In-Person Surveys: Implementation Guide

A practical guide for planning and implementing in-person surveys in development research. Covers IPA’s required protocols, field coordination strategies, and best practices for managing complex data collection operations while maintaining high data quality standards.

TipKey Takeaways
  • Strategic preparation three or more months helps ensure survey success; proper planning is critical
  • Survey coordination requires systematic team management, clear communication protocols, and adaptive problem-solving
  • Success depends on integrating comprehensive quality systems with adaptive survey management strategies

Understanding In-Person Survey Applications

In-person surveys represent the most resource-intensive yet comprehensive approach to primary data collection in development research. They enable researchers to gather nuanced information through direct interaction, observe contextual factors firsthand, and build the rapport necessary for honest responses to sensitive questions. This depth comes with substantial complexity; field teams must navigate diverse contexts, challenging logistics, and significant resource requirements while adhering to research protocols.

The fundamental appeal of in-person surveys lies in their ability to capture the full spectrum of human experience in development contexts. When researching poverty, education, health, or governance interventions, the physical presence of trained enumerators allows for complex questionnaire administration, visual aids utilization, and immediate clarification of misunderstandings. This methodology proves particularly valuable when working with populations who may have limited literacy, varying language capabilities, or cultural norms that favor face-to-face communication.

Comparison with Alternative Methods

Criterion In-Person Phone Surveys WhatsApp Admin Data
Cost High Medium Low Low
Data Quality Highest Medium Medium Variable
Speed Slow Fast Fast Fast
Complex Questions Excellent Limited Limited N/A
Geographic Reach Limited High High High
Rapport Building Excellent Limited Limited N/A

For complex questionnaires, measurements requiring validation, sensitive topics, or populations with limited technology access, in-person surveys remain the preferred method. For rapid data collection or follow-up surveys, consider phone surveys or WhatsApp data collection.

Strategic Planning and Timeline Development

Effective in-person surveys require extended preparation periods that resist shortening without compromising quality. The planning timeline should begin six or more months before data collection, with IRB approvals, instrument design, and budget planning forming the foundation. Instrument development follows two to four months before launch, encompassing survey programming, translation, and pilot testing. Field preparation occupies the final one to two months, focusing on team recruitment, training materials, and logistics coordination.

This extended timeline reflects the complex interdependencies inherent in field operations. Each phase builds upon previous work and cannot proceed without solid foundations. Research teams attempting to compress these timelines typically encounter quality issues that prove more expensive to resolve than proper initial preparation.

Field Team Structure and Management

Successful implementation relies on clear hierarchical structures with defined roles and responsibilities. Field coordinators oversee overall operations while managing logistics and ensuring quality standards. Supervisors provide direct enumerator oversight through regular spot-checks and performance feedback, with manageable supervisor-enumerator ratios to safeguard effective supervision. Enumerators serve as primary data collectors, requiring appropriate training and ongoing support to maintain consistency.

Training requirements extend far beyond survey content to encompass field and ethics protocols, quality procedures, and technology proficiency. Teams must understand respondent selection procedures, revisit protocols, safety guidelines, and back-check processes. Technology training ensures platform proficiency and basic troubleshooting capabilities that reduce downtime during data collection. Additional staff should be trained beyond projected needs to secure adequate replacements and maintain operational continuity. All team members should be evaluated to confirm proficiency with protocols and procedures, with re-training provided as needed, and the strongest profiles prioritized for fieldwork.

Communication systems provide the foundation for effective field coordination. Daily check-ins between field teams and research coordinators enable rapid issue identification and resolution. Group messaging facilitates updates and problem-sharing across teams, while clear escalation procedures ensure serious issues receive immediate attention. Regular team meetings provide structured feedback opportunities and coordination discussions.

Quality Control and Monitoring Systems

Real-time monitoring through high-frequency checks enables immediate feedback loops between field teams and research headquarters. Dashboard monitoring tracks collection progress and data quality, allowing the research team to verify that fieldwork advances at the expected pace while identifying outliers and flagging potential issues before they become systematic problems. Communication protocols ensure immediate feedback reaches field teams when quality concerns arise.

Back-check procedures provide essential verification through re-interviewing selected respondents within 24-48 hours of initial surveys. These checks help identify interviewer effects, data quality issues, and systematic errors that may not appear in automated monitoring. Findings provide targeted information for retraining or corrective measures. In addition, audio audits offer another tool to assess enumerator performance, ensuring questions are asked consistently, probing is appropriate, and consent procedures are followed, while also providing material for targeted feedback.

