Appendix C: Sampling and recruitment approach

People who use and experience violence

Sampling approach

In order to implement a sampling strategy, a number of contextual factors were considered, including the size of the programs, and the timing of commencement, and it is acknowledged that these may impact on the number and diversity of participants recruited for the evaluation. This requires determination of selection criteria, noting that the smaller the sample size, the fewer selection criteria should be used.

For this evaluation, the following selection criteria were considered (noting that they are not mutually exclusive – e.g. victim/perpetrator sets belong to either individual and/or group interventions):

• inclusion of both ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’
• individual and group approaches
• inclusion of ‘cohort’ groups.

Table 8.1 shows the sampling matrix that was developed. This represents the proposed number of interviews for each phase. The final numbers were subject to participant availability and willingness to participate.

Table 8‑3 Sampling approach for people who use and experience violence

Recruitment

A flexible, indirect recruitment approach (recruitment via service providers) was adopted for the current research. Researchers worked closely with program providers and participant case workers to identify suitable participants for the research. Strict exclusion criteria were adhered to in the identification of participants in order to uphold the ethical integrity of the research and ensure the safety of all participants and the researchers. The following criteria were adhered to in recruitment:

Given the potential risk for violence to escalate, people who use violence should only be invited to be interviewed if the person who has experienced violence is currently engaged with a family safety contact worker or an equivalent service;

• clients must be in-service, and not just in the referral stage of the program
• involvement in the evaluation should be unlikely to disrupt client engagement in the service
• involvement in the evaluation should be unlikely to place unreasonable burden on clients
• clients should be selected who will not pose a risk to researchers.

An additional safety measure involved avoiding the ‘pairing’ of people who have used violence and people who have experienced violence known to be currently, or previously, in a relationship. This was due to potential concerns around safety and the confidentiality of discussions.

To facilitate this indirect recruitment approach, researchers followed a number of steps (see Figure 2). A primary approach e-mail was initially sent to 31 providers (7 cohort, 24 case management) to introduce the research and to invite providers to forward eligible participants. A time for a follow-up telephone conversation with providers was then scheduled, to discuss the approach in more detail.

Indirect recruitment approach adopted for the research

• send an initial approach email to providers
• arrange a phone discussion with the provider
• send information packs to providers
• monitor responses and contact participants.

Upon engaging providers and explaining the research, ‘information packs’ were then sent to providers (both electronic and physical copies were provided). Each information pack contained:

• information for case workers
• information sheets about the research for both people who have used and people who have experienced violence;
• a plain language information sheet
• an ‘expression of interest’ form for any interested participants.

Once providers had received the ‘information packs’, they were invited to approach and distribute materials to eligible participants. Interested participants were then able to complete an expression of interest form to provide consent to be contacted. Providers passed on completed forms to the research team, who contacted participants to organise a suitable date and time for interviews to occur.

Participants were not directly offered an incentive for participation in the research. Instead, an $85 ‘donation’ was made to a family violence organisation (which was agreed on being the provider offering the service). Providers were afforded discretion with regards to how they used the donation. Some providers chose to offer the incentive directly to participants or affected family members, whereas others chose to utilise the donation to fund program resources. Providers were considered best placed to make this decision, balancing the ethical need to reimburse participants, while also recognising that some deem it inappropriate to offer an incentive to a person who has used violence.

Non-client participants

Recruitment of providers, government, referral agency and peak body representatives for participation in interviews and focus groups will occur in consultation with FSV. Initial contact will be made by FSV, to inform potential participants of the evaluation and what will be involved in participation, and to seek the most appropriate contact details. If the potential participant expresses an interest in taking part, their details will then be passed onto the Deloitte Access Economics team to make contact with them to set up an appropriate time/location.

Providers will already be aware of their involvement in the evaluation due to their contractual obligations, as well as previous input sought via Deloitte Access Economics on the approach to the evaluation. All details will be confirmed in writing, by email. Providers will determine the most appropriate staff from their organisation to take part in the focus groups. Service providers will be informed that if they wish to withdraw from the consultation at any stage, or do not want to participate, this will not impact their relationship with FSV.