Survey of Election Officers Following the 42nd Federal General Election

4. Satisfaction with Election Materials

This section presents findings related to the overall satisfaction of election officers regarding the election materials, list of electors, and bingo sheets that were provided to them.

Election Materials

Overall, eighty-nine percent (TOP2: 89%) of officers reported being satisfied with the election materials that were provided to them, which is a single point decrease from 2011 results (90%). Regionally, officers from Ontario (TOP2: 91%) and Atlantic Provinces (TOP2: 90%) were more likely to report being satisfied, while officers from Alberta (TOP2: 81%) and British Columbia (TOP2: 86%) were significantly less likely to report being satisfied. Compared with 2011, satisfaction with election materials has slightly decreased in all provinces, except in Ontario, where it has increased by a single point of percentage.

Chart 4 : Satisfaction with election materials^{Footnote 6}

Text Description of "Chart 4 : Satisfaction with election materials"

* TOP2 (Very satisfied + fairly satisfied)

Officers working in ordinary polls were significantly more likely to report satisfaction with the election materials (TOP2: 90%) than those working in advance polls (TOP2: 83%). Meanwhile, those working in advance polls (BTM2: 17%) were significantly more likely to report being not satisfied than those who worked at the ordinary polls and mobile polls (BTM2: 10%, each)

Both deputy returning officers and information officers were significantly more likely to report being satisfied (TOP2: 90% each) than central poll supervisors (TOP2: 83%).

Table 14: Satisfaction with election materials, by type of poll and staffing position

Q7: How satisfied are you with the election materials that were provided to you? Are you...	Type of Poll				Staffing Position
	Adv. (n=232)	Ord. (n=2997)	Adv. + ord. (n=224)	Mobile (n=49)*	DRO (n=1261)	IO (n=421)	CPS (n=245)	RegO (n=315)	PC (n=1261)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	83	90	86	89	90	90	83-	87	89	89
BTM2	17	10	14	10	10	9	17	13	11	11
Very satisfied	45	53+	41	39	54	52	41-	48	52	52
Fairly satisfied	38	36	45	50+	36	38	42+	39	37	37
Not very satisfied	12	9	12	8	9	7	16+	11	9	9
Not at all satisfied	5+	1	3	2	2	2	2	2	2	2
DK/Refused	0	0	0	2	0	1	0	0	0	0

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Election officers indicated several reasons for not being satisfied with the election materials. Over a quarter (26%) of those who reported they were either "not very satisfied" or "not at all satisfied" with the election materials (n=383) specified that they were particularly not satisfied with the guidebook. That said, "Documentation was too complicated/confusing" (worded as "materials were not clear/hard to understand" in 2015) experienced a seventeen percentage point decrease from 2011 (24%) to 2015 (7%).

Table 15: Materials not satisfied with, overall – Top Nine Answers^{Footnote 7}

Q8: Could you tell us which materials you were not satisfied with? [max 3 mentions]	Overall (n=383)
	%
Guidebook	26
Flowchart	14
Insufficient or poor trainingFootnote 8	12
Generally dissatisfied with materials	10
Insufficient amount of materials / no materials (unspecified)	10
Too much material (i.e., excess/left over)	9
Signs	8
Materials were not clear / hard to understand (unspecified)	7
Pencils, rulers, tape or other utensils were poor quality or missing	7

There were variances across regions to note in comparison to the overall population:

1. Officers in the Atlantic Provinces were significantly more likely to report that they were not satisfied with the guidebook (47%) and forms (7%, as compared with 3% overall).
2. Officers in Quebec were significantly more likely (18%) to report that there was too much material left over.
3. Officers in Quebec were also more likely to report that pencils, rulers, tape or other utensils were poor quality or missing (18%).
4. Officers in Saskatchewan were significantly more likely (21%) to report overall dissatisfaction with materials.

