Regarding point 2 below:

If I run the original survey application I do match the NAR for primary and secondary with the STATcompiler data. Also the GAR for secondary is the same. The only difference I see is for the GAR for primary. The reason being that the SC standardizes on ages 5-24 for this table, while Haiti used 6-24.

It also means that there may be something wrong with the report table 2.10, p. 29, for 2012.

It will be hard to replicate this tables in STATA since we impute for missing age at beginning of the school year. For that we use a seed generator. Even running this table with newer versions of CSPro will give slightly different results because the seed generator changed in version 6.0 of CSPro (I think).

I attach the table as it is produced by the survey application (defacto 6-24, primary school age 6:24 and secondary school age 12:17).

Thanks,

Han.

Some notes on point 3 below:

Indeed based upon HV110 for defacto population 6-24 as in:

box hhage => hhage5;   // hhage comes from HV105
           6-10 => 0;
          11-15 => 1;
          16-20 => 3;
          21-24 => 4;
                => notappl;
      endbox;
      hv025w = HV025;
      if !special(hhage5) then       // ie not not applicable
        t = xtab(t205, rweight);     // this is the general population
        if HV110(i) = 1 then
          t = xtab(t205w, rweight);  // this is the school attending population
        endif;
      endif;

at the end of the run one divides the school attending population by the general population (as in t205 = t205w * 100 / t205).
With this one should be able to match the 1994 report.

Cheers,