Community Relations Officers and Outreach Activities – Report on the Survey of Election Administrators: Selected Engagement Activities and Products in the 43rd General Election

The following section describes EAs' involvement in outreach activities toward target groups and communities in their electoral district (ED) or region in the lead-up to and/or during the 43rd GE.

Representation of Outreach Target Groups in Electoral Districts

In order to understand what opportunities ROs might have to be involved in outreach toward particular groups, ROs were asked to identify which target groups (other than youth, seniors and persons with disabilities) represented a significant portion of the population in their ED.

Most often, ROs reported that there was a significant population of ethnocultural electors (41%) in their ED, followed by Indigenous electors (30%), homeless electors (21%) and electors who primarily speak the minority official language in their ED (20%).

The following differences in representation by region were notable:

ROs from Western and Northern Canada (48%) were more likely to report that Indigenous people represented a significant portion of the population in their ED.
ROs from Ontario (60%) were more likely to say that ethnocultural groups were a significant portion of their population, while ROs from Atlantic Canada were least likely (11%).
ROs from Quebec were the least likely to report that homeless electors made up a significant portion of their population (6%).

Reasons for not hiring Community Relations Officers

ROs were asked if they had appointed a CRO for specific target groups for the 43rd GE and, if not, what the main reason was for not hiring a CRO for a specific target group, or if it was difficult to find a suitable CRO for any specific groups.

More than 9 in 10 ROs (94%) reported hiring a CRO for seniors living in long-term care facilities, followed by 72% who reported hiring a CRO for youth. Fewer than half of ROs reported hiring CROs for other groups: accessibility (44%), ethnocultural (43%), Indigenous (35%), homeless (34%) and minority official language (21%) groups.^{footnote 1}
For these other groups, the most common reason ROs cited for not hiring a CRO for a specific target group was lack of a significant population in the electoral district (ranging from 20% to 52% of ROs). This is consistent with the 2018 Survey of Election Administrators on Communications where a lack of significant population in the ED was most often the main reason EAs did not conduct outreach activities with certain groups.
Otherwise, the most common reason cited was that the ROs did not see the need to hire a CRO for certain groups. This was particularly the case for the ethnocultural (13%) and minority official language (12%) groups.
Another reason ROs gave for not hiring a CRO for minority official language groups was that they had a high level of bilingualism in their ED or among their staff (mentioned by 4% of ROs).
A reason more often cited for not hiring a CRO for accessibility issues was the lack of any organized groups in the electoral district (8%). Another 4% of ROs mentioned that activities involving accessibility were covered by the RO, another staff position or another CRO(most often the CRO for seniors).
When ROs were asked if it was difficult to find a CRO for any group, a small percentage of them (11%) indicated that it was difficult to find a CRO for youth.

Involvement in Outreach Activities Before and During the 43rd GE

EAs were asked questions about the nature of their involvement in any outreach activities conducted before and after the election.

Overall, EAs were more likely to be involved in outreach activities conducted in the lead-up to the election compared with during the election:

EAs were involved in outreach activities conducted toward seniors both in the lead-up to the election (45%) and during the election (33%).
Nearly 4 in 10 (38%) EAs were involved in outreach activities conducted toward youth in the lead-up to the election, compared with 28% during the election.
One quarter (25%) of EAs were involved in outreach activities conducted toward Indigenous electors in the lead-up to the election, compared with 17% during the election.
Nearly one quarter (23%) of EAs were not involved in outreach activities conducted toward any of these groups in the lead up to the election, compared with 36% during the election.

Figure 3: Involvement in Outreach Toward Groups

Q. Were you involved in any outreach activities conducted toward any particular groups, communities, or their representatives in the lead up to the 43rd GE? …during the 43rd GE? Select all that apply Base: n=326 Source: Survey of EAs 2020

Description of "Figure 3: Involvement in Outreach Toward Groups"

This horizontal bar chart shows the involvement of EAs in outreach activities toward groups in the lead-up to and during the 43rd GE. The breakdown is as follows:

Seniors
- In the lead-up to the election: 45 percent
- During the election: 33 percent
Youth
- In the lead-up to the election: 38 percent
- During the election: 28 percent
Indigenous
- In the lead-up to the election: 25 percent
- During the election: 17 percent
Persons with disabilities/accessibility groups
- In the lead-up to the election: 23 percent
- During the election: 16 percent
Ethnocultural groups
- In the lead-up to the election: 21 percent
- During the election: 17 percent
Minority official language
- In the lead-up to the election: 17 percent
- During the election: 8 percent
Homeless
- In the lead-up to the election: 15 percent
- During the election: 11 percent
New Canadians
- In the lead-up to the election: 11 percent
- During the election: 8 percent
Jewish
- In the lead-up to the election: 2 percent
- During the election: 3 percent
Other
- In the lead-up to the election: 7 percent
- During the election: 6 percent
None of the above
- In the lead-up to the election: 23 percent
- During the election: 36 percent

