data Processing ..........................................................................................8
1.5 Response Rates ......................................................................................................8
CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND WOMEN
2.1 Population by Age and Sex...................................................................................11

2.2 Household Composition ......................................................................................12
2.3 Household Environment ......................................................................................13
2.3.1 Drinking Water......................................................................................13
2.3.2 Household Sanitation Facilities ..............................................................14
2.3.3 Housing Characteristics..........................................................................15
2.4 Household Possessions.........................................................................................16

2.5 Wealth Index .......................................................................................................17
2.6 Characteristics of Women Respondents................................................................18
2.6.1 General Characteristics ..........................................................................18
2.6.2 Education Attainment of Women...........................................................20
2.6.3 Literacy of Women ................................................................................21
Contents | iii
CHAPTER 3 FERTILITY, PRENATAL CARE, AND CHILDHOOD MORTALITY
3.1 Current Fertility....................................................................................................23

3.2 Fertility Differentials by Background Characteristics..............................................24
3.3 Fertility Trends .....................................................................................................25
3.4 Children Ever Born and Living ..............................................................................26
3.5 Birth Intervals.......................................................................................................27
3.6 Age at First Birth...................................................................................................29
3.7 Teenage Pregnancy and Motherhood...................................................................29
3.8 Prenatal Care .......................................................................................................31
3.9 Levels and Trends in Infant and Child Mortality....................................................32
3.10 Data Quality ........................................................................................................35
3.11 Socioeconomic Differentials in Infant and Child Mortality ....................................36
3.12 Demographic Differentials in Infant and Child Mortality.......................................37
CHAPTER 4 MALARIA
4.1 Knowledge of Malaria ..........................................................................................39

4.1.1 Knowledge of Malaria Symptoms ...........................................................39
4.1.2 Knowledge of Age Groups Most Affected by Malaria..............................40
4.1.3 Knowledge of Causes of Malaria ............................................................41
4.1.4 Knowledge of Ways to Avoid Malaria.....................................................41
4.1.5 Knowledge of Malaria Treatment ...........................................................43
4.1.6 Exposure to Malaria Messages................................................................44
4.2 Ownership and Use of Mosquito Nets..................................................................46

4.2.1 Ownership of Mosquito Nets .................................................................46
4.2.2 Cost of Mosquito Nets ...........................................................................49
4.2.3 Use of Mosquito Nets by Children under Five........................................50
4.2.4 Use of Mosquito Nets by Women..........................................................52
4.3 Intermittent Preventive Treatment of Malaria in Pregnancy ..................................55

4.4 Malaria Case Management among Children .........................................................57
4.5 Anemia and Malaria Prevalence among Children .................................................60
4.5.1 Anemia Prevalence among Children ......................................................61
4.5.2 Malaria Prevalence among Children ......................................................62
4.6 Cost of Malaria Treatment....................................................................................64
REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................67
APPENDIX A SAMPLE DESIGN ..............................................................................................69
A.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................69

A.2 Sampling Frame...................................................................................................59
A.3 Sampling Procedure and Sample Allocation.........................................................70
A.4 Sampling weights.................................................................................................71
iv │ Contents
A.5 Survey Implementation........................................................................................73
APPENDIX B ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS .......................................................75
APPENDIX C DATA QUALITY TABLES .................................................................................83
APPENDIX D PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE 2009 LIBERIA

MALARIA INDICATOR SURVEY .....................................................................89
APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRES ..........................................................................................93
Contents | v
TABLES AND FIGURES
Page
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Table 1.1 Selected human development indicators for Liberia 2008 .....................................1
Table 1.2 Results of the household and individual interviews................................................9
CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND WOMEN
Table 2.1 Household population by age, sex, and residence...............................................11

Table 2.2 Household composition......................................................................................13
Table 2.3 Household drinking water...................................................................................14
Table 2.4 Household sanitation facilities.............................................................................14
Table 2.5 Household characteristics ...................................................................................15
Table 2.6 Household durable goods ...................................................................................17
Table 2.7 Wealth quintiles..................................................................................................18
Table 2.8 Background characteristics of respondents ..........................................................19
Table 2.9 Educational attainment of women.......................................................................20
Table 2.10 Women’s literacy................................................................................................22
Figure 2.1 Population Pyramid ............................................................................................12
CHAPTER 3 FERTILITY, PRENATAL CARE, AND CHILDHOOD MORTALITY
Table 3.1 Current fertility ...................................................................................................23

Table 3.2 Fertility by background characteristics .................................................................25
Table 3.3 Trends in fertility from various surveys.................................................................26
Table 3.4 Children ever born and living..............................................................................27
Table 3.5 Birth intervals......................................................................................................28
Table 3.6 Age at first birth ..................................................................................................29
Table 3.7 Teenage pregnancy and motherhood..................................................................30
Table 3.8 Prenatal care.......................................................................................................32
Table 3.9 Early childhood mortality rates ............................................................................33
Table 3.10 Early childhood mortality rates by socioeconomic characteristics.........................36
Table 3.11 Early childhood mortality rates by demographic characteristics............................38
Figure 3.1 Age-Specific Fertility Rates by Urban-Rural Residence, Liberia 2006-08 ..............24
Figure 3.2 Trends in Total Fertility Rate ...............................................................................26
Figure 3.3 Infant and Child Mortality Rates, Liberia 2004-08 ..............................................34
Figure 3.4 Trends in Infant and Under-Five Mortality Rates .................................................35
Tables and Figures | vii

CHAPTER 4 MALARIA
Table 4.1 Knowledge of malaria symptoms.........................................................................39

Table 4.2 Knowledge of age group most affected by malaria...............................................40
Table 4.3 Knowledge of causes of malaria ..........................................................................41
Table 4.4 Knowledge of ways to avoid malaria ...................................................................42
Table 4.5 Knowledge of ways to treat malaria.....................................................................43
Table 4.6 Exposure to malaria messages .............................................................................44
Table 4.7 Source of malaria messages.................................................................................45
Table 4.8 Ownership of mosquito nets ...............................................................................47
Table 4.9 Reason for not having mosquito nets...................................................................49
Table 4.10 Cost of mosquito nets .........................................................................................49
Table 4.11 Use of mosquito nets by children ........................................................................51
Table 4.12 Use of mosquito nets by women.........................................................................53
Table 4.13 Use of mosquito nets by pregnant women ..........................................................54
Table 4.14 Prophylactic use of antimalarial drugs and use of intermittent
preventive treatment (IPT) by women during pregnancy .....................................56
Table 4.15 Prevalence and prompt treatment of fever ..........................................................58
Table 4.16 Type and timing of antimalarial drugs..................................................................59
Table 4.17 Coverage of testing for anemia and malaria in children .......................................61
Table 4.18 Prevalence of anemia in children ........................................................................62
Table 4.19 Prevalence of malaria in children ........................................................................63
Table 4.20 Prevalence of fever among household population ...............................................65
Table 4.21 Cost of malaria treatment....................................................................................66
Figure 4.1 Trends in Ownership of Any Mosquito Net, Liberia.............................................47

Figure 4.2 Differentials in Ownership of ITNs ......................................................................48
Figure 4.3 Use of ITNs by Children under Five ....................................................................52
Figure 4.4 Malaria Indicators for Pregnant Women, Liberia .................................................55
Figure 4.5 Malaria Prevalence among Children 6-59 Months...............................................64
APPENDIX A SAMPLE DESIGN
Table A.1 Distribution of census enumeration areas (EAs) and average EA size
by county and type of residence, Liberia 2008....................................................69
Table A.2 Census residential population by county and residence, percent
urban and percent distribution by county, Liberia 2008 ......................................70
Table A.3 Sample allocation of clusters by region, county and residence,
number of households selected, and expected number of households
interviewed by county and region, 2009 LMIS ....................................................71
Table A.4 Sample implementation ......................................................................................73
APPENDIX B ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS
Table B.1 List of selected variables for sampling errors, Liberia 2009...................................77
Table B.2 Sampling errors for National sample, Liberia MIS 2009 .......................................77
Table B.3 Sampling errors for Urban sample, Liberia MIS 2009...........................................78
viii | Tables and Figures

Table B.4 Sampling errors for Rural sample, Liberia MIS 2009 ............................................78
Table B.5 Sampling errors for Monrovia sample, Liberia MIS 2009 .....................................79
Table B.6 Sampling errors for North Western sample, Liberia MIS 2009 .............................79
Table B.7 Sampling errors for South Central sample, Liberia MIS 2009 ...............................80
Table B.8 Sampling errors for South Eastern A sample, Liberia MIS 2009 ............................80
Table B.9 Sampling errors for South Eastern B sample, Liberia MIS 2009 ............................81
Table B.10 Sampling errors for North Central sample, Liberia MIS 2009 ...............................81
APPENDIX C DATA QUALITY TABLES
Table C.1 Household age distribution .................................................................................83

Table C.2 Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women ............................................84
Table C.3 Completeness of reporting ..................................................................................84
Table C.4 Births by calendar years ......................................................................................85
Table C.5 Reporting of age at death in days ........................................................................86
Table C.6 Reporting of age at death in months....................................................................87
Tables and Figures | ix

FOREWORD
Malaria, though preventable and curable, still remains a major public health problem in Liberia,
taking its greatest toll on young children and pregnant women. In an effort to reduce the malaria burden in
Liberia, the Ministry of Health & Social Welfare (MOH&SW), through the National Malaria Control
Program (NMCP), introduced a policy and strategic plan for malaria control and prevention. This plan is
in line with the Abuja Declaration, which the Government of Liberia signed in April 2000. The measures
laid out in the National Strategic Plan are attempts to fulfil the objective of reducing malaria morbidity
and mortality by 50 percent by the year 2010, set by the Roll Back Malaria (RBM) initiative of the World
Health Organization (WHO).
Some resources have been mobilized from the Global Funds for AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria
(GFATM) and the U.S. President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) and other partners to implement this National
Malaria Strategic Plan. Since 2005, the NMCP and her partners have increased implementation of key
interventions such as use of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), long-lasting insecticide-
treated mosquito nets (LLINs) and education and behavior change programs in Liberia.
One of the key tools to improve the management of malaria control activities in any country is an
accurate and reliable indicator database. The MOH&SW is currently strengthening the integrated Health
Management Information System (HMIS) unit in an effort to provide a repository for routine data for the
Ministry. At present, data from the HMIS are not very reliable and cover only those with access to health
facilities, estimated to be about half the population.
Thus, the NMCP relies on the Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey (LMIS) every two years in order
to track progress of malaria control interventions in the general population. The first LMIS was conducted
in 2005 and provided baseline data for all key malaria control and prevention indicators for Liberia. The
need to update the 2005 data was the impetus for the 2009 LMIS.
The results presented in this report clearly indicate that coverage of malaria control interventions
in Liberia is increasing gradually. However, use of these interventions is still low, indicating that more
needs to be done both by the MOH&SW and her partners in terms of behaviour change communication, if
Liberia is to achieve the WHO/RBM targets of reducing malaria morbidity and mortality by 50 percent by
the year 2010.
The information in this report will help the NMCP and other partners in the RBM initiative to
assess the current Malaria Control Policy and Strategic Plan and to better plan and implement future
malaria control activities in Liberia. We want to urge our partners (both local and international) to double
their efforts in rolling back malaria in Liberia.
Mr. Tornorlah Varpilah
DEPUTY MINISTER FOR PLANNING, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT,

MINISTRY OF HEALTH & SOCIAL WELFARE
REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA
Foreword │ xi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would herein like to extend my heartfelt thanks and appreciation to all institutions and
individuals that made the 2009 Liberia Malaria Indictor Survey (LMIS) achievable.
The LMIS was conducted under the auspices of the National Malaria Control Program (NMCP)
of the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOH&SW) and the Liberia Institute for Statistics and Geo-
Information Services (LISGIS), with technical support from the MEASURE DHS project at ICF Macro.
Financial support was provided by the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) through the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID). Funds from the Global Fund for AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria and the United Nations Development Program were used to partition office space at the
NMCP’s headquarters to accommodate the data processing operation.
The overall coordinating body for the LMIS was the Planning and Coordinating Committee
(PCC), made up of the Planning Department of the MOH&SW, LISGIS, UNICEF, and WHO.
Administrative and moral support was provided by many individuals, including Dr. Walter
Gwenigale, Minister of Health & Social Welfare, RL; Mr. Tornorlah Varpilah, Deputy Minister for
Planning, Research & Human Resource Development, MOH&SW; Dr. Bernice Dahn, Deputy
Minister/Chief Medical Officer, MOH&SW, RL; Mr. T. Edward Liberty, Director, LISGIS; Mr. Tolbert
Nyenswah, Deputy Program Manager, NMCP/MOH&SW; Mr. Christopher McDermott, Health Team
Leader, USAID; Dr. Kassahun Abate Belay, Malaria Advisor, USAID/PMI; Dr. Filiberto Hernandez,
PMI/CDC; Dr. James Tanu Duworko, USAID; Mr. Kaa Williams, USAID; County Health Officers of the
15 counties; and the Internal Affairs Ministry and County Superintendents of the 15 counties. Finally, Dr.
Saye Dahn Baawo of the Family Health Division of the MOH&SW made valuable comments on the
questionnaire.
Again, I am highly grateful to all institutions and individuals who contributed to the successful
completion of the LMIS and the writing of this final report.
Dr. Joel J. Jones

PROGRAM MANAGER
NATIONAL MALARIA CONTROL PROGRAM
MINISTRY OF HEALTH & SOCIAL WELFARE
REPUBLIC OF LIBERIA
Acknowledgments │ xiii
ABBREVIATIONS
ACT Artemesinin-combination therapy
CBR Crude birth rate
EA Enumeration area
GFR General fertility rate
IPT Intermittent preventive treatment

ITN Insecticide-treated mosquito net
LDHS Liberia Demographic and Health Survey

LMIS Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey
LISGIS Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services
MOH&SW Ministry of Health and Social Welfare
NMCP National Malaria Control Program

NN Neonatal
PMI President’s Malaria Initiative

PNN Postneonatal
RDT Rapid diagnostic test
SP Sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine
TFR Total fertility rate
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development
WHO World Health Organization
Abbreviations │ xv
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
The 2009 LMIS was carried out from Although the survey took place just after the
mid-December 2008 to March 2009, using a na- height of the malaria transmission season, slightly
tionally representative sample of 4,500 house- over one-quarter of children (26 percent) were re-
holds. All women age 15-49 years in these ported to have slept under an ITN the night before
households were eligible to be individually in- the survey. Twenty-nine percent of all women and
terviewed and were asked questions about ma- 33 percent of pregnant women reported that they
laria prevention during pregnancy and treatment slept under an ITN the night before the survey.
of childhood fevers. In addition, the survey in-
cluded testing for anemia and malaria among INTERMITTENT PREVENTIVE TREATMENT FOR
children age 6-59 months. Using a finger prick PREGNANT WOMEN
blood sample, results from anemia and malaria
testing were available immediately and were In the 2009 LMIS, women who had a live birth
provided to the children’s parents or guardians. in the two years preceding the survey were asked if
Thick blood smears were also made in the field they had taken any drugs to prevent getting malaria
and taken to a laboratory in Monrovia for ma- during that pregnancy and, if yes, which drug. Al-
laria testing. most half (45 percent) of women reported that they
took SP/Fansidar two or more times during the
The 2009 LMIS was designed to provide pregnancy at a prenatal care visit, a huge improve-
data to monitor all the key malaria indicators in ment from the 4 percent measured in the 2005 sur-
Liberia. Specifically, the LMIS collected infor- vey.
mation on ownership and use of mosquito bed
nets—including insecticide-treated nets, inter-
TREATMENT OF CHILDHOOD FEVER
mittent preventive treatment for pregnant
women, timing and type of treatment of child-
hood fever, and prevalence of malaria parasites In the 2009 LMIS, mothers were asked whether
and anemia among young children. their children under five years had had a fever in the
two weeks preceding the survey and if so, whether
the child was given any medicine and if so, what
BEDNET OWNERSHIP AND USE
kind. Survey results show that 44 percent of children
under five had a fever in the two weeks preceding
The survey documented a dramatic increase the survey and, of these, two-thirds took some type
in household ownership of mosquito bednets. of antimalarial drug.
Overall, 49 percent of households in Liberia
have at least one mosquito net (treated or un- Thirty percent of mothers said that the child was
treated), and 19 percent have more than one net. given the “new malaria medicine”, the common
This is a big improvement over the household name given for the recommended combination drug,
net ownership of 18 percent recorded in 2005, artesunate plus amodiaquine. This is an encouraging
and a sizeable jump in the last two years from increase from the 3 percent reported to be using
the 30 percent recorded in the 2007 Liberia ACT as measured in the 2005 MIS and the 9 percent
Demographic and Health Survey. It is also reas- reported in the 2007 LDHS. Nevertheless, it is dis-
suring to note that almost all nets are insecticide- couraging to note that almost the same proportion of
treated nets (ITNs); 47 percent of households children (28 percent) are reported to have received
report owning an ITN. chloroquine for their fever.
Summary of Findings | xvii

ANEMIA IN CHILDREN FERTILITY AND CHILD MORTALITY
Survey data confirm that anemia is a critical Although measuring fertility and childhood mor-
public health problem in Liberia. Almost two- tality indicators was not an objective of the LMIS,
thirds (63 percent) of Liberian children 6-59 they are useful by-products. To measure indicators
months old are anemic. Twenty-nine percent of related to coverage of intermittent malaria preven-
children are mildly anemic, while another 29 tion treatment during pregnancy and treatment of
percent are moderately anemic, and 5 percent childhood fever, a complete birth history was in-
are severely anemic. cluded in the LMIS as part of the woman’s ques-
tionnaire.
MALARIA PREVALENCE IN CHILDREN
Results indicate that the total fertility rate in Li-
Malaria parasitemia among children age beria was 5.9 children per woman for the three-year
6-59 months was measured in the 2009 LMIS in period preceding the survey (roughly 2006 through
two ways. In the field, health technicians used 2008). This represents a sizeable increase from the
the Paracheck Pf™ rapid diagnostic blood test to level of 5.2 children measured in the 2007 LDHS.
determine whether children had malaria. In addi- Since it is unlikely that fertility rates would have
tion, health technicians made thick blood smears increased so much in such a short time, a more likely
that were brought back to Monrovia for micro- explanation is that the earlier survey may have un-
scopic testing in the laboratory. derestimated the level of fertility.
According to the microscopy readings in the With regard to childhood mortality, the 2009
central laboratory, 32 percent of children 6-59 LMIS data indicate no significant change since the
months tested positive for malaria. 2007 LDHS. For example, for the five years imme-
diately preceding the surveys, the infant mortality
rate was 73 deaths per 1,000 live births as measured
in the 2009 LMIS, compared with 71 as measured in
the 2007 LDHS. Similarly, under-five mortality was
114 deaths per 1,000 live births in 2009 and 110 in
2007.
xviii | Summary of Findings

LIBERIA
±
Lofa
GUINEA
SIERRA LEONE
Gbarpolu
NORTH WESTERN
Grand Cape CÔTE D’IVOIRE
Mount NORTH CENTRAL
Bong
Nimba
Bomi
Margibi
Montserrado SOUTH CENTRAL

MONROVIA Grand Bassa
Grand Gedeh
River Cess
SOUTH
EASTERN A
River Gee
Sinoe
Atlantic Ocean SOUTH

EASTERN B
Grand Kru
0 50 100 200 Kilometers

Maryland
xx | Map of Liberia
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 COUNTRY PROFILE
Liberia is located on the west coast of Africa, with a land area of 110,080 km2 and a coastline of
560 km along the Atlantic Ocean. It is bordered by Sierra Leone to the west, Guinea to the northwest, and
Côte d’Ivoire to the northeast and the east (see map). Most of the country lies below 500 meters in
altitude; rain forest and swampy areas are common features. The climate is suitable for malaria
transmission throughout the year in almost all parts of the country. During the main rainy season—July to
September—temperatures average 24.5°C and rise to 26.5°C in December and January when it is
predominantly dry. Rainfall in the coastal areas where the capital, Monrovia, lies, is over 5,000 mm per
annum; however, this decreases as one moves inland to as little as 2,000 mm. Average humidity is about
72 percent (Ministry of Health, 2001).
The country is divided into 15 counties that are further subdivided into districts, chiefdoms and
clans. The total population is estimated 3.5 million with an annual growth rate of 2.1 percent (LISGIS,
2008). Table 1.1 shows some selected indicators of development for Liberia.
Table 1.1 Selected human development indicators for Liberia 2008
Population 3.5 million

Annual population growth 2.1 percent
Under-five mortality rate (per 1,000 births) 110 deaths
Maternal mortality ratio (per 100,000 births) 994 maternal deaths
Literacy rate (age 15-49) 41 percent (women); 70 percent (men)
Net attendance ratio at primary school (as percentage of
primary-school-age population) 41 percent (boys); 39 percent (girls)
Net attendance ratio at primary school (as percentage of
secondary-school-age population) 21 percent (boys); 18 percent (girls)
Source: LISGIS, 2008; LISGIS et al., 2008
1.2 BACKGROUND ON MALARIA IN LIBERIA
Although it is preventable and curable, malaria remains a major public health problem in
Liberia, taking its greatest toll on young children and pregnant women. Malaria is the leading cause of
attendance at out-patient departments (38 percent) and is also the number one cause of in-patient deaths.
Hospital records suggest that at least 42 percent of in-patient deaths are attributable to malaria (NMCP,
2006). This health problem was exacerbated by 15 years of civil conflict that resulted in large population
displacements as well as damage to health systems. In an effort to reduce the malaria burden in Liberia,
the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (MOHSW) introduced a policy and strategic plan for malaria
control and prevention (NMCP, 2008). This plan is in line with the Abuja Declaration, which the
Government of Liberia signed in April 2000. The measures laid out in the National Strategic Plan are
attempts to fulfill WHO’s Roll Back Malaria objective of reducing malaria morbidity and mortality by 50
percent by the year 2010. As part of this plan, the MOHSW has endorsed the use of more effective drugs
for treatment in Liberia—Artesunate plus Amodiaquine (ACT)—as well as preventive measures such as
intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) for pregnant women, and the use of insecticide-treated nets
(ITNs).
Introduction | 1
In 2005, the National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) of the MOHSW implemented a
nationally representative, household-based Malaria Indicators Survey (MIS) (NMCP, 2006). The overall
objective of this survey was to update the core baseline indicators of malaria in Liberia. Data collection in
8,226 households was conducted by the NMCP in close collaboration with the Bureau of Statistics of the
Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs, now the Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information
Services (LISGIS), with funding and support from several international donors, including the Global
Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria; the World Health Organization; and the UN Population
Fund (UNFPA). The survey also included a health facility component. Among the more important
findings of the survey was the fact that 66 percent of children under five were infected with the malaria
parasite (Plasmodium falciparum) using a rapid diagnostic test at the time of the survey and that 87
percent of children under five had anemia (NMCP, 2006).
In addition, the Government of Liberia implemented the 2007 Liberia Demographic and Health
Survey (LDHS), with LISGIS as the national implementing agency, assisted by the Ministries of Planning
and Economic Affairs (MPEA) and Health and Social Welfare (MOHSW). The survey was a joint
undertaking of LISGIS, MPEA, MOHSW, the National AIDS Control Program (NACP), the Liberia
Institute for Biomedical Research (LIBR), the United Nations Population Fund, the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID), UNICEF, UNDP, and Macro International, Inc. The survey
provides information about the levels and trends in fertility, child mortality, family planning use, and
maternal and child health. It also showed that 30 percent of households in Liberia in early 2007 owned a
mosquito bednet and that 59 percent of children under five with fever were treated with antimalarial
drugs, mostly chloroquine, while only 9 percent were treated with artemisinin combination therapy
(ACT), which in Liberia consists of artesunate and amodiaquine (LISGIS et al., 2008).
1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE LIBERIA MALARIA INDICATOR SURVEY
Since the first LMIS in 2005, the NMCP and its partners have scaled-up malaria interventions in
all parts of the country. In order to determine the progress made in malaria control and prevention in
Liberia since 2005, the 2009 Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey (LMIS) was designed to provide data on
key malaria indicators including mosquito net ownership and use, as well as prompt and effective
treatment with ACT.
The key objectives of the 2009 LMIS were to:
• Measure the extent of ownership and use of mosquito bednets

• Assess coverage of the intermittent preventive treatment program to protect pregnant women
• Identify practices used to treat malaria among children under five and the use of specific anti-
malarial medications
• Measure the prevalence of malaria and anemia among children age 6-59 months
• Assess malaria-related knowledge, attitudes, and practices in the general population.
Another objective of the survey was to transfer knowledge about best practices in survey
implementation and to transfer skills to Liberian counterparts related to survey design, training,
budgeting, logistics, data collection, monitoring, data processing, analysis, report drafting, and data
dissemination.
2 | Introduction
1.4 METHODOLOGY OF THE 2009 LIBERIA MALARIA INDICATOR SURVEY
The 2009 LMIS was carried out from mid-December 2008 to March 2009, using a nationally
representative sample of almost 4,500 households. All women age 15-49 years in these households were
eligible to be individually interviewed and were asked questions about malaria prevention during
pregnancy and treatment of childhood fevers. In addition, the survey included testing for anemia and
malaria among children age 6-59 months. Using a finger prick blood sample, results from anemia and
malaria testing were available immediately and were provided to the children’s parents or guardians.
Thick blood smears were also made in the field and carried to the China-Liberia Malaria laboratory at the
JFK Hospital in Monrovia where they were tested for presence of malaria parasites.
1.4.1 Survey Organization
The 2009 LMIS was implemented by the National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) of the
MOHSW. The NMCP was responsible for general administrative management of the survey, including
overseeing of day-to-day operations; establishing and hosting meetings of the Technical Committee;
designing the survey; developing the survey protocol and ensuring its approval by the Liberian National
Ethics Committee on Bio-Medical Research prior to the data collection; participating along with LISGIS
in recruiting, training, and monitoring field staff, and providing the necessary medicines for treatment of
any children who test positive for malaria during the survey. The NMCP also took primary responsibility
for the data processing operation, report writing, and data dissemination. NMCP was also responsible for
administering all the funds for the local costs and for keeping adequate accounts and provided office
space for the survey operations and data processing.
The Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS) assisted NMCP in
the design of the LMIS, especially in the area of sample design and selection. In this regard, they
provided the necessary maps and lists of households in the selected sample points. LISGIS also took a
primary role in recruiting, training, and monitoring the data collection staff and loaned some of its
vehicles for the survey operations. LISGIS also provided the geographic coordinates for each of the
selected sample points, as well as their portable weighing scales for use in weighing children prior to
prescribing medication.1
The Laboratory at the China-Liberia Malaria Center on the JFK Hospital compound in
Monrovia implemented the microscopic reading of the malaria slides to determine malaria parasite
infection. A sample of slides was sent to the laboratory at the Saclepea Comprehensive Health Center for
external quality control reading.
In order to maintain communications between all parties, to improve the survey design and to
broaden acceptance and ownership of the survey, NMCP organized a Technical Committee. The
Technical Committee consisted of staff who met periodically to make recommendations on project design
and questionnaires, monitor the progress of activities and review survey results.
Technical assistance was provided by MEASURE DHS at ICF Macro using funds provided by
the President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) through (USAID)/Liberia. Over the course of the project, Macro
staff made 11 person-visits to Liberia to assist with overall survey design, sample design, questionnaire
design, field staff training, field work monitoring, biomarkers (anemia testing, rapid malaria testing, and
making and reading blood smears), data processing, data analysis, report preparation, and data
dissemination. DHS also provided copies of its model Malaria Indicator Survey questionnaires; model
1
Most of the vehicles and scales were purchased with USAID/Liberia funds for use in the 2007 LDHS.
Introduction | 3
interviewers’, supervisors’ and training manuals; data entry and editing programs; programs for tracking
the results of the malaria blood smear testing at the laboratory, and tabulation and report plans, as well as
all the supplies needed for anemia and malaria parasitemia testing and some computers and related
equipment for data processing.
Financial support for the survey was provided by the Government of Liberia and the U.S.
President’s Malaria Initiative (PMI) project.
1.4.2 Sample Design
The LMIS sample was designed to produce most of the key indicators for the country as a whole,
for urban and rural areas separately, and for Monrovia and each of five regions that were formed by
grouping the 15 counties. The regional groups are as follows:
1 Greater Monrovia
2 North Western: Bomi, Grand Cape Mount, Gbarpolu
3 South Central: Montserrado (outside Monrovia), Margibi, Grand Bassa
4 South Eastern A: River Cess, Sinoe, Grand Gedeh
5 South Eastern B: River Gee, Grand Kru, Maryland
6 North Central: Bong, Nimba, Lofa
Thus, the sample was not spread geographically in proportion to the population, but rather equally
across the regions, with 25 sample points or clusters per region. As a result, the LMIS sample is not self-
weighting at the national level and sample weighting factors have been applied to the survey records in
order to bring them into proportion.
The survey utilized a two-stage sample design (see Appendix A for details). The first stage
involved selecting 150 clusters with probability proportional to size from the list of approximately 7,000
enumeration areas (EAs) covered in the March 2008 National Population and Housing Census. The EA
size was the number of residential households residing in the EA recorded in the census. Stratification
was achieved by separating each county into urban and rural areas. The urban areas in each county mainly
consist of the county capital. Therefore the 15 counties plus Greater Monrovia (which has only urban
areas) were stratified into 31 sampling strata, 15 rural strata and 16 urban strata. Samples were selected
independently in every stratum, with a predetermined number of EAs to be selected. Implicit stratification
was achieved in each of the explicit sampling stratum by sorting the sampling frame according to districts
and clan within each of the sampling stratum and by using the probability proportional to size selection
procedure. Among the 150 EAs (clusters) selected, 69 were in urban areas and 81 were in rural areas.
In the second stage, for all of the selected EAs, a fixed number of households (30) was selected
using an equal probability systematic sampling from a list of households in the EA. Because the census
was still fresh (March 2008), it was decided to use the census household results as the sampling frame for
household selection in the second stage, thus avoiding having to undertake a costly separate household
listing operation. This involved borrowing the census questionnaire books for each of the selected EAs or
clusters and copying information for all the occupied residential households recorded in the census book.
These lists served as the sampling frame for household selection.
All women age 15-49 years who were either permanent residents of the households in the sample
or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed in the
survey. In addition, all children age 6-59 months who were listed in the household were eligible for the
anemia and malaria testing component.
4 | Introduction
1.4.3 Questionnaires
Two questionnaires were used in the LMIS: a Household Questionnaire and a Woman’s
Questionnaire for all women age 15-49 in the selected households. Both instruments were based on the
model Malaria Indicator Survey questionnaires developed by the Roll Back Malaria and DHS programs,
as well as on previous surveys conducted in Liberia, including the 2005 LMIS and the 2007 LDHS. In
consultation with the Technical Committee, NMCP and Macro staff modified the model questionnaires to
reflect relevant issues of malaria in Liberia. Given that there are dozens of local languages in Liberia,
most of which have no accepted written script and are not taught in the schools, and given that English is
widely spoken, it was decided not to attempt to translate the questionnaires into vernaculars. However,
many of the questions were broken down into a simpler form of Liberian English that interviewers could
use with respondents.
The Household Questionnaire was used to list all the usual members and visitors in the selected
households. Some basic information was collected on the characteristics of each person listed, including
age, sex, and relationship to the head of the household. The main purpose of the Household Questionnaire
was to identify women who were eligible for the individual interview and children age 6-59 months for
anemia and malaria testing. The household questionnaire also collected information on characteristics of
the household's dwelling unit, such as the source of water, type of toilet facilities, materials used for the
floor, roof, and walls of the house, ownership of various durable goods, and ownership and use of
mosquito nets. In addition, this questionnaire was also used to record consent and results with regard to
the anemia and malaria testing of young children.
The Woman’s Questionnaire was used to collect information from all women age 15-49 years
and covered the following topics:
• Background characteristics (age, residential history, education, literacy, religion, dialect)
• Full reproductive history and child mortality
• Prenatal care and preventive malaria treatment for most recent birth
• Prevalence and treatment of fever among children under five
• Knowledge about malaria (symptoms, causes, ways to avoid, types of medicines, etc.).
Because almost all of the questions had been included in previous surveys and NMCP had
experience with anemia and malaria testing, no formal pretest was held.
1.4.4 Anemia and Malaria Testing
The 2009 LMIS incorporated three biomarkers, taking finger prick blood samples from children
age 6-59 months to perform on-the-spot testing for (1) anemia and (2) malaria and (3) to prepare thick
blood smears that were read in the laboratory to determine malaria parasitemia. Each data collection team
included two health technicians who were responsible for implementing the malaria and anemia testing
and making the blood smear slides. Each field team included at least one medically trained staff (nurse,
physician’s assistant) who—in addition to either interviewing or conducting the testing—was also
responsible for ensuring that medications for malaria were given in accordance with the appropriate
treatment protocols. Verbal informed consent for testing of children was requested from the child’s parent
or guardian at the end of the household interview. The protocol for the blood specimen collection and
analysis was approved by Macro International’s Institutional Review Board as well as by the Liberian
National Ethics Committee on Bio-Medical Research.
Introduction | 5
Anemia testing. Because of the strong correlation between malaria infection and anemia, the
LMIS included anemia testing for children age 6-59 months. After obtaining informed consent from the
child’s parent or guardian, blood samples were collected using a single-use, spring-loaded, sterile lancet
to make a finger prick. Health technicians then collected a drop of blood on a micro cuvette from the
finger prick. Hemoglobin analysis was carried out on site using a battery-operated portable HemoCue
analyzer which produces a result in less than one minute. Results were given to the child’s parent or
guardian verbally and in written form. Those whose children had a hemoglobin level of under 8 g/dl were
urged to take the child to a health facility for follow-up care and were given a referral letter with the
hemoglobin reading to show staff at the health facility. Results of the anemia test were recorded on the
household questionnaire as well as in a brochure explaining the causes and prevention of anemia that was
left in the household.
Rapid malaria testing. Another major objective of the LMIS was to provide information about
the extent of malaria infection among children age 6-59 months. Using the same finger prick used for
anemia testing, a drop of blood was tested immediately using the Paracheck rapid diagnostic test (RDT),
which tests for Plasmodium falciparum. The test includes a loop applicator that comes in a sterile packet.
A tiny volume of blood is captured on the applicator and placed on the well of the device. Results are
available in 15 minutes. The results were provided to the child’s parent/guardian in oral and written form
and were recorded on the household questionnaire.
Those who tested positive for malaria using the rapid diagnostic test were offered a full course of
medicine according to standard procedures for treating malaria in Liberia (NMCP, 2007a). In order to
ascertain the correct dose, the nurse on each team was instructed to ask about any medications the child
might already be taking. S/he then weighed the child using a portable scale and provided the appropriate
dose of artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) along with instructions on how to administer the
medicines to the child.2 All medicines for malaria treatment were provided by the NMCP.
Malaria testing: blood smears. In addition to the Paracheck rapid test, a thick blood smear was
also taken for all children tested. Each blood smear slide was given a bar code label, with a duplicate label
attached to the Household Questionnaire on the line showing consent for that child. A third copy of the
same bar code label was affixed to a Blood Sample Transmittal Form in order to track the blood samples
from the field to the laboratory. The blood smears were dried and packed carefully in the field. They were
periodically collected in the field along with the completed questionnaires and transported to NMCP
headquarters in Monrovia for logging in, after which they were taken to the Malaria Center at the JFK
hospital compound in Monrovia for microscopic reading and determination of malaria infection.
1.4.5 Training
From a pool of over 1,200 applicants for the supervisor and interviewer positions, NMCP and
LISGIS recruited 56 for the interviewer/supervisor training. They also allowed over 26 observers to
attend the training without remuneration, all of whom hoped to do better than those who were officially
recruited. The pool of male and female trainees consisted largely of those who had experience in previous
surveys such as the 2007 LDHS, the 2005 LMIS, and other social surveys.
2
MOHSW issues ACT as separate medicines—amodiaquine and artesunate. Amodiaquine is issued in blister packs
of tablets of 153 mg, while artesunate is in blister packs of tablets of 50 mg. Dosage depends on the weight of the
recipient. For example, the proper dosage for a child weighing 5-7 kg is one-quarter tablet of amodiaquine and one-
half tablet of artesunate to be taken together once a day for three days, while the dosage for a child weighing 11-13
kg is three-fourths of a tablet of amodiaquine and 1 tablet of artesunate taken together once a day for three days.
6 | Introduction
These participants attended a two-week training course from December 1-12 at Thinker’s Village
Beach on the outskirts of Monrovia. Training of the interviewer/supervisor candidates consisted of
reviewing how to fill the Household and Woman’s Questionnaires, mock interviewing, and sessions
covering tips on interviewing, how to locate selected households, and how to code interview results. Two
quizzes were administered. Trainers included the LMIS Project Director, the Assistant Project Director,
and three LISGIS staff, with support from two Macro staff. Despite the large candidate pool, many did
not qualify on the basis of tests and practice interviewing and many were not proficient in the major local
languages. Of the 82 attendees in the interviewer/supervisor training, twelve were selected as supervisors,
24 were selected as interviewers, and eight were held in reserve.
NMCP also identified over 35 staff with either laboratory or medical experience who were
trained in taking blood for the anemia and malaria testing at the same time and place as the
interviewer/supervisor candidates. Of these, 24 were selected as health technicians for the biomarker data
collection and 7 were further trained as microscopists in the laboratory (see below). The health
technicians were trained by a Macro biomarker specialist and a malaria laboratory consultant on how to
identify children eligible for testing, how to administer informed consent, how to conduct the anemia and
malaria rapid tests, and how to make a proper thick blood smear. They were also trained on how to store
the blood slides, how to record test results on the questionnaire, and how to provide results to the
parents/caretakers of the children tested. Trainees participated in numerous practice sessions in the
classroom.
All trainees participated in two field practice exercises in households living close to the training
site. They also received a lecture on the epidemiology of malaria in Liberia and correct treatment
protocols by a senior member of the NMCP. Finally, all health technicians, team supervisors, and the
nurses/nurse aides on each team received more specific instructions on how to calculate the correct dose
of antimalarial medication to leave with the parents/caretakers of children who test positive on the
malaria rapid diagnostic test. This included how to use the portable scales to determine the child’s weight.
It also included how to record children’s anemia and malaria results on the anemia and malaria brochure
that was to be left in every household in which children were tested and on how to fill in the referral slip
for any child who was found to be severely anemic.
1.4.6 Fieldwork
Twelve teams were organized for the data collection, each comprised of one supervisor, two
interviewers, two health technicians, and one driver. Three senior staff from LISGIS, one from NMCP,
and one from the MOH&SW Monitoring and Evaluation Unit were designated as field coordinators and
were each assigned a number of teams to monitor. NMCP was able to organize the questionnaire printing
on time, and arrange for the fieldwork logistics such as field staff contracts, identification cards with
pictures, special survey T-shirts, and other local supplies for the field teams.
Data collection for the LMIS started as scheduled on December 15, 2008. In order to allow for
maximum supervision in the first two weeks as well as to allow teams to be home for Christmas, all 12
teams started work in Monrovia, covering two clusters each before moving out of Monrovia just after the
holidays. Fieldwork was completed by all teams by the end of February. However, field checking
uncovered a situation in which one team had not actually conducted interviews in some four clusters that
it claimed it had completed. To rectify the deception, three other teams were sent to complete the four
clusters in March 2009.
Introduction | 7
1.4.7 Laboratory Testing
Prior to the start of the field staff training, a Macro malaria consultant worked with the head of
the malaria laboratory at the JFK Hospital compound to inspect the lab, check on supplies, unpack and
inventory the supplies sent by Macro, and obtain electrical stabilizers for the microscopes and materials
needed for staining the slides. Although the lab was refurbished by the Chinese in 2007, it had not been
extensively used.
After the health technician training was completed, the consultant trained the seven identified
microscopists at the laboratory. All trainees had participated in the health technician training, so they
were fully aware of the objectives and logistics of the survey. The training covered the importance of
good laboratory practice such as quality control of reagents, smears, and malaria diagnosis and the
consequences of failing to care for and maintain laboratory equipment used in microscopy. Also
discussed was the biology of the plasmodium parasite, including describing the red blood cells where the
parasites live, the life cycle of each plasmodium species, and their characteristic features. The importance
of making good blood smears was emphasized, as were the standard procedures for staining slides.
Finally, trainees spent about a week practicing slide reading using blood smears taken during the practice
interviewing. One of the trainees was assigned to registering, staining and mounting the slides. The other
six microscopists then started to read slides from the actual survey. The purpose of the blood slides was to
provide a gold standard for malaria infection and not to ascertain the type of parasite.
The consultant returned to Monrovia in late January to check on the progress of the lab work.
During this visit, he conducted a second reading of some 400 slides, including at least 60 from each of the
six microscopists. Using his reading as the gold standard, he selected microscopists with the fewest
discordant results to be the second readers. If the results of the first and second readings did not match, a
third person acted as the tie breaker. Laboratory testing continued for about five months. Macro also
provided the computer software for recording the laboratory test results.
After the laboratory testing at the Malaria Center was completed, a systematic sample of 300
slides were sent to the Comprehensive Health Center Laboratory in Saclepea for an independent quality
control check.
1.4.8 Data Processing
The processing of the LMIS questionnaire data began a few weeks after the fieldwork
commenced. Completed questionnaires were returned periodically from the field to the NMCP office in
Monrovia, where they were coded by data processing personnel recruited and trained for this task. The
data processing staff consisted of a supervisor and an assistant from NMCP, a questionnaire
administrator, five data entry operators, and two data editors, all of whom were trained by a Macro data
processing specialist. Data were entered using the CSPro computer package. All data were entered twice
(100 percent verification). The concurrent processing of the data was a distinct advantage for data quality,
since NMCP was able to advise field teams of errors detected during data entry. The data entry and
editing phase of the survey was completed in early May 2009.
1.5 RESPONSE RATES
Table 1.2 shows response rates for the 2009 LMIS. Of the 4,485 households selected in the sample,
4,285 were found occupied at the time of the fieldwork. The shortfall is due to households that were away
for an extended period of time, dwellings that could not be found in the field, and dwellings that were found
8 | Introduction
to be vacant or destroyed (see Appendix Table A.4). Of the existing households, 4,162 were successfully
interviewed, yielding a household response rate of 97 percent.
In the households interviewed in the survey, a total of 4,512 eligible women were identified, of
whom 4,397 were successfully interviewed yielding a response rate of 98 percent. The household response
rates are slightly lower in the urban than rural sample, though they are almost equal for women. The princi-
pal reason for nonresponse among eligible women was the failure to find them at home despite repeated
visits to the household.
Table 1.2 Results of the household and individual interviews
Number of households, number of interviews, and response rates,