There were also differences when looking at the reasons for dissatisfaction by staffing position:

Deputy Returning Officers

More likely to report there was too much paperwork (6%) More likely to report they were not satisfied with forms (7%)

Information Officers

More likely to report that there was an insufficient amount of materials (16%) More likely to report that pencils, rulers, tape or other utensils were poor quality or missing (10%) Less likely to report being generally dissatisfied with materials (5%)

Central Poll Supervisors

More likely to report being dissatisfied with the guidebook (36%) More likely to report insufficient or poor training (21%)

Registration Officers

More likely to be generally dissatisfied with materials (22%) Less likely to be dissatisfied with the guidebook (16%) Less likely to report insufficient or poor training (6%) Less likely to be dissatisfied with the flowchart (6%)

Poll Clerks

More likely to be dissatisfied with the flowchart (19%) More likely to report that they received too much material (13%) Less likely to report materials were not clear (2%)

Overall, almost all election officers (TOP2: 95%) reported that the guidebook was useful. Across regions, election officers in Manitoba and Saskatchewan were more likely to find it useful (TOP2: 96% each), while those in Alberta were less likely to share this opinion (TOP2: 89%).

Table 16: Guidebook usefulness, by region

Q9: Would you say that the guidebook was...?	Region
	ATL (n=346)	QC (n=924)	ON (n=1385)	MAN (n=154)	SASK (n=115)	AB (n=39)*	BC (n=423)	TER (n=115)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	95	94	95	96	96	89	94	91	95
BTM2	5	6	4	5	2	10	5	5	5
Very useful	64+	55	61	67+	56	49-	55	55	59
Somewhat useful	31-	39	34	28-	41	40+	40	35	36
Not very useful	4	5	3	2	2	8	5	2	4
Not at all useful	1	2	1	3	0	2	0	3	1
DK/Refused	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	5	1

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

The usefulness of the guidebook across polling stations is similar, with minimal differences between stations. Officers who worked at a polling station on an Aboriginal reserve were significantly more likely to report the guidebook as "very useful" (68%) compared with all other polling stations.

Table 17: Guidebook usefulness, by polling station

Q9: Would you say that the guidebook was...?	Polling Station
	Abo. Reserve (n=282)	Sen. / LT Care (n=797)	Stud. Res. (n=466)	Other (n=1958)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	96	96	96	95	95
BTM2	3	4	4	5	5
Very useful	68+	59	58	59	59
Somewhat useful	28-	37	38	36	36
Not very useful	2	3	3	4	4
Not at all useful	1	1	1	1	1
DK/Refused	0	0	0	1	1

Regardless of the type of poll, usefulness of guidebooks was rated highly; officers who worked at the advance polls (64%) were significantly more likely to report the guidebook as "very useful" than those who worked both advance and ordinary polls (52%) and mobile polls (50%). Deputy returning officers (63%) were significantly more likely to report the guidebook as "very useful" compared with information officers (51%). Information officers were the least likely to have found the guidebook useful (TOP2: 93%).

Table 18: Guidebook usefulness, by type of poll and staffing position

Q9: Would you say that the guidebook was...?	Type of Poll				Staffing Position
	Adv. (n=232)	Ord. (n=2997)	Adv. + ord. (n=224)	Mobile (n=49)*	DRO (n=1261)	IO (n=421)	CPS (n=245)	RegO (n=315)	PC (n=1261)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	92	95	96	92	95	93	95	94	94	95
BTM2	7	5	4	7	4	5	5	5	5	5
Very useful	64+	59	52	50-	63+	51-	55	59	59	59
Somewhat useful	29-	36	45	42	33	42+	40	36	36	36
Not very useful	5	4	4	7	4	4	3	3	4	4
Not at all useful	2	1	0	1	1	2	2	2	1	1
DK/Refused	1	1	0	0	0	2	1	1	0	1

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Eighty-five percent (TOP2: 85%) of election officers reported that the forms provided were very or somewhat easy to complete. By region, officers in Ontario (TOP2: 88%), Saskatchewan (TOP2: 87%), Quebec (TOP2: 86%), and the Atlantic Provinces (TOP2: 86%) were significantly more likely to find the various forms easy to complete compared with officers in British Columbia and Alberta (TOP2: 78% and 76% respectively). Further, officers in Ontario (48%) and Manitoba (53%) were significantly more likely to report that the various forms were "very easy" to complete.

