Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
3.1. Planning and Conducting Data Collection – Community and Focus Group
Discussions
Session-at-a-glance
Content
Approximate
Time
(Minutes)
Instructional Activity
Summary of Day 2
10
Group presentation
Introduction
15
Interactive lecture
Focus Group Discussion Game
50
Role-play exercise
Game Debriefing
45
Plenary discussion
Total Time
120 minutes
/ 2 hours
Session Objectives
After this session, the participants will be able to:

Describe the fundamentals of successfully using focus group and community
discussions in assessments;

Improve knowledge and skills on effective moderation and note-taking techniques;

Moderate a focus group discussion.
Session Supplies
Power Point: D3S1-9. Planning and Conducting Data Collection-Community & Focus Group
Discussions.ppt
Documents:
o Exercise 7 (D3S1-9. Exercise 7-Focus Group Discussion Role Play Game.doc).
First page copied for all participants; pages 2-8 copied to three participants;
page 9 copied to all but three participants; pages 10-12 copied to three
participants (who will play specific roles as focus group participants) either by
stapling these pages to three of the participant role guides, or by keeping the
pages separately and distributing them to the three “special” participants after
five minutes of distributing the other papers. NB: these copies all should be
prepared/organized in folders in advance.
Page 1 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
o Handout 10 (D3S1-9. H10-On Planning and Moderating Discussions.doc), copied
to all participants.
Other:
o Flipchart and markers
Key Messages
(NB: The first three reinforce earlier messages from session 3)
The key difference between FGDs (Focus Group Discussions) and Community Discussions
(CDs) is in the mix of participants and issues discussed. Community discussions generally
draw a diverse group of participants to discuss a broad topic, whereas focus group
discussions are organized with a group of participants who have one, or more, common
characteristic to discuss an issue that concerns them in depth.
The purpose of a CG is generally to gather a large amount of information in a relatively
short period of time, and/or get general feedback on specific issues.
The main advantage of focus groups is that they yield a large amount of information over a
relatively short period of time. They also provide a broad range of views on a specific topic,
as opposed to achieving group consensus. Focus groups are not the best method for
acquiring information on personal or socially sensitive topics; one-on-one interviews are
better-suited for such exercise.
Effective facilitation and note-taking is key to the success of both community and focus
group discussions. Facilitators of both types of discussions should master the discussion
guide developed (and pre-tested) for the event and must be able to deal effectively with
different types of participants to ensure that the discussion goes as smoothly as possible.
Guidance Materials
The above key messages and notes presented in the session activities below should provide
sufficient guidance to prepare for this session. However, facilitators are strongly
encouraged to review TGS #8 and TGS #9 and WFP’s Comprehensive Food Security and
Vulnerability
Analysis
Guidelines
(http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/manual_guide_proced/wf
p203208.pdf).
You may also consult several guidance materials on conducting focus group discussion
available online (recommended search: “Focus Group Discussions” ~ Guidance for
practitioners).
Session and Facilitator Guidance
Make sure to thoroughly review this discussion guidance note. Exercise 7 is based on the
assumption that participants will have sufficient familiarity with car purchases and vehicle
quality attributes. You can nonetheless adapt the subject to make it more congruent with
Page 2 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
participants’ knowledge and discussion preferences. If you change the topic of discussion,
it is strongly advised not to select a food security related topic [briefly explain why].
Room Setup
Arrange for an area for small group preparation for Exercise 10. Also arrange for a round
table or open circular seating for the focus group discussion.
Session Activities
Summary of Day 2
10 minutes
Invite the assigned group to deliver its presentation on the summary of the previous day
(no more than 10 minutes). Take two-three minutes to stress the key messages from the
previous day.
Introduction
15 minutes
Provide a general overview of Day 3 and present the title and objectives of the session
(slides 1-2). Highlight that this session is a natural follow up of yesterday’s sessions,
especially since discussions are key methods used in participatory appraisals. All of the
tools discussed yesterday are often used in focus group or community discussions.
Ask participants to recall the strengths of focus group and community discussions versus in
depth interviews. Present the comparison (slide 3). Note that the richness of focus groups
data emerges from the group dynamic.
Generally many different viewpoints will be expressed as each participant has its own
experience and views. While this is completely true in community discussions due to the
diversity of the participants involved, it is also true –albeit to a lesser extent- for focus
group discussions. The homogeneity of people in a focus group does not always preclude
differences in age, ethnicity and access to resources, among others. These differences affect
people’s perception of certain issues that affect food security.
Ask participants why many focus group and community discussions do not meet
expectations? (slide 4) Participants will likely suggest: Facilitator not being prepared;
ineffective note-taking; weak facilitation; wrong choice and attitude of participants; lack of
information and misinformation, etc… Write participants’ answers on the flip chart and
transition to the next slide by highlighting that there are three key fundamental features of
successful focus group and community discussions: Planning, effective moderation, and
effective note-taking.
Page 3 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
Present the focus group and community discussions success fundamentals (slide 5 -8). For
each slide ask participants to reflect on why planning, moderating, and note-taking (as
appropriate) are important. As you facilitate the discussion, stress the following points:

