1. Who Knows?: Facilitating Meaningful, Manageable Participatory Data Analysis
Kristin Bradley-Bull
New Perspectives Consulting Group
Thomas McQuiston
USW Tony Mazzocchi Center
M. Josie Beach
USW Local Union
AEA – Orlando, 12 November 2009

2. Acknowledgments
This work was supported via a cooperative agreement from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (U45ES S1). The views here are those of the authors. The authors wish to acknowledge USW the co-evaluators with whom we have worked side by side over the past decade and the local unions and workers who make this work necessary and possible.

3. RAP OVERVIEW Research-Action Projects (RAPs)
Engage community (industrial workers, USW staff ) in all evaluation stages
RAP purpose: improve health and safety in industrial workplaces to protect workers, surrounding communities
Seek to effect changes: fed. policy, corp. policy/ practice, individual workplaces, training focus, etc.

4. KEY CONTEXT Working with major union (United Steelworkers/USW)
National scope of projects
Luxury of time
Luxury of funding

5. ANALYSIS FACILITATION COMPONENTS
Selecting Analysis Team Members
Preparing for Analysis Meeting
Conducting Analysis Meeting
Completing Analysis Post-Meeting

6. 1. Selecting Analysis Team Members
Community members
Formal organizational leaders
Evaluators/researchers
Facilitators/trainers

7. 2. Preparing for Analysis Meeting
Pre-meeting orientation
Aims of the project

8. Preparing (cont’d) DATA REPORT PREPARATION: Review raw data
Run preliminary cross-tabs, tests
Refine data report content to include most noteworthy
Remove extraneous columns, data, etc.
Organize report content for maximum ease of use

9. Preparing (cont’d) ANALYSIS MEETING AGENDA DEVELOPMENT:
Consider how to build skills, confidence, trust and move through a lot of analysis
Determine time- and complexity- equivalent analyses per small group “round”
Create responsive, flexible agenda

10. 3. Conducting Analysis Meeting
Trust-building
Strategic small group assignment

11. Conducting (cont’d)
ACCESSIBLE, RELEVANT ANALYSIS TRAINING MATERIAL EXAMPLES:
Sample size puzzle
Legos
Factsheets

12. Conducting (cont’d)
Facilitate distinguishing among: analysis, interpretation, recommendations
Clarify product/s of meeting

13. Conducting (cont’d) First round: full group (who is our “n?”)
Small groups complete rounds with small group facilitator support
Full group facilitated to provide deep input during report-backs
Work captured on laptops; reviewed via projector, track changes

14. Conducting (cont’d) Toward end of meeting:
More focus on recommendation development
Evaluation by team on the process, products, facilitation, etc.; advice for “next time”
Next steps identification, dates, sign-up

15. 4. Completing Analysis Post-Meeting
Review what’s been done/plan out in detail:
What’s next?
Who will do what?
Who else needs to be involved?
Work via: web-based meetings, conference calls, ?

16. VALUE-ADDED OF PARTICIPATORY ANALYSIS
Technical expertise
Misinterpretation avoidance
“A-ha” moments
Relevance/reality/readability checks

17. Value-Added (cont’d)
Insiders with deep knowledge of results, recommendations for dissemination, action stages
Institutionally-credible people contributing to analysis and interpretation
Capacity-building
Institutional valuing of participatory approaches, results

18. REFLECTIONS Q/A Advice for/from peers