Table 19: Completion of various forms, by region

Q12: Would you say that the various forms that were provided to you were (response) to complete?	Region
	ATL (n=346)	QC (n=924)	ON (n=1385)	MAN (n=154)	SASK (n=115)	AB (n=39)*	BC (n=423)	TER (n=115)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	86	86	88	85	87	76	78	78	85
BTM2	13	13	11	12	10	21	22	22	13
Very easy	42	37	48+	53+	34-	39	42	39	43
Somewhat easy	44	49+	40	32-	54+	37-	36-	39	42
Somewhat difficult	13	11	10	9	7	18	20	19	12
Very difficult	1	2	1	3	4	3	1	3	2
DK/Refused	1	1	1	3	3	4	1	0	1

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Election officers who worked at a polling station on an Aboriginal reserve, at a student residence, and at a regular polling station were significantly more likely to find the various forms easy to use compared with those who worked at a seniors' residence poll (TOP2: 85%, 85% and 86% respectively, compared with 78%).

Table 20: Completion of various forms, by polling station

Q12: Would you say that the various forms that were provided to you were (response) to complete?	Polling Station
	Abo. Reserve (n=282)	Sen. / LT Care (n=797)	Stud. Res. (n=466)	Other (n=1958)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	85	78	85	86	85
BTM2	14	21	14	13	13
Very easy	50+	37-	46	43	43
Somewhat easy	35-	40	38	43	42
Somewhat difficult	11	18+	13	12	12
Very difficult	3	2	2	1	2
DK/Refused	1	2	1	1	1

Officers who worked at an advance poll (45%), an ordinary poll (43%), or both poll types (46%) were significantly more likely to find the various forms "very easy" to complete than those who worked at mobile polls (33%).

Deputy returning officers (TOP2: 87%), information officers (TOP2: 89%), and registration officers (TOP2: 95%) were significantly more likely to report the various forms as easy to complete compared with poll clerks (81%). Further, deputy returning officers (BTM2: 13%), central poll supervisors (BTM2: 15%), and poll clerks (BTM2: 18%) were significantly more likely to find the various forms difficult to complete compared with information officers (BTM2: 7%) and registration officers (BTM2: 4%).

Table 21: Completion of various forms, by type of poll and staffing position

Q12: Would you say that the various forms that were provided to you were (response) to complete?	Type of Poll				Staffing Position
	Adv. (n=232)	Ord. (n=2997)	Adv. + ord. (n=224)	Mobile (n=49)*	DRO (n=1261)	IO (n=421)	CPS (n=245)	RegO (n=315)	PC (n=1261)	Overall (n=3503)
	%
TOP2	86	85	87	79	87	89	84	95	81	85
BTM2	13	13	13	20	13	7	15	4	18	13
Very easy	45	43	46	33-	40	52+	39	58+	40	43
Somewhat easy	40	43	41	45	47	38-	45	37-	41	42
Somewhat difficult	11	12	13	17	12	6	15	4	15	12
Very difficult	2	2	1	3	1	1	1	0	3	2
DK/Refused	1	1	0	2	0	4	1	1	1	1

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Lists of Electors

Overall, most (90%) of deputy returning officers, central poll supervisors, registration officers, and poll clerks were fairly or very satisfied with the lists of electors that were provided to them. Over nine in ten (92%) poll clerks reported being satisfied with the lists of electors. Deputy returning officers reported slightly lower levels of satisfaction (90%) when compared with 2011 (93%). Across regions, respondents in Ontario were more likely to be satisfied, while officers in Saskatchewan were less likely.

Chart 5: Satisfaction regarding the lists of electors

Text Description of "Chart 5 : Satisfaction regarding the lists of electors"

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Deputy Returning Officer, Central Poll Supervisor, Registration Officer, Poll Clerk

NOTE: Not all options listed. Some DROs (n=20) reported that they did not have to use the lists of electors.

Deputy returning officers, central poll supervisors, registration officers, and poll clerks who worked at a polling station on an Aboriginal reserve were significantly less likely (BTM2: 19%) to be satisfied with the lists of electors provided to them.

