Determining whether you have collected sufficient data to meaningfully understand – and act on – community preferences depends on both the issue or problem that is the focus of your feedback loop process and your chosen data collection method(s). You will likely never have a 100 percent response rate to your surveys or 100 percent participation in FGDs or interviews. Accordingly, you will likely need to decide when you have “good enough” information to understand – and act on – the preferences of your community in all of its diversity.

The team should refer to its goals for the feedback loop process set at the beginning of the efforts (Steps 1 and 2). What is the question you are trying to answer and the problem you are trying to solve? What depth or breadth of information do you need – and from whom – to meaningfully address this problem? Has this level of data from your identified target groups been gathered?

In terms of data collection methodology, some key rules of thumb can help you determine if your data collection has been sufficiently robust. 

  • For a survey, your sample size is your key marker for whether you have collected enough data. If you have not reached your sample size goal within two weeks of issuing the survey, refer to the previous sections and either (a) reissue the survey to a wider sample, send reminders or adopt additional distribution methods, or (b) supplement the survey findings with focus groups. When more than a month has passed (and you have made efforts to solicit additional survey responses or issue reminders), you should close the survey, work with the collected findings and note any challenges in data collection or shortages in the sample size in your analysis report. Depending on the number of responses compared to your sample size goal, your findings may be more or less representative of community views and should be viewed as a starting point for further discussion, rather than as a robust and representative basis for policymaking.
  • For focus groups and interviews, you have collected enough data if you have heard from the groups or individuals you intended to reach. You cannot speak to everyone directly and indirectly affected by a particular issue; instead, aim to hear perspectives from individuals representing all groups with a stake in the process and some knowledge to contribute. To identify these groups, refer back to the stakeholder mapping conducted by the team earlier in the process (Step 1). Your stakeholder mapping and sorting of groups by their interests, power and relevance to the topic will help you prioritize groups for outreach. 

Box 19. Learn from experience: Focus groups on municipal performance in Georgia

A team of local officials, civil society representatives and leaders in Ozurgeti, Georgia, wanted to understand how to improve a grant-based assistance program for rural business owners. The team conducted two focus groups, one with individuals who had won a grant and the other with individuals whose applications for a grant had not been selected. Through a series of moderated questions that were specifically designed for each type of group, feedback was collected from both successful and unsuccessful applicants. 

This feedback helped the city to identify how both groups perceived and navigated the application process, their views on the impartiality of decisions and their ideas for improvements. Feedback from these two focus groups provided sufficient perspectives from people with diverse experiences – men and women, successful and unsuccessful applicants – so no additional focus groups were needed. To ground recommendations in specific municipal processes, the city’s assessment team discussed the findings with the city’s economic development office. Subsequently, the team shared findings and recommended improvements at a public meeting with local civil society and residents. 

For all data collection methods, if you feel that the collected feedback is not sufficient, revisit Step 4 to identify missing information and the best way to collect it. For example, your survey might show split responses on two issues, residents might raise unexpected topics, a small sample size could weaken your confidence in representing diverse views, or data might indicate contradictory or confusing trends. Before going to the public with your initial findings, it may be worth conducting additional focus groups or convening a meeting or series of interviews with local civil society representatives and leaders or government officers. At these focus groups or discussions, you can present your initial findings and ask for feedback and clarity on points of confusion; participants might provide additional information that will help you make sense of the initial feedback. This step may also validate your decision to return to the data collection phase with a new survey where you ask different questions or more targeted outreach to a particular community for another focus group. 

Overall, your approach should be flexible and oriented toward listening more, rather than less. It is better to return to the data collection stage and listen again for more information than to present findings to the public that are difficult to act on or pointing in different directions. However, you should always maintain momentum and keep an eye on moving forward toward the steps of solving problems and communicating with the public.

Previa Anterior