according to residence (unweighted), Liberia 2009
Residence
Result Urban Rural Total
Household interviews
Households selected 2,065 2,420 4,485
Households occupied 1,967 2,318 4,285
Households interviewed 1,884 2,278 4,162
Household response rate1 95.8 98.3 97.1
Interviews with women age 15-49

Number of eligible women 2,263 2,249 4,512
Number of eligible women interviewed 2,199 2,198 4,397
Eligible women response rate2 97.2 97.7 97.5

1
Households interviewed/households occupied
2
Respondents interviewed/eligible respondents
Introduction | 9
CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND WOMEN 2
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a descriptive summary of some socioeconomic charac-
teristics of the households and women interviewed in the 2009 LMIS. For the purpose of the survey, a
household was defined as a person or a group of persons, related or unrelated, who live together and share
a common source of food. The Household Questionnaire (see Appendix E) included a schedule collecting
age, sex, and relationship to the head of the household for all usual residents and visitors who spent the
night preceding the interview. This method of data collection allows the analysis of the results for either
the de jure (usual residents) or de facto (those who are there at the time of the survey) populations. The
household questionnaire also obtained information on housing facilities, (e.g., source of water supply,
sanitation facilities) and household possessions. These latter items are used to create an index of relative
wealth which is described in this chapter.
This chapter also provides a profile of the women who were interviewed in the LMIS.
Information is presented on basic characteristics including age at the time of the survey, religion,
residence, education, literacy, and wealth quintile.
The information presented in this chapter is intended to facilitate interpretation of the key
demographic, socioeconomic, and health indicators presented later in the report. It is also intended to
assist in the assessment of the representativeness of the survey sample.
2.1 POPULATION BY AGE AND SEX
Age and sex are important demographic variables and are the primary basis of demographic
classification. The distribution of the de facto household population in the 2009 LMIS is shown in Table
2.1 by five-year age groups, according to sex and residence.
Table 2.1 Household population by age, sex, and residence
Percent distribution of the de facto household population by five-year age groups, according to sex and
residence, Liberia 2009
Urban Rural Total
Age Male Female Total Male Female Total Male Female Total
<5 18.4 16.5 17.4 24.8 23.5 24.2 21.9 20.2 21.1
5-9 14.5 14.9 14.7 17.1 16.0 16.5 15.9 15.5 15.7
10-14 12.6 14.8 13.8 10.9 10.2 10.6 11.7 12.4 12.0
15-19 10.8 10.4 10.6 7.7 6.1 6.9 9.1 8.1 8.6
20-24 10.1 9.6 9.9 6.0 7.1 6.5 7.9 8.3 8.1
25-29 7.4 7.7 7.6 5.5 7.0 6.2 6.3 7.3 6.8
30-34 5.2 5.5 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.3 5.3
35-39 5.1 5.7 5.4 5.5 5.9 5.7 5.3 5.8 5.6
40-44 4.6 3.9 4.2 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.0 4.1
45-49 3.7 2.2 3.0 3.7 3.2 3.4 3.7 2.7 3.2
50-54 2.6 3.3 3.0 2.7 3.7 3.2 2.6 3.5 3.1
55-59 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.7 2.3 2.0 1.8 2.0 1.9
60-64 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.9 1.7 1.2 1.5 1.4
65-69 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.1
70-74 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
75-79 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6
80 + 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.6 1.0 0.8 0.5 0.8 0.6
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 5,015 5,360 10,376 6,074 6,109 12,183 11,090 11,470 22,559
Characteristics of Households and Women | 11

A total of over 22,000 people were enumerated in the survey, almost equally divided by sex; the
overall sex ratio is 97 males per 100 females. The sex ratio is higher in rural areas (99 males per 100
females) than urban areas (94 males per 100 females). Almost half of the total household population (46
percent) resides in urban areas; this statistic correlates closely with the proportion urban from the 2008
Population and Housing Census.
The population age structure shows a substantially larger proportion of persons in younger age
groups than in the older age groups for each sex (Figure 2.1). This is a reflection of the young age
structure of the population of Liberia and indicates a population with high fertility. Forty-nine percent of
the population are below 15 years of age while 48 percent are age 15-64 and 3 percent are age 65 or older.
However, there is an implausibly large drop-off between ages 10-14 and 15-19, especially for females.
Examination of the distribution by single year (Appendix Table C.1) shows evidence that interviewers
may have intentionally underestimated women’s ages to be younger than the age cut-off of 15 so as to
make them ineligible for the individual interview; for example, whereas the number of boys age 14 and
15 enumerated in the household are identical, the number of girls age 14 is more than 50 percent higher
than the number age 15.
Figure 2.1 Population Pyramid

Age
80+
75-79
70-74
65-69
60-64
55-59
Male Female
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
25-29
20-24
15-19
10-14
5-9
0-4
12 10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Percent
LMIS 2009
2.2 HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION
Information on key aspects of the composition of households including the sex of the head of the
household and the size of the household is presented in Table 2.2. These characteristics are important
because they are associated with the welfare of the household. Female-headed households are, for
example, typically poorer than male-headed households. Economic resources are often more limited in
larger households. Moreover, where the size of the household is large, crowding also can lead to health
problems.
Households in Liberia are predominantly male-headed (70 percent), a common feature in African
countries. Nevertheless, three in ten households are headed by women with the proportion of female–
headed households higher in urban than rural areas.
12 | Characteristics of Households and Women

Liberian households most commonly consist of Table 2.2 Household composition
4-6 members, with the average household size being 5.6
Percent distribution of households by sex of head of
persons. This is considerably larger than the average household and by household size and mean size of
household size of 5.0 found in the 2006-07 LDHS. household, according to residence, Liberia 2009
Overall, 16 percent of households have nine or more
Residence
members. Rural households are slightly larger than urban
Characteristic Urban Rural Total
households.
Household headship
Male 66.0 73.4 70.0
2.3 HOUSEHOLD ENVIRONMENT Female 34.0 26.6 30.0
The physical characteristics of the dwelling in Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
which a household lives are important determinants of Number of usual members

the health status of household members, especially 1 7.8 6.4 7.0
children. They can also be used as indicators of the 2 9.7 7.3 8.4
3 12.5 10.1 11.2
socioeconomic status of households. LMIS household 4 14.3 16.0 15.2
respondents were asked a number of questions about 5 13.9 13.4 13.7
their household environment, including questions on the 6 11.0 14.9 13.1
source of drinking water, type of toilet facility, cooking 7 8.2 9.7 9.0
8 6.2 6.8 6.5
fuel, type of flooring, roof, and walls, and the number of 9+ 16.4 15.3 15.8
rooms in the dwelling used for sleeping. The results are
presented both in terms of households and of the de jure Total 100.0 100.0 100.0
population. Mean size of households 5.5 5.7 5.6
Number of households 1,940 2,222 4,162

2.3.1 Drinking Water
Note: Table is based on de jure household members, i.e.,
usual residents.
Increasing access to improved drinking water is
one of the Millennium Development Goals that Liberia
along with other nations worldwide has adopted (United Nations General Assembly 2001). Table 2.3
shows the percent distribution of households and of population by the source of the household’s drinking
water. Sources which are likely to provide water suitable for drinking are identified as ‘improved
sources’. They include a piped source within the dwelling or plot, public tap, tube well or borehole,
protected well or spring, rainwater, and bottled water.1 However, even if water is obtained from an
improved source, it may be contaminated during transport or storage.
The survey shows that three-quarters (75 percent) of Liberian households have an improved
source of drinking water. By far the most common single source of water is protected dug wells (61
percent of households). Urban households are much more likely than rural households to use an improved
source of drinking water (93 versus 58 percent). One-quarter of rural households get their drinking water
from lakes and ponds, rivers, and streams (surface water).
Comparison with the 2006-07 LDHS implies that there has been some improvement in sources of
water. The proportion of households with improved sources of water increased from 65 to 75 percent.
Some of this ‘improvement’ is due to the increase in the proportion of urban households between the two
surveys, while some is also due to an increase in the proportion of urban households with improved water
sources.
1
The categorization into improved and non-improved follows that proposed by the WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring
Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (WHO/UNICEF, 2004).

Table 2.3 Household drinking water
Percent distribution of households and de jure population by source of drinking water, according to residence,
Liberia 2009
Households Population
Source of drinking water Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
Improved source1 93.3 58.2 74.5 92.8 62.8 76.5
Piped water into dwelling/yard/plot 11.5 0.3 5.5 10.0 0.5 4.8
Public tap/standpipe 7.7 0.0 3.6 7.4 0.0 3.4
Tube well or borehole 3.5 1.2 2.3 3.6 1.2 2.3
Protected dug well 66.9 56.0 61.1 68.7 60.7 64.4
Protected spring 0.0 0.5 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.3
Bottled water 3.6 0.1 1.7 3.0 0.0 1.4
Non-improved source 6.7 41.8 25.4 7.1 37.1 23.4
Unprotected dug well 4.6 6.7 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.5
Unprotected spring 0.5 10.9 6.0 0.4 9.4 5.3
Tanker truck/cart with small tank 1.3 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.0 0.4
Surface water 0.3 24.2 13.0 0.2 22.3 12.2
Missing 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 1,940 2,222 4,162 10,598 12,599 23,197
1
Bottled water is considered an improved source
2.3.2 Household Sanitation Facilities
Ensuring adequate sanitation facilities is another of the Millennium Development Goals. Table
2.4 shows that 44 percent of Liberian households use an improved toilet facility, while 56 percent use a
non-improved facility, mostly the bush or fields. Although it appears as though there has been a major
improvement in toilet facilities since 2006-07, much of the difference is due to the fact that in the LDHS,
toilets that were shared with other households were considered to be ‘non-improved’ facilities. In the
LMIS, no question was asked as to whether the toilet was shared or not.
Table 2.4 Household sanitation facilities
Percent distribution of households and de jure population by type of toilet facilities, according to
residence, Liberia 2009
Type of toilet facility Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
Improved facility 62.7 27.3 43.7 63.6 30.2 45.4
Flush/pour flush to piped sewer
system 5.4 0.0 2.5 4.8 0.0 2.2
Flush/pour flush to septic tank 15.1 0.7 7.4 15.1 0.8 7.3
Flush/pour flush to pit latrine 3.6 0.0 1.7 3.7 0.0 1.7
Ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine 9.2 8.0 8.5 9.0 8.3 8.6
Pit latrine with slab 28.3 17.7 22.6 29.9 20.3 24.7
Composting toilet 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.1 0.8 0.9
Non-improved facility 36.0 72.6 55.7 35.0 69.7 53.8
Flush/pour flush not to sewer/septic
tank/pit latrine 1.4 0.0 0.7 1.2 0.0 0.5
Pit latrine without slab/open pit 10.1 6.3 8.1 9.6 5.6 7.4
Bucket 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.3
Hanging toilet/hanging latrine 3.7 1.2 2.4 4.0 1.0 2.4
No facility/bush/field 20.1 65.0 44.1 19.6 63.1 43.2
Other 1.3 0.0 0.6 1.2 0.0 0.6
Missing 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number 1,940 2,222 4,162 10,598 12,599 23,197
Note: In the LMIS, households were not asked if the toilet was shared with other households; conse-
quently, the data are not comparable to the 2007 LDHS results.

2.3.3 Housing Characteristics
Table 2.5 presents information on a number of characteristics of the dwelling in which LMIS
households live. These characteristics reflect the household’s socioeconomic situation. They also may
influence environmental conditions—for example, in the case of the use of biomass fuels, exposure to
indoor pollution—that have a direct bearing on the health and welfare of household members.
Table 2.5 Household characteristics
Percent distribution of households and de jure population by housing characteristics and percentage using solid
fuel for cooking, according to residence, Liberia 2009
Housing characteristic Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
Electricity
Yes 3.5 0.5 1.9 3.4 0.4 1.8
No 96.3 99.3 97.9 96.5 99.2 98.0
Missing 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.3
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Flooring material
Earth, sand 22.1 79.1 52.5 22.4 75.9 51.5
Wood/planks 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Floor mat, linoleum, vinyl 2.9 0.0 1.3 2.2 0.0 1.0
Ceramic tiles 6.1 0.7 3.2 6.2 1.0 3.3
Concrete/cement 68.3 20.0 42.5 68.8 22.8 43.8
Carpet 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1
Other/missing 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Roofing material
Thatch/palm leaf 4.6 47.6 27.6 4.2 43.9 25.8
Palm/ bamboo/ mats 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2
Tarpaulin, plastic 3.2 2.1 2.6 2.7 2.1 2.4
Zinc, metal 87.1 48.7 66.6 88.1 52.3 68.7
Ceramic tiles 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0
Concrete, cement 2.5 0.2 1.3 2.6 0.4 1.4
Asbestos sheets, shingles 2.0 1.2 1.6 1.8 1.1 1.4
Other 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Wall material
Mud and sticks 14.2 77.5 48.0 13.4 73.5 46.0
Cane/ palm/ trunks 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Straw, thatch mats 3.4 0.9 2.0 2.8 0.6 1.6
Mud bricks 12.5 7.6 9.9 14.8 9.9 12.1
Cement or stone blocks 58.5 12.6 34.0 58.6 14.6 34.7
Bricks 2.1 0.8 1.4 2.3 0.7 1.5
Wood planks/shingles 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1
Other/missing 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2
Total 91.5 99.8 95.9 92.3 99.8 96.4
Rooms used for sleeping
One 51.0 43.0 46.7 34.3 27.9 30.8
Two 23.6 32.3 28.2 25.2 34.7 30.3
Three or more 25.2 24.6 24.9 40.4 37.3 38.7
Missing 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Cooking fuel
Charcoal, fire coal 76.9 6.7 39.4 74.2 5.7 37.0
Wood 21.9 92.6 59.7 25.5 93.9 62.7
No food cooked in household 1.0 0.6 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.2
Missing/ Other 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Percentage using solid fuel for
cooking1 98.8 99.3 99.1 99.8 99.6 99.6
Number of households 1,940 2,222 4,162 10,598 12,599 23,197
1
Includes fire coal/charcoal and wood.

Ninety-eight percent of Liberian households do not have electricity. The two percent that have
electricity are mostly located in the urban areas. The reason for the low level of electricity access is that
the entire electric grid of the country was destroyed during the civil crisis and only a small fraction of
Monrovia has been restored to the electricity grid that is being developed.
The type of material used for flooring is an indicator of the economic situation of households and
therefore the potential exposure of household members to disease-causing agents. Over half (53 percent)
of households in Liberia live in dwellings with earth, sand or mud floors, while 43 percent live in
dwellings with concrete or cement floors. Differences by urban-rural residence are very large. Over two-
thirds of urban households have concrete or cement floors, while almost 80 percent of rural households
have earthen floors.
Two in three households in Liberia live in dwellings with zinc or metal roofs. Most of the
remainder live in dwellings with roofs made of thatch or palm leaf (28 percent). While almost 90 percent
of urban households live in dwellings with metal roofs, rural households are almost evenly split between
those with metal roofs and those with thatch or palm leaf roofs.
With regard to the type of walls in the dwelling, almost half of households live in structures with
mud walls, while one-third live in structures with cement or stone blocks for walls. The materials of the
walls are more likely to be cement or stone blocks in urban areas and mud and sticks in rural areas.
The number of rooms a household uses for sleeping is an indicator of socio-economic level, but
also can be used to assess crowding which can facilitate the spread of disease. In the 2009 LMIS,
household respondents were asked how many rooms were used for sleeping, regardless of whether they
were bedrooms. In Liberia, 47 percent of households have only one room for sleeping, while 28 percent
have two rooms and 25 percent have three or more rooms. Urban households have somewhat more
crowded sleeping arrangements than rural households; they are more likely than rural households to have
only one room for sleeping.
Table 2.5 also shows the distribution of households by the type of fuel used for cooking. Three in
five (60 percent) of Liberian households use wood for fuel, while the remainder use charcoal (also called
fire coal or coal). Over three-quarters of urban households use charcoal for cooking, while almost all rural
households use wood.
2.4 HOUSEHOLD POSSESSIONS
The availability of durable consumer goods is a good indicator of a household’s socioeconomic

status. Moreover, particular goods have specific benefits. For instance, having access to a radio or a
television exposes household members to innovative ideas; a refrigerator prolongs the wholesomeness of
foods; and a means of transport allows greater access to many services away from the local area. Table
2.6 shows the availability of selected consumer goods by residence.
Of the 16 selected household durable goods, chairs, tables, and mattresses stand out as the most
commonly owned by households; all three items are owned by about 70 percent of Liberian households.
Half of Liberian households have a radio, while over four in ten households have a mobile phone and
one-third own a watch. Only 18 percent of households have a cupboard and less than ten percent have a
generator or a television. Ownership of refrigerators, sewing machines, computers, bicycles, motorcycles,
cars, and boats is very rare.

Table 2.6 Household durable goods
Percentage of households and de jure population possessing various household effects and means of
transportation, by residence, Liberia 2009
Possession Urban Rural Total Urban Rural Total
Household effects
Generator 18.7 2.1 9.9 22.0 3.3 11.9
Radio 64.2 37.5 49.9 68.3 41.5 53.7
Television 16.5 1.7 8.6 18.6 2.5 9.9
Mobile telephone 69.0 20.7 43.2 74.5 23.8 47.0
Refrigerator/ice box 2.8 0.9 1.8 3.0 1.1 2.0
Table 82.3 56.0 68.2 84.9 59.6 71.2
Chair 81.2 60.4 70.1 83.7 63.5 72.7
Cupboard 30.1 6.6 17.6 32.6 7.3 18.8
Mattress 89.3 52.9 69.9 90.3 57.7 72.6
Sewing machine 4.6 1.2 2.8 5.0 1.5 3.1
Computer 2.1 0.1 1.0 2.2 0.1 1.1
Watch 44.9 22.4 32.9 48.1 25.7 35.9
Means of transport
Bicycle 4.3 1.8 3.0 5.9 2.5 4.0
Motorcycle/scooter 5.7 2.2 3.8 6.4 2.7 4.4
Car/truck 4.8 0.1 2.3 5.7 0.1 2.6
Boat/canoe 0.6 1.7 1.2 0.8 1.8 1.4
Number 1,940 2,222 4,162 10,598 12,599 23,197
There is noticeable urban-rural variation in the proportion of households owning durable goods.
The largest gaps between urban and rural households are in ownership of mobile phones, mattresses,
radios, and tables.
Comparison with the 2006-07 LDHS shows mostly minor differences in the proportion of
households owning these various possessions. One exception, however, is mobile phones. The proportion
of households with a mobile phone has increased from 29 percent in 2006-07 to 43 percent in 2009.
2.5 WEALTH INDEX
The wealth index is a background characteristic that is used throughout the report as a proxy for
long-term standard of living of the household. It is based on the data on the household’s ownership of
consumer goods; dwelling characteristics; type of drinking water source; toilet facilities; and other
characteristics that are related to a household’s socioeconomic status. To construct the index, each of
these assets was assigned a weight (factor score) generated through principal component analysis, and the
resulting asset scores were standardized in relation to a standard normal distribution with a mean of zero
and standard deviation of one (Gwatkin et al., 2000). Each household was then assigned a score for each
asset, and the scores were summed for each household. Individuals were ranked according to the total
score of the household in which they resided. The sample was then divided into quintiles from one
(lowest) to five (highest). A single asset index was developed on the basis of data from the entire country
sample and this index is used in all the tabulations presented.
Table 2.7 shows the distribution of the de jure household population into five wealth levels
(quintiles) based on the wealth index by residence. These distributions indicate the degree to which
wealth is evenly (or unevenly) distributed by geographic areas.

The table shows that according to the wealth index, urban respondents and those in Monrovia are
much more likely to fall in the higher wealth quintiles. Only 1 percent of the urban population falls in the
lowest wealth quintile, compared to 36 percent of the rural population. Similarly, based on the list of
assets used in calculating the wealth index for Liberia, none of the residents in Monrovia falls into the
poorest quintile, while almost three-fifths (59 percent) fall in the highest quintile. Residents of South
Eastern A, South Eastern B, and North Western regions are more likely than average to fall into the
poorest wealth quintile.
Table 2.7 Wealth quintiles
Percent distribution of the jure population by wealth quintiles, according to residence and region,
Liberia 2009
Wealth quintile Number of

Residence/region Lowest Second Middle Fourth Highest Total population
Residence
Urban 1.1 6.5 17.7 33.9 40.8 100.0 10,598
Rural 35.9 31.4 22.2 8.1 2.4 100.0 12,599
Region
Monrovia 0.0 0.4 5.7 34.5 59.4 100.0 5,534
North Western 34.3 34.4 20.3 8.1 3.0 100.0 1,650
South Central 19.9 17.1 21.5 22.9 18.6 100.0 4,440
South Eastern A 49.3 35.2 9.6 2.7 3.3 100.0 1,716
South Eastern B 38.7 34.2 16.1 6.9 4.2 100.0 1,349
North Central 21.4 26.2 31.7 16.7 4.1 100.0 8,509
Total 20.0 20.0 20.2 19.9 19.9 100.0 23,197
2.6 CHARACTERISTICS OF WOMEN RESPONDENTS
2.6.1 General Characteristics
Table 2.8 presents the distribution of women age 15-49 by age group, religion, dialect, urban-
rural residence, region, education level, and wealth quintile. The proportion of respondents in each age
group generally declines as age increases, reflecting the comparatively young age structure of the
population. The slightly lower proportion of women age 15-19 than age 20-24 could be due to deliberate
age misreporting on the part of interviewers. As mentioned above and shown in Appendix Table C.1,
there were 50 percent more girls listed on the Household Questionnaire as being age 14 than age 15. This
pattern is almost certainly due to interviewers’ deliberately displacing the ages of these adolescents to
avoid having to do an individual interview.
The overwhelming majority of Liberian women (85 percent) are Christian, while 9 percent are
Muslim. The largest ethnic group in terms of dialect spoken is Kpelle (20 percent), followed by Bassa (13
percent) and Mano (12 percent).
Women age 15-49 are almost evenly split between urban (51 percent) and rural (49 percent). The
distribution of respondents by region shows that just over one-third of women live in the North Central
region (Bong, Nimba, and Lofa counties) and just under one-third live in Greater Monrovia. Seventeen
percent of women respondents live in South Central region (Grand Bassa, Margibi, and Montserrado
outside of Monrovia). Regions with the less than 10 percent of respondents are South Eastern A (River
Cess, Sinoe, and Grand Gedeh counties), South Eastern B (River Gee, Grand Kru, and Maryland
counties) and North Western (Bomi, Grand Cape Mount, and Gbarpolu counties).

Table 2.8 Background characteristics of respondents
Percent distribution of women age 15-49 by selected background

characteristics, Liberia 2009
Number of women
Background Weighted
characteristic percent Weighted Unweighted
Age
15-19 19.1 839 835
20-24 20.2 886 868
25-29 17.5 771 784
30-34 12.8 564 594
35-39 14.1 622 612
40-44 9.7 429 420
45-49 6.5 286 284
Religion
Christian 84.6 3,718 3,760
Muslim 9.0 394 451
Traditional religion 1.2 53 28
No religion 5.0 220 146
Missing 0.2 11 11
Ethnicity
Bassa 13.3 584 685
Gbandi 3.7 164 107
Belle 0.3 13 11
Dey 0.2 7 6
Gio 8.0 351 200
Gola 2.1 92 154
Grebo 7.3 319 656
Kissi 5.8 254 166
Kpelle 19.7 868 666
Krahn 2.5 110 223
Kru 6.4 281 462
Lorma 6.1 267 181
Mandigo 1.7 73 68
Mano 11.6 511 276
Mende 1.3 59 66
Vai 4.1 179 229
None/ English only 4.5 196 158
Other/missing 1.5 69 83
Residence
Urban 50.6 2,225 2,199
Rural 49.4 2,172 2,198
Region
Monrovia 29.2 1,285 853
North Western 6.3 276 533
South Central 17.3 762 634
South Eastern A 7.2 317 790
South Eastern B 4.8 211 702
North Central 35.2 1,546 885
Education
No education 41.7 1,834 1,928
Primary 30.1 1,322 1,353
Secondary + 28.2 1,241 1,116
Wealth quintile
Lowest 18.2 802 990
Second 18.4 811 1,034
Middle 18.6 818 773
Fourth 21.2 934 751
Highest 23.5 1,033 849
Total 100.0 4,397 4,397
Note: Education categories refer to the highest level of education

attended, whether or not that level was completed.

Just over four in ten women age 15-49 have never been to school, while 30 percent have attended
only primary school and 28 percent have reached secondary school. By definition, roughly one-fifth of
respondents fall into each wealth quintile.
2.6.2 Education Attainment of Women
Education is a key determinant of the lifestyle and status an individual enjoys in a society. Studies
have consistently shown that educational attainment has a strong effect on health behaviors and attitudes.
In general, the higher the level of education a woman has attained, the more knowledgeable she is about
the use of health facilities, family planning methods, and the health of her children. Liberia’s education
system has been unstable for a little over fifteen years because of the civil crisis; however, recently a
major restructuring of the infrastructure and program is being undertaken by the government. Presently,
the government of Liberia has adopted a free primary education policy in all government schools with a
special program for female education. The government is undertaking massive renovation of infra-
structure damaged during the war and is also restructuring and expanding programs in the educational
system.
Table 2.9 presents an overview of the relationship between the respondent’s level of education
and other background characteristics. The results show that only one-third of women age 15-49 have
completed primary school and only 6 percent have completed secondary school. Overall, the median
number of years of education is 2.
Table 2.9 Educational attainment of women
Percent distribution of women age 15-49 by highest level of schooling attended or completed, and median grade completed,
according to background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Highest level of schooling Median

Background No Some Completed Some Completed More than years Number of
characteristic education primary primary1 secondary secondary2 secondary Total completed women
Age
15-24 22.9 36.4 5.8 27.5 4.3 3.0 100.0 4.0 1,726
15-19 14.9 47.0 7.7 25.2 4.5 0.9 100.0 4.0 839
20-24 30.6 26.3 4.1 29.8 4.1 5.1 100.0 3.9 886
25-29 48.1 21.3 2.5 22.2 1.6 4.4 100.0 0.1 771
30-34 47.9 26.7 2.7 16.1 0.8 5.8 100.0 0.4 564
35-39 56.2 19.7 2.8 16.3 1.2 3.8 100.0 0.0 622
40-44 55.2 16.0 1.7 22.5 0.4 4.2 100.0 0.0 429
45-49 73.7 9.0 1.3 12.2 0.6 3.2 100.0 0.0 286
Residence
Urban 26.7 21.9 5.3 35.5 3.2 7.4 100.0 5.2 2,225
Rural 57.1 30.9 2.1 8.3 1.4 0.2 100.0 0.0 2,172
Region
Monrovia 21.3 20.8 4.1 41.1 2.9 9.8 100.0 6.1 1,285
North Western 65.3 22.8 1.3 9.2 1.3 0.3 100.0 0.0 276
South Central 50.8 27.0 3.8 13.7 1.2 3.5 100.0 0.0 762
South Eastern A 56.4 30.9 1.0 8.2 3.1 0.4 100.0 0.0 317
South Eastern B 45.5 31.8 5.2 17.1 0.0 0.3 100.0 0.8 211
North Central 46.5 29.6 4.1 16.2 2.7 0.9 100.0 0.9 1,546
Wealth quintile
Lowest 67.1 26.2 2.0 3.7 0.6 0.4 100.0 0.0 802
Second 60.1 26.6 1.9 8.5 2.5 0.4 100.0 0.0 811
Middle 41.4 35.3 4.4 15.9 2.2 0.9 100.0 1.6 818
Fourth 31.3 28.2 6.0 30.3 2.8 1.5 100.0 4.0 934
Highest 17.3 17.5 3.8 44.4 3.2 13.7 100.0 7.2 1,033
Total 41.7 26.4 3.7 22.1 2.3 3.9 100.0 2.0 4,397
1
Completed grade 6 at the primary level
2
Completed grade 12 at the secondary level

Younger women have generally reached higher levels of school than older women. For example,
only 15 percent of women age 15-19 have never been to school, compared with 74 percent of women age
45-49. Urban women are better educated than rural women; the median number of years of school is 5.2
for urban women and 0 for rural women.
Among the regions, Monrovia has by far the largest proportion of women who have attended
secondary school and above (54 percent). The educational level of women in North Western region
(Bomi, Grand Cape Mount, and Gbarpolu counties) is particularly low, with 65 percent of women having
no schooling at all.
Table 2.9 also shows that poorer women tend to be less educated; more than three-fifths of
women in the two lowest wealth quintiles have no education, compared to less than one-fifth of women in
the highest wealth quintile.
2.6.3 Literacy of Women
The ability to read and write is an important personal asset, allowing individuals increased
opportunities in life. Knowing the distribution of the literate population can help those involved in health
communication plan how to reach women with their messages. Instead of asking respondents if they
could read, LMIS interviewers assessed the ability to read among women who had never been to school
or who had attended only the primary level by asking them to read a simple, short sentence.2 Table 2.10
shows the percent distribution of female respondents by level of literacy and the percentage literate
according to background characteristics.
The data show that only 40 percent of adult women are literate. There are large differentials in
literacy across background characteristics. For example, only 19 percent of women 45-49 are literate,
compared with 60 percent of women age 15-19. There is a threefold urban-rural differential in literacy,
with 60 percent of urban women literate, compared with 20 percent of rural women. Monrovia has by far
the highest proportion of women who are literate (67 percent), while North Western and South Eastern A
regions have the lowest. Literacy increases as wealth increases, from 12 percent among women in the
poorest wealth quintile to 72 percent of those in the highest quintile.
2
These sentences include the following: 1. The child is reading a book. 2. Farming is hard work; 3. Parents should
care for their children; 4. The rains were heavy this year.