Field supervision combines direct observation with unannounced verification of survey procedures. Supervisors accompany enumerators during interviews to observe techniques and provide immediate feedback, and complete supervision forms that document adherence to protocols. Regular individual and team performance reviews maintain accountability while supporting continuous improvement.

Technology Integration and Platform Selection

Data collection platform selection must balance functionality, security, cost, and user-friendliness considerations across a diverse ecosystem of tools. Open Data Kit provides a foundational open source framework that supports various implementations and custom solutions. KoBoToolbox offers comprehensive capabilities without licensing fees, making it attractive for humanitarian and budget-constrained projects. CommCare specializes in mobile data collection with strong case management features for longitudinal studies. Survey 1-2-3 provides simplified survey creation with cloud-based deployment options. SurveyCTO provides the highest level of security standards through zero-knowledge encryption systems, making it a preferred option for sensitive research requiring maximum data protection.

These platforms all use the XLSForm standard for survey design, which IPA recommends for digital data collection due to its flexibility, portability, and widespread adoption. This standardization enables survey forms to transfer between platforms when needed, providing researchers with greater flexibility in platform selection and migration options.

Hardware decisions vary significantly based on deployment contexts. Device selection requires balancing durability, functionality, and cost according to field conditions. Power management becomes critical in remote areas, often requiring solar charging systems and backup batteries. Data backup systems ensure multiple storage locations with regular synchronization to prevent data loss.

Quality assurance tools enhance verification capabilities where ethically appropriate. GPS tracking enables location verification while photo documentation supports certain survey components. These technological enhancements require careful consideration of privacy implications and participant consent.

Context-Specific Implementation Strategies

Urban areas present unique challenges requiring sophisticated approaches. Security protocols become essential in informal settlements, while traffic and accessibility issues complicate scheduling and logistics. Respondent availability varies significantly across urban contexts, demanding flexible timing and efficient routing strategies.

Rural contexts emphasize different strategic priorities, particularly transportation logistics and seasonal coordination. Agricultural calendar alignment prevents conflicts with critical farming periods, while infrastructure limitations around power and connectivity require alternative solutions. Transportation costs often consume substantial portions of rural survey budgets.

Challenging environments demand comprehensive risk assessment and adaptive protocols. Security situations require continuous monitoring with clear escalation procedures and evacuation plans. Local partnership development becomes essential for accessing populations and ensuring team safety, though partnerships require careful vetting to maintain research independence.

Mixed-Method Integration Strategies

In-person surveys often achieve optimal results when integrated with complementary data collection approaches. Baseline studies using in-person methods can be efficiently followed by phone surveys for tracking purposes, reducing costs while maintaining contact with study populations. Combining quantitative survey data with qualitative methods, such as focus groups or in-depth interviews, provides richer contextual understanding.

Primary data collection gains significant value when linked with administrative data sources for comprehensive outcome measurement. WhatsApp surveys serve well for interim check-ins, appointment scheduling, or simple follow-up questions that maintain participant engagement between major data collection rounds.

Budget Planning and Resource Management

Cost factors vary dramatically across contexts and survey types. Personnel expenses typically dominate budgets through salaries, training, supervision, and transportation allowances. Equipment costs encompass devices, accessories, backup equipment, and ongoing maintenance requirements. Operations include transportation, accommodation, communications, and participant incentives, while quality assurance activities add costs through supervision and monitoring systems.

Comprehensive budgeting should account for all direct and indirect costs, including technical assistance and opportunity costs of existing resources. Organizations often underestimate the full cost of quality implementation, leading to budget overruns or quality compromises that prove more expensive than proper initial planning.

Success Measurement and Evaluation

Survey success evaluation encompasses multiple dimensions beyond simple completion rates. In-person response rates should target 80% or higher for most contexts, though acceptable thresholds vary by population and survey characteristics. Data quality indicators focus on low error rates in back-checks and quality audits, while timeline adherence measures performance against planned milestones and deadlines. Budget performance tracking ensures resource allocation remains within approved limits.

Effective in-person surveys require systematic planning, comprehensive quality systems, and adaptive field management. Success depends on following established protocols while adapting to specific research contexts and maintaining focus on data quality throughout implementation. The investment in proper preparation and execution pays dividends through reliable, high-quality data that supports robust research conclusions and policy recommendations.

Integration with IPA Quality Systems

Implementation must align with IPA’s comprehensive data quality framework, incorporating required protocols for survey planning and IRB compliance. Quality systems should implement data integrity and data anonymization measures throughout the survey lifecycle, while field protocols use bench testing and accompaniment procedures to maintain standards.

Additional Resources

Back to top