1/3/2018 20. Glan houye FY 14: Gender-based violence among stateless and national populations in Cote d'Ivoire 42. Koudougou 21. Gbapleu 22. Danipleu 43. Saria Zuenoula 44. Kaya 45. Ouagadougou Survey development: With input from ASA, portions of previously validated sets of surveys were adapted and included from: 1) WHO Multi-country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence against Women[22] which includes collection of both intimate partner violence (IPV) and non-partner violence victimization; 2) UN research on perpetration of violence[23-25]; 3) the Hopkins Symptom Checklist- Depression subscale[26]; and items developed by our research team focusing on social norms about violence and others derived from qualitative findings. The adapted questionnaire was translated from English to French and then back-translated by local translators; back-translations were then reviewed by the research team and the local ASA team. Additional edits were made through an iterative process to ensure that the translation captured the essence of each question. The surveys were then programmed in English and French for tablet-based data collection, which was deemed a more secure method than paper-based data collection. Sampling frame: The research team had consulted with UNHCR, local organizations working with stateless persons, and local community leaders for all available information for possible sampling frame of stateless persons living in the Cote d’Ivoire. To the best of our knowledge, there was no available sampling frame at the time when we conducted the survey. Sampling Plan: The aim of the study was to measure proportions of key indicators relating to demographics, GBV, GBV-related health impacts and health care access among the stateless population, compared to the populations with legal citizenship. We controlled for socio-economic status between stateless and legal citizens by sampling the population with legal citizenship who live in closest proximity to the surveyed stateless participants. Given the challenge of the sampling frame that could not be established, we adjusted our sampling methodology as follows: Identification of all communities where stateless populations are known to reside; Consult, inform and request for participation in the survey from local non-governmental organizations and stateless community leaders who work in the respective communities; Raise awareness of the survey’s goals, objectives and expected date of survey with community leaders within communities that have agreed to participate in the survey; Upon arrival to the prospective community being surveyed, local community promoters informed community members about the survey. Community leaders were consulted on the general map of the community being surveyed using satellite Google Earth images and estimates of the number of stateless persons living in the community. The community was divided into subsections, from which a subsection was randomly selected using a random number table. If the subsection had more than approximately 30 households, it was further divided and the process of random selection was repeated until an area was chosen with approximately 30 households to facilitate the process of randomly selecting a household. A house was selected randomly to look for the first stateless person to interview using the inclusion criteria described below under participant recruitment. If the household did not have a stateless person, surveyors went to the next nearest household as measured from the front door of one dwelling to the front door of the next. When a survey with a stateless person was completed, the surveyor then identified and interviewed the next nearest person of legal citizenship of the same gender using the same method above. If the person who has legal citizenship is not found based on the inclusion criteria, the surveyor will proceed to the next nearest house until the target respondent type is found. This process was repeated, alternating between a person who was stateless and one with legal citizenship, using the most recent house with a completed survey as the reference for the selection of the next nearest house to sample. If the interviewer could not find a person to sample, most often a person of legal citizenship in that same community, after one hour, then the surveyors continued sampling for only the stateless persons until they had surveyed eight respondents/interviews. The team would then proceed to the next nearest community to sample for the match of persons with citizenship and to match for the same gender. Staff trained as survey supervisors oversaw the household selection process and reviewed completed surveys on the iPad to assure completeness. Participants: The inclusion criteria for stateless persons were: 1) aged 18 years or older; 2) do not have any birth certificate from any country; 3) whose parents do not have national certificate from any country; or 4) if the person is a foundling who have never known their parents. The inclusion criteria for a person with legal citizenship were: 1) aged 18 years or older; 2) has a national certificate from Cote d’Ivoire; or 3) if either parent has a national certificate from Cote d’Ivoire. To avoid potentially raising undue concern, we did not ask participants to provide documentation for verification of nationality. Recruitment and consent: Recruitment was facilitated by local community leader who was familiar with the community to be sampled. Prior to commencement of interviews, the interviewer read a consent script, which described the study purpose, procedures, and risks related to participation. The interviewer asked for the participant’s consent to participate and, separately, for consent to record the interview/discussion. Verbal consent was obtained from all participants from a standardized consent script that was read to the participants by the surveyors. Verbal – in lieu of written consent – was used to ensure that all data collection was anonymous; a written consent would have otherwise been the only linking identifier of the data to the participant. A copy of the informed consent was made available for the participants if they preferred to retain a copy. All participants were provided with information essential for informed consent prior to participation in the discussion/interviews. All participants were informed about the potential risks in participating in the study and measures taken by the study team to protect participants. All participants were notified that they could withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. All data collection was anonymous and data was recorded on an iPad tablet. The data on the iPad table was then uploaded on an encrypted and password protected server at the end of each working day. The data on the iPad was erased from the tablet after uploading of data to protect participant information and confidentiality. https://www.state.gov/j/prm/policyissues/prmfund/276832.htm 14/27