Table 2.10 Women’s literacy
Percent distribution of women age 15-49 by level of schooling attended and level of literacy, and percentage literate, according to
background characteristics, Liberia 2009
No schooling or primary school

No card
Secondary Can read Can read with Blind/ Percent-
Background school or a whole part of a Cannot required visually age
characteristic higher sentence sentence read at all language impaired Missing Total literate1 Number
Age
15-19 30.5 9.5 19.6 39.6 0.1 0.3 0.4 100.0 59.6 839
20-24 39.0 2.7 6.1 51.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 100.0 47.8 886
25-29 28.2 0.4 6.6 64.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0 35.2 771
30-34 22.7 2.1 7.1 67.9 0.0 0.0 0.3 100.0 31.9 564
35-39 21.3 1.5 5.4 71.5 0.3 0.0 0.0 100.0 28.2 622
40-44 27.1 2.0 2.8 67.7 0.0 0.0 0.4 100.0 31.9 429
45-49 16.0 1.6 1.6 80.2 0.0 0.0 0.6 100.0 19.2 286
Residence
Urban 46.1 4.0 8.9 40.2 0.2 0.0 0.5 100.0 59.1 2,225
Rural 9.9 2.4 7.5 80.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 100.0 19.7 2,172
Region
Monrovia 53.8 3.5 9.3 32.3 0.3 0.0 0.7 100.0 66.6 1,285
North Western 10.7 2.6 9.6 77.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 100.0 22.8 276
South Central 18.3 4.7 8.6 68.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 100.0 31.7 762
South Eastern A 11.7 3.2 9.0 76.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 23.9 317
South Eastern B 17.5 3.8 12.0 66.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 100.0 33.3 211
North Central 19.8 2.3 6.1 71.5 0.0 0.2 0.1 100.0 28.2 1,546
Wealth quintile
Lowest 4.7 2.3 5.3 87.3 0.1 0.3 0.0 100.0 12.3 802
Second 11.4 1.2 7.9 79.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 100.0 20.6 811
Middle 18.9 3.5 9.7 67.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 32.2 818
Fourth 34.6 4.8 10.6 49.5 0.1 0.0 0.5 100.0 49.9 934
Highest 61.4 3.8 7.3 26.6 0.3 0.0 0.6 100.0 72.4 1,033
Total 28.2 3.2 8.2 59.9 0.1 0.1 0.3 100.0 39.6 4,397
1
Refers to women who attended secondary school or higher and women who can read a whole sentence or part of a sentence

FERTILITY, PRENATAL CARE, AND CHILDHOOD
MORTALITY 3
Although measuring fertility and childhood mortality indicators was not an objective of the
LMIS, they are useful by-products. In order to measure indicators related to coverage of intermittent
malaria prevention treatment during pregnancy and treatment of childhood fever, a complete birth history
was included as part of the woman’s questionnaire.
Data on fertility were collected in several ways. Each woman interviewed was asked about all of
the births she had had in her lifetime. Questions were asked separately about the number of sons and
daughters who live with the mother, those who live elsewhere, and those who have died. Subsequently, a
list of all births was recorded along with name, age if still alive, and age at death if dead. Finally,
information was collected on whether women were pregnant at the time of the survey. In addition to
providing data about fertility, the birth history also is used to measure childhood mortality.
This chapter looks at a number of fertility indicators including levels, patterns, and trends in both
current and cumulative fertility; the length of birth intervals; and the age at which women initiate
childbearing. It also covers data on the proportion of women who obtained prenatal care for their most
recent birth in the last five years. Estimates of childhood mortality are presented at the end of the chapter.
3.1 CURRENT FERTILITY
Current fertility can be measured using the age-specific Table 3.1 Current fertility
fertility rate (ASFR), the total fertility rate (TFR), the general
Age-specific and total fertility rates, the
fertility rate, and the crude birth rate. The ASFR provides the age general fertility rate, and the crude birth rate
pattern of fertility, while the TFR refers to the number of live births for the three years preceding the survey, by
that a woman would have had if she were subject to the current residence, Liberia 2009
ASFRs throughout the reproductive ages (15-49 years). The Residence
general fertility rate is expressed as the number of live births per Age group Urban Rural Total
1,000 women of reproductive age, and the crude birth rate is ex- 15-19 136 240 177
pressed as the number of live births per 1,000 population. The 20-24 198 345 268
measures of fertility presented in this chapter refer to the period of 25-29 191 289 241
three years prior to the survey. This generates a sufficient number 30-34 159 266 214
35-39 109 211 166
of births to provide robust and current estimates. Current estimates 40-44 46 109 81
of fertility levels are presented in Table 3.1 by urban-rural resi- 45-49 7 44 29
dence. TFR (15-49) 4.2 7.5 5.9
GFR 152 260 205
Survey results indicate that the total fertility rate in Liberia CBR 33.5 45.9 40.3
was 5.9 children per woman for the three-year period preceding the Notes: Age-specific fertility rates are per
survey (roughly 2006 through 2008). This means that a Liberian 1,000 women. Rates for age group 45-49
woman who is at the beginning of her childbearing years would may be slightly biased due to truncation.
Rates are for the period 1-36 months prior to
give birth to an average of almost six children by the end of her interview.
reproductive period if fertility levels remained constant at the TFR: Total fertility rate expressed per woman
levels observed in the three-year period before the 2009 LMIS. The GFR: General fertility rate expressed per
1,000 women age 15-44
TFR of 7.5 for women in rural areas is more than three births
CBR: Crude birth rate, expressed per 1,000
higher than the rate of 4.2 for women in urban areas. These rates population
are considerably higher than those measured in the LDHS two
years earlier (see section 3.3).
Fertility, Prenatal Care, and Childhood Mortality | 23

Figure 3.1 Age-Specific Fertility Rates by Urban-Rural Residence,
Liberia 2006-08
Births per 1,000 women
400
350 &
300
&
&
250
&
200
&
+ +
150 +
+
100 + &
50 + &
0 +
15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49
Age group
+ Urban & Rural
The peak childbearing years are 20-24, followed by 25-29. Fertility at each age is higher in rural
than in urban areas (Figure 3.1). Adolescent fertility is very high, with teenage girls contributing 15
percent of the total fertility rate in Liberia.
The general fertility rate is 205. This means that there were 205 births for every 1,000 women
during the three-year period preceding the survey. There is a clear differential in this rate by residence:
260 births per 1,000 women age 15-44 years in the rural areas versus 152 births per 1,000 women in the
urban areas.
The crude birth rate for Liberia is 40 births per 1,000 population. As with the general fertility rate,
there is also a clear differential by residence: 46 births per 1,000 population in the rural areas versus 34
births per 1,000 population in the urban areas.
3.2 FERTILITY DIFFERENTIALS BY BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS
Fertility is known to vary by residence, educational background, and other background character-
istics of a woman. Table 3.2 shows several different indicators of fertility, mainly the total fertility rate,
the mean number of births to women age 40-49, and the percentage currently pregnant by residence,
region, education, and wealth quintile. The mean number of births to women age 40-49 is an indicator of
cumulative fertility; it reflects the fertility performance of older women who are nearing the end of their
reproductive period. If fertility remains stable over time, the two fertility measures, total fertility rate
(TFR) and children ever born (CEB), tend to be very similar. The percentage pregnant provides a useful
additional measure of current fertility, although it is recognized that it may not capture all pregnancies in
an early stage.
As mentioned above, the data in Table 3.2 show a strong urban-rural differential in fertility.
Regional variations in fertility are marked, ranging from a high of 7.9 births per woman in North Western
region to a low of 3.5 in Monrovia. The TFR is inversely related to the level of education. Women with
no education give birth to almost twice as many children as women who have been to secondary school
24 | Fertility, Prenatal Care, and Childhood Mortality

(7.1 vs. 3.9 births). Fertility is strongly related to wealth; women in the poorest wealth quintile have an
average of 8.0 births per woman, compared with only 3.2 among women in the highest quintile.
Ten percent of the women interviewed at

the time of the survey said they were pregnant. Table 3.2 Fertility by background characteristics
Rural women are much more likely to be preg- Total fertility rate for the three years preceding the survey,
nant (12 percent) than urban women (9 percent). percentage of women age 15-49 currently pregnant, and mean
Current pregnancy is highest in South Eastern A number of children ever born to women age 40-49 years, by
background characteristics, Liberia 2009
(13 percent) and North Western regions (12 per-
cent) and lowest in Monrovia (7 percent). The Percentage of Mean number
percentage of women currently pregnant is lower Total women age of children ever
Background fertility 15-49 currently born to women
among women with at least some secondary characteristic rate pregnant age 40-49
school (7 percent) than among those with either
Residence
no education or only primary education (both 11 Urban 4.2 8.6 5.9
percent). The proportion pregnant declines as Rural 7.5 11.5 7.4
wealth increases.
Region
Monrovia 3.5 7.1 5.4
Table 3.2 also shows the mean number of North Western (7.9) 12.2 7.3
children ever born to women age 40-49 years. South Central (6.2) 10.6 7.7
Overall, women age 40-49 years have given birth South Eastern A 7.5 13.3 7.8
South Eastern B (6.6) 9.3 6.8
to an average of 6.8 children. Differences in the North Central 6.8 11.2 6.8
mean number of children ever born generally fol-
low a similar pattern to that for the TFR and the Education
No education 7.1 11.3 7.1
percentage currently pregnant. Primary 6.2 11.2 7.1
Secondary + 3.9 7.0 5.5
3.3 FERTILITY TRENDS
Wealth quintile
Lowest 8.0 13.2 7.4
Table 3.3 examines trends in fertility in Second 7.1 11.2 7.1
Liberia by comparing the results of the 2009 Middle 6.5 11.3 7.7
LMIS with the three LDHS surveys that were Fourth 5.3 10.3 6.6
Highest 3.2 5.6 5.2
implemented in Liberia in 1986, 1999-2000, and
2007. This comparison is appropriate because all Total 5.9 10.0 6.8
four surveys used similar methods of data col-
Note: Total fertility rates are for the period 1-36 months prior to
lection although the current fertility rates for the interview. Total fertility rates in parentheses are based on 500-749
1986 LDHS are based on births in the five years unweighted women; all others are based on 750 or more
preceding the survey, while those for the other unweighted women.
three surveys are based on births in the three
years preceding the survey.
The data show a steady decline in the fertility rates across the first three surveys with a steep
increase for the LMIS. The TFR declined gradually from 6.6 in the five years preceding the 1986 LDHS
(roughly equivalent to 1981-85) to 6.2 for the three years before the 1999-2000 LDHS (approximately
1997-99), and then dropped rapidly to 5.2 for the period 2004-06 (Figure 3.2). The fact that the decline
was so rapid and was followed by a steep increase to 5.9 two years later calls into question the accuracy
of the rate from the 2007 LDHS. It is unlikely that fertility has changed so much in such a short period of
time. A more plausible explanation is that, since the 2007 LDHS included a sizeable section of questions
for children under five, interviewers may have omitted young children and/or displaced their ages so as to
make them older and not subject to lengthy questioning.

Table 3.3 Trends in fertility from various surveys
Age-specific and total fertility rates from various surveys, Liberia
1981-85 to 2006-08
Survey and approximate calendar period
of the fertility rates
1986 1999-2000 2007
Mother’s age LDHS LDHS LDHS 2009 LMIS
at birth 1981-85 1997-99 2004-06 2006-08
15-19 184 135 141 177
20-24 285 279 243 268
25-29 272 241 226 241
30-34 223 211 187 214
35-39 181 171 142 166
40-44 114 112 72 81
45-49 63 83 29 29
Total fertility rate 6.6 6.2 5.2 5.9
Notes: Age-specific fertility rates are per 1,000 women.

Source: Chieh-Johnson et al., 1988; MPEA, et al., 2000; LISGIS et
al., 2008
Figure 3.2 Trends in Total Fertility Rate
Births per woman

8
6.6
6.2
5.9
6
5.2
0
1981-85 1997-99 2004-06 2006-98
2006-08
Source: Chieh-Johnson et al., 1988; MPEA et al., 2000; LISGIS and Macro, 2008
3.4 CHILDREN EVER BORN AND LIVING
Table 3.4 presents the distribution of all women by the number of children ever born, according
to five-year age groups. The table also shows the mean number of children ever born. Data on the number
of children ever born reflect the accumulation of births to women over their entire reproductive years and
therefore have limited reference to current fertility levels, particularly when a country has experienced a
decline in fertility. However, the information on children ever born is useful for observing how average
family size varies across age groups, and for observing the level of primary infertility.

Table 3.4 Children ever born and living
Percent distribution of all women by number of children ever born, mean number of children ever born and mean number of
living children, according to age group, Liberia 2009
Mean
number
of Mean
Number of children ever born Number children number
of ever of living
Age 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10+ Total women born children
15-19 67.4 27.7 4.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 839 0.38 0.35
20-24 15.2 32.3 31.3 16.1 3.6 1.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 886 1.65 1.44
25-29 7.4 15.1 23.7 22.4 16.5 10.2 3.6 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 100.0 771 2.77 2.31
30-34 3.6 10.8 11.0 15.6 16.1 17.2 13.0 7.3 4.2 0.8 0.3 100.0 564 4.04 3.18
35-39 0.5 4.1 6.1 11.6 14.7 16.1 17.0 12.9 7.5 6.6 2.9 100.0 622 5.32 4.16
40-44 0.5 2.7 3.3 7.8 8.6 14.9 12.5 11.3 11.3 8.6 18.5 100.0 429 6.62 4.85
45-49 0.5 2.1 4.1 9.2 7.6 7.7 11.9 14.3 8.0 14.1 20.6 100.0 286 6.98 5.04
Total 17.8 16.8 14.1 12.3 9.1 8.5 6.7 4.9 3.3 2.8 3.6 100.0 4,397 3.26 2.56
The data show that early childbearing is common in Liberia. One-third of girls age 15-19 have
already given birth; by age 20-24, over 8 in 10 have had a baby. Less than one percent of women at the
end of their reproductive age remain childless.
On average, Liberian women attain a parity of 7 children per woman at the end of their
childbearing. As expected, the mean number of children ever born rises steadily with increasing age of
women, thus indicating minimal or no recall lapse. Women in their late 20s have given birth to almost
three children on average, while women in their early 30s have had four births and those age 40-44 have
borne 6.6 children each. As expected, women above 40 years have much higher parities, with one in five
women 45-49 reporting having had 10 or more births.
3.5 BIRTH INTERVALS
A birth interval is defined as the length of time between two live births. Research has shown that
short birth intervals are closely associated with poor health of children, especially during infancy.
Children born too close to a previous birth, especially if the interval between the births is less than two
years, are at increased risk of health problems and dying at an early age. Longer birth intervals, on the
other hand, contribute to the improved health status of both mother and child.
The study of birth intervals is done using two measures, namely, median birth interval and
proportion of non-first births that occur with an interval of 24 months or more after the previous birth.
Table 3.5 presents the distribution of second and higher-order births in the five years preceding the survey
by the number of months since the previous birth, according to background characteristics. The table also
presents the median number of months since the preceding birth.
The table shows that the median birth interval is 33 months, that is, half of non-first births to
women in Liberia occur within three years after a previous birth. The median birth interval increases with
age from 28 months for births to women age 15-19 years to 40 months for births to women age 40-49
years. The longer birth interval among older women may be attributed to the decline in fecundity as
women grow older.

Table 3.5 Birth intervals
Percent distribution of non-first births in the five years preceding the survey by number of months since preceding birth, and median number
of months since preceding birth, according to background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Median
number of
months
Number of since
Background Months since preceding birth non-first preceding
characteristic 7-17 18-23 24-35 36-47 48-59 60+ Total births birth
Age
15-19 20.8 12.5 54.6 7.2 4.9 0.0 100.0 49 27.7
20-29 8.8 15.4 38.5 20.6 8.0 8.6 100.0 1,458 31.1
30-39 8.6 13.6 28.8 19.7 10.7 18.7 100.0 1,232 35.6
40-49 6.7 12.5 25.5 11.9 15.3 28.0 100.0 385 39.9
Sex of preceding birth
Male 8.1 13.2 33.9 20.2 10.1 14.5 100.0 1,578 33.2
Female 9.1 15.4 32.8 17.7 9.7 15.3 100.0 1,546 32.6
Survival of preceding birth
Living 6.1 13.7 34.5 19.9 10.6 15.2 100.0 2,621 33.9
Dead 21.9 17.4 27.2 14.2 6.4 12.9 100.0 503 27.8
Birth order
2-3 7.2 13.4 34.4 21.1 9.2 14.8 100.0 1,338 33.8
4-6 9.6 14.4 33.4 16.8 10.7 15.0 100.0 1,197 32.6
7+ 10.0 16.1 30.7 18.5 10.0 14.7 100.0 590 31.9
Residence
Urban 6.3 11.7 29.2 18.3 12.0 22.4 100.0 1,058 37.3
Rural 9.8 15.6 35.5 19.3 8.8 11.0 100.0 2,066 31.2
Region
Monrovia 5.4 10.7 25.8 18.8 14.1 25.2 100.0 478 39.3
North Western 12.0 18.0 36.2 17.2 7.9 8.7 100.0 261 29.9
South Central 9.6 13.9 35.6 21.5 9.0 10.4 100.0 631 31.9
South Eastern A 12.9 16.0 34.2 18.0 8.4 10.5 100.0 329 30.3
South Eastern B 11.5 12.1 35.3 18.6 10.5 11.9 100.0 171 31.7
North Central 7.1 14.9 34.0 18.5 9.5 16.0 100.0 1,254 32.9
Education
No education 9.2 14.9 34.1 18.9 9.8 13.2 100.0 1,775 32.4
Primary 9.0 16.2 35.1 19.6 8.6 11.5 100.0 885 31.1
Secondary + 5.6 8.4 27.1 18.1 13.1 27.7 100.0 464 40.8
Wealth quintile
Lowest 11.5 17.8 35.4 17.7 8.1 9.5 100.0 838 30.1
Second 8.1 15.7 34.8 20.4 8.8 12.1 100.0 748 32.2
Middle 10.8 13.6 35.6 17.4 9.2 13.3 100.0 648 31.5
Fourth 5.0 11.4 32.1 20.3 13.7 17.5 100.0 526 36.5
Highest 4.5 8.6 23.1 19.8 12.2 31.8 100.0 364 44.3
Total 8.6 14.3 33.3 19.0 9.9 14.9 100.0 3,124 32.9
Note: First-order births are excluded from this table. The interval for multiple births is the number of months since the preceding pregnancy
that ended in a live birth.
There are no significant differences in the median birth interval by sex of the child and birth
order. The median birth interval is shorter if the previous child has died than if the previous child survived
(28 vs. 34 months). The median interval between births to urban women is almost 6 months longer (37
months) than for rural women (31 months). The median birth interval ranges from a low of 30 months in
the North Western and South Eastern A regions to 39 months in Monrovia. The median number of
months since the preceding birth is longer among non-first births to women with at least some secondary
education (41 months) than among women with no education or only primary schooling (31-32 months).
Birth intervals increase with wealth; the median interval increases from 30 months among births to
women in the lowest wealth quintile to 44 months among those in the highest quintile.

Comparison with data from the 2007 LDHS shows somewhat shorter birth intervals in 2009. The
median number of months between births reported in the 2007 LDHS was 36 months, compared with 33
months in the 2009 LMIS.
3.6 AGE AT FIRST BIRTH
The age at which childbearing commences is an important determinant of the overall level of
fertility as well as the health and welfare of the mother and the child. In some societies, postponement of
first births due to an increase in age at marriage has contributed to overall fertility decline. Table 3.6
shows the percentage of women who have given birth by specific ages, according to age at the time of the
survey.
Table 3.6 Age at first birth
Percentage of women age 15-49 who gave birth by exact ages, percentage who have never given birth,
and median age at first birth, according to current age, Liberia 2009
Percentage
who have
Percentage who gave birth by exact age never Number Median age
Current age 15 18 20 22 25 given birth of women at first birth
15-19 3.4 na na na na 67.4 839 a
20-24 7.2 37.8 66.6 na na 15.2 886 18.9
25-29 6.4 37.1 61.0 75.1 88.5 7.4 771 19.0
30-34 8.0 38.5 60.2 75.8 86.3 3.6 564 19.0
35-39 11.1 47.0 67.6 81.0 90.6 0.5 622 18.3
40-44 16.9 53.0 75.1 87.7 94.5 0.5 429 17.7
45-49 11.2 51.7 70.2 82.9 90.3 0.5 286 17.8
20-49 9.3 42.3 65.9 na na 6.2 3,558 18.6
25-49 10.0 43.8 65.6 79.5 89.7 3.1 2,671 18.5
na = Not applicable due to censoring

a = Omitted because less than 50 percent of women had a birth before reaching the beginning of the
age group
The data show that the median age at first birth in Liberia fluctuates around 18 to 19 years across
age groups of women. The percentage of women who gave birth before age 15 and 18 years generally
shows some postponement of first birth by younger cohorts of mothers. For example, only 3 percent of
women age 15-19 years had given birth by age 15 years, compared with at least 11 percent of those age
35 years and older.
Comparison with previous surveys indicates some evidence of a decline in age at first birth. The
median age at first birth among women age 20-49 was 19.2 in 1986, 19.4 in 1999/2000, 19.1 in 2007 and
18.6 in 2009.
3.7 TEENAGE PREGNANCY AND MOTHERHOOD
Teenage pregnancy is a major health concern because of its association with higher morbidity and
mortality for both the mother and child. Childbearing during the teenage years also frequently has adverse
social consequences, particularly on female educational attainment since women who become mothers in
their teens are more likely to curtail education.

Using information from the 2009 LMIS, Table 3.7 shows the percentage of women age 15-19
who are mothers or who are pregnant with their first child. The table shows that 33 percent of adolescents
have had a birth and another five percent are currently pregnant with their first child. This means that
almost four in ten girls 15-19 have begun childbearing.
Table 3.7 Teenage pregnancy and motherhood
Percentage of women age 15-19 who have had a live birth or who are
pregnant with their first child and percentage who have begun childbearing,
by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Percentage of teenage
women who: Percentage
Are pregnant who have
Background Have had with first begun Number of
characteristic a live birth child childbearing women
Age
15 4.9 5.6 10.5 149
16 14.1 8.0 22.0 182
17 36.7 4.1 40.8 124
18 44.8 2.8 47.6 207
19 57.9 4.5 62.3 177
Residence
Urban 26.7 3.5 30.3 502
Rural 41.3 7.1 48.4 337
Region
Monrovia 21.1 3.9 25.0 304
North Western 43.0 9.4 52.3 43
South Central 32.2 3.1 35.3 130
South Eastern A 44.1 12.2 56.4 46
South Eastern B 41.7 9.2 50.9 42
North Central 40.6 4.5 45.1 274
Education
No education 59.1 8.2 67.3 125
Primary 29.4 5.3 34.7 458
Secondary + 25.5 2.8 28.3 256
Wealth quintile
Lowest 46.6 6.4 53.0 117
Second 33.7 10.1 43.8 116
Middle 49.6 4.3 53.9 153
Fourth 30.7 3.5 34.2 208
Highest 16.5 3.6 20.1 246
Total 32.6 5.0 37.6 839
The proportion of adolescents already on the path to family formation rises rapidly with age, from
11 percent at age 15 years to 62 percent at age 19 years. Rural adolescents tend to start childbearing
earlier than their urban counterparts. Forty-eight percent of adolescents in rural areas have begun
childbearing, compared with 30 percent of their counterparts in the urban areas. By region, the percentage
of women 15-19 years who have begun childbearing ranges from a low of 25 percent in Monrovia to a
high of 56 percent in South Eastern A region. Table 3.7 also shows that childbearing among adolescents
decreases with higher education—67 percent of adolescents with no education have started childbearing,
compared with only 28 percent of those with at least some secondary education. Early childbearing varies
considerably by wealth quintile. The proportion of adolescents who have begun childbearing decreases
from 53 percent of those in the lowest wealth quintile to only 20 percent of those in the highest quintile.

Comparison with similar data from 1999-2000 implies that early childbearing has increased over
the last few years. The proportion of women age 15-19 who have already had a child or are pregnant with
their first birth increased from 29 percent to 32 percent between 1999-2000 and 2007 and then to 38
percent in 2009. The proportion has increased at almost every age. For example, in 1999-2000 37 percent
of 18-year-olds had begun childbearing, compared with 48 percent in 2009.
3.8 PRENATAL CARE
The major objective of prenatal care is to identify and treat problems during pregnancy such as
anemia and infections. It is during a prenatal care visit that screening for complications and advice on a
range of issues including place of delivery and referral of mothers with complications occur. Information
on prenatal care is of great value in identifying subgroups of women who do not utilize such services and
is useful in planning improvements in the services.
Table 3.8 presents the percent distribution of women age 15-49 who had a live birth in the five
years preceding the survey by the type of prenatal care provider consulted during the pregnancy for the
most recent birth, according to background characteristics. If a woman received prenatal care from more
than one provider, the provider with the highest qualifications was recorded. The survey shows that over
nine in ten mothers (95 percent) receive prenatal care from a health professional (doctor, nurse, midwife,
or physician’s assistant). Only two percent of mothers receive prenatal care from a traditional midwife
and 2 percent do not receive any prenatal care.
Differences in professional prenatal care coverage by age of mother and by birth order are very
small. There are somewhat larger differences in the use of prenatal care services between women in urban
and rural areas. Health professionals provide prenatal care services for 99 percent of urban mothers,
compared with 93 percent of rural mothers. Urban mothers are particularly more likely than rural mothers
to receive care from doctors. By region, South Eastern B stands out as having a particularly low level of
prenatal care coverage by health professionals (80 percent).
Use of prenatal care services is related to women’s educational level. Ninety-nine percent of
mothers with at least some secondary education receive prenatal care services from a health professional,
compared with only 93 percent of mothers with no education. The proportion of mothers who receive
prenatal care increases with wealth, from 90 percent of those in the lowest wealth quintile to 99 percent of
those in the highest quintile.
Trends in prenatal care coverage in Liberia are difficult to interpret. The proportion of women
who get prenatal care from a doctor, nurse, or midwife (excluding physician’s assistants) increased very
slightly from 83 percent in 1986 to 84 percent in 1999-2000, declined to 76 percent in 2007, and then
increased dramatically to 95 percent in 2009.1 Although the wording of the question on prenatal care was
identical in the 2007 LDHS and the 2009 LMIS, it appears as if reporting was not reliable in one or both
surveys, since such a large increase in prenatal care coverage in a two-year period is implausible.
1
Data for 1986, 2007, and 2009 refer to the most recent birth to women who had a birth in the five years preceding
the survey, while data for 1999-2000 refer to all births in the three years preceding the survey. These discrepancies
in definition probably do not affect the results to any considerable degree. Moreover, the earlier two surveys did not
include a category for physician’s assistants.

Table 3.8 Prenatal care
Percent distribution of women age 15-49 who had a live birth in the five years preceding the survey by prenatal care provider
during pregnancy for the most recent birth and the percentage receiving prenatal care from a skilled provider for the most
recent birth, according to background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Percentage
receiving
prenatal
care from a
Background Nurse/ Physician's Traditional No skilled Number
characteristic Doctor midwife assistant midwife Other one Missing Total provider of women
Mother's age at birth
<20 21.7 74.9 0.9 1.6 0.2 0.8 0.0 100.0 97.4 473
20-34 18.6 76.1 0.8 2.2 0.2 1.8 0.3 100.0 95.5 1,726
35-49 20.9 71.2 0.4 4.1 0.0 3.3 0.3 100.0 92.4 488
Birth order
1 25.1 71.6 0.6 1.4 0.2 0.9 0.3 100.0 97.2 577
2-3 19.8 76.1 0.5 1.6 0.2 1.6 0.2 100.0 96.3 890
4-5 16.1 77.0 0.9 4.2 0.1 1.7 0.1 100.0 94.0 587
6+ 17.4 74.8 1.1 2.9 0.1 3.3 0.4 100.0 93.2 633
Residence
Urban 28.1 70.7 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.7 0.2 100.0 99.0 1,138
Rural 13.2 78.2 1.1 4.2 0.2 2.8 0.3 100.0 92.5 1,549
Region
Monrovia 42.7 55.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.3 100.0 98.8 581
North Western 13.3 77.9 0.7 7.7 0.0 0.3 0.0 100.0 91.9 193
South Central 15.1 80.4 1.3 1.1 0.0 1.9 0.2 100.0 96.8 492
South Eastern A 9.5 81.6 1.1 1.8 1.7 4.0 0.3 100.0 92.2 229
South Eastern B 12.4 65.5 1.8 11.2 0.0 8.3 0.9 100.0 79.7 141
North Central 13.1 82.4 0.5 2.4 0.0 1.5 0.2 100.0 96.0 1,051
Mother's education
No education 13.8 78.3 1.1 3.6 0.2 2.8 0.3 100.0 93.1 1,280
Primary 21.2 74.5 0.3 2.1 0.2 1.6 0.1 100.0 96.0 796
Secondary + 29.4 68.8 0.6 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.4 100.0 98.8 611
Wealth quintile
Lowest 8.3 79.9 1.9 5.0 0.4 4.0 0.5 100.0 90.1 591
Second 14.2 78.5 0.8 4.6 0.1 1.6 0.3 100.0 93.4 571
Middle 16.9 79.2 0.1 1.0 0.2 2.6 0.0 100.0 96.2 551
Fourth 25.7 72.8 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.4 0.0 100.0 98.8 538
Highest 37.4 61.4 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 100.0 99.2 436
Total 19.5 75.0 0.7 2.4 0.1 1.9 0.2 100.0 95.3 2,687
Note: If more than one source of prenatal care was mentioned, only the provider with the highest qualifications is considered in
this tabulation.
1
Skilled provider includes doctor, nurse, midwife, and physician's assistant
3.9 LEVELS AND TRENDS IN INFANT AND CHILD MORTALITY
Information on child mortality serves the needs of the health sector by identifying population
groups that are at high risk. Infant and child mortality rates are also regarded as indices reflecting the
degree of poverty and deprivation of a population.

The data for mortality estimation were collected in the birth history section of the Woman’s
Questionnaire. The birth history section began with questions about the respondent’s experience with
childbearing (i.e., the number of sons and daughters living with the mother, the number who live
elsewhere, and the number who have died). These questions were followed by a birth history in which the
respondent was asked to list each of her births, starting with the first. For each birth, data were obtained
on sex, month and year of birth, survivorship status, and current age, or if the child was dead, age at
death. This information is used to directly estimate mortality rates. Age-specific mortality rates are
categorized and defined as follows:
Neonatal mortality (NN): the probability of dying within the first month of life
Postneonatal mortality (PNN): the difference between infant and neonatal mortality
Infant mortality (1q0): the probability of dying before the first birthday
Child mortality (4q1): the probability of dying between the first and fifth birthday
Under-five mortality (5q0): the probability of dying between birth and fifth birthday.
All rates are expressed per 1,000 live births, except for child mortality, which is expressed per
1,000 children surviving to 12 months of age.
Table 3.9 shows neonatal, postneonatal, infant, child, and under-five mortality rates for succes-
sive five-year periods before the survey. For the five years immediately preceding the survey (approxi-
mately calendar years 2004-2008), the infant mortality rate is 73 deaths per 1,000 live births and under
five mortality is 114 deaths per 1,000 live births (Figure 3.3). Thus, one in every nine Liberian children
dies before reaching age five. The neonatal mortality rate is 38 deaths per 1,000 live births during the
most recent five-year period, while the postneonatal mortality rate is 35 deaths per 1,000 live births. This
means that one-third of under-five deaths occur during the first month of life. The child mortality rate is
45 deaths per 1,000 children surviving to age one year.
Mortality trends str usually examined in two ways: by comparing mortality rates for three five-
year periods preceding a single survey, and by comparing mortality estimates obtained from various
surveys. Any conclusions with respect to the trends in mortality have to be interpreted with caution
because sampling errors associated with mortality estimates are large.
Table 3.9 Early childhood mortality rates
Neonatal, postneonatal, infant, child, and under-five mortality rates for five-year
periods preceding the survey, Liberia 2009
Neonatal Postneonatal Infant Child Under-five

Years preceding mortality mortality mortality mortality mortality
the survey (NN) (PNN)1 (1q0) (4q1) (5q0)
0-4 38 35 73 45 114
5-9 54 81 135 88 211
10-14 66 91 157 110 249
1
Computed as the difference between the infant and neonatal mortality rates

Figure 3.3 Infant and Child Mortality Rates
Liberia 2004-08
120 114
100
80
73
60
45
40 38
35
20
0
Neonatal Postneonatal Infant Child Under five
Note: Data refer to the 5-year period preceding the survey.
Rates are per 1,000 births., except for child mortality, which
is children surviving to age 12 months.
The data from the birth histories in the 2009 LMIS imply that there has been a dramatic decline in
child mortality in Liberia over the 15-year period preceding the survey. For example, under-five mortality
appears to have been cut in half, from 211 deaths per 1,000 births 10-14 years before the survey to 114 for
the five-year period before the survey. Although this trend is very plausible given the end of the civil war
that raged in Liberia for over a decade, caution should also be exercised since the child mortality data are
derived from the birth history and many women who were interviewed had difficulty in providing dates of
birth for their children.
Nevertheless, the downward trend is substantiated by comparison with the 1986 LDHS data.
which showed an infant mortality rate of 144 and an under-five mortality rate of 220. Figure 3.4 shows
the infant and under-five mortality rates for the 1986 LDHS, the 2007 LDHS, and the 2009 LMIS.2 The
surveys reveal that both infant and under-five mortality rates have declined considerably, though they
have plateaued in the past two years.
2
Data for the 1999-2000 LDHS are not shown since the rates (117 for infant mortality and 194 for under-five
mortality) were estimated using indirect methods which have been shown to over-estimate child mortality.

Figure 3.4 Trends in Infant and Under-Five Mortality Rates
Deaths per 1,000 births

250
220
'
200
144
150
+
110 114
' '
100
71 73
+ +
50
0
1983 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 2006
Midpoint of reference survey
+ Infant ' Under five
Note: Data refer to the five years before each survey.
3.10 DATA QUALITY
The quality of mortality estimates calculated from retrospective birth histories depends upon the
completeness with which births and deaths are reported and recorded. One factor that affects childhood
mortality estimates is the quality of reporting of age at death, which may distort the age pattern of
mortality. If age at death is misreported, it will bias the estimates, especially if the net effect of the age
misreporting results in transference from one age bracket to another. For example, a net transfer of deaths
from under one month to a higher age will affect the estimates of neonatal and postneonatal mortality. To
minimize errors in reporting of age at death, interviewers were instructed to record age at death in days if
the death took place in the month following the birth, in months if the child died before age two years,
and in years if the child was at least two years of age. They also were asked to probe for deaths reported
at one year to determine a more precise age at death in terms of months.
The data in Appendix Table C.6 show that despite these instructions, there were a number of
deaths reported to have occurred at age “one year.” It is likely that at least some of these may have
occurred before the child’s first birthday and thus should be classified as infant deaths. Transferring some
of these deaths from childhood to infancy would slightly increase the infant mortality rate and slightly
decrease the child mortality rate. For the most recent five-year period before the survey, the proportion of
infant deaths that occurred during the first month of life (57 percent) is plausible.
Another potential data quality problem is the selective omission from the birth histories of
children who did not survive, which can lead to underestimation of mortality rates. When selective
omission of childhood deaths occurs, it is usually more severe for deaths occurring early in infancy. One
way such omissions can be detected is by examining the proportion of early neonatal deaths to infant
deaths. Generally, if there is substantial underreporting of deaths, the result is an abnormally low ratio of
early neonatal deaths to infant deaths. As shown in Appendix Table C.5, for the most recent five-year
period before the survey, the proportion of neonatal deaths occurring in the first week of life is high (77

percent).3 The fact that the proportions are lower for earlier periods prior to the survey implies that
reporting may not be as accurate for these earlier times.
A third potential data quality problem is displacement of birth dates, which may cause a distortion
of mortality trends. This can occur if an interviewer knowingly records a death as occurring in a different
year, which would happen if an interviewer is trying to reduce their workload, because additional
questions are asked for children under five. In the 2009 LMIS questionnaire, the cut-off year for these
questions was 2003.
As shown in Appendix Table C.4, there is no evidence of displacement of births from 2003 back
to 2002. There are 836 births reported as occurring in 2003, compared with 692 in 2002, which if
anything, represents displacement into the reference period instead of out of it. It is interesting to note that
this lack of displacement in the LMIS is in contrast with a considerable displacement seen in the 2007
LDHS (LISGIS et al., 2008). An important difference in the two surveys is that the LMIS had very few
questions for children under five compared with the lengthy sections on health and delivery care for births
in the five years before the 2007 LDHS.
3.11 SOCIOECONOMIC DIFFERENTIALS IN INFANT AND CHILD MORTALITY
Mortality differentials by place of residence, region, educational level of the mother, and
household wealth are presented in Table 3.10. For a sufficient number of births to study mortality
differentials across population subgroups, period-specific rates are presented for the ten-year period
preceding the survey (roughly corresponding to calendar years 1999 to 2008).
Table 3.10 Early childhood mortality rates by socioeconomic characteristics
Neonatal, postneonatal, infant, child, and under-five mortality rates for the 10-year
period preceding the survey, by background characteristic, Liberia 2009

Background mortality mortality mortality mortality mortality
characteristic (NN) (PNN)1 (1q0) (4q1) (5q0)
Residence
Urban 48 41 90 53 138
Rural 44 64 108 70 170
Region
Monrovia 56 30 87 56 137
North Western 36 83 119 78 187
South Central 41 60 100 84 176
South Eastern A 57 64 120 68 181
South Eastern B 32 48 79 49 124
North Central 44 59 103 54 151
Mother's education
No education 40 62 102 69 164
Primary 51 52 102 66 162
Secondary + 53 42 95 39 131
Wealth quintile
Lowest 52 69 121 62 176
Second 46 57 103 55 153
Middle 33 62 95 66 155
Fourth 38 43 81 85 159
Highest 62 34 95 46 137
1
3
There are no models for mortality patterns during the neonatal period. However, one review of data from several
developing countries concluded that, at neonatal mortality rate levels of 20 per 1,000 or higher, approximately 70
percent of neonatal deaths occur within the first six days of life (Boerma, 1988).

