NRC I Displacement, HLP and access to civil documentation in the south of the Syrian Arab Republic METHODOLOGY AND VALIDITY This assessment is based on qualitative and quantitative data. The research team surveyed 734 IDP households, covering all five districts of Dar’a and Quneitra. Despite some limits to access, the local humanitarian partner organisation who undertook the field work reached households in NGCAs in all but four sub-districts. The household survey data was complemented by 15 focus group discussions and 21 key informant interviews targeting local de facto authorities in NGCAs and decision-makers involved in housing, land and property rights as well civil documentation. One of the key informant interviews and three of the focus group discussions were held with Syrians in Jordan including some with technical expertise, complementing the 20 interviews and 12 discussions that were spread across 11 of the surveyed sub-districts of southern Syria. In Jordan, the focus groups were as follows: a group of women, a group of lawyers, and a group of men with knowledge of property registration. Through surveys with 734 households, comprising 467 male respondents and 267 female respondents, the research team compiled a family member dataset of 4,047 persons. While the majority of data is at household level, the latter dataset reflects details for individual family members, for example, their possession or lack of valid identity documents. All male household survey respondents were heads of household, while only 8 per cent of female respondents were. The majority of female respondents were the highest status female in their household; they were surveyed in place of the head of household in order to ensure that female respondents were represented in the dataset. The proportional selection of households in each sub-district was informed by IDP population data from the 2017 HNO. Given the focus on HLP, the location of IDP accommodation within the sub-district was used as a basic sample frame to ensure inclusion of a variety of locations, communities, shelters and tenure types. The research team liaised with local leaders to inform the sampling, while methods such as randomised door knocking were also used to mitigate local biases. Sampling was limited by security and access considerations: it was not possible to reach all sub-districts, nor to reach all parts of the 17 sub-districts that were surveyed. As such, one limitation to the dataset is that it does not represent all IDPs across Dar’a and Quneitra; instead, it only accurately represents IDPs in accessible parts, and it may over-represent those who are known to local leaders and, for example, those who are therefore included in locally compiled beneficiary lists. 8 I NRC Assessment Report