Appendix B: Detailed data collection approach

Data collection

The data collection involved a mix of primary and secondary data collection, as outlined below:

Primary data sources

Stakeholder interviews

Consultations with non-clients, including individual providers, FSV and DHHS representatives, coordination and referral staff, and advisory and peak bodies was undertaken to understand the process of the designing and implementation of the programs, and the barriers and enablers in delivering/overseeing the programs. An overview of the stakeholders consulted is shown in Table 2.2.

Table 8‑1 Phase 1 non-client interviews

A total of 87 interviews were conducted with program participants, including both face-to-face and telephone. In consultation with FSV, key characteristics of interest were identified for recruitment. Obtaining a spread of participants across cohort trials and case management programs was considered preferable, including a mix of people who have used violence, as well as those who have experienced violence. Other variables included provider location (metro/regional) and target cohort of the program. The sampling and recruitment approach is outlined in Appendix C. Table 2.3 outlines the number of participants interviewed across key variables of interest.

Table 8‑2 Phase 1 and 2 client interviews

Fieldwork ran over a two-month period from late May 2019 until late June 2019. Eligible participants were offered the choice between completing an interview face-to-face or over the phone.

• All face-to-face interviews were conducted at the relevant provider’s premises, to ensure a safe and comfortable environment for both the participant and the researcher.
• Telephone interviews were organised for a time convenient to the participant.

The specific approach to recruitment is outlined in Appendix C.

Service provider data collection tool

To address gaps in data availability from the Integrated Reports and Information System (IRIS) system, the data management system used by FSV/DHHS for family violence programs, data was sought directly from service providers through a data collection tool. For each program participant and victim survivor, the tool included demographic, referral and outcome information.

The process for developing and administering this tool was undertaken in consultation with providers to ensure it was easy to use, did not create excessive administrative burden, and contained information that will be useful for providers in their own performance monitoring processes. The data collection tool included client outcome questions focused on behaviour change and victim survivor feelings of safety, aligned to the family violence outcomes framework. Three providers piloted the tool and provided feedback on useability of the tool. Following the first phase of data collection, information sessions on using the tool were held with providers, to address some of the difficulties experienced in phase one. A number of providers commented that collection of client outcome questions was incorporated into their own service delivery processes.

For the process data collection phase, 17 of the 31 providers completed and returned the tool. In the outcome phase this increased to 21 providers.

The limitations related to this data are discussed in Section 2.5.