The 2009 LMIS data show that mortality levels in rural areas tend to be higher than urban areas.
For example, under-five mortality in rural areas is 170 per 1,000 live births, compared with 138 for urban
areas.
There are regional variations in childhood mortality rates. The data show that South Eastern B
region (124 deaths per 1,000 live births) and Monrovia (137 deaths per 1,000 births) have the lowest
under-five mortality rates, while the North Western region has the highest (187 per 1,000 births). This
means that almost one in five children born in North Western region does not live to the fifth birthday.
Many studies have documented that mother’s level of education is strongly correlated with child
survival. Higher levels of maternal educational attainment are generally associated with lower mortality
rates, since education exposes mothers to information about better nutrition, use of contraceptives to
space births and knowledge about childhood illness and treatment. In Liberia, under-five mortality
amongst children whose mothers have no education (164 per 1,000 live births) or only primary school
(162 per 1,000 births) is higher than among mothers with secondary or higher education (131 per 1,000
live births).
Childhood mortality also varies by household wealth status. Under-five mortality decreases from
176 deaths per 1,000 births for the lowest wealth quintile to 137 for the highest wealth quintile.
3.12 DEMOGRAPHIC DIFFERENTIALS IN INFANT AND CHILD MORTALITY
The demographic characteristics of both mother and child have been found to play an important
role in the survival probability of children. Table 3.11 presents early childhood mortality rates by demo-
graphic characteristics (i.e., sex of child, mother’s age at birth, birth order, and previous birth interval).
Childhood mortality rates show the usual pattern of higher rates for males than females. Data in
Table 3.11 shows that male mortality exceeds female mortality at all levels except child mortality (age 1-
4 years). Data from previous studies show that births to young mothers (under age 20 years) and older
mothers (35 years and over) experience a higher risk of dying. This U-shaped pattern is also seen in
Liberia, where mortality rates are generally higher for the youngest and oldest mothers.
First births and higher order births normally experience a higher risk of mortality. Data from the
2009 LMIS confirm this pattern. Neonatal, infant, postneonatal, and under-five mortality rates are lowest
for second through sixth births, while child mortality rates do not show any particular pattern by birth
order.
The spacing of birth interval has a significant impact on a child’s chances of survival. Generally,
children born less than two years after a prior sibling suffer significantly higher risks of death than
children born after a longer birth interval.
The data for Liberia corroborate this pattern. Mortality rates at all ages of childhood show a
strong relationship with length of the birth interval. Under-five mortality is more than twice as high
among children born less than two years after a preceding sibling than for those born four or more years
after a previous child (238 versus 91 per 1,000 births). The relationship occurs at every age group.

Table 3.11 Early childhood mortality rates by demographic characteristics
Neonatal, postneonatal, infant, child, and under-five mortality rates for the 10-year period
preceding the survey, by demographic characteristics, Liberia 2009

Demographic mortality mortality mortality mortality mortality
characteristic (NN) (PNN)1 (1q0) (4q1) (5q0)
Child's sex
Male 52 57 109 62 164
Female 39 54 92 64 151
Mother's age at birth

<20 64 67 131 81 201
20-29 42 50 92 74 159
30-39 34 57 91 31 119
40-49 78 43 121 72 184
Birth order
1 57 57 114 64 170
2-3 39 48 88 73 154
4-6 35 51 86 66 146
7+ 61 78 139 36 170
Previous birth interval2

<2 years 74 81 155 99 238
2 years 38 54 92 69 155
3 years 26 41 66 47 110
4+ years 24 37 61 31 91
1
2
Excludes first-order births

MALARIA 4
4.1 KNOWLEDGE OF MALARIA
4.1.1 Knowledge of Malaria Symptoms
In order to assess basic knowledge about malaria, all women who were interviewed in the LMIS
were asked if they had ever heard of malaria and if so, they were asked if they could name any symptoms
of malaria (specifically, “what are some things that can happen to you when you have malaria?”). Results
are shown in Table 4.1. Percentages may sum to more than 100 because respondents could give more than
one response.
Table 4.1 Knowledge of malaria symptoms
Among women age 15-49, the percentage who have heard of malaria and among those who have heard of malaria, the percentage who
reported specific signs or symptoms of malaria infection, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Among women who have heard of malaria, percentage who reported specific
All women signs or symptoms of malaria Number of
Percentage Does women
who have Number Poor Yellow not who have
Background heard of of Head- Joint appe- Vomit- Weak- urine/ know heard of
characteristic malaria women Fever Chills ache pain tite ing ness eye any malaria
Age
15-19 95.0 839 47.2 59.8 29.9 13.1 22.9 5.2 14.5 4.3 2.9 798
20-24 98.0 886 58.3 66.3 25.7 16.6 28.0 4.1 16.1 4.5 1.1 868
25-29 98.1 771 54.0 67.3 24.7 17.6 30.1 5.8 12.8 4.6 1.5 756
30-34 97.9 564 52.7 63.6 28.3 24.7 32.0 4.8 14.0 3.0 0.8 552
35-39 98.7 622 55.7 69.0 30.0 29.8 34.5 6.1 11.9 3.5 0.3 614
40-44 98.9 429 51.5 69.1 33.3 29.7 31.3 5.1 13.6 1.5 0.5 424
45-49 99.4 286 54.0 67.5 34.7 38.4 26.1 5.9 9.4 3.1 1.2 285
Residence
Urban 98.3 2,225 53.4 62.0 30.0 20.5 37.0 4.9 16.6 4.4 1.2 2,187
Rural 97.1 2,172 53.5 69.5 27.1 23.1 20.8 5.5 10.7 3.0 1.4 2,109
Region
Monrovia 97.7 1,285 50.6 56.0 29.8 20.6 38.6 3.4 18.1 4.9 1.2 1,256
North Western 98.8 276 73.8 64.0 25.8 13.3 21.4 4.8 15.0 1.3 0.2 272
South Central 97.7 762 66.1 61.0 16.0 15.2 26.2 4.6 21.2 3.7 0.4 745
South Eastern A 97.2 317 61.9 74.5 32.7 30.4 17.2 2.7 12.5 10.3 1.1 308
South Eastern B 94.9 211 49.3 35.7 31.6 20.2 20.8 2.8 12.6 7.5 7.0 200
North Central 97.9 1,546 44.7 78.5 33.1 26.0 27.4 7.9 6.4 1.4 1.2 1,514
Education
No education 97.2 1,834 54.5 68.8 24.1 24.8 22.3 4.2 11.2 3.2 1.2 1,783
Primary 97.2 1,322 51.7 66.5 31.2 19.0 30.3 4.8 13.2 4.2 1.7 1,285
Secondary + 99.0 1,241 53.7 60.2 32.4 20.3 37.5 7.1 17.8 4.0 1.0 1,228
Wealth quintile
Lowest 98.0 802 52.2 68.8 22.9 24.4 17.6 6.2 10.1 4.0 1.5 785
Second 96.8 811 53.7 70.6 29.5 24.5 21.4 4.8 12.0 4.0 1.9 785
Middle 96.9 818 53.8 69.0 27.9 18.9 29.1 5.2 8.6 2.5 1.7 793
Fourth 97.4 934 54.7 66.3 31.2 18.8 33.7 5.0 15.1 3.1 1.0 909
Highest 99.1 1,033 52.9 56.2 30.6 22.6 39.6 4.9 20.4 4.9 0.6 1,024
Total 97.7 4,397 53.4 65.7 28.6 21.8 29.1 5.2 13.7 3.8 1.3 4,296
Note: Percentages may add to more than 100.0, since multiple responses were allowed.
Malaria | 39
The results show that knowledge of malaria is almost universal. Ninety-eight percent of women
have heard of malaria, a statistic that varies little by background characteristics.
When asked about symptoms of malaria, the most common responses were chills (mentioned by
66 percent of women) and fever (53 percent). Poor appetite, headache, and joint pain were mentioned by
20-30 percent of women, while weakness, vomiting, and yellow eyes were mentioned by fewer women.
Differences in the reporting of malaria symptoms by background characteristics are surprisingly small,
with region being the only variable with sizeable differences. Women in Monrovia are particularly likely
to cite poor appetite as a symptom of malaria, while those in North Western are most likely to cite fever
as a symptom. Women in South Eastern B are the least likely of women in any region to say that chills are
a sign of malaria, while women in North Central are the most likely to cite this symptom.
4.1.2 Knowledge of Age Groups Most Affected by Malaria
Women who had heard of malaria were asked which age groups of people are most likely to get a
serious case of malaria. Answers are shown in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2 Knowledge of age group most affected by malaria
Among women age 15-49 who have heard of malaria, the percentage who cite specific age groups of
people who are most likely to get a serious case of malaria, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Background Pregnant Does not Number of

characteristic Children women Adults Elderly Everyone know women
Age
15-19 70.2 27.5 8.2 10.7 17.4 5.1 798
20-24 76.9 32.5 7.7 9.1 13.9 4.6 868
25-29 74.2 37.9 8.7 8.5 13.1 5.4 756
30-34 75.9 30.8 9.5 10.0 15.5 5.0 552
35-39 75.6 31.7 7.2 11.8 20.8 3.3 614
40-44 76.3 34.9 7.1 8.7 17.5 3.3 424
45-49 72.8 28.7 13.6 13.3 18.4 6.9 285
Residence
Urban 76.3 33.0 8.7 10.3 16.3 3.3 2,187
Rural 72.7 31.3 8.3 9.8 16.2 6.1 2,109
Region
Monrovia 75.8 27.1 9.1 10.8 17.9 3.2 1,256
North Western 76.8 28.6 6.8 5.2 19.0 2.8 272
South Central 75.6 36.0 9.3 12.5 20.8 4.5 745
South Eastern A 83.7 40.1 15.6 18.9 12.4 5.9 308
South Eastern B 57.7 24.1 10.1 10.1 20.9 18.0 200
North Central 72.9 34.7 6.2 7.2 12.3 4.4 1,514
Education
No education 70.8 31.3 9.2 9.8 19.2 7.2 1,783
Primary 74.4 31.1 6.6 10.7 14.9 4.1 1,285
Secondary + 80.1 34.5 9.3 9.6 13.5 1.8 1,228
Wealth quintile
Lowest 67.3 29.7 10.1 9.9 17.1 9.1 785
Second 74.6 31.6 10.1 10.7 16.2 5.3 785
Middle 72.3 33.7 4.7 6.8 15.1 6.0 793
Fourth 75.4 34.8 7.3 10.6 17.1 2.7 909
Highest 81.0 31.0 10.0 11.6 15.8 1.7 1,024
Total 74.5 32.2 8.5 10.0 16.3 4.7 4,296
40 | Malaria
Three-quarters of women age 15-49 know that children are most likely to be seriously affected by
malaria, while almost one-third mentioned that pregnant women are most likely to be seriously affected.
One in six (16 percent) say that everyone is likely to be seriously affected by malaria. There are only
minor differences by background characteristics, except that women in South Eastern A seem to be more
likely than women in other regions to mention children, pregnant women, adults, and the elderly as being
particularly vulnerable to malaria.
4.1.3 Knowledge of Causes of Malaria
Ignorance of how malaria is spread inhibits women’s ability to take preventive measures. When
asked what causes malaria, 84 percent of Liberian women age 15-49 said it is caused by mosquitoes, 39
percent said it is caused by dirty surroundings, and 20 percent said it is caused by dirty water (Table 4.3).
Differences by background characteristics are not large, although urban women, those with more
education, and those in higher wealth quintiles are more likely than other women to mention mosquitoes,
dirty water, and dirty surroundings as causes of malaria.
Table 4.3 Knowledge of causes of malaria
Among women age 15-49 who have heard of malaria, the percentage who cite specific causes of malaria,
Background Dirty Dirty Certain Does not Number of

characteristic Mosquitoes water surroundings Beer food know any women
Age
15-19 80.4 18.0 38.9 0.9 3.0 6.7 798
20-24 83.3 17.0 37.9 0.5 4.8 6.1 868
25-29 84.6 22.1 40.2 0.6 3.0 6.4 756
30-34 86.0 21.0 39.9 0.1 4.1 7.4 552
35-39 86.1 21.3 39.4 0.1 2.6 6.8 614
40-44 88.3 24.3 37.2 0.2 4.1 4.3 424
45-49 84.7 22.9 37.2 0.2 1.8 6.3 285
Residence
Urban 88.5 21.7 45.4 0.6 3.7 3.4 2,187
Rural 80.0 18.9 32.1 0.3 3.2 9.4 2,109
Region
Monrovia 89.5 18.4 47.1 0.4 4.0 3.4 1,256
North Western 84.4 16.6 25.2 0.4 0.7 8.9 272
South Central 74.9 19.9 37.9 0.2 3.9 10.9 745
South Eastern A 89.2 25.3 36.3 1.1 10.7 6.7 308
South Eastern B 70.0 16.3 21.4 0.3 5.4 18.0 200
North Central 85.5 22.3 37.7 0.4 1.6 4.6 1,514
Education
No education 79.8 18.7 34.5 0.3 3.6 9.4 1,783
Primary 83.7 20.1 35.7 0.3 3.3 6.8 1,285
Secondary + 91.6 22.9 48.4 0.7 3.5 1.5 1,228
Wealth quintile
Lowest 78.1 19.0 25.9 0.5 3.3 11.9 785
Second 80.9 20.1 36.5 0.5 4.2 7.6 785
Middle 82.0 20.5 35.5 0.5 2.5 8.3 793
Fourth 87.5 20.5 46.1 0.7 2.4 3.6 909
Highest 90.7 21.2 46.7 0.1 4.7 2.1 1,024
Total 84.3 20.3 38.9 0.4 3.5 6.4 4,296
4.1.4 Knowledge of Ways to Avoid Malaria
Over 90 percent of Liberian women say that there are ways to avoid getting malaria (Table 4.4).
Urban women, women in Monrovia, those with more education, and those in wealthier quintiles are more
likely to say that malaria is avoidable. Women in South Eastern B (78 percent) are notably less likely to
say that there are ways to avoid getting malaria.
Malaria | 41
Table 4.4 Knowledge of ways to avoid malaria
Among women age 15-49 who have heard of malaria, the percentage who say there are ways to avoid getting malaria, and among those, the
percentage who cite specific ways of avoiding malaria, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Women who
have heard
of malaria
Number Among women who have heard of malaria and who say there are ways to
Percentage of avoid getting malaria, percentage who cite specific ways to avoid malaria
who say women
there are who Sleep Use Keep
ways to have under Use insecti- door and Use Keep sur- Does not Number
Background avoid heard of mosquito mosquito cide windows insect roundings Cut the know of
characteristic malaria malaria net coils spray closed repellant clean grass Other any women
Age
15-19 92.2 798 71.0 12.7 7.6 7.5 0.5 57.1 7.3 9.4 3.0 736
20-24 92.1 868 79.4 9.8 10.7 7.0 0.8 53.9 7.3 6.3 3.3 800
25-29 93.0 756 77.9 11.9 11.6 8.9 1.6 55.5 10.2 8.0 3.4 703
30-34 92.3 552 75.3 10.5 12.5 7.6 0.4 56.9 7.0 6.2 4.9 509
35-39 91.4 614 78.1 13.8 11.4 10.0 0.8 58.5 8.1 8.7 1.9 561
40-44 92.7 424 76.5 8.5 8.2 5.1 1.1 57.4 10.8 6.8 2.6 393
45-49 91.9 285 74.9 15.5 13.3 12.8 2.2 54.6 10.3 8.7 2.5 262
Residence
Urban 94.7 2,187 74.6 15.1 16.7 7.3 1.5 61.4 6.7 8.9 1.6 2,070
Rural 89.7 2,109 78.1 7.8 3.8 9.0 0.4 50.5 10.3 6.4 4.9 1,893
Region
Monrovia 95.5 1,256 71.8 19.2 21.9 6.0 2.2 58.7 4.7 9.7 1.6 1,199
North Western 91.0 272 89.6 6.0 3.1 4.5 0.7 50.3 5.6 4.4 1.0 248
South Central 93.8 745 70.9 9.2 9.5 6.1 0.0 50.3 4.3 16.8 8.9 698
South Eastern A 92.6 308 90.4 10.2 5.5 12.9 0.3 39.3 14.6 5.2 1.8 285
South Eastern B 77.7 200 76.0 9.2 1.9 1.5 0.2 36.7 8.0 10.4 9.7 155
North Central 90.9 1,514 77.6 7.8 4.5 11.4 0.7 63.7 13.0 2.2 1.6 1,377
Education
No education 89.4 1,783 74.8 12.6 5.9 9.3 1.1 50.3 9.5 5.7 5.1 1,595
Primary 91.2 1,285 76.3 9.0 7.0 8.2 0.1 53.4 9.0 7.6 3.2 1,172
Secondary + 97.4 1,228 78.3 12.8 20.2 6.4 1.7 66.8 6.6 10.5 0.7 1,196
Wealth quintile
Lowest 87.3 785 75.4 9.8 3.0 11.4 0.0 42.5 13.8 5.5 5.6 685
Second 90.6 785 80.1 7.4 3.9 10.1 0.5 58.0 10.6 5.1 3.5 711
Middle 90.3 793 77.0 7.0 6.5 8.0 0.5 56.6 8.3 4.9 3.5 716
Fourth 94.6 909 78.0 13.4 11.0 6.0 1.0 59.1 5.5 7.6 3.1 860
Highest 96.7 1,024 72.1 17.6 23.1 6.4 2.2 61.5 5.9 13.2 1.0 990
Total 92.2 4,296 76.3 11.6 10.5 8.1 1.0 56.2 8.4 7.7 3.2 3,963
When asked about the main ways to avoid getting malaria, 76 percent of women reported
sleeping under a mosquito net and 56 percent reported keeping the surroundings clean. Twelve percent of
women mentioned using mosquito coils as a way of avoiding malaria, while 11 percent mentioned using
insecticide spray, and 8 percent each mentioned cutting the grass and keeping doors and windows closed.
There are surprisingly small differences by background characteristics. For example, the proportion of
women who mention sleeping under mosquito nets as a way of avoiding malaria is between 70 and 80
percent of women in all categories except women in both North Western and South Eastern A regions,
where the proportion is 90 percent. Women in higher wealth quintiles are more likely than other women
to mention mosquito coils and insecticide spray as ways to avoid malaria.
42 | Malaria
4.1.5 Knowledge of Malaria Treatment
Almost all women know that malaria can be treated. Ninety-eight percent of women say that
malaria is treatable, with only slightly lower levels among women in South Eastern B region (Table 4.5).
Table 4.5 Knowledge of ways to treat malaria
Among women age 15-49 who have heard of malaria, the percentage who say malaria can be treated, and among those, the percentage
who cite specific drugs for malaria treatment, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Women who have
heard of malaria Among women who have heard of malaria and who say that malaria can be treated,
percentage who cite specific drugs for treatment of malaria
Number Number of
Percentage of women New Aspirin, Herbs, Does women who
who say who have malaria panadol, tradi- not say malaria
Background malaria can heard of SP/ Chloro- drug/ para- tional know can be
characteristic be treated malaria Fansidar quine Quinine ACT cetemol medicine Other any treated
Age
15-19 96.8 798 2.1 44.7 20.2 38.0 25.3 1.0 1.3 10.4 772
20-24 97.7 868 3.6 50.2 24.1 50.7 19.0 0.8 1.4 5.7 848
25-29 97.8 756 4.3 49.0 25.7 53.0 21.2 1.4 1.0 5.5 740
30-34 97.2 552 4.8 53.1 28.6 56.9 17.9 1.6 1.8 2.6 536
35-39 97.7 614 4.1 51.2 30.7 51.6 18.3 3.0 1.6 5.0 600
40-44 98.2 424 6.7 52.8 27.7 46.4 19.5 2.3 1.5 5.1 416
45-49 97.3 285 3.3 55.7 23.1 52.6 19.2 3.6 2.1 5.5 277
Residence
Urban 98.5 2,187 6.1 53.5 32.8 49.8 20.4 1.2 1.6 4.3 2,154
Rural 96.5 2,109 1.7 46.5 17.7 49.0 20.4 2.3 1.2 7.7 2,035
Region
Monrovia 99.2 1,256 6.1 58.1 34.7 46.0 19.7 1.1 1.8 4.9 1,247
North Western 98.5 272 1.5 29.6 15.1 67.8 16.8 1.0 1.0 5.1 268
South Central 97.7 745 4.9 51.2 23.2 46.7 26.9 3.1 2.5 9.2 728
South Eastern A 97.4 308 2.0 35.1 19.3 63.9 16.0 7.0 2.3 5.2 300
South Eastern B 90.2 200 4.6 61.1 11.0 32.3 27.1 4.7 1.8 9.1 180
North Central 96.8 1,514 2.5 48.2 23.7 49.3 18.4 0.2 0.5 5.2 1,466
Education
No education 96.5 1,783 1.9 49.5 19.5 47.2 20.4 2.7 1.3 7.1 1,721
Primary 97.1 1,285 2.8 45.8 22.6 46.5 19.5 1.3 1.2 7.9 1,247
Secondary + 99.4 1,228 8.1 55.3 36.8 55.4 21.3 0.7 1.8 2.3 1,220
Wealth quintile
Lowest 94.6 785 0.5 41.8 15.4 48.6 18.5 3.7 1.2 9.7 743
Second 96.8 785 2.2 49.0 17.6 49.0 21.7 2.1 1.2 6.2 759
Middle 98.0 793 2.1 45.8 21.6 52.4 16.6 1.1 0.9 6.4 777
Fourth 98.5 909 5.2 53.2 29.2 48.2 20.9 1.0 1.8 4.7 896
Highest 99.0 1,024 8.2 57.4 38.5 49.0 23.2 1.1 1.9 3.8 1,014
Total 97.5 4,296 4.0 50.1 25.5 49.4 20.4 1.7 1.4 6.0 4,189
When asked what drugs are used to treat malaria, half of women mentioned chloroquine and/or
the “new malaria drug,” artesunate-amodiaquine combination (ACT). One-quarter of women mentioned
quinine, while 20 percent mention aspirin, panadol, or paracetemol. Only a tiny proportion of women
reported SP/Fansidar as a drug used to treat malaria.
Knowledge of ACT is quite uniform across background characteristics, though it is slightly lower
among the youngest women interviewed (15-19) and among women in South Eastern B. The proportion
of women who mention ACT as a malaria treatment is almost identical in urban and rural areas. It is
particularly high among women in North Western and South Eastern A regions.
Malaria | 43
4.1.6 Exposure to Malaria Messages
A crucial element in the fight to eliminate malaria is the ability to reach the population with
information and educational materials. In an effort to assess the coverage of communication programs,
women interviewed in the LMIS were asked if they had seen or heard any messages about malaria in the
few months before the survey.
As shown in Table 4.6, almost 7 in 10 women (69 percent) said they had seen or heard a message
about malaria. The proportion is over 60 percent in all categories of background characteristics except
among women in South Eastern B, only 27 percent of whom reported that they had seen or heard a
malaria message in the few months before the survey. The proportion of women who were exposed to a
malaria message increases with education and with wealth.
Table 4.6 Exposure to malaria messages
Among women age 15-49 who have heard of malaria, percentage who have seen or heard a message about malaria in the past
few months and among those who have, the percentage who cite specific messages, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Women who have Among women who have heard of malaria and who have seen or heard a
heard of malaria malaria message, percentage who heard/saw specific messages
Percentage
who have Pregnant Number of
seen or Number of women women
heard a women If have Sleep should take who saw or
message who have fever, go under drugs to heard a
Background about heard of to health mosquito prevent Malaria Does not malaria
characteristic malaria malaria facility bednets malaria kills Other know any message
Age
15-19 64.1 798 34.5 33.9 12.5 46.3 8.9 0.5 512
20-24 68.8 868 39.5 37.1 11.7 42.6 6.1 0.4 597
25-29 69.1 756 36.8 36.6 14.6 41.4 11.2 0.1 522
30-34 69.8 552 36.5 39.3 16.7 44.6 10.3 0.6 385
35-39 69.3 614 37.5 36.2 12.2 44.8 7.8 0.4 425
40-44 75.7 424 45.4 33.1 10.6 43.1 12.0 0.0 321
45-49 66.4 285 47.9 31.6 17.8 48.4 6.9 0.3 189
Residence
Urban 72.8 2,187 33.6 38.4 13.6 47.4 10.7 0.4 1,592
Rural 64.5 2,109 44.6 32.7 13.0 40.2 7.0 0.2 1,360
Region
Monrovia 71.9 1,256 24.5 40.0 15.4 53.5 11.1 0.7 903
North Western 63.5 272 37.1 33.0 33.7 51.1 6.2 1.2 173
South Central 62.4 745 59.7 27.4 9.1 45.8 20.3 0.0 465
South Eastern A 67.5 308 20.3 29.3 10.1 81.8 21.6 0.0 208
South Eastern B 26.5 200 27.9 29.1 5.6 58.6 6.4 3.1 53
North Central 75.9 1,514 45.3 37.8 11.3 27.4 1.0 0.0 1,149
Education
No education 62.3 1,783 43.7 33.1 12.7 42.1 7.6 0.2 1,111
Primary 71.0 1,285 37.0 35.7 11.4 40.7 8.4 0.5 912
Secondary + 75.6 1,228 34.3 39.2 16.0 49.7 11.2 0.4 929
Wealth quintile
Lowest 57.8 785 39.8 34.8 9.4 38.9 6.6 0.5 454
Second 62.9 785 45.2 32.6 15.0 44.9 8.4 0.2 494
Middle 72.5 793 43.6 35.1 13.8 35.6 4.4 0.4 575
Fourth 73.6 909 37.8 37.0 12.8 43.0 7.9 0.5 669
Highest 74.2 1,024 30.7 37.9 14.8 53.9 15.3 0.2 759
Total 68.7 4,296 38.7 35.8 13.3 44.1 9.0 0.3 2,951
Note: Percentages may add to more than 100.0, because multiple responses were allowed.
44 | Malaria
When asked about the content of the message, the most commonly mentioned reply was that the
message was related to the fact that malaria is a deadly disease (“Malaria kills”), mentioned by 44 percent
of women who heard or saw a message. Almost as many women reported seeing or hearing a message
about the importance of going to a health facility when having a fever (39 percent of women) or a
message about sleeping under a mosquito bed net (36 percent of women). Thirteen percent of women saw
or heard a message about the need for pregnant women to take drugs to prevent getting malaria.
There are some differences in the exposure to specific malaria-related messages, especially by
region. Messages about the importance of going for treatment when having a fever seem to have the
highest coverage among women in South Central region (60 percent) and the lowest in South Eastern A
(20 percent). There are also strong regional differences in the proportion of women who have heard or
seen messages that malaria can kill, from only 27 percent of women in North Central region to 82 percent
of those in South Eastern A region.
Table 4.7 shows the places women say they saw or heard malaria messages. The most commonly
cited source is community health workers (58 percent of women), followed by radio (46 percent). All
other sources of information were mentioned by less than 10 percent of women. Urban women are more
likely than rural women to see or hear malaria messages on the radio and less likely to get such messages
from community health workers. Community health workers in North Western and North Central regions
appear to be doing a better job in terms of malaria education than their counterparts in other regions.
Table 4.7 Source of malaria messages

Among women age 15-49 who have seen or heard a malaria message in the few months before the survey, the percentage who cite specific
places where they saw/heard a message, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Number of
Place where malaria message was seen or heard women who
Leaflet/ Com- have seen or
fact munity Peer Clinic/ heard a
Background Bill- sheet/ Tele- Video health edu- health malaria
characteristic Radio board Poster T-Shirt brochure vision club School worker cators center Others message
Age
15-19 44.2 4.9 4.6 2.7 0.0 0.5 1.3 13.5 50.8 10.7 5.8 2.6 512
20-24 44.2 6.6 8.5 1.5 1.5 0.3 0.8 3.8 59.0 11.0 6.1 2.5 597
25-29 43.2 5.7 8.8 2.1 0.1 1.3 0.2 1.7 61.1 7.7 11.5 2.3 522
30-34 43.3 5.9 5.7 1.7 0.0 2.4 0.0 2.3 56.9 7.4 9.6 4.3 385
35-39 46.9 1.8 5.9 1.7 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.2 61.5 7.0 8.5 3.5 425
40-44 51.3 6.9 6.6 0.4 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.1 59.0 7.4 6.6 2.8 321
45-49 62.0 0.6 5.1 2.3 0.7 1.0 0.0 1.2 50.7 8.3 10.1 2.9 189
Residence
Urban 54.5 7.1 7.2 2.4 0.9 1.6 0.5 4.7 51.7 7.6 7.8 2.3 1,592
Rural 36.5 2.5 6.2 1.2 0.0 0.1 0.4 3.1 64.3 10.1 8.5 3.6 1,360
Region
Monrovia 60.7 8.7 8.5 3.1 1.5 2.7 0.7 5.0 43.1 7.0 8.2 3.1 903
North Western 40.5 9.5 22.6 7.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 3.0 76.8 24.6 0.0 1.5 173
South Central 54.1 8.7 4.5 1.7 0.0 0.2 0.0 2.9 44.6 13.7 23.9 1.8 465
South Eastern A 23.8 2.5 17.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 5.4 58.5 14.1 19.4 17.1 208
South Eastern B 27.7 2.3 3.2 0.0 0.4 1.0 0.4 5.0 59.4 2.9 9.0 0.9 53
North Central 37.4 0.5 2.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.5 3.3 70.9 5.1 0.8 0.9 1,149
Education
No education 35.6 2.9 6.8 1.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 66.1 8.3 9.1 4.3 1,111
Primary 46.9 3.6 4.4 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.7 5.7 52.7 9.9 7.3 2.2 912
Secondary + 58.2 8.9 8.9 2.7 1.5 2.6 0.5 6.7 52.0 8.2 7.8 2.0 929
Wealth quintile
Lowest 23.0 1.3 8.1 1.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.9 69.1 9.3 8.1 7.0 454
Second 34.5 3.7 8.8 1.8 0.1 0.1 1.0 2.5 66.3 9.6 8.6 3.5 494
Middle 48.1 3.9 3.2 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.3 3.3 61.3 7.3 4.6 0.7 575
Fourth 55.3 4.2 5.4 2.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 4.5 55.9 8.7 5.8 2.3 669
Highest 58.2 9.6 8.4 2.6 1.1 3.1 0.5 6.0 43.4 9.0 12.5 2.3 759
Total 46.2 5.0 6.7 1.8 0.5 0.9 0.4 3.9 57.5 8.8 8.1 2.9 2,951
Note: Percentages may add to more than 100.0 because multiple responses were allowed.
Malaria | 45
Similarly, health workers at clinics and health centers in South Central and South Eastern A regions are
reaching a larger percentage of women than those in North Western and North Central regions. There is a
steady increase by wealth quintile in the proportion of women who say they saw or heard a malaria
message on radio, billboard, and at school.
4.2 OWNERSHIP AND USE OF MOSQUITO NETS
Untreated nets and window screening have long been considered useful protection methods
against mosquitoes and other insects (Lindsay and Gibson, 1988). Nets reduce the human-vector contact
by acting as a physical barrier and thus reducing the number of bites from infective vectors (Bradley et
al., 1986). However, nets and screens are often not well fitted or are torn, thus allowing mosquitoes to
enter or feed on the part of the body adjacent to the netting fabric during the night (Lines et al., 1987).
The problem of ill-used nets and screens provides one of the motives for impregnating them with a fast-
acting insecticide that will repel or kill mosquitoes before or shortly after feeding (Lines et al., 1987;
Hossain and Curtis, 1989).
The treatment of nets has been made possible by the availability of synthetic pyrethroids, the
only insecticides currently used for treatment of nets. This class of insecticides was developed to mimic
the insecticidal compounds of the natural pyrethrum. Currently, insecticide-treated mosquito nets (ITNs)
are regarded as a promising malaria control tool, and when used by all or most members of the
community can reduce malaria transmission. The Government of Liberia is committed to achieving
coverage of 80 percent of households with ITNs by 2010.
4.2.1 Ownership of Mosquito Nets
The 2009 LMIS household questionnaire included questions on net ownership and re-treatment
practices. Table 4.8 provides information on the percentage of households that have any net, an ever-
treated net and an ITN according to residence, region and wealth quintile.
Overall, 49 percent of households in Liberia have at least one mosquito net (treated or untreated).
This is a big improvement over the household net ownership of 18 percent recorded in 2005, and a
sizeable jump in the last two years from the 30 percent recorded in the 2007 LDHS (Figure 4.1). The
2009 LMIS also shows that 19 percent of households have more than one net.
46 | Malaria
Table 4.8 Ownership of mosquito nets
Percentage of households with at least one and more than one mosquito net (treated or untreated), ever-treated mosquito net and insecticide-
treated net (ITN), and the average number of nets per household, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Ever-treated mosquito net1

Average Insecticide-treated
Any type of mosquito net number of mosquito nets (ITNs)2
Average ever- Average
Percentage Percentage number of Percentage Percentage treated Percentage Percentage number of
Background with at with more nets per with at with more nets per with at with more ITNs per Number of
characteristic least one than one household least one than one household least one than one household households
Residence
Urban 44.5 14.9 0.7 42.1 13.9 0.6 42.0 13.8 0.6 1,940
Rural 52.7 22.4 0.9 51.8 21.8 0.8 51.8 21.8 0.8 2,222
Region
Monrovia 36.7 9.0 0.5 33.8 7.7 0.4 33.8 7.5 0.4 1,078
North Western 64.4 24.3 1.0 63.0 23.8 1.0 62.9 23.8 1.0 382
South Central 32.4 7.8 0.4 31.6 7.6 0.4 31.6 7.6 0.4 810
South Eastern A 62.2 23.3 0.9 60.7 22.7 0.9 60.6 22.3 0.9 305
South Eastern B 67.2 38.7 1.2 66.0 37.2 1.2 66.0 37.1 1.2 231
North Central 58.0 27.5 1.0 56.7 26.9 1.0 56.6 26.9 1.0 1,355
Wealth quintile
Lowest 49.0 17.5 0.7 48.1 16.7 0.7 48.0 16.6 0.7 903
Second 55.3 24.7 0.9 54.5 24.2 0.9 54.5 24.1 0.9 860
Middle 54.0 21.9 0.9 52.8 21.7 0.9 52.6 21.6 0.9 785
Fourth 45.1 16.2 0.7 42.9 15.1 0.6 42.9 14.9 0.6 811
Highest 40.9 14.0 0.6 37.7 12.8 0.6 37.7 12.8 0.6 803
Total 48.9 18.9 0.8 47.3 18.1 0.7 47.2 18.0 0.7 4,162
1
An ever-treated net is 1) a pretreated net or a non-pretreated net which has subsequently been soaked with insecticide at any time.
2
An insecticide-treated net (ITN) is 1) a factory-treated net that does not require any further treatment, or 2) a pretreated net obtained within
the past 12 months, or 3) a net that has been soaked with insecticide within the past 12 months.
Figure 4.1 Trends in Ownership of Any Mosquito Net,