(Slide 5) Effective logistical planning involves:
o Carefully identifying the purpose and expected outcomes of the discussion, and
confirming that this is the right method to collect the data needed.
o Developing detailed guidelines for moderating the discussion. These guidelines
should be tested and translated as needed. The guidelines should include the
participant selection criteria and participant profiles, the list of key questions
and a form for note-taking and briefing.
o Identifying an appropriate venue. It should afford privacy and quietness to the
extent possible. Group discussions often go wrong because of onlookers or
uninvited individuals who decide to join.
o Planning for the appropriate length, i.e. about 90-120 minutes.
o Selecting the right participants is one of the key. Community discussions should be
organized with a group that represents the community (for example, heads of
different clans, CBOs, local leaders, women representatives, etc..). Focus groups
should be organized with a relatively homogenous group of individuals. It is
important to ensure that participants can speak and exchange ideas freely. Potential
obstacles such as hierarchy, gender and power structures have to be considered when
selecting FG participants.
o Planning what you will ask, how, and why: Focus group and community
discussions should be guided by an outline flexible enough to allow additional
themes to emerge. Participatory techniques (mapping, ranking, listing) are
frequently used during both types of discussion to ensure that all participants
are involved.
o Using a team of two facilitators: one facilitator is responsible for moderation and
the other for note-taking. However, both should be thoroughly familiar with the
subject discussed and the focus group guidelines, and be able to switch
responsibilities if need be.
 (Slides 6&7) Effective moderation of focus group and community discussions:
o Requires the moderator to keep the discussion moving along, with as many
people participating as possible. Moderators do not lead the discussion.
o Requires a skilled moderator: A moderator should be able to create a
discussion in which he or she participates very little. He should stress the
value of participants’ contributions to the assessment and emphasize his
own role as a learner rather than a teacher. Hence, he should speak as little
as possible and encourage those who are silent to speak up. This should be
done as early as possible to mitigate the risk of having one or only few of the
participants from “holding the floor”.
Page 4 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
o Ensures that participants are able to express themselves and answer the
discussion questions. Moderators should direct the discussion at a pace that
allows all questions in the guide to be addressed thoroughly. This depends
on the moderator’s familiarity with the discussion guide, flexibility, ability to
monitor and gauge the tone of the discussion and to make quick judgments
about when and how to interject.
 (Slide 8) Note-taking is equally important. Note-takers must ensure that their notes
reflect and summarize what is being said. A note-taker should first thoroughly
review the discussion guide and prepare a note-taking form, which should include
the basic information (date, site, start and finish time, name of the moderator and
note-taker, seating chart and identifiers, number of participants by sex). Notetakers should also be careful observers of verbal and nonverbal behaviors and be
discreet about note-taking as they operate the recording equipment. They should
be able to synthesize their observations to serve as the basis for discussion after
each focus group session. Proficiency rests on preparation for the focus group and
developing effective note-taking techniques. Note-takers should expand their notes
on the same day in which the discussion is held.
Focus Group Discussion Game (Exercise 7)
50 minutes
Use Slide 9 to guide the instructions.
Assign three participants the role of focus group facilitation team. Tell this group that they
will facilitate a discussion on a topic you prepared. Hand out the role guides to the team of
facilitators (pages 1-8 of Exercise 8). They have 15 minutes to prepare. They should do so
outside the conference room. Remind them that one of them is expected to facilitate, one
will take notes and the last one observe the discussion.
Hand out the Focus Group Participant Role Guide (page 9 of Exercise 8) to the rest of the
participants. Give them a general overview of the focus group discussion about to take
place, but do not give any details on the objectives. Ask them not to share their role guides
with each other. Instruct them to take notes on what is being said and to observe group
dynamics. Give participants time to read their role guide and prepare themselves.
Distribute pages 10-12 of the Participant Role Guide to three participants who you believe
can play the envisaged roles effectively (i.e. try to pre-select these participants and avoid
participants who are shy or excessively quiet).
Ask your colleague facilitator to join the assessment team to make suggestions and brief
responses to any questions the group may have. Once the focus group begins, watch for the
following and be ready to give feedback afterwards:

Introduction: How did the team members introduce themselves to the participants?
Did the moderator introduce his/her colleagues? Did the introduction include
information on the purpose of the discussion? Did the moderator manage to get the
Page 5 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
attention of the participants? Was the note-taker sitting in a place that allows
him/her to listen and observe?

Moderation: Did the moderator seem to be confident about his/her ability to
moderate? Was he/she comfortable with the discussion guide? Did the moderator
probe effectively? Did the moderator miss asking important follow-up questions?
Were questions easily understood by the participants? Did the moderator deal
properly with the aggressive, talkative and the interruptive participants?

Note-Taking: Did the note-taker and observer seem to be taking their role seriously?
Did they seem to be following what was going on?
Invite participants to take their seats to begin the debriefing.
Game Debriefing (slide 10)
45 minutes
1.
2.
Ask the assessment team if they believe they accomplished their aims. Did they get the
information they needed? Why do they think they succeeded? Make sure to prompt
each of the three team members to reflect on these questions, and try to pick up on any
differences of opinion between them.

