The OPERA Framework Quantitative indicators are also vital for determining if there are inequalities in the accessibility of these goods and services that affect particular groups. Disaggregated indicators on the use and distribution of services can point to issues of accessibility, when certain groups fall behind national averages. For example the proportion of births assisted by skilled attendants, which is an MDG indicator, is often disaggregated in national demographic health surveys by income quintile, education level, location and age group. Indicators on levels of the use of goods and services should be complemented with indicators that show geographic and economic accessibility. Water collection time, for example, is a strong indicator on water accessibility. Similarly, enrollment fees and indirect costs such as school supplies and transportation highlight economic barriers to accessing education. Quantitative indicators can also highlight concerns in the quality of goods and services. For example, poor performance on standardized tests might raise concerns regarding the quality of education. Similarly, a water source classified as ‘improved’ but showing high levels of contaminants will not be satisfactory to give effect to the right to water. Finally, comparing indicators over time can illustrate whether policies are translating into practical improvements in the availability, accessibility and quality of goods and services on the ground and are reducing disparities in terms of access to services. Nonetheless, qualitative information is also crucial, particularly related to questions of quality, adaptability and acceptability, which reflect a population group’s perceived experience. In particular, it helps to get a fuller understanding of people’s daily experiences and self-identified challenges in enjoying the right(s) under review. Some of these findings may point to other rights violations that may require further interrogation (as provided for in step four). This kind of information is often less readily available and primary data might need to be collected through surveys, interviews and individual testimonies with affected communities. A more systematic approach to analyzing qualitative information is to categorize it through coding techniques frequently employed for qualitative research in the social sciences. For example, showing that a certain percentage of a particular group are satisfied or dissatisfied with waiting times at health care facilities speaks to the quality of care they provide. Further, looking at disaggregated information on quality of services may show that conditions are worse in areas whose populations are particularly marginalized, which might point to possible patterns of discrimination or failure to prioritize minimum essential levels of the right(s) under review; a possibility that may be affirmed or challenged by consultations with affected communities. c) Analyzing policy processes In addition to analyzing the content of policies and the way they have translated into the provision of goods and services, the step considers whether the policy cycle upholds the human rights principles of participation, accountability and transparency. As noted above, participation in decision-making throughout all stages of the policy cycle—design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation—is a procedural right, underpinned by a number of civil and political rights such as access to information, as well as freedom of speech and of assembly. Understanding the relationship between ESC rights and civil and political rights is also important in this analysis. For example, if a person is illiterate, their ability to gather the necessary information to actively participate in public life is limited, further worsening their chance to claim their ESC rights. In order to assess a state’s compliance with these procedural human rights principles, the step identifies indicators on the forms of participation mechanisms available; the community’s awareness 20