Percent
Liberia
60
49
40
30
20 18
0
2005 2007 2009
Year
Malaria | 47
It is also reassuring to note that almost all nets are ITNs; 47 percent of households report owning
an ITN. As shown in Figure 4.2, ITN ownership is higher among rural than urban households (52 versus
42 percent). It ranges from 32 percent of households in South Central region to a high of 66 percent of
households in South Eastern B region. Greater Monrovia has one of the lowest levels of net ownership of
any region; only 34 percent of households in Monrovia own an ITN. It is interesting to note that the
wealthiest households are the least likely to own an ITN. These patterns are plausible because in Liberia,
most ITNs are donated to Liberia, so they are distributed free of charge. Prior to the 2009 LMIS, counties
with large urban populations such as Montserrado, Nimba, Bong and Bassa, had not benefited from mass
ITN distribution. This explains the low coverage of ITNs in these regions.
Figure 4.2 Differentials in Ownership of ITNs
RESIDENCE
Urban 42
Rural 52
REGION
Monrovia 34
North Western 63
South Central 32
South Eastern A 61
South Eastern B 66
North Central 57
WEALTH QUINTILE
Lowest 48
Second 55
Middle 53
Fourth 43
Highest 38
0 20 40 60 80
Note: Percentage of households owning at least one insecticide-treated net LMIS 2009
Households without nets were asked why they did not have one. Responses shown in Table 4.9
indicate that the most common reason given was that nets are not available (59 percent), followed by the
cost of nets (24 percent). Citing high cost appears to be more of an issue among households in South
Central region and Monrovia, both areas that have relatively lower proportions citing lack of availability
as reasons for not owning nets. Households in Monrovia and households in the wealthiest quintile are also
more likely than other households to mention not liking to use nets as reasons for not owning one.
48 | Malaria
Table 4.9 Reason for not having mosquito nets
Among household without mosquito nets, percentage reporting various reasons for not owning
a net, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Reason for not owning a net Number of

Background No Not Don't like Too households
characteristic mosquitoes available to use nets expensive Other without nets
Residence
Urban 2.5 50.5 11.3 26.0 13.1 1,076
Rural 1.3 68.3 1.8 22.7 8.7 1,050
Region
Monrovia 3.5 40.3 16.2 29.5 14.5 682
North Western 0.0 88.7 1.0 4.6 8.4 136
South Central 2.9 43.3 2.6 37.9 18.1 548
South Eastern A 0.0 73.7 1.3 17.9 10.8 115
South Eastern B 0.7 85.0 1.5 5.0 13.7 76
North Central 0.0 84.1 2.0 13.8 0.0 570
Wealth quintile
Lowest 0.3 68.4 1.6 24.2 8.6 461
Second 0.1 68.4 0.9 25.2 7.6 384
Middle 0.3 65.0 2.9 25.7 9.2 361
Fourth 1.5 53.6 6.5 29.2 12.2 445
Highest 6.4 44.2 19.0 18.3 16.0 475
Total 1.9 59.3 6.6 24.4 10.9 2,127
Note: Percentages may sum to more than 100.0 because more than one reason can be given.
4.2.2 Cost of Mosquito Nets
As part of its program to curtail malaria, the NMCP has been distributing mosquito nets widely,
mostly free of charge. In the LMIS, households that owned nets were asked how much they paid for the
nets. Table 4.10 shows information on the proportion of nets obtained for free and the average cost for
those purchased.
Table 4.10 Cost of mosquito nets
Percent distribution of mosquito nets by whether purchased or obtained free of charge and for those purchased, the
mean cost, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
For nets that

For all nets reported by households were bought
Background Obtained Don't Number of Mean Number of
characteristic Bought free know Missing Total nets cost1 nets bought
Residence
Urban 34.6 63.9 0.8 0.7 100.0 1,281 260 443
Rural 10.9 88.0 0.0 1.0 100.0 1,893 235 207
Region
Monrovia 61.9 36.4 1.6 0.0 100.0 530 272 329
North Western 4.0 95.1 0.1 0.8 100.0 382 * 15
South Central 24.1 74.1 0.2 1.5 100.0 354 218 85
South Eastern A 7.0 91.4 0.1 1.5 100.0 285 (257) 20
South Eastern B 3.4 95.0 0.0 1.6 100.0 281 * 10
North Central 14.3 84.9 0.0 0.8 100.0 1,342 238 192
Wealth quintile
Lowest 9.5 89.1 0.0 1.4 100.0 650 225 62
Second 8.9 90.0 0.0 1.1 100.0 777 231 69
Middle 15.1 83.7 0.3 0.9 100.0 688 208 104
Fourth 28.9 70.5 0.2 0.5 100.0 554 268 160
Highest 50.6 47.6 1.5 0.3 100.0 504 272 255
Total 20.5 78.3 0.3 0.9 100.0 3,174 252 651
Note: Numbers in parentheses are based on 25-49 unweighted cases, while an asterisk denotes a figure based on
fewer than 25 unweighted cases that has been suppressed.
1
In Liberian dollars
Malaria | 49
Results show that well over three-quarters of nets (78 percent) are obtained free of charge, with
only 21 percent being purchased. Nets in urban areas, especially in Monrovia, are far more likely to be
purchased than nets in other areas. More than 3 in 5 nets (62 percent) owned by households in Monrovia
were purchased, compared with only 3 percent of nets in South Eastern B region and 4 percent of nets in
North Western region. Just over half of nets owned by households in the wealthiest quintile were bought.
Among nets that were purchased, the average cost was 252 Liberian dollars (approximately U.S.
$3.80). There is little variation in cost of nets by residence or region.
4.2.3 Use of Mosquito Nets by Children under Five
Those living in areas of high malaria transmission naturally acquire immunity to the disease
over time (Doolan et al., 2009). Acquired immunity is not the same as sterile immunity—that is, acquired
immunity does not prevent P. falciparum infection but rather protects against severe disease and death. A
key factor in acquiring immunity is age. For their first six months of life, children born in areas of heavy
malaria transmission are protected from disease, possibly due in part to the presence of antibodies
acquired from the mother during pregnancy. This protection is gradually lost, and, until they develop their
own immunity to malaria through repeated exposure to P. falciparum, young children are highly
susceptible to the disease. How rapidly children acquire immunity depends in part on the frequency of
exposure to P. falciparum, but in areas of high transmission, children are considered immune by their
fifth birthday. In areas of low or seasonal malaria transmission, immunity is acquired more slowly or not
at all. As a result, in such regions, malaria affects all members of the community regardless of age.
Malaria transmission is heavy throughout Liberia, and the Liberian government recognizes children under
five years of age as a high risk group and recommends that they be protected by sleeping under
insecticide-treated nets.
Table 4.11 shows the information on use of any nets and ITNs by children under five years of
age. Just over one-quarter of children (27 percent) were reported to have slept under any net the night
before the survey, while 26 percent slept under an ITN. Among children living in a households that own
an ITN, only half (51 percent) slept under an ITN the night before the survey. This statistic implies that
greater efforts should be made to encourage households to use the bednets that they own.1
The proportion of children under five in all households who slept under an ITN the night before
the survey declines slightly as age increases. While one-third of infants under one year of age slept under
an ITN, the proportion declines to 20-23 percent among children who are three and four years old.
Differences in use of ITNs by sex of the child and by urban-rural residence are minimal. Differences by
region reflect the data on ownership of ITNs, with the lowest proportions of children sleeping under an
ITN appearing for South Central region (17 percent) and for Monrovia (20 percent) (Figure 4.3).
1
It should be noted that data collection for the LMIS took place from mid-December-February, somewhat after the
height of malaria transmission season. This may account for the relatively low use of nets in households that own
them. Another reason for low use of nets could be heat, since the period December-February is usually the warmest
time of year in Liberia.
50 | Malaria
Table 4.11 Use of mosquito nets by children
Among children under five years of age in all households, the percentages who slept the night before the
survey under a mosquito net (treated or untreated), under an ever-treated mosquito net, and under an
insecticide-treated net (ITN), and among children under five years of age in households with at least one
ITN, the percentage who slept the night before the survey under an ITN, by background characteristics,
Liberia 2009
Children under age 5 in

Children under age 5 in all households households with an ITN
Percentage Percentage Percentage Percentage
who slept who slept who slept who slept
under any under an ever- under an ITN under an ITN
net the night treated net the the night Number the night Number
Background before night before before of before of
characteristic the survey the survey1 the survey2 children the survey2 children
Age in months
<1 33.6 33.3 33.2 915 63.5 478
1 29.0 28.1 28.1 980 54.7 504
2 28.7 27.6 27.6 935 52.6 491
3 21.4 20.3 20.3 915 41.5 447
4 23.6 23.0 23.0 981 44.5 507
Sex
Male 26.6 25.8 25.8 2,413 49.9 1,249
Female 27.9 27.1 27.1 2,312 53.1 1,177
Residence
Urban 25.6 24.1 24.0 1,796 52.5 822
Rural 28.2 27.9 27.9 2,930 50.9 1,605
Region
Monrovia 22.0 19.8 19.8 823 50.3 324
North Western 32.7 32.2 32.2 360 49.4 234
South Central 17.2 17.0 17.0 806 44.8 305
South Eastern A 35.6 35.4 35.4 416 58.4 252
South Eastern B 36.4 36.3 36.3 237 52.5 164
North Central 29.5 28.8 28.8 2,083 52.3 1,147
Wealth quintile
Lowest 25.7 25.6 25.6 1,116 51.0 561
Second 34.9 34.3 34.3 1,080 60.2 616
Middle 25.1 24.7 24.5 985 45.1 535
Fourth 24.3 22.6 22.6 900 48.2 422
Highest 24.5 22.8 22.8 645 50.2 293
Total 27.2 26.5 26.4 4,725 51.4 2,427

1
An ever-treated net is 1) a pretreated net or a non-pretreated net which has subsequently been soaked
with insecticide at any time.
2
An insecticide-treated net (ITN) is 1) a factory-treated net that does not require any further treatment, or
2) a pretreated net obtained within the past 12 months, or 3) a net that has been soaked with insecticide
within the past 12 months.
Malaria | 51
Figure 4.3 Use of ITNs by Children under Five
RESIDENCE
Urban 24
Rural 28
REGION
Monrovia 20
North Western 32
South Central 17
South Eastern A 35
South Eastern B 36
North Central 29
WEALTH QUINTILE
Lowest 26
Second 34
Middle 25
Fourth 23
Highest 23
0 10 20 30 40 50
Note: Percentage of children under five who slept under an

insecticide-treated net the night before the survey. LMIS 2009
4.2.4 Use of Mosquito Nets by Women
In areas of high malaria transmission, adults acquire immunity to malaria, which protects them
from death and severe disease. Pregnancy, however, leads to immune suppression and pregnant women,
especially those in their first pregnancies, are at increased risk for severe malaria relative to other adults.
In addition, malaria in pregnant women is frequently associated with the development of anemia; it also
interferes with the maternal-fetus exchange, leading to low-birth-weight infants. To reduce the risks
associated with malaria during pregnancy, pregnant women are recommended to sleep under bed nets; in
Liberia, the National Malaria Strategy target is for 80 percent of pregnant women to sleep under ITNs.
The 2009 LMIS collected information on usage of nets by women. Table 4.12 shows the proportion of
women who slept under mosquito nets the night before the survey, while Table 4.13 provides similar
information for women who were pregnant at the time of the survey (Figure 4.4).
Twenty-nine percent of all women and 33 percent of pregnant women reported that they slept
under an ITN the night before the survey. Use of ITNs among all women and pregnant women is higher
among rural women and those who are less educated. Among all women, use of ITNs is highest for
women in South Eastern B and North Western regions, while for pregnant women, it is highest in North
Central and North Western regions. Use of ITNs shows no consistent pattern by wealth quintile.
As expected, use of ITNs is considerably higher for women who live in households that own
ITNs. Sixty-one percent of all women and 63 percent of pregnant women who live in households with
ITNs reported that they slept under an ITN the night before the survey.
52 | Malaria
Table 4.12 Use of mosquito nets by women
Among all women age 15-49 in all households, the percentage who slept the night before the
survey under a mosquito net (treated or untreated), under an ever-treated mosquito net, and under
an insecticide-treated net (ITN), and among all women age 15-49 in households with at least one
ITN, the percentage who slept the night before the survey under an ITN, by background
Percentage of women
age 15-49 in
Percentage of all women age 15-49 households with an
who slept under: ITN who:
An ever-
Any net treated net An ITN Slept under
the night the night the night an ITN the
Background before the before the before the Number of night before Number of
characteristic survey survey1 survey2 women the survey2 women
Residence
Urban 25.6 24.1 24.0 2,414 57.6 1,007
Rural 34.6 34.0 34.0 2,356 62.8 1,276
Region
Monrovia 18.4 16.4 16.3 1,394 49.6 458
North Western 42.4 41.7 41.6 299 64.5 193
South Central 20.2 19.6 19.6 826 55.4 292
South Eastern A 37.9 37.6 37.6 344 64.6 200
South Eastern B 43.4 42.9 42.9 228 62.3 157
North Central 39.0 38.3 38.2 1,677 65.2 983
Education
No education 34.7 33.5 33.4 1,935 66.7 970
Primary 28.3 27.5 27.4 1,396 53.9 711
Secondary + 26.3 25.2 25.2 1,306 59.6 553
Wealth quintile
Lowest 28.2 27.6 27.5 870 55.9 429
Second 41.7 41.2 41.2 879 71.6 506
Middle 35.7 35.1 34.9 895 63.2 494
Fourth 29.0 27.5 27.3 1,008 60.9 453
Highest 18.7 17.1 17.1 1,117 47.6 401
Total 30.0 29.0 29.0 4,769 60.5 2,282

1
An ever-treated net is a pretreated net or a non-pretreated net which has subsequently been
soaked with insecticide at any time.
2
An insecticide treated net (ITN) is 1) a factory-treated net that does not require any further
treatment, or 2) a pretreated net obtained within the past 12 months, or 3) a net that has been
soaked with insecticide within the past 12 months.
Malaria | 53
Table 4.13 Use of mosquito nets by pregnant women
Among pregnant women age 15-49 in all households, the percentage who slept the night before the
survey under a mosquito net (treated or untreated), under an ever-treated mosquito net, and under an
insecticide-treated net (ITN), and among pregnant women age 15-49 in households with at least one
ITN, the percentage who slept the night before the survey under an ITN, by background characteristics,
Liberia 2009
Percentage of
pregnant women age
Percentage of pregnant women age 15-49 15-49 in households
who slept under: with ITN who:
An ever- Slept under
Any net treated net an ITN
the night the night An ITN the the night
Background before before the night before Number of before the Number of
characteristic the survey survey the survey2 women survey2 women
Residence
Urban 30.1 29.3 29.3 204 62.4 96
Rural 36.5 35.6 35.6 268 63.7 150
Region
Monrovia 16.9 16.9 16.9 96 * 31
North Western 44.8 44.8 44.8 36 59.9 27
South Central 19.1 18.4 18.4 86 * 28
South Eastern A 29.7 29.7 29.7 46 66.2 20
South Eastern B 36.1 34.9 34.9 21 (48.0) 15
North Central 47.8 46.1 46.1 186 69.5 124
Education
No education 40.4 38.7 38.7 219 72.0 118
Primary 29.0 29.0 29.0 156 51.9 87
Secondary + 25.0 24.8 24.8 92 (59.3) 38
Wealth quintile
Lowest 31.4 29.9 29.9 113 63.8 53
Second 36.3 35.5 35.5 99 60.2 58
Middle 46.9 46.9 46.9 98 74.3 62
Fourth 29.0 27.5 27.5 101 59.9 47
Highest 20.5 20.5 20.5 60 (47.8) 26
Total 33.8 32.9 32.9 471 63.2 245
Note: Numbers in parentheses are based on 25-49 unweighted cases, while an asterisk denotes a figure
based on fewer than 25 unweighted cases that has been suppressed.
1
An ever-treated net is a pretreated net or a non-pretreated net which has subsequently been soaked
with insecticide at any time.
2
An insecticide-treated net (ITN) is 1) a factory-treated net that does not require any further treatment,
or 2) a pretreated net obtained within the past 12 months, or 3) a net that has been soaked with
insecticide within the past 12 months.
54 | Malaria
Figure 4.4 Malaria Indicators for Pregnant Women, Liberia
Percent
100
80
80
60
40
31 33
20
0
2005* 2009 Target for 2010
Slept under an ITN the previous night
* Refers to any mosquito net
Percent
100
80
80
60
45
40
20
4
0
2005 2009 Target for 2010
Percentage receiving intermittent preventive treatment
4.3 INTERMITTENT PREVENTIVE TREATMENT OF MALARIA IN PREGNANCY
As explained above, in areas of high malaria transmission, by the time an individual reaches
adulthood, s/he has acquired immunity that protects her/him from severe disease. However, pregnant
women—especially those pregnant for the first time—frequently regain their susceptibility to malaria.
Although malaria in pregnant women may not manifest itself as either febrile illness or severe disease, it
is frequently the cause of mild to severe anemia. In addition, malaria during pregnancy can interfere with
the maternal-fetus exchange that occurs at the placenta, leading to the delivery of low-birth-weight
infants.
Malaria | 55
The National Policy for Malaria Control and Prevention (NMCP, 2004) calls for pregnant
women to receive intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) to reduce the risks associated with malaria
infection. IPT using sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP/Fansidar) was introduced as a replacement to
chloroquine prophylaxis, which was no longer effective due to high levels of chloroquine resistance.
Current policy states that all pregnant women living in areas of high malaria transmission should receive a
minimum of two doses of SP/Fansidar. The first dose should be administered at the beginning of the
second trimester; the second dose at the start of the third trimester.
In the 2009 LMIS, women who had a live birth in the two years preceding the survey were
asked several questions regarding the time they were pregnant with their most recent birth. They were
asked if anyone told them during their pregnancy that pregnant women need to take medicine to keep
them from getting malaria. They were also asked if they had taken any drugs to prevent getting malaria
during that pregnancy and, if yes, which drug. If the respondent did not know the name of the drug she
took, interviewers were instructed to show her some examples of common antimalarials. They also were
instructed to probe to see if she took three big, white tablets at the health facility (indicative of
SP/Fansidar). If respondents had taken SP/Fansidar, they were further asked how many times they took it
and whether they had received it during a prenatal care visit. Table 4.14 shows the percentage of pregnant
women who were counseled about IPT, the percentage who took any antimalarial drugs to prevent
malaria, and the percentage who took SP/Fansidar.
Table 4.14 Prophylactic use of antimalarial drugs and use of intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) by women during
pregnancy
Percentages of women who were told about intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), who took any antimalarial drugs for
prevention, who took SP/Fansidar, and who received IPT during the pregnancy for their last live birth in the two years
preceding the survey, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Intermittent preventive
SP/Fansidar treatment
Percentage Percentage
Percentage Percentage Percentage who received who received
who were who took any who took Percentage any SP/Fansidar 2 or more
Background told about antimalarial any who took during a doses during Number of
characteristic IPT drug SP/Fansidar 2+ doses PNC visit PNC visit women
Residence
Urban 80.7 69.1 61.8 49.6 58.9 47.1 585
Rural 72.1 62.9 55.6 46.1 53.0 43.9 988
Region
Monrovia 84.9 71.8 59.9 45.5 57.0 42.6 285
North Western 87.5 76.8 73.4 63.1 70.0 60.1 127
South Central 75.1 64.6 62.1 46.1 61.3 45.3 313
South Eastern A 77.3 66.7 66.7 50.8 65.0 49.5 143
South Eastern B 57.9 44.0 30.8 25.3 27.0 22.0 85
North Central 70.4 62.7 53.4 48.0 49.8 45.1 619
Education
No education 74.9 64.8 58.9 48.0 55.8 45.7 738
Primary 72.6 64.7 55.3 45.0 52.3 42.1 513
Secondary + 80.6 67.0 59.8 49.7 58.3 48.3 322
Wealth quintile
Lowest 71.9 60.0 50.2 41.1 47.0 38.6 390
Second 75.4 62.8 56.7 45.2 53.2 42.5 337
Middle 69.4 63.2 59.5 51.7 57.4 49.7 330
Fourth 78.4 69.6 61.5 50.2 59.4 48.2 303
Highest 86.1 75.6 66.3 51.8 63.8 49.4 212
Total 75.3 65.2 57.9 47.4 55.2 45.1 1,573
IPT = Intermittent preventive treatment is treatment with SP/Fansidar during a prenatal care (PNC) visit.
56 | Malaria
The survey results show that three-quarters of women with a live birth in the two years before the
survey were told about IPT, while almost two-thirds (65 percent) of women took some kind of
antimalarial medicine for prevention of malaria during the last pregnancy. Most of these women were
following the national policy, i.e., 58 percent of women said they took SP/Fansidar—the recommended
drug for prevention of malaria during pregnancy in Liberia—at least once during the pregnancy and 47
percent of women took SP/Fansidar two or more times, a huge improvement from the 4 percent reported
in the 2005 survey (NMCP, 2006). Slightly smaller percentages of women said that they received the
SP/Fansidar during a prenatal care visit; consequently, 45 percent of women received two or more doses
of SP/Fansidar, at least one of which was received as part of a prenatal care visit (Figure 4.4),
4.4 MALARIA CASE MANAGEMENT AMONG CHILDREN
Most malarial fevers and convulsions occur at home and prompt and effective malaria treatment
is important to prevent the disease from becoming severe and complicated. The 2009 LMIS asked
mothers whether their children under five years had had a fever in the two weeks preceding the survey
and if so, whether any treatment was sought. Questions were also asked about blood testing, the types of
drugs given to the child and how soon and for how long the drugs were taken.
Table 4.15 shows the percentage of children under five who had fever in the two weeks
preceding the survey and the percentage of such children who had a drop of blood taken from a finger or
heel-prick (presumably for a malaria test), the percentage who took antimalarial drugs, and the percentage
taking drugs on the same or next day.
Survey results show that 44 percent of children under five had a fever in the two weeks preceding
the survey and, of these, 67 percent took some type of antimalarial drug, with 38 percent taking
antimalarials on the same or next day. Almost one-quarter of children with fever were reported to have
had a drop of blood taken from a finger or heel. Prevalence of fever is quite uniform across age,
residence, region, and mother’s education, though it is slightly lower among children in South Eastern B
region. The proportion of children with fever who are given antimalarial drugs is somewhat higher
among children in urban areas, those whose mothers are better educated, and those in higher wealth
quintiles. It is also relatively higher among children in North Central region and Monrovia. Similar
patterns exist for treatment with antimalarial drugs the same or the day after the fever started.
Malaria | 57
Table 4.15 Prevalence and prompt treatment of fever
Percentage of children under age five with fever in the two weeks preceding the survey, and among children
with fever, the percentage who had a blood drop taken from a finger or heel, the percentage who took
antimalarial drugs and the percentage who took the drugs the same or next day following the onset of fever,
Children under five Children under five with fever

Percentage Percentage
with fever in Percentage Percentage who took
the two weeks who had who took antimalarial
Background preceding Number of blood drop antimalarial drugs same or Number of
characteristic the survey children taken drugs next day children
Age (in months)
<12 40.1 787 21.6 63.5 37.6 316
12-23 51.9 773 23.4 65.1 31.6 401
24-35 48.4 706 22.5 70.5 42.0 342
36-47 41.7 688 23.5 70.0 38.4 287
48-59 35.8 740 26.8 67.3 40.2 265
Residence
Urban 46.7 1,411 28.4 72.2 42.7 659
Rural 41.7 2,283 20.0 63.7 34.1 951
Region
Monrovia 49.0 689 33.8 74.4 42.4 337
North Western 40.3 286 21.3 55.4 40.8 115
South Central 41.9 708 11.5 57.3 22.6 297
South Eastern A 44.0 344 13.4 46.5 17.1 151
South Eastern B 32.8 197 12.9 55.6 24.0 65
North Central 43.9 1,471 27.3 76.0 47.6 645
Mother's education
No education 41.5 1,880 20.2 65.2 35.3 780
Primary 45.2 1,111 24.4 66.0 36.3 502
Secondary + 46.6 703 29.7 73.6 45.2 328
Wealth quintile
Lowest 39.7 919 20.3 54.3 22.7 365
Second 45.9 816 19.9 65.5 41.6 375
Middle 41.8 755 22.2 70.0 45.1 316
Fourth 44.4 707 26.4 76.9 38.7 314
Highest 48.5 496 31.5 72.8 42.8 240
Total 43.6 3,694 23.4 67.2 37.6 1,610
Details on the types and timing of antimalarial drugs given to children to treat fever are shown in
Table 4.16. In interpreting the data, it is important to remember that the information is based on reports
from the mothers of the ill children, many of whom may not have known the specific drug given to the
child. The drug newly recommended according to the national policy—artesunate plus amodiaquine (or
ACT for artemisinin combination therapy)—is commonly called the “new malaria medicine” in Liberia,
so that was the name put on the list of codes in the questionnaire. However, it is also often referred to
simply as “amodiaquine,” making it difficult to distinguish use of the single drug and the combination
therapy.
58 | Malaria
Table 4.16 Type and timing of antimalarial drugs
Among children under age five with fever in the two weeks preceding the survey, percentage who took specific antimalarial
drugs and percentage who took each type of drug the same or next day after developing the fever, by background
Percentage of children who took drug the

Percentage of children who took drug: same or next day: Number
Other Other of
Background SP/ Chloro- anti- SP/ Chloro- anti- children
characteristic Fansidar quine Quinine ACT malarial Fansidar quine Quinine ACT malarial with fever
Age (in months)
<12 0.2 34.6 4.8 20.8 3.7 0.2 22.3 2.5 10.6 2.0 316
12-23 0.0 29.3 8.5 27.1 1.4 0.0 13.2 3.8 15.1 0.4 401
24-35 0.5 26.0 9.6 34.8 0.5 0.5 14.3 5.4 21.8 0.5 342
36-47 0.6 24.6 7.9 36.0 1.1 0.1 16.5 2.4 19.1 0.5 287
48-59 0.3 24.8 9.8 32.2 1.2 0.3 15.2 6.4 18.0 0.4 265
Residence
Urban 0.6 31.3 13.2 25.8 2.7 0.4 18.8 7.5 15.5 1.2 659
Rural 0.1 25.8 4.6 32.8 0.8 0.1 14.3 1.7 17.7 0.5 951
Region
Monrovia 1.0 38.3 16.4 16.8 4.6 0.5 22.7 10.1 8.8 1.5 337
North Western 0.7 12.6 2.7 38.0 2.2 0.7 6.9 2.7 29.9 1.3 115
South Central 0.0 19.1 3.8 33.6 1.3 0.0 8.6 0.5 12.6 0.8 297
South Eastern A 0.0 15.7 4.5 26.3 0.0 0.0 7.4 1.5 8.3 0.0 151
South Eastern B 0.6 32.7 2.0 21.1 0.0 0.6 14.6 0.0 8.8 0.0 65
North Central 0.1 32.1 8.2 35.4 0.5 0.1 20.1 3.7 23.5 0.5 645
Mother's education
No education 0.4 28.1 5.4 31.5 0.7 0.4 15.7 1.9 17.3 0.2 780
Primary 0.1 27.4 7.9 30.5 0.7 0.1 15.2 4.2 17.0 0.2 502
Secondary + 0.4 29.1 15.0 25.2 5.1 0.0 18.5 8.9 15.5 3.0 328
Wealth quintile
Lowest 0.0 19.6 4.1 30.1 0.6 0.0 9.2 1.0 12.0 0.4 365
Second 0.5 25.5 5.7 33.5 0.9 0.5 15.9 3.8 21.3 0.4 375
Middle 0.0 26.6 7.0 35.8 1.1 0.0 18.2 3.5 23.4 0.6 316
Fourth 0.0 37.5 8.9 28.6 4.1 0.0 18.3 3.8 15.2 1.9 314
Highest 1.3 34.6 18.4 18.0 1.5 0.8 21.5 10.1 10.7 0.7 240
Total 0.3 28.1 8.1 29.9 1.6 0.2 16.1 4.0 16.8 0.8 1,610
This “new malaria medicine” (ACT) was mentioned by 30 percent of mothers as being used to
treat fever in their children under the age of five. This is an encouraging increase from the 3 percent
reported to be using ACT as measured in the 2005 MIS (NMCP, 2006) and the 9 percent reported in the
2007 LDHS (LISGIS et al., 2008). Nevertheless, it is discouraging to note that almost the same
proportion of children (28 percent) are reported to have received chloroquine for their fever. Eight percent
of children received quinine.
Use of ACT tends to increase with the age of the child. It is higher among rural than urban
children. Use of ACT is highest among children in North Western and North Central regions and declines
as mother’s education increases. Use of ACT shows no consistent pattern by wealth quintile.
Treatment with antimalarial drugs for children with fever tends to be delayed. Only about half of
the children who are given an antimalarial drug are given that drug the same day or the next day after
getting the fever. Consequently, only 17 percent of children with a fever are treated with ACT the same
day or the next day. Prompt treatment with ACT is highest for children in North Western and North
Central regions.
Malaria | 59
Because of the need to treat malaria quickly, it can be useful for parents to have antimalarial
drugs at home. In Liberia, however, the policy requires that antimalarial drugs be prescribed by trained
health personnel after proper diagnosis. Consequently, it is not recommended for caregivers to have these
drugs at home. This may account for the LMIS finding that antimalarial drugs were at home when the
child became ill in only 11 percent of the cases (data not shown).
4.5 ANEMIA AND MALARIA PREVALENCE AMONG CHILDREN
Anemia—a low level of hemoglobin in the blood—decreases the amount of oxygen reaching the
tissues and organs of the body and reduces their capacity to function. It is associated with impaired
cognitive and motor development in children. Although there are many causes of anemia, inadequate
intake of iron, folate, vitamin B12, or other nutrients usually accounts for the majority of cases in many
populations. Malaria accounts for a significant proportion of anemia in children under five in malaria
endemic areas. Other causes of anemia include thalassemia, sickle cell disease, and intestinal worms.
Promotion of the use of insecticide-treated bednets and deworming medication every six months for
children under age five are some of the important measures to reduce anemia prevalence among children.
As mentioned above, malaria is the leading cause of death among children under five in Liberia.
In areas of constant and high malaria transmission, partial immunity develops within the first two years of
life. Many people, including children, may have malaria parasites in their blood without showing any
outward signs of infection. Such asymptomatic infection not only contributes to further transmission of
malaria but also takes a toll on the health of individuals by contributing to anemia. Anemia is a major
cause of morbidity and mortality associated with malaria, making prevention and treatment of malaria
among children and pregnant women all the more important.
All children age 6-59 months living in the households selected for the 2009 LMIS were eligible
for hemoglobin and malaria testing. In the 2009 LMIS, the HemoCue system was used to measure the
concentration of hemoglobin in the blood and the Paracheck Pf™ rapid diagnostic blood test was used to
detect malaria. As shown in Table 4.17, of the 4,110 children age 6-59 months eligible for testing, 98
percent (over 4,000 children) were tested for anemia and malaria. The coverage levels were uniformly
high across background characteristics.
60 | Malaria
Table 4.17 Coverage of testing for anemia and malaria in children
Percentage of eligible children age 6-59 months who were tested for
anemia and for malaria, by background characteristics (unweighted),
Liberia 2009
Number of
Percentage tested for:
children
Background Malaria Malaria eligible
characteristic Anemia with RDT slide (unweighted)
Age in months
6-8 87.7 88.1 88.1 252
9-11 98.8 98.8 98.8 244
12-17 98.5 97.8 98.5 453
18-23 98.9 98.7 98.9 475
24-35 98.2 98.2 98.2 865
36-47 97.9 97.7 97.8 897
48-59 98.8 98.7 98.8 924
Sex
Male 97.2 97.0 97.2 2,062
Female 98.3 98.2 98.3 2,048
Residence
Urban 97.1 96.9 97.2 1,595
Rural 98.2 98.1 98.1 2,515
Region
Monrovia 97.2 97.2 97.6 466
North Western 98.1 97.9 97.9 573
South Central 96.3 96.1 96.1 592
South Eastern A 98.7 98.3 98.7 839
South Eastern B 95.8 95.7 95.8 626
North Central 99.1 99.1 99.1 1,014
Mother’s education
No education 98.5 98.5 98.6 1,659
Primary 98.4 98.2 98.4 933
Secondary 97.2 96.8 97.0 495
Missing1 96.3 96.1 96.3 1,023
Wealth quintile
Lowest 98.1 97.9 98.1 1,183
Second 97.3 97.1 97.3 1,099
Middle 97.7 97.7 97.7 770
Fourth 97.6 97.3 97.5 593
Highest 98.3 98.5 98.7 465
Total 97.8 97.6 97.8 4,110

1
Includes cases in which it was not possible to match child to the mother
in the household.
4.5.1 Anemia Prevalence among Children
Table 4.18 shows the percentage of children age 6-59 months classified as having anemia
(hemoglobin concentration of less than 11.0 grams per deciliter) by background characteristics.2 Anemia
is a critical public health problem in Liberia, where almost three-fifths (63 percent) of Liberian children
6-59 months old are anemic. Twenty-nine percent of children are mildly anemic, while another 29 percent
are moderately anemic, and 5 percent are severely anemic. The proportion of children with anemia
decreases substantially with age and is higher among boys than girls. There is little difference in the
proportion of children with anemia by urban-rural residence, education of the mother, or wealth quintile.
However, anemia appears to be more prevalent among children in Monrovia (71 percent) and South
Central region (69 percent) than those in South Eastern A (55 percent).
2
Given that hemoglobin requirements differ substantially depending on altitude, anemia data are normally adjusted
for altitude using the formulas recommended by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 1998).
However, all of Liberia lies below the lowest level indicated for adjustment, so no adjustments were required.
Malaria | 61
Table 4.18 Prevalence of anemia in children
Percentage of children age 6-59 months classified as having anemia, by background characteristics,
Liberia 2009
Anemia status by hemoglobin level

Background Mild Moderate Severe Any Number of
characteristic (10.0-10.9 g/dl) (8.0-9.9 g/dl) (below 8.0 g/dl) anemia children
Age in months
6-8 34.8 41.4 5.3 81.6 247
9-11 36.8 38.0 4.4 79.2 253
12-17 28.7 35.3 7.8 71.8 466
18-23 28.3 34.0 7.4 69.7 502
24-35 27.9 29.1 6.1 63.1 912
36-47 29.5 24.7 2.8 57.0 901
48-59 26.1 22.2 2.4 50.7 979
Sex
Male 29.3 31.5 4.8 65.7 2,154
Female 28.5 26.6 4.6 59.7 2,106
Mother's interview status

Interviewed 29.8 28.8 5.3 63.8 3,109
Not interviewed 26.4 30.0 3.3 59.8 1,151
Residence
Urban 28.7 31.3 5.0 65.1 1,599
Rural 29.0 27.7 4.6 61.3 2,660
Region
Monrovia 31.0 33.1 6.6 70.7 719
North Western 27.1 33.5 4.4 65.1 326
South Central 33.1 32.6 3.0 68.7 720
South Eastern A 31.5 20.5 2.9 54.9 380
South Eastern B 29.5 25.6 5.9 61.0 203
North Central 26.2 27.6 5.0 58.8 1,911
Mother's education
No education 31.2 28.7 5.2 65.1 1,615
Primary 28.8 28.7 5.7 63.2 931
Secondary + 27.4 29.0 4.8 61.1 563
Not in household/missing1 26.4 30.0 3.3 59.8 1,151
Wealth quintile
Lowest 29.0 24.8 5.3 59.1 1,017
Second 32.2 28.7 5.5 66.3 979
Middle 24.6 32.5 3.8 61.0 884
Fourth 27.8 32.3 4.3 64.4 806
Highest 31.2 27.7 4.6 63.5 574
Total 28.9 29.1 4.7 62.7 4,260

