Existing Data Approach
Existing Data Approach
Advantages
1. Makes use of already existing statistical data
2. Can be done relatively quickly
3. Easy to chart changes over time
Disadvantages
1. Indicators often are indirect
2. Available information may be dated
3. Does not consider people's perceptions of needs
Disadvantages
1. Information likely to be biased - age, occupation, education, income
2. Information is typically from "providers" of services as opposed to "customers" of
services
3. Number of informants surveyed may be too small to generalize findings to total
community
Community Forum
Advantages
1. Inexpensive and easy
2. Input comes from a wide range of people
3. May have good public relations as well as planning benefits
Disadvantages
1. Those who attend may not be representative of total community but may represent
special interest groups
2. Participants may try to use the forum as a gripe session
3. Public meeting may heighten expectations beyond what the program may
reasonably expect to deliver
Disadvantages
1.
2.
3.
4.
simple, unbiased, and focused to the issue at hand. The purpose of the questions is
to stimulate discussion. The questions are merely a guide for the discussion.
Undoubtedly the discussion will illicit more questions and bring up issues that the
facilitator will want to follow-up on.
3. Identify and Recruit Participants
Identify the types of people who may be able to provide you with the answers you
need. Think about the key population groups that may have an interest in the
issues being researched. You want to form several different, separate groups that
represent different viewpoints. The groups can be formed based on several
different characteristics: age, income, gender, race, place of work, place of
residency, unemployed, single mothers, students, retired, education, etc.
Although the groups should have a common background, you should avoid
getting people who know each other in the same group. You also want people
who will participate in the discussion and freely share their opinions.
Participants can be sent a letter inviting them to participate in the focus group.
The letter should state the purpose of the focus group session, who is sponsoring
and conducting the session, and what the results will be used for. It should be
made clear that individual comments made during the focus group are strictly
confidential. They can return a postcard indicating if they will or won't participate
in the focus group. A telephone call reminding them of the time and place of the
meeting is helpful.
4. Pre-Meeting Preparation
The meeting room should be quiet, comfortable, and free from outside
distractions. Participants should all sit around a table so they can see each other.
The chairs should be comfortable. Light refreshments can be served if they do not
distract from the discussion.
5. Conducting the Focus Group Interview
The facilitator is the key to the focus group discussion. The facilitator must direct
the discussion without being a part of it. She/he must have excellent
communication skills. The facilitator must be able to create a relaxed, informal
atmosphere where people feel free to express their opinions. The facilitator should
never express his or her own opinions or make judgments on the opinions of the
participants.
The facilitator should ask a series of open-ended questions from general to
specific. The questions should not get in the way of the participants expressing
their opinions, experiences, and suggestions. The facilitator should allow the
discussion to lead in new directions as long as the topics pertain to the subject of
the focus group interview.
All members of the group should be encouraged to participate. One person should
not be allowed to dominate the discussion. Some focus groups have participants
write their ideas down without consulting others before discussion starts. This
eliminates bias and brings out many different viewpoints.
The session should be tape recorded and transcribed after the meeting. Some
focus group interviews are conducted with someone taking notes during the
meeting. This sometimes inhibits the discussion. The facilitator may make some
brief notes as long as they do not protrude into the discussion.
6. Analyzing the Data
The focus group will generate a lot of information. The task is to code and
summarize the data for analysis and discovery.
The tape recording should be transcribed, omitting the names of the speakers.
Type the discussion using a computer word processing program. After the
discussion has been carefully typed, read the transcript looking for key words and
concepts that reoccur. You'll want to count each instance of a key word or
concept. Most word processing programs have a "search and find" feature that
will find and count specific words and phrases.
The next step is to group the key words and phrases into several categories. Each
category should have from three to ten key words or phrases. All comments
should fit into at least one category. Some comments may have several key words
that fit into different categories. Key words and phrases should be coded for (1)
central theme and (2) general sentiment (positive, negative, neutral, suggestion).
After the key words and phases have been grouped into categories, the
interpretation step begins. Central themes and issues will emerge. The relative
weight of each theme should be accurately reported.
7. Reporting Findings
It is usually desirable in community development work to make a public
presentation of the findings. Background information should be included in a
written report of the findings.
Both quantitative and qualitative results should be reported. Quantitative results
are statistical or numerical in nature - - the number of people who mentioned X
and the percent of people who think Y. Qualitative results are representative
comments from focus group participants. Qualitative results create a vivid picture
of the participants' feelings and mood. Comments can usually be directly quoted,
making sure that the speaker is not identified. Comments should accurately reflect
the views of the focus group with care taken not to bias the findings with
unrelated comments.