Next Generation Myanmar > 57 Quality assurance CMC and CDNH assured the quality of the survey in three ways. First, qualified enumerators were further trained in the research tool devised specifically for the Next Generation Myanmar study, ensuring enumerators understood the value of the data they collected. Second, the layered field model of enumeration places a field officer with each enumeration team to provide on-theground quality assurance and ‘spotchecks’, strengthening the quality of the data received for coding. Third, all data collection was overseen by a field manager, who detected any inaccuracies and irregularities that were then addressed by field teams. Such inaccuracies were also caught by research team members coding the data, who conducted telephone checks to ensure interviews indeed took place to protocol. Last, all data collected was reviewed by deputy team leader Morten Nygaard Christensen for consistency. Limitations In several instances, enumeration was delayed by transport complications due to heavy rainfall in the rainy season. While this incurred some delay, enumerators were ultimately able to reach the polling units identified in the sampling plan. A few exceptions were when specific wards or villages that had been identified were not possible to locate, because they either had been vacated or had changed name. In around five cases, it was necessary to re-sample a polling unit. When this was done, the original sampling protocol was followed. In some areas of Myanmar, active conflict or ongoing travel restrictions make research difficult. This is all the more problematic, insofar as the people who live in these areas share life conditions that are markedly different from most, and thus warrant attention. Due to CDNH’s networks and access, restrictions were not faced. It is nonetheless the case that due to the random sampling employed, most conflict areas were under-sampled 19 (PSUs drawn fell outside these areas). Recognising the importance of representing voices from conflictaffected areas, the research team made alternative arrangements to consult youth from such areas through key informant interviews and focus group discussions in Yangon and other places. The survey conducted under the study surveyed a total of 2,473 individuals aged 18–30 across the country. The survey aimed to achieve a sample that would allow analysis of the data disaggregated by gender, age, education, income, religion and other critical demographics. The sample was drawn through a multi-stage stratified, clustered sample design. While it aimed to achieve national representativeness, it is inevitable in a country as diverse and geographically distinct as Myanmar that at lower levels, specific communities (e.g. religious or ethnic) are not represented. Further, survey respondents were not asked to provide their specific ethnic identity. Instead, survey respondents were asked if they identified as an ethnic majority or an ethnic minority in their areas. This means that in some cases, a Bamar youth may have identified as an ethnic minority if they were living in an area where a national ethnic minority was the local majority. The research team believes such instances were few in number, though they may in some cases have the effect of suppressing figures disaggregated by minority-ethnic status. Analysis 1: stock-taking Using findings from the survey,19 topics for further exploration were identified and presented in a stock-taking report, which was discussed with the project’s task force. Based on their input, interview guides for the subsequent key informant interviews and focus group discussions were prepared. These were tested with field staff from different regions to ensure appropriateness and relevance. Data collection 2: focus group discussions and key informant interviews Key informant interviews and focus group discussions were conducted between October and November 2018. Each collected in-depth accounts of youth experiences, with special attention paid to the findings identified for further exploration during the stock-taking phase. Both focus group discussions and key informant interviews were facilitated primarily by senior Myanmar research staff, but also involved other members of the core research team. Technical expert and field manager Constant Courtin and deputy team leader Morten Nygaard Christensen joined when necessary, in which case translating staff accompanied the team. Despite these limitations, the research team remains confident that the findings presented in this report represent a unique and unprecedented attempt to measure youth opinion across Myanmar. Its methodology and findings may be further refined in subsequent youth opinion research, while also informing public discourse on the priorities of Myanmar youth today. > D ue to delays incurred in the process of achieving approval from the ethical review board of the Ministry of Social Welfare, it was necessary to conduct the stock-taking using results from only half of the full sample. The differences between this sub-sample and the full sample have nonetheless not proven to be of particular significance