1
Includes cases for which it was not possible to match the child to the mother in the household.
4.5.2 Malaria Prevalence among Children
Malaria prevalence among children age 6-59 months was measured in the 2009 LMIS in two
ways (Table 4.19). In the field, health technicians used the Paracheck Pf™ rapid diagnostic test (RDT) to
diagnose malaria from finger prick blood samples; those children who tested positive for the presence of
P. falciparum by the RDT were offered treatment with antimalarials. In addition, health technicians
62 | Malaria
prepared thick blood smears that were brought back to Monrovia for microscopic examination in the
laboratory.3 Blood smears in which parasites were identified were classified as “slide positives.”
Table 4.19 shows the results of both tests. Using the RDT, 37 percent of children age 6-59
months in Liberia tested positive for malaria. Analysis of blood smears by microscopy revealed a
somewhat lower prevalence: 32 percent of children age 6-59 months tested positive. Regardless of which
diagnostic test was used, malaria prevalence increases with age, is independent of gender, and decreases
with mother’s education level and, in general, with household wealth. Malaria prevalence is higher in
rural areas (38 percent by microscopy) than urban areas (21 percent by microscopy) and is highest in the
North Central region (42 percent by microscopy) (Figure 4.5).
Table 4.19 Prevalence of malaria in children
Percentage of children age 6-59 months classified in two tests as

having malaria, by background characteristics, Liberia 2009
Malaria prevalence
Number of Number of
Background RDT children Slide children
characteristic positive tested positive tested
Age in months
6-8 10.5 248 7.7 248
9-11 21.5 253 14.7 253
12-17 31.1 464 23.7 466
18-23 29.0 502 22.6 502
24-35 37.9 911 33.8 911
36-47 44.5 899 39.7 901
48-59 44.8 979 41.2 979
Sex
Male 37.1 2,152 32.5 2,154
Female 36.0 2,104 30.8 2,106
Residence
Urban 26.7 1,597 21.3 1,600
Rural 42.4 2,659 37.9 2,660
Region
Monrovia 19.4 717 15.1 721
North Western 33.5 325 27.8 325
South Central 32.1 719 24.4 719
South Eastern A 29.6 379 27.4 380
South Eastern B 43.4 203 35.0 203
North Central 45.8 1,911 41.8 1,911
Education
No education 38.2 1,616 34.0 1,616
Primary 36.2 930 31.2 931
Secondary 22.0 562 15.8 562
Missing1 41.5 1,147 36.6 1,150
Wealth quintile
Lowest 40.2 1,016 35.2 1,017
Second 45.4 979 41.2 979
Middle 40.9 884 37.6 884
Fourth 29.9 803 21.1 805
Highest 17.4 574 14.8 575
Total 36.5 4,255 31.7 4,260

1
Includes cases for which it was not possible to match the child to
the mother in the household.
3
All slides were read twice, first by any of the six microscopists specially trained as part of the survey and then by
one of the three who were designated by the expert malaria consultant as being the better readers. In the roughly 12
percent of cases with discordant results from these two readings, the slide was examined a third time by another of
the three best readers.
Malaria | 63
Figure 4.5 Malaria Prevalence among Children 6-59 Months
RESIDENCE
Urban 21
Rural 38
REGION
Monrovia 15
North Western 28
South Central 24
South Eastern A 27
South Eastern B 35
North Central 42
WEALTH QUINTILE
Lowest 35
Second 41
Middle 38
Fourth 21
Highest 15
Total 32
0 10 20 30 40 50
Note: Percentage of children age 6-59 months who tested positive

for malaria on blood slide LMIS 2009
The differences in malaria prevalence observed between the Paracheck Pf™ RDT and micro-
scopy are not unexpected. Microscopic analysis of blood smears for malaria parasites has long been
considered the gold standard of malaria diagnosis; when performed under optimal conditions, it is highly
sensitive (limit of detection is 5-10 parasites per microliter of blood). In comparison to microscopy, RDTs
have the advantage of being quick and easy to use, but are less sensitive.4 The Paracheck Pf™ RDT, like
many other commercially available RDTs, detects the P. falciparum-specific protein HRP-2 rather than
the parasite itself. Because HRP-2 remains in the blood for up to a month following parasite clearance
with antimalarials (Moody, 2002), in areas highly endemic for P. falciparum malaria, its persistence could
account for the observation that a higher malaria prevalence was detected using RDTs than microscopy.
4.6 COST OF MALARIA TREATMENT
One objective of the LMIS was to provide some basic data on malaria-related health care costs
for the national health accounts calculations. To meet this objective, the LMIS household questionnaire
included four questions to be asked for every household member: whether they had been sick with fever
at any time in the previous four weeks and, if so, whether they got any treatment for the fever and if so,
where and how much the treatment cost (including provider fees and costs for drugs and tests). In
interpreting the results, it is important to remember that, although interviewers were instructed to consult
any and all household members in collecting information, they were not required to make call-backs to
interview everyone in the household. Consequently, the information in many cases was reported by
someone other than the household member him/herself which may lead to some inaccuracies.
4
The Paracheck Pf™ RDT was recently evaluated by the WHO (WHO, 2008). In samples with high parasitemia,
the test’s detection rate was nearly 100 percent; in samples with low parasitemia, however, the detection rate was
substantially reduced.
64 | Malaria
As shown in Table 4.20, 43 percent of Liberians were reported as having fever in the four weeks
before the survey. The proportion with fever is highest among children under five (60 percent), after
which it declines rapidly to only about 28-29 percent of those age 10-19.5 It then increases with age.
Fever is somewhat more common among women than men and among rural residents than urban
residents. It is also most common in North Central (48 percent) and North Western (46 percent) regions
and least common in South Eastern B region (30 percent). More than 4 in 5 of those with fever were
reported to have received some treatment for the fever.
Table 4.20 Prevalence of fever among household population
Percent distribution of de facto household population by whether people reported having fever in the 4 weeks before
the survey and percent distribution of those reported to have had fever by whether they sought treatment for the fever,
according to selected background characteristics, Liberia, 2009
Household population with fever Household population with fever

in past four weeks who sought treatment
Don’t Don’t Number
Background know/ Number know/ of people
characteristic Yes No missing Total of people Yes No missing Total with fever
Age
0-4 59.6 39.6 0.8 100.0 4,752 83.5 16.4 0.1 100.0 2,830
5-9 42.4 57.1 0.5 100.0 3,539 80.9 18.9 0.2 100.0 1,500
10-14 27.8 71.7 0.5 100.0 2,715 80.5 19.1 0.4 100.0 754
15-19 28.7 70.7 0.7 100.0 1,939 77.0 22.3 0.7 100.0 556
20-29 39.0 60.1 0.9 100.0 3,362 79.1 20.3 0.7 100.0 1,311
30-39 41.9 57.4 0.6 100.0 2,446 78.2 21.3 0.5 100.0 1,026
40-49 43.2 56.1 0.6 100.0 1,658 82.1 17.7 0.2 100.0 716
50-59 42.7 56.5 0.8 100.0 1,117 78.3 21.3 0.4 100.0 477
60+ 47.7 50.7 1.6 100.0 1,021 76.8 22.7 0.6 100.0 487
Sex
Male 39.6 59.6 0.8 100.0 11,090 80.7 18.9 0.4 100.0 4,395
Female 45.9 53.4 0.7 100.0 11,470 80.6 19.2 0.2 100.0 5,268
Residence
Urban 40.0 59.4 0.5 100.0 10,376 81.9 17.4 0.6 100.0 4,155
Rural 45.2 53.9 0.9 100.0 12,183 79.6 20.3 0.1 100.0 5,507
Region
Monrovia 40.2 59.3 0.5 100.0 5,431 83.6 15.4 1.0 100.0 2,184
North Western 46.3 53.1 0.7 100.0 1,586 86.3 13.6 0.0 100.0 734
South Central 43.0 55.9 1.1 100.0 4,221 77.2 22.6 0.2 100.0 1,815
South Eastern A 33.4 65.0 1.6 100.0 1,679 66.4 33.5 0.1 100.0 561
South Eastern B 29.9 69.5 0.6 100.0 1,316 69.4 30.6 0.0 100.0 393
North Central 47.7 51.7 0.6 100.0 8,326 82.6 17.3 0.1 100.0 3,975
Wealth quintile
Lowest 44.8 53.9 1.2 100.0 4,488 75.6 24.4 0.0 100.0 2,013
Second 45.9 53.3 0.8 100.0 4,500 77.9 22.1 0.1 100.0 2,065
Middle 44.9 54.7 0.5 100.0 4,552 82.6 17.1 0.3 100.0 2,043
Fourth 41.8 58.0 0.3 100.0 4,499 82.6 16.8 0.5 100.0 1,880
Highest 36.7 62.4 0.9 100.0 4,521 85.4 13.8 0.7 100.0 1,661
Total 42.8 56.4 0.7 100.0 22,559 80.6 19.1 0.3 100.0 9,662
Note: Data are based on reports from the respondent to the household questionnaire and not necessarily the household
member him/herself. Total includes 5 cases with age missing.
5
The results shown here differ from those shown in Table 4.15 for several reasons. First, the data in Table 4.20 refer
to all children under five listed in the household schedule, while Table 4.15 is based only on children whose mothers
were interviewed. Secondly, Table 4.20 refers to fevers in the four weeks before the survey, while Table 4.15 refers
to children with fever in the two weeks before the survey.
Malaria | 65
Table 4.21 shows the percent distribution of those who sought treatment by the place where they
were treated (column 1). Approximately one-quarter of those with fever who sought treatment went to a
government health clinic, while 20 percent went to a private hospital or clinic, and 12 percent each went
to a pharmacy or shop. Eleven percent of those who got treated got help from a “black bagger” or drug
peddler. A total of 81 percent of those with fever sought treatment from one of these five places.
The mean cost of treatment is 162 Liberian dollars (approximately U.S. $2.45). However, as
shown in Table 4.21, over one-third of respondents (37 percent) were reported to have received treatment
for free. Excluding these, the mean cost for those who paid for treatment for fever is 259 Liberian dollars
(approximately U.S. $3.92).
Table 4.21 Cost of malaria treatment
Among those with fever in the four weeks before the survey who sought treatment for the fever, percent distribution by place
of treatment and mean cost of treatment by place of treatment, Liberia, 2009
Number of Mean cost Number of
Percent Mean cost people (excluding people
distribution (including those receiving Percentage those with paying for
Background by place of with free treatment receiving free treatment
characteristic treatment treatment) from source free treatment treatment) from source
Government hospital 6.8 117 529 65.8 359 172
Government health center 6.7 59 523 79.9 293 105
Government health clinic 25.8 20 2,010 81.2 104 377
Private hospital/clinic 20.2 445 1,573 12.8 518 1,351
Pharmacy 12.2 150 954 4.7 161 892
Private doctor 2.0 261 153 7.6 284 140
Mobile clinic 0.2 271 14 22.7 * 11
Shop 11.8 139 920 1.3 142 901
Traditional practitioner 1.0 32 81 80.9 * 14
Black bagger, drug peddler 11.4 118 891 2.3 121 867
Other 1.5 47 115 72.5 (187) 29
Does not know 0.2 85 12 36.9 * 3
Missing 0.2 13 15 10.2 * 1
Total 100.0 162 na 36.6 259 na

Number 7,790 na 7,790 na na 4,863
Note: Data are based on reports from the respondent to the household questionnaire and not necessarily the household
member him/herself. Costs are in Liberian dollars. Numbers in parentheses are based on 25-49 unweighted cases, while an
asterisk represents a figure based on fewer than 25 cases that has been suppressed.
na = Not applicable
66 | Malaria
REFERENCES
Boerma, T.J. 1988. Monitoring and evaluation of health interventions: Age- and cause-specific mortality
and morbidity in childhood. In Research and interventions issues concerning infant and child mortality
and health, 195-218. Proceedings of the East Africa Workshop, International Development Research
Center, Manuscript Report 200e. Ottawa, Canada.
Bradley, A.K., B.M. Greenwood, A.M. Greenwood, K. Marsh, P. Byass, S. Tulloch, and R. Hayes. 1986.
Bed nets (mosquito nets) and morbidity from malaria. The Lancet 328: 204-207.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 1998. Recommendations to prevent and control iron
deficiency in the United States. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 47 (RR-3).
Chieh-Johnson, D., A. Cross, A. Way, and J. Sullivan. 1988. Liberia Demographic and Health Survey
1986. Monrovia, Liberia: Bureau of Statistics [Liberia], Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs, and
Columbia, Maryland, USA: Institute for Resource Development/ Westinghouse.
Doolan, D.L., C. Dobaño, and J.K. Baird. 2009. Acquired immunity to malaria. Clinical Microbiology
Review 22(1):13-36.
Gwatkin, D.R., S. Rutstein, K. Johnson, R.P. Pande, and A. Wagstaff. 2000. Socio-economic differences
in health, nutrition and poverty. HNP/Poverty Thematic Group of the World Bank. Washington, D.C.:
The World Bank.
Hossain, M.I., and C.F. Curtis. 1989. Permethrin impregnated bed nets: Behavioural and killing effects on
mosquitoes. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 3: 367-376.
Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS), Ministry of Health and Social
Welfare [Liberia], National AIDS Control Program [Liberia], and Macro International Inc. 2008. Liberia
Demographic and Health Survey 2007. Monrovia, Liberia: Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-
Information Services (LISGIS) and Macro International Inc.
Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-Information Services (LISGIS). 2008. 2008 National Population
and Housing Census, Preliminary Results. Monrovia, Liberia: Liberia Institute of Statistics and Geo-
Information Services (LISGIS).
Lindsay, S.W., and M.E. Gibson. 1988. Bed nets revisited: Old idea, new angle. Parasitology Today 4:
270- 272.
Lines, J.O., J. Myamba, and C.F. Curtis. 1987. Experimental hut trials of permethrin-impregnated
mosquito nets and eave curtains against malaria vectors in Tanzania. Medical and Veterinary Entomology
1: 37-51.
Ministry of Health (MOH) [Liberia]. 2001. Roll Back Malaria situation analysis, Liberia. Monrovia,
Liberia: MOH.
References | 67
Ministry of Planning and Economic Affairs (MPEA) [Liberia], University of Liberia, and United Nations
Population Fund (UNFPA). 2000. Liberia Demographic and Health Survey: 1999/2000. Vol. 3,
Analytical Report. Monrovia, Liberia: MPEA.
Moody, A. 2002. Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria parasites. Clinical Microbiology Review 15: 66-78.
National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) [Liberia], Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. 2004.
National policy for malaria control and prevention. Monrovia, Liberia: National Malaria Control
Program.
Liberia Malaria Indicators Survey 2005. Monrovia, Liberia: National Malaria Control Program.
National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) [Liberia], Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. 2007a.
Training manual for management of malaria: Liberia. Participants guide. Version 3. Monrovia, Liberia:
National Malaria Control Program (unpublished).
National Malaria Control Program (NMCP) [Liberia], Ministry of Health and Social Welfare. 2007b.
Routine malaria treatment report. Monrovia, Liberia: National Malaria Control Program (unpublished).
National Malaria Strategic Plan 2009-2013. Monrovia, Liberia: NMCP.
Rutstein, S. 1999. Wealth versus expenditure: Comparison between the DHS wealth index and household
expenditures in four departments of Guatemala. Calverton, Maryland, USA: ORC Macro (unpublished).
Rutstein, S., K. Johnson, and D. Gwatkin. 2000. Poverty, health inequality, and its health and
demographic effects. Paper presented at the 2000 Annual Meeting of the Population Association of
America, Los Angeles, California.
Rutstein, S.O., and K. Johnson. 2004. The DHS wealth index. DHS Comparative Reports No 6. Calverton,
Maryland, USA: ORC Macro.
United Nations General Assembly. 2001. Road map towards the implementation of the United Nations
Millennium Declaration: Report of the Secretary-General. New York: United Nations General Assembly.
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. 2004. Meeting on the
MDG drinking water and sanitation target: A mid-term assessment of progress. New York: World Health
Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund.
WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. 2005. Water for life:
Making it happen. Geneva: World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund.
World Health Organization. 2008. Malaria rapid diagnostic test performance: results of WHO product
testing of malaria RDTs: Round 1. Geneva: WHO.
68 | References
SAMPLE DESIGN Appendix A
A.1 INTRODUCTION
The LMIS sample was designed to produce most of the key malaria indicators for the country as a
whole, for urban and rural areas separately, and for Monrovia and each of five regions that were formed
by grouping the 15 counties. Thus, there are eight reporting domains:
1 Urban areas
2 Rural areas
3 Greater Monrovia
4 North Western: Bomi, Grand Cape Mount, Gbarpolu
5 South Central: Montserrado (outside Monrovia), Margibi, Grand Bassa
6 South Eastern A: River Cess, Sinoe, Grand Gedeh
7 South Eastern B: River Gee, Grand Kru, Maryland
8 North Central: Bong, Nimba, Lofa
A.2 SAMPLING FRAME
Liberia conducted a National Population and Housing Census in March 2008, about nine months
before the 2009 LMIS. Approximately 7,000 enumeration areas (EAs) had been constructed for the
census, covering the entire territory of the country. Table A.1 shows the distribution of the 6,960 non-
empty census EAs and the average EA size by county and type of residence. On average, an EA has 99
households—107 in urban areas and 93 in rural areas. Since this is an adequate size for a survey cluster, it
was decided that the 2009 LMIS cluster should correspond to a census EA.
Table A.1 Distribution of census enumeration areas (EAs) and average EA size by county and type of residence,
Liberia 2008
Urban Rural Total

Average Average Average
number of number of number of
Number households Number households Number households
Region County of EAs per EA of EAs per EA of EAs per EA
Greater Monrovia Monrovia 1,934 109 1934 109
North Western Bomi 54 72 215 82 269 80
Gbarpolu 15 110 134 98 149 99
Grand Cape Mount 23 88 251 91 274 90
South Central Grand Bassa 128 95 340 109 468 105
Margibi 146 122 285 93 431 103
Montserrado 100 110 181 104 281
North Central Bong 255 82 672 73 927 76
Lofa 133 113 366 95 499 100
Nimba 172 120 606 104 778 107
South Eastern A Grand Gedeh 72 92 101 119 173 108
River Cess 5 102 144 101 149 101
Sinoe 23 116 195 68 218 73
South Eastern B Grand Kru 9 60 122 69 131 68
Maryland 64 115 107 125 171 121
River Gee 27 92 81 96 108 95
Total 3,160 107 3,800 93 6,960 99
Source: Preliminary results of National Population and Housing Census 2008
Appendix A │ 69
Table A.2 shows the distribution of the residential population enumerated in the census by county
and urban-rural residence. In Liberia, 47 percent of the population lives in urban areas, with 28 percent in
the capital city of Monrovia. The sample allocation of the 2009 LMIS was based on these distributions.
Table A.2 Census residential population by county and residence, percent urban and percent
distribution by county, Liberia 2008
Percent
Percent of
Region County Urban Rural urban Total national
Greater Monrovia Monrovia 949,381 0 100.0 949,381 27.8
North Western Bomi 15,512 66,036 19.0 81,548 2.4
Gbarpolu 7,440 73,274 9.2 80,714 2.4
Grand Cape Mount 8,359 119,729 6.5 128,088 3.8
South Central Grand Bassa 57,248 166,766 25.6 224,014 6.6
Margibi 82,824 115,283 41.8 198,107 5.8
Montserrado 54,997 77,993 41.4 132,990
North Central Bong 100,951 225,591 30.9 326,542 9.6
Lofa 80,478 187,458 30.0 267,936 7.9
Nimba 108,768 358,063 23.3 466,831 13.7
South Eastern A Grand Gedeh 40,358 85,447 32.1 125,805 3.7
River Cess 2,280 63,427 3.5 65,707 1.9
Sinoe 14,451 90,238 13.8 104,689 3.1
South Eastern B Grand Kru 3,309 53,708 5.8 57,017 1.7
Maryland 44,619 91,615 32.8 136,234 4.0
River Gee 16,908 50,329 25.1 67,237 2.0
Total 1,587,883 1,824,957 46.5 3,412,840 100.0
Source: Preliminary results of National Population and Housing Census 2008
A.3 SAMPLING PROCEDURE AND SAMPLE ALLOCATION
The sample for the 2009 LMIS was a stratified sample selected in two stages. The first stage
involved selecting 150 EAs with probability proportional to size, using the number of households residing
in the EA at the time of the census as a measure of size. Stratification was achieved by separating every
county into urban and rural areas. Thus, there were 31 sampling strata—15 rural strata and 16 urban strata
(including Monrovia). Samples were selected independently in each stratum, with a predetermined
number of EAs to be selected (Table A.3). Implicit stratification was achieved in each stratum by sorting
the sampling frame according to district and clan within each stratum.
In the second stage, a fixed number of households (30) was selected in each of the sampled EAs,
using an equal probability systematic sampling, from a list of households residing in the EA. Since the
census was still fresh (March 2008), it was decided to use the census household results as sampling frame
for household selection in the second stage in order to avoid having to undertake a costly separate
household listing operation. This involved borrowing the census questionnaire books for each of the
selected EAs or clusters and copying information for all the occupied residential households recorded in
the census book. These lists served as the sampling frame for household selection. In order to prevent
bias, interviewers were instructed to interview only the pre-selected households, with no replacements of
households.
70 | Appendix A
Table A.3 Sample allocation of clusters by region, county and residence, number of households selected, and expected number
of households interviewed by county and region, 2009 LMIS
Expected Expected
Total Total number of number of
Number number of number of Number of households households
of urban Number of EAs by EAs by households interviewed interviewed
Region County name EAs rural EAs county region selected by county by region
Greater Monrovia Monrovia 25 0 25 25 750 675 675
North Western Bomi 2 7 9 25 270 243 675
Gbarpolu 2 4 6 180 162
Grand Cape Mount 2 8 10 300 270
South Central Grand Bassa 3 7 10 25 300 270 675
Margibi 5 4 9 270 243
Montserrado 3 3 6 180 162
North Central Bong 3 6 9 25 270 243 675
Lofa 3 3 6 180 162
Nimba 3 7 10 300 270
South Eastern A Grand Gedeh 4 5 9 25 270 243 675
River Cess 2 6 8 240 216
Sinoe 2 6 8 240 216
South Eastern B Grand Kru 2 4 6 25 180 162 675
Maryland 6 7 13 390 351
River Gee 2 4 6 180 162
Total 69 81 150 150 4,500 4,050 4,050
Table A.3 shows the allocation of clusters by county and by urban-rural residence. Allocation was
equal at the regional level, with 25 clusters in each. These 25 clusters were then allocated to each county
and to its urban and rural areas proportionately. Table A.3 also shows the number of households selected
and the expected number of interviewed households by region and county. Sample allocation was not
proportional at the regional or the county level, since otherwise the smallest county would have received
too small a sample size.
Among the 150 clusters selected, 69 were in urban areas and 81 were in rural areas. The total
number of households selected in the 2009 LMIS was 4,500, with 2,070 in urban areas and 2,430 in rural
areas. Note that urban areas were slightly under-sampled because of the disparity in the proportion urban
across the counties.
All women age 15-49 years who were either permanent residents of the households in the sample
or visitors present in the household on the night before the survey were eligible to be interviewed in the
survey. In addition, all children age 6-59 months who were listed in the household were eligible for the
anemia and malaria testing component. It was estimated that the LMIS sample would result in
approximately 3,850 completed interviews with women age 15-49 and 3,200 children under five.
A.4 SAMPLING WEIGHTS
Because of the nonproportional allocation of the sample to the different reporting domains,
sampling weights will be required for any analysis using 2009 LMIS data to ensure the actual
representativity of the sample. Because the 2009 LMIS sample is a two-stage stratified cluster sample,
sampling weights were calculated based on sampling probabilities which were calculated separately for
each sampling stage and for each cluster. The following notations apply:
P1hi first-stage sampling probability of the ith cluster in stratum h

P2h second-stage sampling probability within the ith cluster (households)
Phi overall sampling probability of any households of the ith cluster in stratum h
Appendix A │ 71
Let ah be the number of clusters selected in stratum h, Mhi the number of households according to
the sampling frame in the ith cluster, and ∑M hi the total number of households in the stratum h. The
probability of selecting the ith cluster in stratum h was calculated as follows:
ah M hi
P1hi =
∑ M hi
Let g hi ( g hi =25 for all h and i for 2009 LMIS) be the number of households selected in the ith
cluster in stratum h. The second stage selection probability for each household in the cluster was
calculated as follows:
g hi
P2 hi =
M hi
The overall selection probability of each household in cluster i of stratum h was therefore the
production of the selection probabilities:
ah g hi
Phi = P1hi × P2 hi =
∑ M hi
The sampling weight for each household in cluster i of stratum h is the inverse of its selection
probability:
Whi = 1 / Phi
Household standard sampling weights for households and women were obtained by adjusting the
above calculated weight to compensate for household nonresponse and women’s nonresponse,
respectively, and then normalized to produce a number of weighted cases equal to the number of
unweighted cases for both households and individuals at the national level. The normalized weights are
valid for estimation of proportions and means at any level of aggregation, but are not valid for estimation
of totals. All children under five in the selected households were eligible for the survey. Therefore, for
indicators based on children in the household, the household weight was used; for indicators based on
children of women interviewed, the child’s mother’s weight was used.
72 | Appendix A
A.5 SURVEY IMPLEMENTATION
Table A.4 shows data regarding response rates by residence and region.
Table A.4 Sample implementation
Percent distribution of households and eligible women by results of the household and individual interviews, and household, eligible
women and overall response rates, according to urban-rural residence and region, Liberia 2009
Residence Region
North South South South North
Result Urban Rural Monrovia Western Central Eastern A Eastern B Central Total
Selected households
Completed (C) 91.2 94.1 91.7 91.9 88.4 94.4 92.2 98.1 92.8
Household present but no competent
respondent at home (HP) 1.2 0.2 1.1 0.4 1.7 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.6
Postponed (P) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0
Refused (R) 0.2 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2
Dwelling not found (DNF) 2.6 1.3 1.3 2.7 5.9 0.1 1.4 0.1 1.9
Household absent (HA) 2.1 2.1 2.0 3.2 2.4 2.0 2.2 0.9 2.1
Dwelling vacant/address not a
dwelling (DV) 1.8 1.2 2.3 0.8 0.5 2.8 2.0 0.4 1.5
Dwelling destroyed (DD) 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.8 0.3 0.8
Other (O) 0.2 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number of sampled households 2,065 2,420 750 741 750 752 740 752 4,485
Household response rate (HRR)1 95.8 98.3 97.0 96.5 91.8 99.7 98.0 99.7 97.1
Eligible women
Completed (EWC) 97.2 97.7 96.8 97.4 94.5 99.1 97.4 98.9 97.5
Not at home (EWNH) 2.0 1.2 2.4 1.3 3.7 0.4 1.7 0.4 1.6
Postponed (EWP) 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Refused (EWR) 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2
Partly completed (EWPC) 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2
Incapacitated (EWI) 0.2 0.5 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.4
Other (EWO) 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2
Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
Number of women 2,263 2,249 881 547 671 797 721 895 4,512
Eligible women response rate (EWRR)2 97.2 97.7 96.8 97.4 94.5 99.1 97.4 98.9 97.5
Overall response rate (ORR)3 93.1 96.0 94.0 94.0 86.8 98.8 95.4 98.6 94.7
1
Using the number of households falling into specific response categories, the household response rate (HRR) is calculated as:
100 * C
———————————
C + HP + P + R + DNF
2
Using the number of eligible women falling into specific response categories, the eligible woman response rate (EWRR) is calculated as:
100 * EWC
—————————————————————————
EWC + EWNH + EWP + EWR + EWPC + EWI + EWO
3
The overall response rate (ORR) is calculated as:
ORR = HRR * EWRR/100
Appendix A │ 73
ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS Appendix B
The estimates from a sample survey are affected by two types of errors: nonsampling errors and
sampling errors. Nonsampling errors are the results of mistakes made in implementing data collection and
data processing, such as failure to locate and interview the correct household, misunderstanding of the
questions on the part of either the interviewer or the respondent, and data entry errors. Although
numerous efforts were made during the implementation of the 2009 Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey
(LMIS) to minimize this type of error, nonsampling errors are impossible to avoid and difficult to
evaluate statistically.
Sampling errors, on the other hand, can be evaluated statistically. The sample of respondents
selected in the 2009 LMIS is only one of many samples that could have been selected from the same
population, using the same design and expected size. Each of these samples would yield results that
differ somewhat from the results of the actual sample selected. Sampling errors are a measure of the
variability between all possible samples. Although the degree of variability is not known exactly, it can
be estimated from the survey results.
A sampling error is usually measured in terms of the standard error for a particular statistic
(mean, percentage, etc.), which is the square root of the variance. The standard error can be used to
calculate confidence intervals within which the true value for the population can reasonably be assumed
to fall. For example, for any given statistic calculated from a sample survey, the value of that statistic will
fall within a range of plus and minus two times the standard error of that statistic in 95 percent of all
possible samples of identical size and design.
If the sample of respondents had been selected as a simple random sample, it would have been
possible to use straightforward formulas for calculating sampling errors. However, the 2009 LMIS sample
is the result of a multi-stage stratified design, and, consequently, it was necessary to use more complex
formulae. The computer software used to calculate sampling errors for the 2009 LMIS is a Macro SAS
procedure. This procedure used the Taylor linearization method of variance estimation for survey
estimates that are means or proportions. The Jackknife repeated replication method is used for variance
estimation of more complex statistics such as fertility and mortality rates.
The Taylor linearization method treats any percentage or average as a ratio estimate, r = y/x,
where y represents the total sample value for variable y, and x represents the total number of cases in the
group or subgroup under consideration. The variance of r is computed using the formula given below,
with the standard error being the square root of the variance:
1 H ⎡ (1 − f h )mh ⎛ mh 2 z h2 ⎞⎤
SE (r ) = var (r ) = 2
2
∑ ⎢
−
⎜⎜ ∑ z hi − ⎟⎟⎥
x h =1 ⎣ m h 1 ⎝ i =1 m h ⎠⎦
in which
z hi = y hi − rx hi , and z h = y h − rx h
where h represents the stratum which varies from 1 to H,

mh is the total number of clusters selected in the hth stratum,
yhi is the sum of the weighted values of variable y in the ith cluster in the hth stratum,
Appendix B │ 75
xhi is the sum of the weighted number of cases in the ith cluster in the hth stratum, and
fh is the sampling fraction in stratum h, which is so small that it is ignored.
The Jackknife repeated replication method derives estimates of complex rates from each of
several replications of the parent sample, and calculates standard errors for these estimates using simple
formulae. Each replication considers all but one cluster in the calculation of the estimates. Pseudo-
independent replications are thus created. In the 2009 LMIS, there were 150 non-empty clusters. Hence,
150 replications were created. The variance of a rate r is calculated as follows:
k
1
SE (r ) = var (r ) =
2
∑
k ( k − 1) i =1
(ri − r ) 2
in which
ri = kr − ( k − 1) r( i )
where r is the estimate computed from the full sample of 150 clusters,
r(i) is the estimate computed from the reduced sample of 149 clusters (ith cluster excluded),
and
k is the total number of clusters.
In addition to the standard error, the design effect (DEFT) for each estimate is calculated, which
is defined as the ratio between the standard error using the given sample design and the standard error that
would result if a simple random sample had been used. A DEFT value of 1.0 indicates that the sample
design is as efficient as a simple random sample, while a value greater than 1.0 indicates the increase in
the sampling error due to the use of a more complex and less statistically efficient design. The relative
standard error and confidence limits for the estimates are also calculated.
Sampling errors for the 2009 LMIS are calculated for selected variables considered to be of
primary interest. The results are presented in this appendix for the country as a whole, for urban and rural
areas separately, for the capital city Monrovia, and for each of the 5 geographical regions. For each
variable, the type of statistic (mean, proportion, or rate) and the base population are given in Table B.1.
Tables B.2 to B.10 present the value of the statistic (R), its standard error (SE), the number of unweighted
(N-UNWE) and weighted (N-WEIG) cases, the design effect (DEFT), the relative standard error (SE/R),
and the 95 percent confidence limits (R±2SE), for each variable. The DEFT is considered undefined
when the standard error considering simple random sample is zero (when the estimate is close to 0 or 1).
In the case of the total fertility rate, the number of unweighted cases is not relevant, as there is no known
unweighted value for woman-years of exposure to child-bearing.
The confidence interval, e.g., as calculated for child slept under an ITN last night, can be
interpreted as follows: the proportion from the national sample is 0.264 and its standard error is 0.014.
Therefore, to obtain the 95 percent confidence limits, one adds and subtracts twice the standard error to
the sample estimate, i.e., 0.264±2×0.014. There is a high probability (95 percent) that the true proportion
of children under five who slept under an ITN the night before the survey is between 0.236 and 0.292.
For the total sample, the value of the DEFT, averaged over all variables for women, is 1.67. This
means that, due to multi-stage clustering of the sample, the average standard error for all the indicators is
increased by a factor of 1.67 over that in an equivalent simple random sample.
76 | Appendix B
Table B.1 List of selected variables for sampling errors, Liberia 2009
Variable Type of estimate Base population

