India - Urban Slums Survey, July 2012 - December 2012, NSS 69th Round
Reference ID | DDI-IND-MOSPI-NSSO-69Rnd-Sch-0dot21-2012 |
Year | 2012 |
Country | India |
Producer(s) | National Sample Survey Office - M/o Statistcs and Programme Implementation(MOSPI),Government of India (GOI) |
Sponsor(s) | M/o Statistics & Programme Implementation, GOI - MOSPI - |
Collection(s) | |
Metadata | Documentation in PDF |
Created on
Jan 18, 2018
Last modified
Mar 27, 2019
Page views
166250
- Block-1-Identificati
on of sample UFS blo
ck - Block-2-some salient
features of the slu
m(s) lying wholly or
partly within the s
ample UFS block - Block-3 - Characteri
stics of slum(s) lyi
ng wholly or partly
within the sample - Block-4-Change durin
g the last 5 years i
n the condition of t
he slum(s) lying who
lly or partly within
the sample UFS bloc
k. - Block-5-Particulars
of field operations
FOD Sub Region
(FOD_Sub_region)
File: Block-1-Identification of sample UFS block
File: Block-1-Identification of sample UFS block
Overview
Type:
Discrete Format: character Width: 4 | Valid cases: 817 Invalid: 0 |
Questions and instructions
FOD-Sub-Region
Value | Category | Cases | |
---|---|---|---|
0000 | 9 | 1.1% | |
0110 | 3 | 0.4% | |
0120 | 6 | 0.7% | |
0122 | 2 | 0.2% | |
0211 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0310 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0311 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0312 | 4 | 0.5% | |
0313 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0320 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0322 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0510 | 2 | 0.2% | |
0511 | 3 | 0.4% | |
0610 | 7 | 0.9% | |
0615 | 3 | 0.4% | |
0710 | 11 | 1.3% | |
0810 | 4 | 0.5% | |
0811 | 12 | 1.5% | |
0812 | 3 | 0.4% | |
0820 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0821 | 7 | 0.9% | |
0822 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0823 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0910 | 9 | 1.1% | |
0911 | 1 | 0.1% | |
0912 | 6 | 0.7% | |
0920 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0930 | 3 | 0.4% | |
0931 | 2 | 0.2% | |
0940 | 5 | 0.6% | |
0944 | 10 | 1.2% | |
1011 | 1 | 0.1% | |
1012 | 4 | 0.5% | |
1013 | 4 | 0.5% | |
1020 | 3 | 0.4% | |
1021 | 6 | 0.7% | |
1022 | 1 | 0.1% | |
1710 | 2 | 0.2% | |
1810 | 4 | 0.5% | |
1820 | 2 | 0.2% | |
1821 | 2 | 0.2% | |
1910 | 9 | 1.1% | |
1911 | 2 | 0.2% | |
1912 | 7 | 0.9% | |
1913 | 5 | 0.6% | |
1920 | 29 | 3.5% | |
1921 | 8 | 1.0% | |
1930 | 5 | 0.6% | |
1931 | 5 | 0.6% | |
1932 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2010 | 4 | 0.5% | |
2011 | 1 | 0.1% | |
2012 | 6 | 0.7% | |
2013 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2110 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2111 | 2 | 0.2% | |
2113 | 8 | 1.0% | |
2120 | 14 | 1.7% | |
2210 | 9 | 1.1% | |
2212 | 4 | 0.5% | |
2213 | 12 | 1.5% | |
2310 | 15 | 1.8% | |
2311 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2312 | 8 | 1.0% | |
2313 | 6 | 0.7% | |
2321 | 6 | 0.7% | |
2322 | 6 | 0.7% | |
2323 | 15 | 1.8% | |
2332 | 5 | 0.6% | |
2410 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2411 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2412 | 1 | 0.1% | |
2413 | 5 | 0.6% | |
2414 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2420 | 14 | 1.7% | |
2422 | 1 | 0.1% | |
2423 | 9 | 1.1% | |
2424 | 10 | 1.2% | |
2710 | 12 | 1.5% | |
2711 | 9 | 1.1% | |
2712 | 10 | 1.2% | |
2713 | 5 | 0.6% | |
2720 | 33 | 4.0% | |
2721 | 23 | 2.8% | |
2722 | 2 | 0.2% | |
2730 | 11 | 1.3% | |
2731 | 11 | 1.3% | |
2732 | 10 | 1.2% | |
2740 | 15 | 1.8% | |
2741 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2742 | 5 | 0.6% | |
2810 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2811 | 8 | 1.0% | |
2812 | 9 | 1.1% | |
2813 | 4 | 0.5% | |
2814 | 4 | 0.5% | |
2820 | 17 | 2.1% | |
2821 | 8 | 1.0% | |
2822 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2823 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2830 | 13 | 1.6% | |
2831 | 8 | 1.0% | |
2832 | 13 | 1.6% | |
2910 | 15 | 1.8% | |
2911 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2912 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2913 | 3 | 0.4% | |
2920 | 13 | 1.6% | |
2921 | 7 | 0.9% | |
2922 | 10 | 1.2% | |
2923 | 2 | 0.2% | |
3010 | 6 | 0.7% | |
3220 | 2 | 0.2% | |
3221 | 3 | 0.4% | |
3310 | 7 | 0.9% | |
3312 | 5 | 0.6% | |
3313 | 9 | 1.1% | |
3320 | 12 | 1.5% | |
3321 | 3 | 0.4% | |
3322 | 6 | 0.7% | |
3323 | 1 | 0.1% | |
3330 | 3 | 0.4% | |
3331 | 2 | 0.2% | |
3332 | 6 | 0.7% | |
3333 | 6 | 0.7% | |
9615 | 1 | 0.1% |
Warning: these figures indicate the number of cases found in the data file. They cannot be interpreted as summary statistics of the population of interest.