EAs who were involved in conducting outreach were most often involved in the distribution of information both in the lead-up to the election (59%) and during the election (67%), followed by meetings with local groups (55% and 51%, respectively).
After that, EAs most often reported being involved in activities that are conducted only before or only during an election. In the lead-up to the election, 39% of EAs were involved in mandated outreach tasks, while during the election, 29% of EAs were involved in revisal desks.

Main Outreach Challenges Outside of and During an Election

EAs were asked what they thought were the main challenges of conducting outreach outside of and during an election, including whether there was anything that prevented them from conducting any outreach they would have liked to do.

The main challenge that EAs associated with conducting outreach activities was a lack of interest from the target group, mentioned by 43% of EAs as being a challenge both before and during the election.

The next most common challenge was reported as follows:

Outside of an election, 40% of EAs reported that a lack of mandate was the main challenge to conducting outreach.
During an election, 40% of EAs indicated that lack of time or resources was the main challenge to conducting outreach.

Figure 4: Main Outreach Challenges Outside of and During an Election

Q. (Outside of/During) an election, what are the main challenges you associate with conducting outreach activities in your ED or region? Please select up to three. Base: all respondents, n=326 Source: Survey of EAs 2020

Description of "Figure 4: Main Outreach Challenges Outside of and During an Election"

This horizontal bar chart shows the main challenges EAs faced when conducting outreach activities in their ED, both outside of and during an election. The breakdown is as follows:

Lack of interest from the target group
- Outside of an election: 43 percent
- During an election: 43 percent
Lack of mandate
- Outside of an election: 40 percent
- During an election: 8 percent
Lack of time and resources
- Outside of an election: 25 percent
- During an election: 40 percent
Difficulty reaching the target groups
- Outside of an election: 22 percent
- During an election: 33 percent
Difficulty finding contacts
- Outside of an election: 29 percent
- During an election: 27 percent
Lack of organized groups in ED or region
- Outside of an election: 21 percent
- During an election: 25 percent
Lack of guidance and/or tools from ECHQ
- Outside of an election: 20 percent
- During an election: 11 percent
Not aware of opportunities
- Outside of an election: 12 percent
- During an election: 9 percent
Cultural or language barrier
- Outside of an election: 4 percent
- During an election: 6 percent
Other
- Outside of an election: 7 percent
- During an election: 9 percent
Nothing in particular
- Outside of an election: 8 percent
- During an election: 10 percent

When asked if conducting outreach activities was more challenging for any of the groups present in their ED or region, EAs most often mentioned Indigenous groups (30%), followed by ethnocultural groups (18%), persons with disabilities (17%) and homeless electors (17%).
1 in 10 EAs reported that they would have liked to, but could not conduct outreach toward youth (11%) or new Canadians (11%). 47% of EAs indicated that there was not any group they would have liked to conduct outreach toward but could not.
Among the minority of EAs who could not conduct the outreach they would have liked to do, the main obstacles that prevented them from conducting this outreach were a lack of time and resources (21%) and difficulty finding contacts (15%).

Support from Elections Canada Headquarters on Outreach

The majority (62%) of EAs at least somewhat agreed that they had enough capacity and support to conduct outreach activities effectively, although only 10% said they strongly agreed. More than a quarter (28%) of EAs somewhat disagreed, while 1 in 10 (9%) strongly disagreed.
When asked about suggestions for how ECHQ could improve support or take more responsibility for outreach activities in their ED or region, EAs mainly suggested providing more resources, allowing outreach activities to take place before the election and creating more mandates to target specific groups.

Footnotes

Return to source of footnote ¹ The figures for CROs hired are self-reported by ROs and there may be discrepancies when compared with the authoritative numbers of CROs hired; but the self-reported figures are provided only to contextualize the results for why ROs did not hire particular CROs.

It should also be noted that while there is one position for CRO-Official Languages/Ethnocultural, the survey asked about each of these groups separately in order to better understand which specific groups ROs were targeting when hiring this CRO. As a result, there may be some amount of double-counting of CROs hired in the proportions for ethnocultural and minority official language groups.

Resource Centre