Table 22: Satisfaction regarding the lists of electors, by polling station

Q10: How satisfied were you with the lists of electors that were provided to you? Were you...?	Polling Station
	Abo. Reserve (n=241)	Sen. / LT Care (n=788)	Stud. Res. (n=411)	Other (n=1769)	Overall (n=3209)
	%
TOP2	80	88	86	90	90
BTM2	19	11	10	8	8
Very satisfied	45-	56	53	59	59
Fairly satisfied	34	32	33	31	31
Not very satisfied	11+	8	7	7	7
Not at all satisfied	9	3	3	1	2
DK/Refused	1	1	3	1	1

Base: Deputy Returning Officer, Central Poll Supervisor, Registration Officer, Poll Clerk

NOTE: Not all options listed. Some DROs (n=20) reported that they did not have to use the lists of electors.

Specified officers who worked at an ordinary poll were significantly more likely to report being "very satisfied" (60%) with the lists of electors compared with those who worked the advance polls (48%), both advance and ordinary polls (48%), and mobile polls (50%). Those who worked the mobile polls were less likely to report being satisfied with the lists of electors (BTM2: 14%) than those who worked the ordinary poll (BTM2: 8%).

Table 23: Satisfaction regarding the lists of electors, by type of poll

Q10: How satisfied were you with the lists of electors that were provided to you? Were you...?	Type of Poll
	Advance (n=219)	Ordinary (n=2645)	Adv. + ord. (n=174)	Mobile (n=47)*	Overall (n=3082)
	%
TOP2	84	91	87	86	90
BTM2	11	8	13	14	8
Very satisfied	48-	60	48-	50-	59
Fairly satisfied	36	31	39+	35	31
Not very satisfied	8	6	10	12+	7
Not at all satisfied	3	1	3	2	2
DK/Refused	4	1	0	1	1

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Deputy Returning Officer, Central Poll Supervisor, Registration Officer, Poll Clerk

NOTE: Not all options listed. Some DROs (n=20) reported that they did not have to use the lists of electors.

Over a third (36%) of those who indicated being "not very satisfied" or "not at all satisfied" (n=348) with the lists of electors said that this was due to the fact that the information was incomplete/inaccurate. This was followed by over a quarter (28%) who believed the lists of electors were disorganized/inefficient, less than a fifth (17%) who indicated that the lists were not updated, and just under a tenth (9%) who had to add people to the list.

Table 24: Reasons for not being satisfied with lists of electors, overall

Q11: Could you tell us why you were not satisfied with the lists of electors?	Overall (n=355)
	%
Information was incomplete / inaccurate / many mistakes	36
Disorganized/inefficient	28
List not updated / electors had moved out of area/died	17
Had to add people to list / names were missing	9
Should be done electronically	1
Other	9
DK/Refused	0

Bingo Sheets

Overall, nine in ten (TOP2: 89%) central poll supervisors and poll clerks reported that the bingo sheets were very or somewhat easy to complete. For central poll supervisors, this represents a six percentage point increase from their 2011 results (83%).^{Footnote 9} Officers in the Atlantic Provinces (TOP2: 97%) were significantly more likely to find the bingo sheets easy to complete compared with their results from 2008 (TOP2: 84%).

To note, in 2011, this question was asked to central poll supervisors, information officers and deputy returning officers, whereas in 2015, this question was asked only to central poll supervisors and poll clerks.

Chart 6: Bingos sheets, by region

Text Description of "Chart 6 : Bingos sheets, by region"

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk

Significantly fewer officers who worked in student residences reported that the bingo sheets were somewhat difficult to complete (3%) compared with officers who worked in Aboriginal reserve polling stations (10%).

Table 25: Bingo sheets, by polling station

Q13: Would you say that the bingo sheet was (read all) to complete?	Polling Station
	Abo. Reserve (n=114)	Sen. / LT Care (n=356)	Stud. Res. (n=192)	Other (n=855)	Overall (n=1517)
	%
TOP2	87	91	87	89	89
BTM2	10	6	5	7	7
Very easy	67	65	65	63	64
Somewhat easy	20	27	23	26	26
Somewhat difficult	10+	6	3	6	6
Very difficult	0	0	3	1	1
DK/Refused	3	3	7	4	4

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk

Officers who worked in mobile and ordinary polls (TOP2: 90%, each) were significantly more likely to find the bingo sheets easy to complete compared with those who worked in both advance and ordinary polls (TOP2: 78%).

