To inform the framework in Anbar, USIP relied on primary and secondary sources, including original qualitative research conducted in Anbar which was used to inform the framework’s themes and indicators. On the latter, USIP  developed and adapted the indicators for each of the thematic issues based on metrics from the Measuring Progress in Conflict Environments framework. USIP worked with Iraq experts and its research contractor, RM Team, to develop survey questions linked to these indicators and adapted to the context of the target locations in Anbar.

• The CSMF indicators are measured using quantitative population surveys. Despite the quantitative nature of the survey, questionnaires are designed to engender detailed responses. 
• The scope of the population survey aimed to cover and statistically represent the most demographically represented tribal confederation groups. 
• The data collection design consists of on average 100 interviews with the different tribal confederation groups living in the target sub-districts. These figures guarantee a sufficient statistical significance of the data. See the Methodology Notes section for more about the sample’s confidence interval and margin of error.

Data collection occurred through household surveys in 11 of  the 12 districts in Anbar. The 11 districts are Al-Falluja, Amiriyah Al-Falluja, Ana, Garma, Habbaniyah, Haditha, Heet, Qaem, Ramadi, Rawa, and Rumana. Rutba district was not covered due to security dynamics. The breakdown of sample size is below.

• Wave 1 – February 2024 – sample size 4,166 – gender balance approximately 62% men to 38% women, with 2,595 men and 1,572 women. Sample breakdown sub-district:
  • Al-Falluja: 408
  • Amiriyah Al-Falluja: 200
  • Ana: 203
  • Garma: 200
  • Habbaniyah: 217
  • Haditha: 605
  • Heet: 1,024
  • Qaem: 609
  • Ramadi: 300
  • Rawa: 200
  • Rumana: 200

The statistical representation of Wave 1 is:

• At district level, between 5% and 7% margin of error within a 95% confidence interval.
• At the sub-district level, between 7% and 10% margin of error within a 95% confidence interval.
• At the tribal confederation group level per sub-district, between 7% and 10%  margin of error within a 95% confidence interval (only groups categorized as major and minor).

Weighting the Sample

Sampling was stratified by sub-district and tribal affiliation to ensure large-enough sample sizes for each of these units of analysis.

However, so that survey results are representative of the actual population size of each tribal confederation group, sub-district, and district, a three-step weighting methodology was applied:

• Step 1: A sample size of 100 surveys was drawn from each confederation tribal group categorized as major, and 100 from the rest. The sample was then distributed equally across the tribes within each group. Groups categorized as non-negligible were also sampled to give indicative results (not statistically representative).
• Step 2: The sample was then weighted: Weighting the population size for each district and sub-district adjusted the sample size to the actual population for each administrative unit. The population figures and weights were based on the estimated district and sub-district population sizes reported in the 2012 World Bank population estimates and the population return figures reported by IOM Iraq’s Displacement Tracking Matrix (DTM).
• Step 3: The final step consisted of ensuring that results were given equal balance to the views of male and female respondents within the sample. This assumes that the population is equally distributed between both groups.

Qualitative methods

Findings were supplemented by additional qualitative work. This included key informant interviews with government (e.g. mayors or mayor office representatives) and local civil society organizations. It also included validation sessions with community members.

Enumerator teams were from the respective district and sub-district locations, comprised members of each of the predominant tribal confederation groups sampled, and interviewed residents from their own group to engender trust. Teams were also gender balanced.

Because the CSMF directly samples Iraqi respondents from the conflict-affected target communities, data collection is challenged by constantly evolving security and conflict dynamics. Many of the themes are also highly subjective, so that while indicators were designed to be as clear and specific as possible, in some instances the CSMF uses vocabulary that is subject to interpretation. USIP welcomes feedback, including questions and recommendations, to improve the CSMF.