5.2 Presentation of preliminary PAR results and priority setting

The participatory appraisal phase provides the interest groups and the PAR support team with an information base about the most significant concerns of the local community. In carrying out the appraisal exercises and the subsequent analyses, the PAR support team works with interest groups within the community to examine perceived problems. Not every member of the community is willing or able to take part in the gathering of information and discussion of perceived problems, but it is important that everyone is given the opportunity to be informed of the results. Therefore, it is a good idea to hold a feedback meeting to present the preliminary PAR findings to the entire community. This meeting serves a number of purposes:

• Information sharing. Information is power, and all community members - regardless of whether or not they were able to directly participate in PAR activities - should have the opportunity to hear and discuss the PAR results. This may bring a wider group of people into the planning and implementation process.

• External validation. It is important that the data gathered are checked for validity by community members who did not participate in the process, and that any differences concerning perceived problems facing the village are discussed openly.

• Setting priorities and building support. Before the next phase of the PAR begins - participatory planning - it is important that a consensus be achieved concerning the most important problems and concerns of the community. For long-term sustainability, initiatives will need the support of most (or at least of many) community members.

Preparing for the feedback meeting

A number of logistical matters need to be addressed for the meeting to be successful. First, the interest groups and the PAR support team must consider the scheduling. Ideally, the meeting will be held within a week or two of the participatory appraisal and analysis, while the activities are still fresh in people's minds. If there is over a month's delay between the appraisal and the feedback meeting, the process may lose momentum.

It is a good idea to pick a day of the week on which the maximum number of people will be able to attend, and a time of the day that is convenient for everyone. To ensure maximum attendance, the meeting should be announced at least a few days before being held, and those involved in the process thus far may wish to personally encourage friends and neighbors to attend. In some parts of the world, village meetings are only attended by adult men, so special efforts may be required to ensure a balanced gender representation. It should be clearly stated that all community members are invited to attend. Especially when the village or community is large, a number of logistical questions need advance considerations. Will the meeting be indoors or outdoors? Will people sit on mats or chairs? Will there be a special place for village elders? What will be the seating arrangement, lighting, refreshments, etc.?

Prior to the presentations, each interest group will identify the key points coming out of the appraisal and analysis phases and select some support material (e.g., maps, lists, matrices) to illustrate them. A special emphasis should be given to the crucial problems identified and the feasible solutions that have emerged. Facilitator support may be useful in helping each group condense their presentation down to the most important statements and providing help in preparing relevant visual aids. If the slide-language technique was used, the groups may wish to make arrangements to show the slides.

The PAR support team can help to facilitate the agreement of the various interest groups on the agenda of the feedback meeting (order of presentations, etc.). A respected local leader may be asked to chair the meeting, in which case he/she should be briefed on the meeting's purpose, and on the order of proceedings. Even in this case it may be advisable to designate one or two members of the PAR support team as facilitators, so that they can encourage the participation of women, youths and other groups that might otherwise be left out of the proceedings.

Holding the feedback meeting and prioritizing proposed actions

Once all community members have gathered for the meeting, it may be appropriate to begin with a prayer (depending on the context) or a few remarks by the village leaders. During the presentations, the interest groups will explain their key concerns, illustrate them via collected data and outline some ideas they have for solutions. If they feel strongly about the desirability of a course of action, they will build a case for it. They may also wish to pose some specific questions to the community-wide audience.

A principal goal of the feedback meeting is to include those who have not been part of the process thus far in important discoveries about the problems facing the community and the opportunities to address them. Every effort should be made to avoid giving the impression that those who participated in the PAR are presenting an agreed-upon 'truth' to other community members. Rather, the meeting will be most effective when it will include a frank and open-minded discussion. It is also possible that the interest groups may have overlooked some important information or perspective in the collection and analysis of information, and the other members of the community will now have a chance to give their views.

During the feedback meeting, the community will offer general comments and discussion but will also contribute by 'scoring' the feasibility and appropriateness of alternative actions. A priority-setting exercise provides a practical method for facilitating decision-making in a large group. In this exercise, after a brainstorming discussion on the strengths and weaknesses of different 'solutions' to some problems, community members are asked to score some proposed actions on two criteria: effectiveness (capacity to bring about a solution), and feasibility (likelihood of being possible). All community members can then express their degree of support for the proposed actions by raising one hand (to express support), two hands (for strong support) and no hands (to abstain or express lack of support for an action). The facilitators can then count hands and tally the votes on a flipchart. It may be decided ahead of time that children under a certain age will be excluded from the voting. (Annex B, section B.9 provides an example of a similar kind of priority-setting exercise.)

A scoring procedure provides an arithmetical basis for reaching a common decision. Facilitators and participants will need to understand, however, that this technique is only meant to serve as an aid for decision-making. While they can indicate collective priorities, the 'scores' need to be interpreted and discussed, and various constraints and limitations invariably need to be addressed in detail.

Whatever the results of the priority-setting exercise, the facilitators should do their best to help the community to reach a final consensus about their preferred actions. Prioritization and decision-making are difficult and sensitive moments. Community members may have trouble setting priorities because they are trying to avoid community conflicts; or they may feel very strongly that it is essential to achieve all the identified objectives. Yet, over-ambitious plans generally lead to failure and frustration.

If the community does not manage to achieve a reasonable level of agreement over the actions to be taken in the near future, a possible strategy is to postpone the decision until all implementation issues have been identified and discussed. In this way, the group will have the opportunity to compare options on the basis of realistic estimates of time and resources necessary to carry them out.

At the end of the presentations and scoring, the chair or facilitators will summarize the resolutions from the feedback meeting and discuss next steps. These include negotiating a plan of action with external partners, implementing the plan and monitoring and evaluating the work accomplished ('learning by doing'). The facilitators may wish to illustrate the chart presented in Figure 5.3, which describes the continual building and learning inherent in the PAR process.

Figure 5.3: Schematic diagram of the PAR process: appraisal, anlysis, planning, implementation and evaluation