Conducting a Participatory Situation Analysis of.pdf - Global HIV ...

dren. For example, an FGD may increase the understanding
of what motivates high-risk behaviors. FGD
information can also be useful when developing questions
for standardized questionnaires. For example,
responses and debate over the question “What conditions
must exist for a vulnerable child to feel safe?”
might generate several potential responses for a related
survey question.
The FGD methodology provides in-depth information,
but it does not produce quantifiable data and the findings
cannot be generalized to a larger population. The
Experience from the Field:
Conducting In-Depth Interviews
In Nigeria, the research team conducted the following
in-depth interviews with key informants and with staff
of organizations undertaking activities for orphans
and vulnerable children:
One-on-one interviews (20 interviews of key
informants):
• Four interviews with ministry/government
officials
• Ten interviews with staff of NGOs
• Six interviews with community leaders/spokespeople
Specifically, a minimum of 2 traditional leaders, 2 religious
leaders, 2 teachers (principal/school head), and
4 health workers (community health workers/doctors/nurses)
per Local Government Area were interviewed.
Note, however, that important
community/spokesperson and opinion leaders outside
these categories were identified from the key informant
interviews (e.g., PLWHA).These identified persons
were interviewed when time permitted.
Organizational response and capability
assessment
Representatives of organizations such as the following
were interviewed: institutional service provider
organizations (private and public), NGOs, CBOs, and
religious groups.As many NGOs as possible were
covered, but no fewer than five.A variety of organizations
were sought to include those providing assistance
and working within areas that directly or
indirectly benefit children, such as those that are
involved with child survival, safe motherhood, community
development, micro-finance, and other OVCrelated
services.
findings will not include numbers or percentages, such as
“80% of participants believed that stigma is a main barrier
to helping children affected by HIV/AIDS.” Instead,
FGDs capture broad themes that convey participants’
experiences and perspectives and uncover why people
think and feel as they do. A theme related to stigma
would present summaries of purported underlying causes
of stigma and suggestions for decreasing it (see Appendix
A—Resources, “Qualitative Methods” for sources of
more information on FGD methodology).
What do focus group discussions require?
A focus group discussion requires a group of 8 to 10 people
experienced with or vested in the topic to be discussed.
People in the group may or may not know each other. The
cultural context will direct the Technical Lead on what is
appropriate for obtaining comfortable group interactions.
It helps for the group to be as homogenous as possible to
avoid factors like authority or power dynamics that can
impede free discussion. For example, people in authority
positions may dominate the discussion.
In terms of the number of FGDs needed, the rule of
thumb is to conduct at least two FGDs for each defining
demographic variable (e.g., sex, age, residence, orphan
status). For instance, to better understand and explore
the issues of inheritance, birth registration, and succession
planning among caregivers and community leaders
will require at least 6 FGDs per data collection site (2
groups with female caregivers, 2 groups with male caregivers,
and 2 groups with community leaders). If the
desire is to explore these same issues from a rural versus
urban community context, 6 FGDs per location would
be needed based on the same demographic breakdown.
The number of defining variables or audience characteristics
to be included increases the resources (e.g., time,
money, and personnel) needed to transcribe, translate,
code, and analyze the data. It is a common misconception
that focus group data collection is less expensive
than standardized or quantitative interviewing.
Because group interaction is key to productive FGDs, an
experienced, well-trained moderator and a carefully crafted
topic guide are essential. The moderator must be able
to establish a non-judgmental and permissive environment
that encourages people to speak comfortably and
freely. The moderator must be empathetic and diplomatic
and have strong observational and listening skills. The
participants should do the majority of the talking, while
the moderator should keep the discussion moving and
focused on the topics. Similar to in-depth interviewing,
the moderator will probe participants’ comments to
Conducting a Participatory Situation Analysis of
Orphans and Vulnerable Children Affected by HIV/AIDS
39