Focus Group Discussions. FGDs were conducted at the three health facilities selected in Senegal’s action plan (two hospitals and one health center); three in Guinea (three health centers); five in Togo (two hospitals, two health centers, and the Association Togolaise pour le Bien-Être Familial (ATBEF) clinic); and four in Burkina Faso (one university teaching hospital and three health centers). A total of 90 service providers participated in the FGDs: Senegal (15), Guinea (18), Togo (27), and Burkina Faso (30) (Table 3). Guinea 3 3 18 Togo 4 4 27 Burkina Faso 4 4 30 FGDs were conducted with all cadres of service providers in maternity and PAC units at each of the health facilities selected by the country teams for implementation of the action plans. These included OB/GYNs, medical officers, nurses, midwives, auxiliary nurses, and maternity assistants who were providing PAC, FP, and maternity services before, during, and after implementation of the action plans. Attempts were made to recruit at least two health care providers with the same designation to enable good representation of the different health care provider cadres that provided the PAC-FP services. Each FGD was convened at a venue where there was unlikely to be interruption or excessive noise interference and was convenient to participants. Each discussion lasted between an hour and a half and two hours, and consisted of six to ten participants of various cadres. Discussions commenced with introductions and clarifications about the purpose and procedures of the focus group. Participants were briefed on the need for confidentiality and were asked to participate through an informed consent process which outlined the investigators’ commitment to confidentiality. E2A’s regional consultant facilitated the FGDs. Prior to the FGDs, each participant was requested to complete an FGD attendance form to provide his or her name, professional designation, and length of time he or she had been providing PAC and/or FP services at the facility. Participants were assured of confidentiality, right to withdraw from the FGD, and to decline to respond to any questions. Identification numbers were allocated to each participant, which were matched with the names/designations on the FGD participant attendance form for reference during data analysis. Each FGD was facilitated with a guide that contained questions on a range of topics related to their role in the implementation of FP services and counseling including completing the PAC registers, ...
Focus Group Discussions. A topic guide was used to offer some structure in the FGDs and to ensure the key issues were covered. Instructions for beginning and ending the focus group were written for the facilitators. The guide included questions that covered face washing, latrine usage, and the importance or reasons for those behaviors. Each guide contained a participatory activity and asked what the best methods for learning/teaching were in the classroom. FGDs took place in comfortable and safe environments and were conducted in Amharic. All members of the study team were fluent in both Amharic and English. All FGDs were recorded for ease of transcription and translation, and a note taker was present. A sample of the FGD topic guides can be found in Appendices 2 through 3. Also included is a demographic form, which can be found in Appendix 4. Transcriptions of the FGDs were translated into English text documents from the Amharic audio files. Every translator, the BCCE (Behavior Change Communications for Education) consultant, and the BCCE assistant reviewed all audio files and transcripts. As such each person involved had a copy of the translated transcript and raw audio file. After all transcripts were completed and collected, they were uploaded to MAXQDA qualitative analysis software. Based on notes from the research team from each collection site and an initial read through of three zones of data, the analyst created a coding scheme. The coding framework was formed based upon the key recurrent themes in the data. This data was first grouped into main themes and sub themes based upon the pre-existing definitions the analyst created for each theme and sub-theme. However, upon advisement and preliminary coding of half the data, the sub-themes were eliminated to produce the codes and definitions found below in Table 4. Students Absenteeism ReasonsAbsent Reasons for self or other children to be absent Student identified reasons for absenteeism in themselves and peers Community forces them not to; family are farmers; no knowledge of importance of education; have to work at home; fighting with father and running away; work overload at home Importance of Education FamilyGoals What would make family happy Student perceived goals that family has for them that would make the family happy Become educated, make money, become teacher, become doctor, get married, stay close, take care of family, not forget family Hygiene activities WashRemind Who reminds students to wash? Who reminds student...
Focus Group Discussions. Done in groups of two or three within the FGDs, the drawn pictures of latrines all shared many similarities. As can be expected, it was emphasized that all of these latrines are separate from the boys’ latrines. All contain water, paper, a trashcan and washbasin with soap for hand washing. Many of the latrines also contain a fetching cup and windows for ventilation; one group specifically wanted a shower connected to the latrines to further their personal hygiene.
Focus Group Discussions. During the focus groups, numerous participants reported that both men and women were at risk for HPV. One individual emphasized that people living in rural areas had an even higher risk for HPV infection and cervical cancer due to the limited information available in those places. Despite this consensus, however, one woman suggested that some people believe if they feel fine, they are not at risk for the disease.
Focus Group Discussions. FGD tools were developed subsequent to the findings from the free-list interviews. The FGDs were conducted to gather greater detail about women’s concerns and determine if the concerns were normative within the community. A total of eight FGDs were held throughout four communities: four with UMW and four with ever-married women (RMW, MW, OW). The topic of concerns regarding menstruation was discussed for one to two hours. FDGs took place in private spaces, such as schools, temples, or houses.