Draw participants’ attention to the note-taker’s key role in identifying areas where
improvements can be made in questions, probes, and follow-up questions. This
usually takes place in a debriefing session after the focus group (on the same day
preferably) when everyone has had some time to write up their conclusions.

The debriefing session draws on the notes taken by the moderator and note-taker
and the expanded focus group report. These allow the assessment team to formulate
and refine its findings on an ongoing basis, while improving the data collection by
identifying questions for follow-up. Indeed, answers to some questions lead
naturally to others. This continual adjustment of the questions is part of the iterative
nature of qualitative assessments.
Then move to the participants Group: Ask them if they thought the moderation team
was effective? Did the teams learn what was really going on? Was the moderator able
to pick up on group dynamics and personalities? Was he/she able to effectively deal
with these individuals? What are the lessons learned?
In facilitating the debriefing, refer to principles enunciated earlier and insist on the
following:

The moderator’s efforts to cultivate a positive atmosphere can foster a productive
and rewarding discussion. Ideally, participants will express a wide range of
perspectives and some points of disagreement rather than consensus. Of course,
Page 6 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
participants may all agree on a given issue, but make sure that this is the case by
encouraging all members to contribute.

A crucial skill for moderating a productive focus group is the ability to build rapport
with and among participants from the outset. A positive, relaxed and mutually
respectful group dynamic needs to be established form the start. If participants do
not feel comfortable expressing personal opinions and experiences, the focus group
will not achieve its objectives.

Every focus group is a unique experience: what the participants say will be different
each time and the group dynamics vary according to the personalities and people’s
mood. Some groups will have a gregarious tone, others a serious or quiet tone. If
someone dominates the discussion, express a negative attitude, or has an emotional
outburst, you need to know how to reduce the impact on the group and steer the
discussion in a more productive direction.
In an interview setting, the interviewer might try to adjust his or her style to the
character of the individual participant. In contrast, in focus groups, there are too many
individuals for this technique to be practical. Suggestions for handling common
personality traits and emotional states within the focus group context are:

If a participant is . . .
Talkative. You may need to intervene. You could thank the person for his or her
contribution and invite others to comment or provide alternative views. You might
also ask a talkative person to make only one point at a time, or. step in beore the
person introduces a new topic and encourage the group to discuss the first point.
You might also use body language, such as decreasing your eye contact with the
talkative participant and increasing eye contact with others.
Prone to interrupt. Remind the group that one of the ground rules is to refrain from
interrupting other people. You might also thank the individual and suggest
returning to his or her point after the first speaker’s contribution has been
completed.
Aggressive. First remind participants of the ground rule that no one is permitted to
insult or personally attack anyone else. You could also calmly ask the individual in
question to explain the reasoning behind the stated negative opinion and then
involving the rest of the group in the discussion.
Shy. Some participants will be hesitant to join an ongoing discussion. Offer them a
safer opportunity to speak by pausing the discussion and asking whether anyone
else has something to contribute. You could also pose questions directly to them,
thank them afterward for sharing their experience, and encourage them with body
language, such as smiling.
Page 7 of 8
Qualitative Approaches for Food Security Assessment
533582471s
Angry. If a participant becomes angry, try to soften the level of emotion by
acknowledging that the issues at hand are indeed sensitive or controversial. If you
prefer to address the person’s anger, steer the conversation towards the idea that it
is the issue that is upsetting rather than another participant.
Crying. If a participant cries, the moderator should gauge whether to address the
issue directly or not call attention to the person. If you decide to discuss it, you
might ask the person to identify the source of his or her distress. When the source is
an issue related to the content of the discussion, ask the group if other people feel
emotional as well. If the issue has to do with group dynamics, react accordingly,
reminding people of the ground rule of mutual respect. In some situations, the notetaker might take the crying participant aside to resolve the situation.
Tired. If more than one participant begins to appear tired or irritable, take a break.
Encourage people to get up and move around, use the restroom and have
refreshments (if provided).

The note-taker typically conducts a debriefing session with the moderator after the
focus group. Debriefing is very important and must be done with rigor to maximize
its usefulness. Debriefing has multiple purposes:
o To log any additional information while it is still fresh in the memory.
o To clarify outstanding issues or comments. Field notes explaining confusing
parts of the focus group will help other analysts to interpret the transcripts
later on.
o To discuss particular questions that did not work well and why.
o To note any information that contradicts or confirms previously collected
information.
o To discuss new topics that arose during the focus group.
o To identify missing information. Comparing what information was being
sought with what was actually learned can help moderators plan how to
solicit this information more effectively in subsequent focus groups.
o To identify information that needs to be researched outside the focus group
setting. This may have to do, for example, with cultural norms, fact-checking,
or specifics about the assessment.
o To discuss trouble spots that came up, with regard to participants, group
dynamics and questions. It may be necessary to develop new strategies for
dealing with a particular issue for subsequent focus groups.
o To provide the moderator and note-taker a forum for giving each other
constructive feedback.
After about 40-45 minutes, distribute handout No. 10 to participants and invite them to a
30 minute break.
Page 8 of 8