No education Proportion All women 15-49
At least some secondary education Proportion All women 15-49
Prenatal care from skilled professional Proportion Last birth of women 15-49 with a live birth
In past 5 years
Total fertility rate (past 3 years) Rate All women
Neonatal mortality rate (past 10 years)* Rate Births in past 10 (5) years
Post-neonatal mortality rate (past 10 years)* Rate Births in past 10 (5) years
Infant mortality rate (past 10 years)* Rate Births in past 10 (5) years
Child mortality rate (past 10 years)* Rate Births in past 10 (5) years
Under five mortality rate (past 10 years)* Rate Births in past 10 (5) years
Ownership of at least 1 insecticide-treated net (ITN) Proportion Households
Child slept under an ITN last night Proportion Children under 5 in household
Woman slept under an ITN last night Proportion All women 15-49 in household
Received 2+ doses of SP/Fansidar during Proportion Last birth of women 15-49 with a live birth
prenatal care visit (IPT) in past 2 years
Child has fever in past 2 weeks Proportion Children under 5 in woman’s birth history
Child took ACT Proportion Children under 5 with fever in past 2 weeks
Child has anemia (any) Proportion Children 6-59 months tested for anemia
Child has malaria (based on rapid test) Proportion Children 6-59 months tested for malaria
* 5 years at the national level
Table B.2 Sampling errors for National sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
ard Un- Weight- Design tive Confidence limits
Value error weighted ed effect error ––––––––––––––––
Variable (R) (SE) (N) (WN) (DEFT) (SE/R) R-2SE R+2SE
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.417 0.013 4397 4397 1.702 0.030 0.392 0.442
At least some secondary education 0.282 0.013 4397 4397 1.851 0.045 0.257 0.307
Prenatal care from skilled professional 0.953 0.007 2762 2687 1.652 0.007 0.939 0.966
Ownership of at least one ITN 0.472 0.015 4162 4162 1.941 0.032 0.442 0.502
Child slept under an ITN last night 0.264 0.014 4484 4725 1.691 0.053 0.236 0.292
Woman slept under an ITN last night 0.290 0.014 4513 4769 1.758 0.047 0.262 0.317
Received 2+ doses of SP/Fansidar during antenatal visit 0.451 0.022 1644 1573 1.736 0.048 0.407 0.494
Child has fever in past 2 weeks 0.436 0.013 3833 3694 1.513 0.031 0.409 0.463
Child took ACT 0.299 0.022 1600 1610 1.718 0.072 0.256 0.342
Child has anemia 0.627 0.016 4019 4260 2.027 0.025 0.596 0.659
Child has malaria (based on rapid test) 0.365 0.020 4012 4255 2.429 0.055 0.325 0.406
Total fertility rate (past 3 years) 5.885 0.268 na 12468 1.931 0.045 5.350 6.421
Neonatal mortality (past 5 years) 38.04 4.296 4232 4064 1.377 0.113 29.45 46.64
Post-neonatal mortality (past 5 years) 34.51 3.314 4244 4080 1.051 0.096 27.88 41.14
Infant mortality (past 5 years) 72.55 5.469 4255 4086 1.274 0.075 61.62 83.49
Child mortality (past 5 years) 45.13 5.583 4233 4061 1.464 0.124 33.96 56.29
Under-five mortality (past 5 years) 114.41 6.311 4324 4150 1.196 0.055 101.79 127.03
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Appendix B │ 77
Table B.3 Sampling errors for Urban sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.267 0.013 2199 2225 1.429 0.051 0.240 0.294
Child took ACT 0.258 0.019 664 659 1.009 0.072 0.220 0.295
Child has anemia 0.651 0.026 1550 1599 1.962 0.039 0.599 0.702
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Table B.4 Sampling errors for Rural sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.571 0.020 2198 2172 1.853 0.034 0.532 0.610
Child has fever in last 2 weeks 0.417 0.017 2329 2283 1.510 0.041 0.383 0.451
Child took ACT 0.328 0.034 936 951 2.020 0.104 0.260 0.396
Child has anemia 0.613 0.021 2469 2660 2.141 0.034 0.572 0.655
Total fertility rate (last 3 years) 7.518 0.331 na 6186 2.073 0.044 6.856 8.179
Neonatal mortality (last 10 years) 43.77 5.027 4808 4653 1.498 0.115 33.71 53.82
Post-neonatal mortality (last 10 years) 64.00 5.177 4805 4656 1.308 0.081 53.64 74.35
Infant mortality (last 10 years) 107.76 7.533 4821 4669 1.583 0.070 92.70 122.83
Child mortality (last 10 years) 69.55 6.935 4674 4532 1.707 0.100 55.68 83.42
Under-five mortality (last 10 years) 169.81 8.632 4876 4721 1.444 0.051 152.55 187.08
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
78 | Appendix B
Table B.5 Sampling errors for Monrovia sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.213 0.015 853 1285 1.036 0.068 0.184 0.242
Child took ACT 0.168 0.029 224 337 1.087 0.172 0.110 0.226
Child has anemia 0.707 0.027 454 719 1.312 0.039 0.652 0.762
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Table B.6 Sampling errors for North Western sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.653 0.037 533 276 1.800 0.057 0.578 0.727
Child took ACT 0.380 0.072 210 115 2.079 0.189 0.236 0.523
Child has anemia 0.651 0.015 562 326 0.720 0.023 0.621 0.681
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Appendix B │ 79
Table B.7 Sampling errors for South Central sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.508 0.024 634 762 1.220 0.048 0.460 0.557
Child took ACT 0.336 0.051 230 297 1.514 0.153 0.233 0.439
Child has anemia 0.687 0.026 570 720 1.301 0.038 0.634 0.740
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Table B.8 Sampling errors for South Eastern A sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.564 0.041 790 317 2.344 0.074 0.481 0.647
Child took ACT 0.263 0.029 360 151 1.135 0.110 0.205 0.320
Child has anemia 0.549 0.018 828 380 1.016 0.032 0.513 0.584
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
80 | Appendix B
Table B.9 Sampling errors for South Eastern B sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.455 0.030 702 211 1.594 0.066 0.395 0.515
Child took ACT 0.211 0.054 211 65 1.822 0.254 0.104 0.318
Child has anemia 0.610 0.021 600 203 1.067 0.035 0.568 0.653
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Table B.10 Sampling errors for North Central sample, Liberia MIS 2009
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Number of cases
Stand- –––––––––––––––– Rela-
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
No education 0.465 0.024 885 1546 1.451 0.052 0.416 0.514
Child took ACT 0.354 0.044 365 645 1.597 0.124 0.266 0.442
Child has anemia 0.588 0.032 1005 1911 1.949 0.054 0.525 0.652
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
na = Not applicable
Appendix B │ 81
DATA QUALITY TABLES Appendix C
Table C.1 Household age distribution
Single-year age distribution of the de facto household population by sex (weighted), Liberia 2009
Female Male Female Male
Age Number Percent Number Percent Age Number Percent Number Percent
0 461 4.0 488 4.4 36 149 1.3 121 1.1
1 455 4.0 512 4.6 37 121 1.1 88 0.8
2 477 4.2 453 4.1 38 161 1.4 137 1.2
3 452 3.9 473 4.3 39 114 1.0 111 1.0
4 477 4.2 505 4.6 40 130 1.1 124 1.1
5 488 4.3 422 3.8 41 75 0.7 64 0.6
6 340 3.0 378 3.4 42 122 1.1 137 1.2
7 336 2.9 373 3.4 43 69 0.6 81 0.7
8 324 2.8 316 2.9 44 59 0.5 70 0.6
9 288 2.5 272 2.5 45 88 0.8 111 1.0
10 333 2.9 277 2.5 46 54 0.5 88 0.8
11 284 2.5 244 2.2 47 41 0.4 52 0.5
12 294 2.6 305 2.8 48 84 0.7 95 0.9
13 240 2.1 237 2.1 49 46 0.4 67 0.6
14 267 2.3 234 2.1 50 111 1.0 73 0.7
15 172 1.5 234 2.1 51 82 0.7 42 0.4
16 193 1.7 225 2.0 52 80 0.7 70 0.6
17 145 1.3 172 1.5 53 72 0.6 48 0.4
18 231 2.0 202 1.8 54 57 0.5 60 0.5
19 190 1.7 177 1.6 55 53 0.5 47 0.4
20 200 1.7 202 1.8 56 63 0.6 50 0.5
21 134 1.2 137 1.2 57 29 0.3 21 0.2
22 188 1.6 209 1.9 58 54 0.5 51 0.5
23 240 2.1 169 1.5 59 26 0.2 25 0.2
24 187 1.6 153 1.4 60 62 0.5 35 0.3
25 188 1.6 158 1.4 61 24 0.2 25 0.2
26 208 1.8 126 1.1 62 29 0.3 41 0.4
27 123 1.1 141 1.3 63 40 0.4 13 0.1
28 186 1.6 151 1.4 64 15 0.1 25 0.2
29 136 1.2 127 1.1 65 39 0.3 38 0.3
30 165 1.4 155 1.4 66 16 0.1 18 0.2
31 116 1.0 94 0.9 67 26 0.2 22 0.2
32 126 1.1 136 1.2 68 30 0.3 29 0.3
33 97 0.8 106 1.0 69 20 0.2 22 0.2
34 109 0.9 89 0.8 70+ 249 2.2 204 1.8
35 121 1.1 130 1.2 Don't know/
missing 5 0.0 5 0.0
Total 11,470 100.0 11,090 100.0
Note: The de facto population includes all residents and nonresidents who stayed in the household the night before the interview.
Appendix C │ 83
Table C.2 Age distribution of eligible and interviewed women
De facto household population of women age 10-54, interviewed

women age 15-49, and percentage of eligible women who were
interviewed (weighted), by five-year age groups, Liberia 2009
Household Percentage
population of Interviewed women of
women age age 15-49 eligible
Age group 10-54 Number Percent women
10-14 1,418 na na na
15-19 930 891 19.2 95.9
20-24 949 929 20.0 97.9
25-29 841 822 17.7 97.7
30-34 613 591 12.8 96.5
35-39 667 657 14.2 98.5
40-44 456 446 9.6 97.9
45-49 314 300 6.5 95.4
50-54 403 na na na
15-49 4,769 4,636 100.0 97.2
Note: The de facto population includes all residents and nonresidents

who stayed in the household the night before the interview. Weights for
both household population of women and interviewed women are
household weights. Age is based on the household schedule.
na = Not applicable
Table C.3 Completeness of reporting

Percentage of observations with information missing for selected demographic and health questions
(weighted), Liberia 2009
Percentage with
information Number of
Subject Reference group missing cases
Birth date Births in the past 15 years
Month only 0.30 10,047
Month and year1 0.03 10,047
Age at death Deceased children born in past 15 years 0.00 1,681
Respondent's education All women age 15-49 0.48 4,397
Anemia
Children Living children age 6-59 months (from the
household questionnaire) 1.85 4,338
1
Both year and age missing
84 | Appendix C
Table C.4 Births by calendar years
Number of births, percentage with complete birth date, sex ratio at birth, and calendar year ratio by calendar year, according
to living (L), dead (D), and total (T) children (weighted), Liberia 2009
Percentage with complete

Number of births birth date1 Sex ratio at birth2 Calendar year ratio3
Calendar year L D T L D T L D T L D T
2009 40 2 42 100.0 100.0 100.0 104.9 na 114.5 na na na
2008 813 35 849 100.0 100.0 100.0 101.2 150.0 102.8 na na na
2007 765 47 811 100.0 100.0 100.0 122.7 135.6 123.4 100.5 81.2 99.2
2006 708 80 788 100.0 100.0 100.0 98.1 116.5 99.8 96.8 130.3 99.4
2005 697 76 773 100.0 100.0 100.0 95.5 118.9 97.6 97.4 82.2 95.7
2004 723 105 828 99.9 100.0 99.9 108.8 106.4 108.5 103.8 97.6 102.9
2003 697 139 836 100.0 99.7 99.9 85.7 118.3 90.4 108.1 120.8 110.0
2002 566 126 692 99.7 99.7 99.7 111.4 92.4 107.7 96.9 93.5 96.3
2001 471 129 600 99.6 98.4 99.3 120.7 81.1 110.8 85.0 92.3 86.5
2000 542 155 696 99.6 98.6 99.4 104.0 116.9 106.8 118.5 114.5 117.5
2005-2009 3,023 240 3,263 100.0 100.0 100.0 104.1 127.1 105.6 na na na
2000-2004 2,999 655 3,653 99.8 99.2 99.7 104.2 102.6 104.0 na na na
1995-1999 2,011 663 2,674 99.5 98.8 99.4 97.6 128.8 104.5 na na na
1990-1994 1,476 663 2,139 99.7 98.8 99.4 101.2 117.0 105.9 na na na
<1989 1,748 869 2,616 99.9 99.6 99.8 103.2 117.9 107.8 na na na
All 1,256 3,089 14,346 99.8 99.2 99.7 102.4 117.2 105.4 na na na
na = Not applicable
1
Both year and month of birth given
2
(Bm/Bf)x100, where Bm and Bf are the numbers of male and female births, respectively
3
[2Bx/(Bx-1+Bx+1)]x100, where Bx is the number of births in calendar year x
Appendix C │ 85
Table C.5 Reporting of age at death in days
Distribution of reported deaths under one month of age by age at death in days
and the percentage of neonatal deaths reported to occur at ages 0-6 days, for
five-year periods of birth preceding the survey (weighted), Liberia 2009
Number of years preceding the survey Total

Age at death (days) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 0-19
<1 50 66 50 42 209
1 29 20 19 12 80
2 13 19 15 11 58
3 6 15 10 2 34
4 6 4 9 8 27
5 3 1 2 2 8
6 1 4 9 2 16
7 10 16 15 22 62
8 3 3 0 1 7
9 3 3 5 1 12
10 0 6 2 2 11
12 2 2 1 0 6
13 0 1 1 0 3
14 8 10 18 10 46
15 1 1 3 1 6
16 2 0 0 2 5
17 0 4 1 1 5
18 2 3 0 3 8
20 0 3 2 0 5
21 1 2 4 1 8
22 0 1 2 0 2
23 1 0 0 0 1
27 1 0 0 0 1
28 0 5 0 0 5
29 0 0 0 0 0
30 0 0 1 2 3
Total 0-30 142 190 169 125 627
Percent early neonatal1 76.6 68.3 67.5 62.9 68.9
1
0-6 days /0-30 days
86 | Appendix C
Table C.6 Reporting of age at death in months
Distribution of reported deaths under two years of age by age at death in

months and the percentage of infant deaths reported to occur at age
under one month, for five-year periods of birth preceding the survey,
Liberia 2009
Number of years preceding the survey

Age at death Total
(months) 0-4 5-9 10-14 15-19 0-19
a
<1 142 190 169 125 627
1 11 21 12 7 51
2 14 36 20 28 98
3 18 29 37 27 111
4 18 24 33 23 98
5 4 23 15 20 62
6 9 30 24 30 93
7 10 30 26 17 83
8 6 28 16 23 74
9 14 38 22 28 102
10 3 5 11 3 22
11 2 4 11 11 29
12 23 47 32 35 137
13 2 17 15 7 41
14 0 6 17 3 27
15 3 1 3 3 9
16 4 8 4 12 28
17 2 2 7 4 15
18 0 3 8 11 21
19 1 5 2 3 11
20 1 4 1 2 8
21 0 5 0 5 10
22 2 3 0 1 6
23 0 2 3 2 8
1 year 15 23 9 8 56
Total 0-11 251 459 397 342 1,449
Percent neonatal1 56.6 41.4 42.6 36.7 43.3
a
Includes deaths under one month reported in days
1
Under one month/under one year
Appendix C │ 87
INVOLVED IN THE 2009 LIBERIA MALARIA
INDICATOR SURVEY Appendix D
Team Supervisors
Andrew Tellewoyan Roxana Kekulah
Fred Tuazama H. Eusebio Bollie
Jemael Johnson Vashti Goe
George Juah D. Samuel Tiah
Georgetta Cooper Robert M. Jallah
Rose Padmore Jebor
Interviewers
Gayflor M. Zayzay Decontee Gbargee
Yarso K. Tellewoyan Albertha G. Porte
Jenekai Kiahon Jamesetta Davies
Kumba Fokoe Roland Kruah
Stephen Freeman Victoria Gonmah
Eddie Elliott Siatta Porte
Jartu Paye Richard Davis
Ebba Ojantoe Togbah Christopher Simmonds
J. Wellington Barchue Patrick Wreh
Dora Koloweah Zoema T. Kargbo
Charlesetta Neor Teh Pearl Yoryor Kruah
Team Health Technicians

Edwin Fallal Iye Fallah
Charles Blay Omeme Willie
Charlesetta Kenneh Ben Kabah
Goshen Gileh Frankline Tokpa
Solomon Budoen George Dahn
Hawa Darame Mlanwin Brown
Beyan Gwama Varshel Harris
Foldesi Bernard William Kanneh
Sam Gibson Fahn Taweh
Precilla Gbolor Gralakpa Gorvego
Josiah George Mardea Woods
Team Drivers
Mohammed Roggers Alexander Clarke
Saykou Kanneh James Kpadeh
Moses Doebo John Smith
Anthony Morris Jusu Morris
Ama Dukuly Samuel Johnson
Boima Diggs Jacob Dugbo
Field Monitors
Robert Johnson Beebee Smith-Wesley
David Taylor Emmanuel Dahn
Joe Kerkulah
Appendix D │ 89
Drivers for Monitors
Othello Mason Boima Morris
Morris Kamara Samuel Sieder
James Glekeh
Malaria Microscopists
Henry Langford (Supervisor) Aaron T. Momulu
Samuel D. Worgee Nyononpine Williams
Mohammed Gbenga Julie P. Blie
Nyilah Opati
External Quality Assurance Microscopists

Vera Yatta Walker Matthew G. Kwaidah
Andrew Samorlu
Administrative Staff
Tolbert Nyenswah Principal investigator
Lewis Kpoto Principal investigator
Edward Liberty Principal investigator
Sanford Wesseh Local consultant
Yah M. Zolia Project director--NMCP
Emmanuel Dahn Assistant project director--NMCP
Francis Wreh Survey director--LISGIS
Augustine Fayiah Project coordinator--LISGIS
Johnson Q.Kei Assistantt project coordinator--LISGIS
Henry Kohar Laboratory coordinator-NMCP
John Bryant Logistician--LISGIS
Amadu Sheriff Driver--LISGIS
Sarah Collins Radio operator
Albert Cephas Support staff
Samuel Kollie Support staff
Stanley Vah Support staff
Victor Koko Office assistant--NMCP
Gloria Guezo Secretary/typist--NMCP
Samuel Sieder Driver--NMCP
Ruth Ricks Accountant--NMCP
J. Tugbeh Williams Driver-consultants
Tabadeh P. Collins Stock keeper
Data Processing Staff

Gabriel Thompson Data processing supervisor
Levi Hinneh Assistant data processing supervisor
Joseph Alade Information technology officer
Sema Toe Office editor
Oscar B. Joboe Secondary editor
Blamo Sieh General technician
Mercy Hardy Questionnaire administrator
Chrispin Williams Data entry operator
Fedesco Freeman Data entry operator
Emmanuel Hiana Data entry operator
Sharon Moses Data entry operator
Mardia Baryogar Data entry operator
90 | Appendix D
Technical Committee Members
Sanford Wisseh Chairman-MOH&SW
Dr. Joel Jones Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Tolbert Nyenswah Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Yah Zolia Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Gabriel Thompson Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Emmanuel Dahn Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Paye Nyansaiye Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Chris Dagadu Member-HPD/MOH&SW
Joseph Alade Member-NMCP/MOH&SW
Dr. Louise Kpoto Member-MOH&SW
Francis Wreh Member-LISGIS
Johnson Kei Member-LISGIS
Augustine Fayiah Member-LISGIS
Dr. Eugene Dolopei Member-Medical College, Univ. of Liberia
Dr. Kassahun Belay Member-USAID/Liberia
Kaa Williams Member-USAID/Liberia
Dr. Ben Terkula Alagh Member-UNICEF/Liberia
Dr. Fatumo Bolay Member-World Health Organization/Liberia
Report Reviewers
Dr. Joel J. Jones NMCP
Tolbert Nyenswah NMCP
Genevieve Barrow MOH&SW
Dr. Peter Clement WHO
Dr. Kassahun Belay USAID/PMI
Dr. Eugene Dolopei Medical College
Daniel Somah NMCP
Kaa Williams USAID/PMI
Roland Nyanama UNDP
Dr. James Duworko USAID
Victor Koko NMCP
Yah Zolia NMCP
ICF Macro Staff

Anne Cross Dean Garrett
Kia Reinis Jasbir Sangha
Ladys Ortiz Nsobya Sam Lubwama (consultant)
Elizabeth Britton Kaye Mitchell
Sidney Moore Joanna Lowell
Barbara Yang Christopher L. Gramer
Appendix D │ 91
QUESTIONNAIRES Appendix E
Appendix E | 93
2009 LIBERIA MALARIA INDICATOR SURVEY
NATIONAL MALARIA CONTROL PROGRAM - MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELFARE
LIBERIA INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS AND GEO-INFORMATION SERVICES
HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNAIRE
IDENTIFICATION
NAME OF COUNTY ..............
NAME OF DISTRICT ..............
NAME OF CLAN/TOWNSHIP
NAME OF CITY/TOWN/VILLAGE
LMIS CLUSTER NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........
HOUSEHOLD NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........
URBAN: MONROVIA=1; OTHER URBAN=2; VILLAGE=3 ................................. ..................
NAME OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD
INTERVIEWER VISITS
1 2 3 FINAL VISIT
DATE DAY
MONTH
2 0 0
YEAR
INTERVIEWER'S NAME INT. NUMBER
RESULT* RESULT
NEXT VISIT: DATE

TOTAL NUMBER
TIME OF VISITS
*RESULT CODES:
1 COMPLETED TOTAL PERSONS
2 NO HOUSEHOLD MEMBER HOME/NO COMPETENT RESPONDENT HOME AT TIME OF VISIT IN HOUSEHOLD
3 ENTIRE HOUSEHOLD ABSENT FOR EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME
4 POSTPONED TOTAL WOMEN
5 REFUSED 15-49
6 DWELLING VACANT OR ADDRESS NOT A DWELLING
7 DWELLING DESTROYED LINE NO. OF
8 DWELLING NOT FOUND RESPONDENT
9 OTHER TO HOUSEHOLD
(SPECIFY) QUESTIONNAIRE
SUPERVISOR OFFICE KEYED BY

EDITOR
NAME
DATE
INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT
Hello, my name is __ and I'm from the Ministry of Health. We are talking to people all over the country about malaria. I would like to ask
you some questions. I hope you will agree. The information you give will help the government to plan health services.
The survey usually takes about 15 to 20 minutes to complete.
The information you give will be kept confidential and will not be shared with anyone other than members of the survey team.
You do not have to participate in the survey. If I ask any question you don't want to answer, just let me know and I will go on to the
next question; or you can stop the interview at any time. However, we hope you will participate in the survey since your views are important.
Do you want to ask me anything about the survey? May I begin the interview now?
Signature of interviewer: Date:
RESPONDENT AGREES TO BE INTERVIEWED . . . 1 RESPONDENT DOES NOT AGREE TO BE INTERVIEWED . . . 2 END
Appendix E | 95
HOUSEHOLD SCHEDULE
LINE USUAL RESIDENTS RELA- SEX RESIDENCE AGE WOMEN AGE 15-49 CHILD-
NO. AND VISITORS TION- REN
SHIP <5
Please give me the What is Is Does Did How CIRCLE Is CIRCLE
names of the persons the (NAME) (NAME) (NAME) old is LINE (NAME) LINE
who usually live in your relation- male or usually stay (NAME)? NUM- currently NUM-
household and guests of ship of female? live here BER pregnant? BER
the household who (NAME) here? last OF ALL OF ALL
stayed here last night, to the night? WOMEN CHILD-
starting with the head head AGE REN
of the household. of the 15-49 AGE
house- 0-5
AFTER LISTING THE hold?
NAMES, RELATIONSHIP
AND SEX FOR EACH SEE
PERSON, ASK QUESTIONS CODES
2A-2C TO BE SURE THE BELOW.
LISTING IS COMPLETE.
THEN ASK APPROPRIATE

QUESTIONS IN COLUMNS
5-14 FOR EACH PERSON.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
M F YES NO YES NO IN YEARS YES NO/DK
01 1 2 1 2 1 2 01 1 2 01
02 1 2 1 2 1 2 02 1 2 02
03 1 2 1 2 1 2 03 1 2 03
04 1 2 1 2 1 2 04 1 2 04
05 1 2 1 2 1 2 05 1 2 05
06 1 2 1 2 1 2 06 1 2 06
07 1 2 1 2 1 2 07 1 2 07
08 1 2 1 2 1 2 08 1 2 08
CODES FOR Q. 3: RELATIONSHIP TO HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD

01 = HEAD 08 = BROTHER OR SISTER
02 = WIFE OR HUSBAND 09 = NIECE/NEPHEW BY BLOOD
03 = SON OR DAUGHTER 10 = NIECE/NEPHEW BY MARRIAGE
04 = SON-IN-LAW OR 11 = OTHER RELATIVE
DAUGHTER-IN-LAW 12 = ADOPTED/FOSTER/
05 = GRANDCHILD STEPCHILD
06 = PARENT 13 = NOT RELATED
07 = PARENT-IN-LAW 98 = DON'T KNOW
96 | Appendix E
LINE FOR EVERYONE
NO. FEVER AND TREATMENT
In the last Did Where How

4 weeks, (NAME) did much
has get any (NAME) did
(NAME) treatment go the
been sick for the for treatment
with a fever treat- cost?
fever at in the ment?
any time? last 4 INCLUDE
weeks? USE COST
CODES OF
BELOW. DOCTOR,
NURSE,
DRUGS,
TESTS
IF > 9990,
WRITE '9990'.
(11) (12) (13) (14)
Y N DK Y N DK LIBERIAN DOLLARS
01 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
02 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
03 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
04 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
05 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
06 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
07 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
08 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
CODES FOR Q. 13: TREATMENT FOR FEVER

01 = GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL 09 = TRADITIONAL
02 = GOVERNMENT HEALTH CENTER PRACTITIONER
03 = GOVERNMENT HEALTH CLINIC 10 = BLACK BAGGER,
04 = PRIVATE HOSPITAL/CLINIC DRUG PEDDLAR
05 = PHARMACY 96 = OTHER
06 = PRIVATE DOCTOR 98 = DOES NOT KNOW
07 = MOBILE CLINIC
08 = SHOP
Appendix E | 97
HOUSEHOLD SCHEDULE
LINE USUAL RESIDENTS RELA- SEX RESIDENCE AGE WOMEN AGE 15-49 CHILD-
NO. AND VISITORS TION- REN
SHIP <5
Please give me the What is Is Does Did How CIRCLE Is CIRCLE
names of the persons the (NAME) (NAME) (NAME) old is LINE (NAME) LINE
who usually live in your relation- male or usually stay (NAME)? NUM- currently NUM-
household and guests of ship of female? live here BER pregnant? BER
the household who (NAME) here? last OF ALL OF ALL
stayed here last night, to the night? WOMEN CHILD-
starting with the head head AGE REN
of the household. of the 15-49 AGE
house- 0-5
AFTER LISTING THE hold?
NAMES, RELATIONSHIP
AND SEX FOR EACH SEE
PERSON, ASK QUESTIONS CODES
2A-2C TO BE SURE THE BELOW.
LISTING IS COMPLETE.
THEN ASK APPROPRIATE

QUESTIONS IN COLUMNS
5-14 FOR EACH PERSON.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
M F Y N Y N IN YEARS Y N
09 1 2 1 2 1 2 09 1 2 09
10 1 2 1 2 1 2 10 1 2 10
11 1 2 1 2 1 2 11 1 2 11
12 1 2 1 2 1 2 12 1 2 12
13 1 2 1 2 1 2 13 1 2 13
14 1 2 1 2 1 2 14 1 2 14
15 1 2 1 2 1 2 15 1 2 15
TICK HERE IF CONTINUATION SHEET USED
2A) Just to make sure that I have a complete listing,

are there any other persons such as small
children or infants that we have not listed? YES ADD NO
2B) Are there any other people who may not be
members of your family, like domestic servants,
lodgers, or friends who usually live here? YES ADD NO
2C) Are there any guests or temporary visitors

staying here, or anyone else who stayed here
last night, who have not been listed? YES ADD NO
98 | Appendix E
LINE FOR EVERYONE
NO. FEVER AND TREATMENT
In the last Did Where How

4 weeks, (NAME) did much
has get any (NAME) did
(NAME) treatment go the
been sick for the for treatment
with a fever treat- cost?
fever at in the ment?
any time? last 4 INCLUDE
weeks? USE COST
CODES OF
BELOW. DOCTOR,
NURSE,
DRUGS,
TESTS
IF > 9990,
WRITE '9990'.
(1) (11) (12) (13) (14)
Y N DK Y N DK LIBERIAN DOLLARS
09 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
10 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
11 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
12 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
13 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
14 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
15 1 2 8 1 2 8
NEXT LINE NEXT LINE
CODES FOR Q. 13: TREATMENT FOR FEVER
01 = GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL 09 = TRADITIONAL

02 = GOVERNMENT HEALTH CENTER PRACTITIONER
03 = GOVERNMENT HEALTH CLINIC 10 = BLACK BAGGER,
04 = PRIVATE HOSPITAL/CLINIC DRUG PEDDLAR
05 = PHARMACY 96 = OTHER
06 = PRIVATE DOCTOR 98 = DOES NOT KNOW
07 = MOBILE CLINIC
08 = SHOP
Appendix E | 99
HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS
NO. QUESTIONS AND FILTERS CODING CATEGORIES SKIP
101 Where do you people get your drinking water from? PIPED WATER
PIPED INTO DWELLING . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
PIPED TO YARD/PLOT . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
PUBLIC TAP/STANDPIPE. . . . . . . . . . . . 13
TUBE WELL OR BOREHOLE. . . . . . . . . . . . 21
DUG WELL
HAND PUMP, PROTECTED WELL . . . 31
UNPROTECTED WELL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
WATER FROM SPRING
PROTECTED SPRING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
UNPROTECTED SPRING. . . . . . . . . . . . 42
RAINWATER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
TANKER TRUCK .................. 61
CART WITH SMALL TANK . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
SURFACE WATER/RIVER/LAKE/STREAM 81
BOTTLED WATER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
102 What type of toilet do you use here? FLUSH OR POUR FLUSH TOILET
FLUSH TO PIPED SEWER SYSTEM. . . 11
FLUSH TO SEPTIC TANK . . . . . . . . . . 12
FLUSH TO PIT LATRINE . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
FLUSH TO SOMEWHERE ELSE . . . . . 14
FLUSH, DON'T KNOW WHERE . . . . . 15
PIT LATRINE
VENTILATED IMPROVED PIT LATRINE 21
PIT LATRINE WITH SLAB . . . . . . . . . . 22
PIT LATRINE WITHOUT SLAB/OPEN PIT 23
COMPOSTING TOILET. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
BUCKET TOILET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
HANGING TOILET/HANGING LATRINE. . . 51
NO FACILITY/BUSH/FIELD . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
103 Does your household have: YES NO
Electricity? ELECTRICITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A generator? GENERATOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A radio? RADIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A mobile telephone? MOBILE TELEPHONE . . . . . . . . 1 2
An ice box? ICE BOX (REFRIGERATOR). . . 1 2
A table? TABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
Chairs? CHAIRS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A cupboard? CUPBOARD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A mattress (not made of straw or grass)? MATTRESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A sewing machine? SEWING MACHINE . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A television? TELEVISION .............. 1 2
A computer? COMPUTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
100 | Appendix E
104 What do you use for cooking--coal, gas, wood? ELECTRICITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 01

GAS CYLINDER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 02
KEROSENE STOVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03
FIRE COAL / COAL / CHARCOAL . . . . . 04
WOOD ........................... 05
NO FOOD COOKED IN HOUSEHOLD . . . 95
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
105 MAIN MATERIAL OF THE FLOOR OF THE HOUSEHOLD. NATURAL FLOOR

EARTH/SAND/MUD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
RECORD OBSERVATION. RUDIMENTARY FLOOR
WOOD PLANKS ................ 21
IF DIFFERENT ROOMS HAVE DIFFERENT FLOOR FINISHED FLOOR
MATERIAL, CIRCLE THE CODE FOR THE MOST PARQUET OR POLISHED WOOD . . . 31
COMMON, i.e., WHAT COVERS THE LARGEST AREA. FLOOR MAT, LINOLEUM, VINYL . . . . . 32
CERAMIC TILES ................ 33
CONCRETE, CEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
CARPET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
106 MAIN MATERIAL OF THE ROOF OF THE HOUSEHOLD. NATURAL ROOFING

THATCH/PALM LEAF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
RECORD OBSERVATION. RUDIMENTARY ROOFING
PALM/BAMBOO/MATS . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
WOOD PLANKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
TARPAULIN, PLASTIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
FINISHED ROOFING
ZINC, METAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
WOOD ........................ 32
CERAMIC TILES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
CONCRETE, CEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
ASBESTOS SHEETS, SHINGLES . . . 36
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
107 MAIN MATERIAL OF THE OUTSIDE WALLS OF THE NATURAL WALLS

HOUSEHOLD. MUD AND STICKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
CANE/PALM/TRUNKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
RECORD OBSERVATION. STRAW, THATCH MATS . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
RUDIMENTARY WALLS
MUD BRICKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
PLYWOOD, REUSED WOOD . . . . . . . . 22
CARDBOARD, PLASTIC . . . . . . . . . 23
FINISHED WALLS
CEMENT OR STONE BLOCKS . . . . . . . . 31
BRICKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
WOOD PLANKS/SHINGLES . . . . . . . . 33
OTHER 96
(SPECIFY)
108 How many rooms in this household are used for

sleeping? ROOMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix E | 101
109 Does any member of this household own: YES NO
A watch? WATCH .................. 1 2

A bicycle? BICYCLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
A motorcycle or motor scooter? MOTORCYCLE/SCOOTER . . . 1 2
A car or truck? CAR/TRUCK .............. 1 2
A boat or a canoe? BOAT OR CANOE .......... 1 2
110 Does your household have any mosquito nets that YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 112
can be used while sleeping? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
111 Why doesn't your household have any mosquito nets? NO MOSQUITOES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
NOT AVAILABLE .................. B
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. DON'T LIKE TO USE NETS . . . . . . . . . . . . C
201
TOO EXPENSIVE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
112 How many mosquito nets does your household have?

NUMBER OF NETS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IF 7 OR MORE NETS, RECORD '7'.
102 | Appendix E
NET #1 NET #2 NET #3
113 ASK RESPONDENT TO SHOW YOU OBSERVED, BUT OBSERVED, BUT OBSERVED, BUT
THE NETS. IF MORE THAN 3, USE HAS HOLES . . . . . 1 HAS HOLES . . . . . 1 HAS HOLES . . . . . 1
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE(S). OBSERVED, DOES OBSERVED, DOES OBSERVED, DOES
NOT HAVE HOLES 2 NOT HAVE HOLES 2 NOT HAVE HOLES 2
NOT OBSERVED. . 3 NOT OBSERVED. . 3 NOT OBSERVED. . 3
114 How many months ago did your MOS MOS MOS
household obtain the mosquito net? AGO . . . . . AGO . . . . . AGO . . . . .
IF LESS THAN ONE MONTH, WRITE '00 37 OR MORE 37 OR MORE 37 OR MORE
MONTHS AGO . . . 95 MONTHS AGO . . . 95 MONTHS AGO . . . 95
NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 98 NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 98 NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 98
115 Did you buy the net or was it given BOUGHT . . . . . . . . . . 1 BOUGHT . . . . . . . . . . 1 BOUGHT . . . . . . . . . . 1
to you free? FREE . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FREE . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 FREE . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
(SKIP TO 117) (SKIP TO 117) (SKIP TO 117)
DON'T KNOW . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . 8
116 How much did you pay for the net? COST IN COST IN COST IN
IF DK, WRITE '998'. LIB. $ LIB. $ LIB. $
117 OBSERVE OR ASK THE BRAND/ LONG-LASTING INSECTI- LONG-LASTING INSECTI- LONG-LASTING INSECTI-
TYPE OF MOSQUITO NET. CIDE TREATED NET CIDE TREATED NET CIDE TREATED NET
OLYSET . . . . . 11 OLYSET . . . . . 11 OLYSET . . . . . 11
PERMANET . . . . . 12 PERMANET . . . . . 12 PERMANET . . . . . 12
OTHER/DK BRAND OTHER/DK BRAND OTHER/DK BRAND
BUT ITN . . . 16 BUT ITN . . . 16 BUT ITN . . . 16
OTHER . . . . . . . . . . 96 OTHER . . . . . . . . . . 96 OTHER . . . . . . . . . . 96
DK BRAND . . . . . . . . 98 DK BRAND . . . . . . . . 98 DK BRAND . . . . . . . . 98
118 When you got the net, was it already YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
treated with an insecticide to kill or NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
repel mosquitos? NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 8 NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 8 NOT SURE . . . . . . . . 8
119 Since you got the mosquito net, was it YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
ever soaked or dipped in a liquid to kill NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
or repel mosquitos? (SKIP TO 121) (SKIP TO 121) (SKIP TO 121)
120 How many months ago was the net last MOS MOS MOS
soaked or dipped? AGO . . . . . AGO . . . . . AGO . . . . .
IF LESS THAN ONE MONTH, WRITE '00 25 OR MORE 25 OR MORE 25 OR MORE
MONTHS AGO . . . 95 MONTHS AGO . . . 95 MONTHS AGO . . . 95
121 Did anyone sleep under this mosquito YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
net last night? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
122 Who slept under this mosquito

net last night? NAME_____________ NAME_____________ NAME_____________
RECORD THE PERSON'S
LINE NUMBER FROM THE LINE LINE LINE
HOUSEHOLD SCHEDULE. NO. ..... NO. ..... NO. .....
NAME_____________ NAME_____________ NAME_____________
LINE LINE LINE

NO. ..... NO. ..... NO. .....
NAME_____________ NAME_____________ NAME_____________
LINE LINE LINE

NO. ..... NO. ..... NO. .....
123 GO BACK TO 113 FOR GO BACK TO 113 FOR GO TO 113 IN FIRST COL. OF
NEXT NET; OR, IF NO NEXT NET; OR, IF NO A NEW QUESTIONRE.; OR,
MORE NETS, GO TO 201. MORE NETS, GO TO 201. IF NO MORE NETS, TO 201
Appendix E | 103
ANEMIA AND MALARIA TESTING FOR CHILDREN AGE 0-5
201 CHECK COLUMN 10. WRITE THE LINE NUMBER AND NAME FOR ALL CHILDREN 0-5 YEARS IN Q. 202 IN ORDER BY LINE NUMBER.
IF MORE THAN 6 CHILDREN, USE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRES. BE SURE TO FILL Qs. 209 AND 211.
CHILD 1 CHILD 2 CHILD 3
202 LINE NUMBER FROM COLUMN 10 LINE LINE LINE

NUMBER ... NUMBER ... NUMBER ...
NAME FROM COLUMN 2 NAME NAME NAME
203 IF MOTHER INTERVIEWED, COPY

CHILD'S MONTH AND YEAR FROM DAY . . . . . . . . . . DAY . . . . . . . . . . DAY . . . . . . . . . .
BIRTH HISTORY AND ASK DAY; IF
MOTHER NOT INTERVIEWED, ASK: MONTH . . . . . MONTH . . . . . MONTH . . . . .
What is (NAME'S) birth date? YEAR YEAR YEAR
204 CHECK 203: YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

CHILD BORN IN JANUARY 2003 OR NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
LATER? (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT
CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO
MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215)
205 CHECK 203: 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1

IS CHILD AGE 0-5 MONTHS, I.E., WAS (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT
CHILD BORN IN MONTH OF CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO
INTERVIEW OR FIVE PREVIOUS MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215)
MONTHS? OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
206 LINE NUMBER OF PARENT OR LINE LINE LINE

ADULT RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILD. NUMBER ... NUMBER ... NUMBER ...
RECORD '00' IF NOT LISTED.
207 READ ANEMIA CONSENT STATEMENT GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1

TO PARENT OR OTHER ADULT
RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILD. (SIGN) (SIGN) (SIGN)
CIRCLE CODE AND SIGN. REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2
208 READ MALARIA CONSENT STATEMENT GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1

CONDUCT TESTS FOR WHICH CONSENT IS GRANTED AND CONTINUE TO 209
209 RECORD RESULT CODE OF TESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 TESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 TESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

ANEMIA TEST. NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2
REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 3 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 3 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 3
OTHER . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 OTHER . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 OTHER . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
210 RECORD HEMOGLOBIN LEVEL HERE