Focus Group Discussions. FGDs aimed to gain detail about the concerns noted in XXXx. They were held in four different communities (two intervention and two control) once XXXx were complete. Two were held per community, one with unmarried women and one with women married for any time period as we could not get enough participants to hold one per life stage. RAs called contacts in communities to recruit potential participants, met women at a private community location, and gathered demographic information one-on-one from participants prior to commencing the FGD collectively. During the FGDs, women were asked to discuss concerns related to urination, defecation and menstruation; were probed about night, monsoon, pregnancy, and dependents; and were asked to discuss noted concerns in detail as a group. We specifically asked about concerns that were mentioned in the XXXx if not mentioned organically during the FGDs. The RAs conducted FGDs in Oriya, one facilitating and the other taking notes. XXXx and FGDs were digitally recorded and translated directly into English. RAs listed out all concerns noted during the FLI and then listened to full recordings to verify initial lists. The list items were collated by the primary author (BC) and used as a preliminary codebook. BC then read all transcripts, applied those list-based codes and created others as needed using MAXQDA analytic software. BC then independently created lists for each participant and compared them to originals created by the RAs for consistency. Frequencies of concerns by participant strata and toilet ownership were then generated. We applied thematic analysis to understand concerns expressed by participants in XXXx and FGDs. It uses a range of tools to examine themes, present the voiced experiences of participants, and build conceptual models[28]. For each concern, we aggregated coded text into summative tables to review collectively and memo. Tables were then sorted by participant type to identify variation by strata and further memos were created to inform results reported[28].
Focus Group Discussions. FGDs were conducted with participants of both genders and study arms. The aim was to identify any changes in community norms in relation to food security, knowledge about nutrition, and community attitudes towards dimensions of women's empowerment that may have been attributable to the intervention. Dimensions of empowerment of interest included women’s mobility, women's input into household decision-making, household food allocation, women's autonomy in production, and finances. FGDs comprised seven to nine participants and were stratified by gender and intervention status (Table 1). FGDs were conducted by a moderator and notetaker team, who were gender matched to the focus group participants. One data collector led the discussion and activities while the other took notes and managed disturbances. FGDs were conducted in outdoor courtyards within private household compounds, and privacy from other community members was maintained by the notetaker, who requested that visitors and observers return later. Participants’ consent was sought before recording the discussion The FGDs were structured around three participatory activities followed by eight questions and were designed to be completed within one hour. All activities involved sorting and arranging a deck of 34 illustrated food cards displaying common Bangladeshi foods, as described below. The first two activities were designed to explore changes in food availability and diets over the intervention period. The third activity was designed to identify the value assigned to different types of foods. The activities are described as follows:
Focus Group Discussions. FGDs were performed to investigate community attitudes of gender roles, decision- making processes, and the roles of support groups among women, men, and kaders in the villages. For the FGD, three semi-structured guides were developed for each participant group. For each FGD population, there was a standard set of twelve questions for each group, a few probes per questions that the facilitator could explore. If an unexpected theme emerged during the discussion, the facilitator was asked to further probe. The topics of discussion were determined by a rapid preliminary analysis of the D/ND, involving a theme list and frequency count. These topics included village perspectives on support group participation, decision-making processes, and defining roles of women, men, and health providers. FGDs were held in lopos, traditionally covered area for sitting for the village, or sometimes in a participant’s home. In total, twelve FGDs were conducted in July of 2011. Of the twelve FGDs, four were conducted with women, four were conducted with men, and four were conducted with kaders, from a combination of villages from both districts. FGDs typically lasted between 45 minutes and two hours. These groups included between three and ten people, were led by a CARE Indonesia employee in Bahasa, who had previously been trained in FGD facilitation. IDIs were performed to determine the finer details of social networks, relationships, and responses to hypothetical situations that could inform researchers as to how women typically access support. For the semi-structured IDI guide, questions were formulated to elicit understanding of the intricacies of mothers’ decision-making processes related to their family, and the family’s health. This included their decisions to attend, or not attend, support groups. The questions were meant to be a more personal investigation of trust dynamics in networks and relationships in a woman’s life. While topics were more personal, and aimed to contextualize behaviors, an adequate amount of rapport building was necessary to access feelings, emotions, and true thoughts. The guide included 13 questions. Follow-up questions and probes were used to facilitate discussion. IDIs were held in each woman’s home. In total, four IDIs were conducted in July of 2011. All four IDIs were conducted with women from two selected villages, one in each district. IDIs typically lasted between 45 minutes and 60 minutes. For these interviews, the researcher asked quest...
Focus Group Discussions. Female 2 1 1 4
iii. Data coding and analysis
Activity 4.2.2: Reconnaissance visits to all potential sites for children in the mining sector Progress against Targets and Budget Table 16: Progress against target and budget Result and Indicators Target Achieve- ment % Achieve- ment Budgeted costs (US$) Actuals expended Rationale for costs less or more than anticipated Crosscutting indicators Result 1: Parents and caregivers have the financial resources to meet the needs of vulnerable children and adolescents Result 2: Parents and caregivers have the skills to meet the needs of HIV infected and vulnerable children and adolescents Result 3: High-quality services are available to HIV infected and vulnerable children and adolescents Result 4: High-quality services are available to “hard-to-reach” HIV-infected and vulnerable children and adolescents Project Management Coordination with Government
Focus Group Discussions. Few focus group participants specifically addressed the behavioral outcomes of the CAA program during the discussion. Some aspects of both screening and vaccination were discussed, albeit briefly. One woman emphasized that the CAA program encouraged women to obtain regular Pap smear exams. However, she noted that both knowledge and cost inhibit some women from acquiring screening.