Table 26: Bingo sheets, by type of poll

Q13: Would you say that the bingo sheet was (read all) to complete?	Polling Station
	Advance (n=102)	Ordinary (n=1283)	Adv. + ord. (n=100)	Mobile (n=21)*	Overall (n=1517)
	%
TOP2	85	90	78	90	89
BTM2	6	6	14	5	7
Very easy	64	64	53-	64	64
Somewhat easy	21	26	25	26	26
Somewhat difficult	6	5	14+	4	6
Very difficult	0	1	0	0	1
DK/Refused	9	4	8	5	4

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk

Candidates' Representatives' Usage of Bingo Sheets

Over half (56%) of election officers from the sample of central poll supervisors, poll clerks and information officers from ordinary and mobile polls indicated that candidates' representatives picked up the bingo sheets as soon as there were updates available – no change from 2011. Officers in Quebec (62%) were significantly more likely to indicate that candidates' representatives picked up the bingo sheets as soon as they were available, while those in Alberta (44%), Manitoba (35%), and Saskatchewan (34%) were significantly less likely.

Table 27: Use of bingo sheets by candidates' representatives, by region

Q14: On election day, did the candidates' representatives generally pick up the bingo sheets as soon as there were updates available?	Region
	ATL (n=167)	QC (n=459)	ON (n=632)	MAN (n=69)	SASK (n=56)	AB (n=15*)	BC (n=205)	TER (n=57)	Overall (n=1659)
	%
Yes	52	62+	58	39-	40-	39-	55	42-	56
No	29	18	23	35+	34	44+	27	26	24
Almost always	12	14	14	13	10	11	9	9	13
DK/Refused	7	6	5	14	16	6	10	23	7

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk, Information Officer at ordinary polls and mobile polls on election day

Election officers in seniors' homes were significantly less likely to report that candidates' representatives were generally picking up the bingo sheets in as soon as they were available.

Table 28: Use of bingo sheets by candidates' representatives, by polling station

Q14: On election day, did the candidates' representatives generally pick up the bingo sheets as soon as there were updates available?	Polling Station
	Abo. Reserve (n=133)	Sen. / LT Care (n=347)	Stud. Res. (n=203)	Other (n=898)	Overall (n=1581)
	%
Yes	44+	20-	49+	57	56
No	45	64+	25	23	24
Almost always	2-	5	13	13	13
DK/Refused	9	11	13	7	7

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk, Information Officer at ordinary polls and mobile polls on election day

Similar to 2011, election officers reported that candidates' representatives were significantly less likely to pick up the bingo sheets in a timely manner at mobile polls.

Table 29: Use of bingo sheets by candidates' representatives, by type of poll and staffing position

Q14: On election day, did the candidates' representatives generally pick up the bingo sheets as soon as there were updates available?	Type of Poll	Staffing Position
	Ordinary (n=1636)	Mobile (n=23)*	IO (n=354)	CPS (n=193)	PC (n=1112)	Overall (n=1659)
	%
Yes	56	23-	53	44-	59	56
No	23	55+	21	32+	23	24
Almost	13	4-	18	24	9	13
DK/Refused	7	18	8	0	9	7

* Caution should be used when interpreting results due to small sample.

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk, Information Officer at ordinary polls and mobile polls on election day

Just over a tenth (13%) of election officers from the sample of central poll supervisors, poll clerks, and information officers from advance polls reported that on advance voting days, candidates' representatives generally took photos of the bingo sheets.

Table 30: Photos of bingo sheets, overall

Q15: On advance voting days, did the candidates' representatives generally take photos of the bingo sheets?	Overall (n=119)
	%
Yes	13
No	73
Not always / Sometimes	0
DK/Refused	15

Base: Central Poll Supervisor, Poll Clerk, Information Officer at advance poll only

---

Return to source of ^{Footnote 6} N values: ATL (n=346); QC (n=924); ONT (n=1385); MAN (n=154); SASK (n=115); AB (n=39); BC (n=423); TER (n=115)

Return to source of ^{Footnote 7} Results with less than 5% of mentions not shown

Return to source of ^{Footnote 8} "Poor training" is specific to the instructor's competency in training staff with provided materials.

Return to source of ^{Footnote 9} Note that the survey of election officers did not include poll clerks in 2011.

• Previous
• Content
• Next