AND IN THE ANEMIA PAMPHLET. G/DL . G/DL . G/DL .
MALARIA TEST NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2
212 BAR CODE LABEL
PASTE BAR CODE HERE AND ON SLIDE

AND ON TRANSMITTAL FORM.
213 RESULT OF MALARIA TEST POSITIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 POSITIVE .......... 1 POSITIVE .......... 1

NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2 NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2 NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2
OTHER ............ 6 OTHER ............ 6 OTHER ............ 6
214 READ INFORMATION FOR MALARIA ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1 ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1 ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1
TREATMENT AND CONSENT STATE-
MENT TO PARENT OR OTHER ADULT (SIGN) (SIGN) (SIGN)
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD. REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2
ASK ABOUT ANY TREATMENT THE ALREADY HAS ACT . 3 ALREADY HAS ACT . 3 ALREADY HAS ACT . 3
CHILD HAS ALREADY RECEIVED. NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4 NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4 NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4
215 GO BACK TO 203 IN NEXT COLUMN IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE OR IN THE FIRST

COLUMN OF THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE(S); IF NO MORE CHILDREN, END INTERVIEW
104 | Appendix E
CHILD 4 CHILD 5 CHILD 6
202 LINE NUMBER FROM COLUMN 10 LINE LINE LINE

NUMBER ... NUMBER ... NUMBER ...
NAME FROM COLUMN 2 NAME NAME NAME
203 IF MOTHER INTERVIEWED, COPY

CHILD'S MONTH AND YEAR FROM DAY . . . . . . . . . . DAY . . . . . . . . . . DAY . . . . . . . . . .
BIRTH HISTORY AND ASK DAY; IF
MOTHER NOT INTERVIEWED, ASK: MONTH . . . . . MONTH . . . . . MONTH . . . . .
What is (NAME'S) birth date? YEAR YEAR YEAR
204 CHECK 203: YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

CHILD BORN IN JANUARY 2003 OR NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
LATER? (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT
CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO
MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215)
205 CHECK 203: 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1 0-5 MONTHS . . . . . . . 1

IS CHILD AGE 0-5 MONTHS, I.E., WAS (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT (GO TO 203 FOR NEXT
CHILD BORN IN MONTH OF CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO CHILD OR, IF NO
INTERVIEW OR FIVE PREVIOUS MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215) MORE, GO TO 215)
MONTHS? OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 OLDER . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
206 LINE NUMBER OF PARENT OR LINE LINE LINE

ADULT RESPONSIBLE FOR CHILD. NUMBER ... NUMBER ... NUMBER ...
RECORD '00' IF NOT LISTED.
207 READ ANEMIA CONSENT STATEMENT GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1

208 READ MALARIA CONSENT STATEMENT GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1 GRANTED 1

CONDUCT TESTS FOR WHICH CONSENT IS GRANTED AND CONTINUE TO 209

ANEMIA TEST. NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2
210 RECORD HEMOGLOBIN LEVEL HERE

AND IN THE ANEMIA PAMPHLET. G/DL . G/DL . G/DL .
MALARIA TEST NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2 NOT PRESENT . . . . . 2
212 BAR CODE LABEL
PASTE BAR CODE HERE AND ON SLIDE

AND ON TRANSMITTAL FORM.
213 RESULT OF MALARIA TEST POSITIVE. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 POSITIVE .......... 1 POSITIVE .......... 1

NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2 NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2 NEGATIVE . . . . . . . . . . 2
OTHER ............ 6 OTHER ............ 6 OTHER ............ 6
214 READ INFORMATION FOR MALARIA ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1 ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1 ACCEPTED MEDICINE 1
TREATMENT AND CONSENT STATE-
MENT TO PARENT OR OTHER ADULT (SIGN) (SIGN) (SIGN)
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD. REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2 REFUSED . . . . . . . . . . 2
ASK ABOUT ANY TREATMENT THE ALREADY HAS ACT . 3 ALREADY HAS ACT . 3 ALREADY HAS ACT . 3
CHILD HAS ALREADY RECEIVED. NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4 NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4 NOT ELIGIBLE. . . . . . . 4
215 GO BACK TO 203 IN NEXT COLUMN IN THIS QUESTIONNAIRE OR IN THE FIRST

COLUMN OF THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE(S); IF NO MORE CHILDREN, END INTERVIEW
Appendix E | 105
CONSENT STATEMENT FOR ANEMIA TEST
As part of this survey, we are asking that children all over the country take an anemia test. Anemia is a serious health problem that
usually results from poor nutrition, infection, or disease. This survey will help the government to develop programs to prevent
and treat anemia.
We request that all children born in 2003 or later participate in the anemia testing part of this survey and give a few drops of blood
from a finger. The equipment used in taking the blood is clean and completely safe. It has never been used before and will be
thrown away after each test.
The blood will be tested for anemia immediately and the result will be told to you right away. The result will be kept confidential.
Do you have any questions about the anemia test?
You can say yes to the test or you can say no. It is up to you to decide.
Will you allow (NAME(S) OF CHILD(REN) to participate in the anemia test?
CONSENT STATEMENT FOR MALARIA TEST
As part of this survey, we are asking that children all over the country take a test to see if they have malaria. Malaria is a serious
illness caused by a parasite transmitted by a mosquito bite. This survey will help the government to develop programs to prevent malaria.
We request that all children born in 2003 or later participate in the malaria testing part of this survey and give a few drops of blood
from a finger. The equipment used in taking the blood is clean and completely safe. It has never been used before and will be
thrown away after each test. (We will use blood from the same finger prick made for the anemia test).
The blood will be tested for malaria immediately and the result will be told to you right away. The result will be kept confidential.
Do you have any questions about the malaria test?
You can say yes to the test or you can say no. It is up to you to decide.
Will you allow (NAME(S) OF CHILD(REN) to participate in the malaria test?
TREATMENT FOR CHILDREN WITH POSITIVE MALARIA TESTS
IF MALARIA TEST IS POSITIVE: The malaria test shows that your child has malaria. We can give you free medicine.
The medicine is called ACT. ACT is very effective and in a few days it should get rid of the fever and other symptoms.
BEFORE PROVIDING ACT, FIRST ASK IF THE CHILD IS ALREADY TAKING OTHER DRUGS AND IF SO, ASK TO SEE THEM.
IF CHILD IS ALREADY TAKING ACT, CHECK ON THE DOSE ALREADY AVAILABLE. BE CAREFUL NOT TO OVERTREAT.
You do not have to give the child the medicine. This is up to you. Please tell me whether you accept the medicine or not.
TREATMENT WITH ACT
Weight (in Kg) Amodiaquine (153 mg.) Artesunate (50 mg.)
Less than 5 kgs. Nothing Nothing
5-7 kgs. 1/4 tablet once a day for 3 days 1/2 tablet once a day for 3 days
8-10 kgs. 1/2 tablet once a day for 3 days 1/2 tablet once a day for 3 days
11-13 kgs. 3/4 tablet once a day for 3 days 1 tablet once a day for 3 days
14-16 kgs. 1 tablet once a day for 3 days 1 tablet once a day for 3 days
17-19 kgs. 1 tablet once a day for 3 days 1 1/2 tablets once a day for 3 days
Amodiaquine and Artesunate (ACT) are to be taken together once a day for 3 days.
IF CHILD WEIGHS LESS THAN 5 KGS., DO NOT LEAVE DRUGS. TELL PARENT TO TAKE CHILD TO
HEALTH FACILITY.
106 | Appendix E
2009 LIBERIA MALARIA INDICATOR SURVEY
NATIONAL MALARIA CONTROL PROGRAM - MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND SOCIAL WELFARE
LIBERIA INSTITUTE OF STATISTICS AND GEO-INFORMATION SERVICES
WOMAN'S QUESTIONNAIRE
IDENTIFICATION
NAME OF COUNTY ................
NAME OF DISTRICT ................
NAME OF CLAN/TOWNSHIP
NAME OF CITY/TOWN/VILLAGE
LMIS CLUSTER NUMBER ................................................................... ...........
HOUSEHOLD NUMBER ...................................................................... ...........
URBAN: MONROVIA=1; OTHER URBAN=2; VILLAGE=3 ...................................... .....................
NAME OF HOUSEHOLD HEAD
NAME AND LINE NUMBER OF WOMAN
INTERVIEWER VISITS
1 2 3 FINAL VISIT
DATE DAY
MONTH
2 0 0
YEAR
INTERVIEWER'S
NAME INT. NUMBER
RESULT* RESULT
NEXT VISIT: DATE

TOTAL NUMBER
TIME OF VISITS
*RESULT CODES:
1 COMPLETED 4 REFUSED
2 NOT AT HOME 5 PARTLY COMPLETED 7 OTHER
3 POSTPONED 6 INCAPACITATED (SPECIFY)
SUPERVISOR OFFICE KEYED BY

EDITOR
NAME
DATE
INTRODUCTION AND CONSENT
Hello. My name is ______ and I'm from the Ministry of Health. We are talking to people all over the country about malaria.
I would like to ask you some questions. I hope you will agree. The information you give will help the government to
plan health services. The survey usually takes about 10 to 20 minutes to complete.
The information you give will be kept confidential and will not be shared with anyone other than members of our survey team.
You do not have to participate in the survey. If I ask any question you don't want to answer, just let me know and I will go on to
the next question; or you can stop the interview at any time. However, we hope you will participate in the survey since your views are
important.
Do you want to ask me anything about the survey? May I begin the interview now?
Signature of interviewer: Date:
RESPONDENT AGREES TO BE INTERVIEWED .... 1 RESPONDENT DOES NOT AGREE TO BE INTERVIEWED .... 2 END
Appendix E | 107
SECTION 1. RESPONDENT'S BACKGROUND
101 RECORD THE TIME.

HOUR .......................
MINUTES .............. ......
102 How long have you been living continuously in (NAME OF

CURRENT PLACE OF RESIDENCE)? YEARS .....................
IF LESS THAN ONE YEAR, RECORD '00' YEARS. ALWAYS .......................... 95

VISITOR .......................... 96 104
103 Just before you moved here, did you live in a city, in a town, or CITY ............................... 1
in a village? TOWN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
VILLAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
104 In what month and year were you born?

MONTH .....................
DON'T KNOW MONTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
YEAR ..............
DON'T KNOW YEAR .............. 9998
105 How old are you?

AGE IN COMPLETED YEARS
COMPARE AND CORRECT 104 AND/OR 105 IF INCONSISTENT.
106 Have you ever attended school? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 110
107 What is the highest level of school you attended: PRIMARY .......................... 1
primary, secondary, or higher? SECONDARY ....................... 2
HIGHER ............................ 3
108 What is the highest grade you completed?

GRADE .....................
109 CHECK 108:
PRIMARY SECONDARY
OR HIGHER 111
110 Now I would like you to read this sentence to me. CANNOT READ AT ALL .............. 1
ABLE TO READ ONLY PARTS OF
SHOW SENTENCES TO RESPONDENT. SENTENCE ....................... 2
ABLE TO READ WHOLE SENTENCE. . 3
IF RESPONDENT CANNOT READ WHOLE SENTENCE, PROBE: NO CARD WITH REQUIRED
Can you read any part of the sentence to me? LANGUAGE 4
(SPECIFY LANGUAGE)
BLIND/VISUALLY IMPAIRED ....... 5
111 What is your religion? CHRISTIAN ....................... 1

MUSLIM ............................ 2
TRADITIONAL RELIGION ........... 3
NO RELIGION ....................... 4
OTHER 6
(SPECIFY)
108 | Appendix E
112 What dialect do you speak very well (besides English)? BASSA ............................ 01
GBANDI ............................ 02
BELLE ............................ 03
DEY ............................... 04
GIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05
GOLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06
GREBO ............................ 07
KISSI ............................... 08
KPELLE ............................ 09
KRAHN ............................ 10
KRU ............................... 11
LORMA ............................ 12
MANDIGO .......................... 13
MANO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
MENDE ............................ 15
VAI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
NONE / ONLY ENGLISH .............. 17
OTHER ............................ 96
SENTENCES FOR READING (Q.110):
1. The child is reading a book. 3. Parents should care for their children.
2. Farming is hard work. 4. The rains were heavy this year.
Appendix E | 109
SECTION 2. REPRODUCTION
201 Now I would like to ask about all the births you have had during YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
your life. Have you ever born a child? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 206
202 Do you have any children you born who are living with you? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I mean belly born. NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 204
203 How many sons live with you? SONS AT HOME .............
And how many daughters live with you? DAUGHTERS AT HOME ......
IF NONE, RECORD '00'.
204 Do you have any children you born who are YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
alive but do not live with you? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 206
205 How many sons are alive but do not live with you? SONS ELSEWHERE ........
And how many daughters are alive but do not live with you? DAUGHTERS ELSEWHERE .
206 Have you ever born a child who was born alive and later died?
YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
IF NO, PROBE: Any baby who cried or showed signs of life but NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 208
did not survive?
207 How many boys have died? BOYS DEAD ...............
And how many girls have died? GIRLS DEAD ...............
208 SUM ANSWERS TO 203, 205, AND 207, AND ENTER TOTAL.
IF NONE, RECORD '00'. TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
209 CHECK 208:
So in all, you have belly born ____ (TOTAL) children in your life.
Is that correct?
PROBE AND
YES NO CORRECT
201-208 AS
NECESSARY.
210 CHECK 208:
ONE OR MORE NO BIRTHS

BIRTHS Q.208 IS '00' 224
110 | Appendix E
211 Now I want the names of all the children you born, whether still alive or not, starting with the first one.
RECORD NAMES OF ALL THE BIRTHS IN 212. RECORD TWINS AND TRIPLETS ON SEPARATE LINES.
(IF THERE ARE MORE THAN 12 BIRTHS, USE AN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE STARTING WITH THE SECOND ROW).
212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221
IF LIVING: IF LIVING: IF LIVING: IF DEAD:
What is/was Were Is In what month Is How old is Is (NAME) RECORD How old was (NAME) Did you
the name any of (NAME) and year was (NAME) (NAME)? living with HOUSE- when he/she died? born any
of your these a boy or (NAME) born? still you? HOLD LINE other child
(first/next) births a girl? living? NUMBER OF IF '1 YR', PROBE: between
child? twins? PROBE: RECORD CHILD How many months old (NAME OF
What is his/her AGE IN (RECORD '00' was (NAME)? PREVIOUS
birthday? COM- IF CHILD NOT RECORD DAYS IF BIRTH) and
PLETED LISTED IN LESS THAN 1 (NAME),
YEARS. HOUSE- MONTH; MONTHS IF including
HOLD). LESS THAN TWO any children
YEARS; OR YEARS. who died
(NAME) after birth?
01 MONTH AGE IN LINE NUMBER DAYS . . . . 1

SING 1 BOY 1 YES . . 1 YEARS YES . . . 1
YEAR MONTHS . 2
MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2
(NEXT BIRTH) YEARS . . . 3
220
02 MONTH AGE IN LINE NUMBER DAYS . . . . 1 YES . . . . 1

SING 1 BOY 1 YES . . 1 YEARS YES . . . 1 ADD
YEAR MONTHS . 2 BIRTH
MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
(GO TO 221) YEARS . . . 3 NEXT
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH
Appendix E | 111
212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221
IF LIVING: IF LIVING: IF LIVING: IF DEAD:
What name Were Is In what month Is How old was Is (NAME) RECORD How old was (NAME) Were there
was given to any of (NAME) and year was (NAME) (NAME) at living with HOUSE- when he/she died? any other
your next these a boy or (NAME) born? still his/her last you? HOLD LINE live births
baby? births a girl? alive? birthday? NUMBER OF IF '1 YR', PROBE: between
twins? PROBE: CHILD How many months old (NAME OF
What is his/her RECORD (RECORD '00' was (NAME)? PREVIOUS
birthday? AGE IN IF CHILD NOT RECORD DAYS IF BIRTH) and
COM- LISTED IN LESS THAN 1 (NAME),
PLETED HOUSE- MONTH; MONTHS IF including
YEARS. HOLD). LESS THAN TWO any children
YEARS; OR YEARS. who died
(NAME) after birth?

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH

MULT 2 GIRL 2 NO . . . 2 NO . . . . 2 NO . . . . . 2
220 BIRTH
222 Did you born any child since the birth of (NAME OF LAST YES ................................... 1
BIRTH)? IF YES, RECORD BIRTH(S) IN TABLE. NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
223 COMPARE 208 WITH NUMBER OF BIRTHS IN HISTORY ABOVE AND MARK:
NUMBERS NUMBERS ARE

ARE SAME DIFFERENT (PROBE AND RECONCILE)
CHECK: FOR EACH BIRTH: MONTH AND YEAR OF BIRTH IS RECORDED.
FOR EACH LIVING CHILD: CURRENT AGE IS RECORDED.
224 CHECK 215 AND ENTER THE NUMBER OF BIRTHS IN 2003 OR LATER.
IF NONE, RECORD '0' AND CONTINUE TO Q. 225.
112 | Appendix E
225 Are you pregnant now? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
UNSURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 227
226 How many months pregnant are you?

MONTHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
RECORD NUMBER OF COMPLETED MONTHS.
227 CHECK 224:

ONE OR MORE NO BIRTHS
BIRTHS IN 2003
IN 2003 OR LATER 501
OR LATER
Appendix E | 113
SECTION 3. PREGNANCY AND INTERMITTENT PREVENTIVE TREATMENT
301 CHECK 212 AND 215: ENTER IN 302 THE NAME AND LINE NUMBER OF THE MOST RECENT BIRTH SINCE 2003
EVEN IF THE CHILD IS NO LONGER ALIVE.
Now I would like to ask you some questions about your last pregnancy that ended in a live birth.
302 NAME AND LINE NUMBER FROM 212 NAME OF LAST BIRTH
LINE NO. ..................
303 When you were pregnant with (NAME) did you see anyone HEALTH PERSONNEL
for a check-up (prenatal care) for this pregnancy? DOCTOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
NURSE/MIDWIFE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B
IF YES: Whom did you see? PHYSICIAN ASST. ............. C
Anyone else?
TRADITIONAL MIDWIFE ............. D
PROBE TO IDENTIFY EACH TYPE OF PERSON AND
RECORD ALL MENTIONED. OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
NO ONE ........................... Y
303A During this pregnancy, did anyone tell you that pregnant YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
women need to take some kind of medicine to keep them NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
from getting malaria? DON'T KNOW ...................... 8
EMPHASIZE THE WORD 'KEEP'.
304 During this pregnancy, did you take any drugs to keep you YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
from getting malaria? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 401
DON'T KNOW ...................... 8
EMPHASIZE 'KEEP'. DO NOT CIRCLE '1' IF SHE WAS ONLY
GIVEN DRUGS BECAUSE SHE HAD MALARIA.
305 What drugs did you take to keep from getting malaria? SP/FANSIDAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
CHLOROQUINE .................... B
RECORD ALL MENTIONED. IF SHE DOES NOT KNOW THE
TYPE OF DRUG, SHOW HER THE TYPICAL ANTIMALARIAL OTHER X
DRUGS. TREATMENT WITH SP/FANSIDAR USUALLY (SPECIFY)
CONSISTS OF TAKING 3 BIG WHITE TABLETS AT THE
HEALTH FACILITY. DON'T KNOW .................... Z
306 CHECK 305: DRUGS TAKEN FOR MALARIA PREVENTION
CODE 'A' CODE 'A'

CIRCLED NOT CIRCLED 401
307 How many times did you take (SP/Fansidar) during this
pregnancy? TIMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
308 CHECK 303: PRENATAL CARE FROM HEALTH PERSONNEL DURING THIS PREGNANCY
CODE 'A', 'B'

OR 'C' CIRCLED OTHER 401
309 Did you get the (SP/Fansidar) during any prenatal care visit, PRENATAL VISIT .................. 1
during another visit to a health facility or from another source? ANOTHER FACILITY VISIT ........... 2
OTHER SOURCE 6
(SPECIFY)
114 | Appendix E
SECTION 4. FEVER IN CHILDREN
401 ENTER IN THE TABLE THE LINE NUMBER, NAME, AND SURVIVAL STATUS OF EACH BIRTH IN 2003 OR LATER.
ASK THE QUESTIONS ABOUT ALL OF THESE BIRTHS. BEGIN WITH THE LAST BIRTH.
(IF THERE ARE MORE THAN 3 BIRTHS, USE AN ADDITIONAL QUESTIONNAIRE, STARTING WITH THE FIRST COLUMN).
Now I would like to ask you some questions about the health of your children. (We will talk about each one separately.)
402 LAST BIRTH NEXT-TO-LAST BIRTH SECOND-FROM-LAST BIRTH

LINE NUMBER LINE LINE LINE
FROM 212 NUMBER . . . . NUMBER . . . . NUMBER . . . .
403 NAME NAME NAME

FROM 212
AND 216 LIVING DEAD LIVING DEAD LIVING DEAD
(GO TO 403 (GO TO 403 (GO TO 403 IN

IN NEXT COLUMN IN NEXT COLUMN FIRST COLUMN OF
OR, IF NO MORE OR, IF NO MORE NEW QUESTIONNAIRE,
BIRTHS, GO TO 501) BIRTHS, GO TO 501) OR IF NO MORE
BIRTHS, GO TO 501)
404 Has (NAME) been ill with a fever YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
at any time in the last 2 weeks? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
(GO BACK TO 403 (GO BACK TO 403 (GO TO 403 IN FIRST
IN NEXT COLUMN; IN NEXT COLUMN; COLUMN OF NEW
OR, IF NO MORE OR, IF NO MORE QUESTIONNAIRE;
BIRTHS, GO TO 501) BIRTHS, GO TO 501) OR, IF NO MORE
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 BIRTHS, GO TO 501)
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8
405 How many days ago did the

fever start? DAYS AGO . DAYS AGO . DAYS AGO .
IF LESS THAN ONE DAY, DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 98 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 98 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 98
WRITE '00'.
406 Did you seek advice or treatment YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

for the fever from any source? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
407 Where did you get treatment PUBLIC SECTOR PUBLIC SECTOR PUBLIC SECTOR
from? GOVT HOSPITAL A GOVT HOSPITAL A GOVT HOSPITAL A
GOVT HEALTH GOVT HEALTH GOVT HEALTH
Anywhere else? CENTER . . . . . . B CENTER . . . . . . B CENTER . . . . . . B
GOVT HEALTH GOVT HEALTH GOVT HEALTH
PROBE TO IDENTIFY EACH CLINIC . . . . . . . . C CLINIC . . . . . . . . C CLINIC . . . . . . . . C
TYPE OF SOURCE AND OTHER PUBLIC OTHER PUBLIC OTHER PUBLIC
CIRCLE THE APPROPRIATE D D D
CODE(S). (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY)
IF UNABLE TO DETERMINE PRIVATE MEDICAL SEC. PRIVATE MEDICAL SEC. PRIVATE MEDICAL SEC.
IF A HOSPITAL, HEALTH PVT. HOSPITAL/ PVT. HOSPITAL/ PVT. HOSPITAL/
CENTER, OR CLINIC IS CLINIC . . . . . . . . E CLINIC . . . . . . . . E CLINIC . . . . . . . . E
PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PHARMACY .... F PHARMACY .... F PHARMACY .... F
MEDICAL, WRITE THE PVT DOCTOR . . . . G PVT DOCTOR . . . . G PVT DOCTOR . . . . G
THE NAME OF THE PLACE. MOBILE CLINIC . H MOBILE CLINIC . H MOBILE CLINIC . H
OTHER PRIVATE OTHER PRIVATE OTHER PRIVATE
MED. I MED. I MED. I
(NAME OF PLACE(S)) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY)
OTHER SOURCE OTHER SOURCE OTHER SOURCE

SHOP . . . . . . . . . . . J SHOP . . . . . . . . . . . J SHOP . . . . . . . . . . . J
TRADITIONAL TRADITIONAL TRADITIONAL
PRACTITIONER K PRACTITIONER K PRACTITIONER K
OTHER X OTHER X OTHER X
(SPECIFY) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY)
Appendix E | 115
LAST BIRTH NEXT-TO-LAST BIRTH SECOND-FROM-LAST BIRTH
NO. QUESTIONS AND FILTERS NAME __________________ NAME __________________ NAME ___________________
408 CHECK 407: TWO OR ONLY TWO OR ONLY TWO OR ONLY

MORE ONE MORE ONE MORE ONE
CODES CODE CODES CODE CODES CODE
CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
409 Where did you first go for advice

or treatment?
FIRST PLACE .... FIRST PLACE .... FIRST PLACE ....
USE LETTER CODE FROM 407.
410 When the fever started, how long

it took for you to carry the child
for advice or treatment? DAYS ...... DAYS ...... DAYS ......
IF THE SAME DAY, RECORD '00'.
411 Is (NAME) still sick with a fever? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8
411A At any time during the illness, YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

did (NAME) have a drop of blood NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
taken from his/her finger or heel? DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8
412 At any time during the illness, did YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
(NAME) take any drugs for the NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
illness? (GO BACK TO 403 (GO BACK TO 403 (GO TO 403 IN FIRST
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8 BIRTHS, GO TO 501)
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . 8
413 What drugs did (NAME) take? ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS
SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A
Any other drugs? CHLOROQUINE . B CHLOROQUINE . B CHLOROQUINE . B
QUININE . . . . . . . . C QUININE . . . . . . . . C QUININE . . . . . . . . C
RECORD ALL MENTIONED. NEW MALARIA NEW MALARIA NEW MALARIA
MEDICINE (ACT) D MEDICINE (ACT) D MEDICINE (ACT) D
IF SHE DOES NOT KNOW THE OTHER ANTI- OTHER ANTI- OTHER ANTI-
TYPE OF DRUG, SHOW HER MALARIAL MALARIAL MALARIAL
THE TYPICAL ANTIMALARIAL E E E
DRUGS. IF SHE STILL IS NOT (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY)
SURE, ASK TO SEE THE DRUGS. OTHER DRUGS OTHER DRUGS OTHER DRUGS
ASPIRIN . . . . . . . . F ASPIRIN . . . . . . . . F ASPIRIN . . . . . . . . F
ACETAMINOPHEN G ACETAMINOPHEN G ACETAMINOPHEN G
IBUPROFEN .... H IBUPROFEN .... H IBUPROFEN .... H
OTHER X OTHER X OTHER X

(SPECIFY) (SPECIFY) (SPECIFY)
DON'T KNOW . . . . . . Z DON'T KNOW . . . . . . Z DON'T KNOW . . . . . . Z
414 CHECK 413: YES NO YES NO YES NO

ANY CODE A-E CIRCLED?
(GO BACK TO 403 (GO BACK TO 403 (GO TO 403 IN FIRST

BIRTHS, GO TO 501)
116 | Appendix E
415 Did you already have (NAME OF ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS ANTIMALARIAL DRUGS
DRUG FROM 413) at home when SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A SP/FANSIDAR . . . . A
the child became ill? CHLOROQUINE . B CHLOROQUINE . B CHLOROQUINE . B
QUININE . . . . . . . . C QUININE . . . . . . . . C QUININE . . . . . . . . C
ASK SEPARATELY FOR EACH NEW MALARIA NEW MALARIA NEW MALARIA
OF THE DRUGS 'A' THROUGH 'E' MEDICINE-ACT D MEDICINE-ACT D MEDICINE-ACT D
THAT THE CHILD IS RECORDED OTHER ANTI- OTHER ANTI- OTHER ANTI-
AS HAVING TAKEN IN 413. MALARIAL .... E MALARIAL .... E MALARIAL .... E
IF YES FOR ANY DRUG, CIRCLE
CODE FOR THAT DRUG. IF NO NO DRUG AT HOME . Y NO DRUG AT HOME . Y NO DRUG AT HOME . Y
FOR ALL DRUGS, CIRCLE 'Y'.
416 CHECK 413: CODE 'A' CODE 'A' CODE 'A' CODE 'A' CODE 'A' CODE 'A'
CIRCLED NOT CIRCLED NOT CIRCLED NOT
SP/FANSIDAR ('A') GIVEN CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
417 How long after the fever SAME DAY . . . . . 0 SAME DAY . . . . . 0 SAME DAY . . . . . 0
started did (NAME) first take NEXT DAY . . . . . 1 NEXT DAY . . . . . 1 NEXT DAY . . . . . 1
SP/Fansidar? TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER
FEVER . . . . . 2 FEVER . . . . . 2 FEVER . . . . . 2
THREE DAYS AFTER THREE DAYS AFTER THREE DAYS AFTER
FOUR OR MORE DAYS FOUR OR MORE DAYS FOUR OR MORE DAYS
AFTER FEVER .. 4 AFTER FEVER .. 4 AFTER FEVER .. 4
DON'T KNOW .... 8 DON'T KNOW .... 8 DON'T KNOW .... 8
418 For how many days did (NAME)

take the SP/Fansidar? DAYS ........... DAYS ........... DAYS ...........
IF 7 DAYS OR MORE, WRITE '7'. DON'T KNOW .... 8 DON'T KNOW .... 8 DON'T KNOW .... 8
419 CHECK 413: CODE 'B' CODE 'B' CODE 'B' CODE 'B' CODE 'B' CODE 'B'
CHLOROQUINE ('B') GIVEN CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
chloroquine? TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER

take the chloroquine? DAYS ........... DAYS ........... DAYS ...........
422 CHECK 413: CODE 'C' CODE 'C' CODE 'C' CODE 'C' CODE 'C' CODE 'C'
QUININE ('C') GIVEN CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
Appendix E | 117
quinine? TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER

take the quinine? DAYS ........... DAYS ........... DAYS ...........
425 CHECK 413: CODE 'D' CODE 'D' CODE 'D' CODE 'D' CODE 'D' CODE 'D'
NEW MALARIA MEDICINE (ACT) CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
('D') GIVEN
the new malaria medicine (ACT)? TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER

take the ACT? DAYS ........... DAYS ........... DAYS ...........
428 CHECK 413: CODE 'E' CODE 'E' CODE 'E' CODE 'E' CODE 'E' CODE 'E'
OTHER ANTIMALARIAL ('E') CIRCLED CIRCLED CIRCLED
GIVEN
the (OTHER ANTIMALARIAL)? TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER TWO DAYS AFTER

take the (OTHER ANTIMALARIAL)? DAYS ........... DAYS ........... DAYS ...........
431 GO BACK TO 403 IN GO BACK TO 403 IN GO TO 403 IN 1st COLUMN

NEXT COLUMN; OR, IF NEXT COLUMN; OR, IF OF NEW QUESTIONNAIRE;
NO MORE BIRTHS, GO NO MORE BIRTHS, GO OR, IF NO MORE BIRTHS,
TO 501. TO 501. GO TO 501.
118 | Appendix E
SECTION 5. KNOWLEDGE OF MALARIA
501 Have you ever heard of an illness called malaria? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 512
502 What are some things that can happen to you when you have FEVER ............................ A
malaria? CHILLS ............................ B
HEADACHE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. JOINT PAIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D
POOR APPETITE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
DOES NOT KNOW ANY .............. Z
503 Which age group of people are most likely to get a serious CHILDREN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
case of malaria? PREGNANT WOMEN ................ B
ADULTS .......................... C
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. ELDERLY .......................... D
EVERYONE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E
DOES NOT KNOW ...................Z
504 What causes malaria? MOSQUITOES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A

DIRTY WATER ..................... B
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. DIRTY SURROUNDINGS .............. C
BEER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D
CERTAIN FOODS ...................E
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
505 Are there ways to avoid getting malaria? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 507
506 What are the ways to avoid getting malaria? SLEEP UNDER MOSQUITO NET ...... A
USE MOSQUITO COILS .............. B
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. USE INSECTICIDE SPRAY ........... C
KEEP DOORS AND WINDOWS CLOSED D
USE INSECT REPELLANT ........... E
KEEP SURROUNDINGS CLEAN ...... F
CUT THE GRASS ...................G
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
507 Can malaria be treated? YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 509
DOES NOT KNOW ................... 8 509
508 What drugs are used to treat malaria? SP/FANSIDAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A

CHLOROQUINE ..................... B
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. QUININE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C
NEW MALARIA DRUG (ACT) ......... D
ASPIRIN, PANADOL, PARACETEMOL E
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
509 In the past few months, have you seen or heard any YES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
messages about malaria? NO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 512
Appendix E | 119
510 What messages about malaria have you seen or heard? IF HAVE FEVER, GO TO HEALTH
FACILITY ....................... A
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. SLEEP UNDER MOSQUITO BED NETS B
PREGNANT WOMEN SHOULD TAKE
DRUGS TO PREVENT MALARIA .... C
MALARIA KILLS ..................... D
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
511 Where did you hear or see these messages? RADIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A

BILLBOARD ....................... B
CIRCLE ALL MENTIONED. POSTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C
T-SHIRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D
LEAFLET/FACT SHEET/ BROCHURE E
TELEVISION ....................... F
VIDEO CLUB ....................... G
SCHOOL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H
COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKERS,
TTM, TBA, HEALTH PROMOTERS . I
PEER EDUCATORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J
OTHER X
(SPECIFY)
512 RECORD THE TIME.

HOUR .......................
MINUTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
120 | Appendix E
INTERVIEWER'S OBSERVATIONS
TO BE FILLED IN AFTER COMPLETING INTERVIEW
COMMENTS ABOUT RESPONDENT:
COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC QUESTIONS:
ANY OTHER COMMENTS:
SUPERVISOR'S OBSERVATIONS
NAME OF SUPERVISOR: DATE:
EDITOR'S OBSERVATIONS
NAME OF EDITOR: DATE:
Appendix E | 121

DATA.2009.Liberia - Dhs.report - Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DATA.2009.Liberia - Dhs.report - Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DATA.2009.Liberia - Dhs.report - Liberia Malaria Indicator Survey 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2009

Liberia 2009 Malaria Indicator Survey

National Malaria Control Program

Liberia Institute of Statistics and

TABLES AND FIGURES ................................................................................................................ vii

1.1 Country Profile.......................................................................................................1

1.5 Response Rates ......................................................................................................8

CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND WOMEN

2.1 Population by Age and Sex...................................................................................11

2.4 Household Possessions.........................................................................................16

3.1 Current Fertility....................................................................................................23

4.1 Knowledge of Malaria ..........................................................................................39

4.2 Ownership and Use of Mosquito Nets..................................................................46

4.3 Intermittent Preventive Treatment of Malaria in Pregnancy ..................................55

4.6 Cost of Malaria Treatment....................................................................................64

APPENDIX A SAMPLE DESIGN ..............................................................................................69

A.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................69

APPENDIX B ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS .......................................................75

APPENDIX C DATA QUALITY TABLES .................................................................................83

APPENDIX D PERSONS INVOLVED IN THE 2009 LIBERIA

APPENDIX E QUESTIONNAIRES ..........................................................................................93

CHAPTER 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSEHOLDS AND WOMEN

Table 2.1 Household population by age, sex, and residence...............................................11

Figure 2.1 Population Pyramid ............................................................................................12

CHAPTER 3 FERTILITY, PRENATAL CARE, AND CHILDHOOD MORTALITY

Table 3.1 Current fertility ...................................................................................................23

Tables and Figures | vii

Table 4.1 Knowledge of malaria symptoms.........................................................................39

Figure 4.1 Trends in Ownership of Any Mosquito Net, Liberia.............................................47

APPENDIX A SAMPLE DESIGN

APPENDIX B ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERRORS

viii | Tables and Figures

APPENDIX C DATA QUALITY TABLES

Table C.1 Household age distribution .................................................................................83

Tables and Figures | ix

Mr. Tornorlah Varpilah

DEPUTY MINISTER FOR PLANNING, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT,

Dr. Joel J. Jones

ACT Artemesinin-combination therapy

CBR Crude birth rate

GFR General fertility rate

IPT Intermittent preventive treatment

LDHS Liberia Demographic and Health Survey

MOH&SW Ministry of Health and Social Welfare

NMCP National Malaria Control Program

PMI President’s Malaria Initiative

RDT Rapid diagnostic test

TFR Total fertility rate

UNFPA United Nations Population Fund

WHO World Health Organization

Summary of Findings | xvii

xviii | Summary of Findings

Montserrado SOUTH CENTRAL

Atlantic Ocean SOUTH

0 50 100 200 Kilometers

Table 1.1 Selected human development indicators for Liberia 2008

Population 3.5 million

Source: LISGIS, 2008; LISGIS et al., 2008

1.2 BACKGROUND ON MALARIA IN LIBERIA