EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Tracking Survey: Canadians’ Perceptions Related to Current State of Economy	

POR 079-10
	
March 2, 2011
Prepared for:
The Department of Finance
140 O’Connor Street
613-943-0193
e-mail: webmaster.webmestre@fin.gc.ca
*Ce rapport est également disponible en française

Contract Award Date: 2010-11-11
Contract Call up Number:  60074-100253

Prepared by : NRG Research Group	

1.	Background 

In introducing Canada's Economic Action Plan (EAP) in Budget 2009, the Government of Canada (GoC) has taken action to stimulate the Canadian economy, protect Canadian jobs and support those hit hardest.  Results of quantitative and qualitative public opinion research (POR) conducted by the Department of Finance (DoF) since the beginning of 2008 have shown that Canadians’ became increasingly worried about the state of the Nation’s economy and of their own sense of economic well-being, as the global economic downturn deepened.  
The economy thus became the number one priority in the minds of most Canadians and they were increasingly looking to the Federal Government to provide leadership to weather the economic storm.  It is important for Finance Canada to obtain information regular public feedback on the environment into which government actions will be communicated.  As a result, Finance Canada contracted NRG Research Group, a national POR firm to collect updated public opinion tracking data on Canadians views and perception of Canada’s economic situation.  The questionnaire and survey approach was designed by the Project Authority.  
2.	Research Objectives

The overall purpose of this tracking research is to provide Finance Canada with up-to-date tracking data on:

•	the Canadian public’s mood relative to the Canadian Economy; 
•	Canadians’ perceptions of their own personal economic well-being; and, 
•	 GoC initiatives and actions in the economic sphere.  

3.	 Methodology

On behalf of the Government of Canada, NRG Research Group conducted 2007 10 minute computer assisted telephone interviews (CATI) with a random sample of Canadians.   Households were randomly selected and at the household level respondents were further randomized using the last birthday method.  On January 27, 2010, 20 pretest interviews were conducted in English and French.  All interviews were conducted from Jan 28, 2011 to Feb 07, 2011. The margin of error (MOE) for the overall survey sample is +/-2.19 percentage points, 19 times out of 20 or at a 95 percent confidence interval (CI).  Please note that the MOE is greater for sub-groups of the overall sample than that of the overall sample. Table 1 below, describes the final regional/provincial sample distribution. 

Table 1: Disproportionate Sampling
Strata	Sample Size
(Un-weighted)	Margin of Error	
Atlantic Canada	253	+/- 6.20 %	
Quebec	400	+/- 4.90%	
Ontario	602	+/- 4.10%	
Manitoba/Nunavut	129	+/  6.20 %	
Saskatchewan	122		
Alberta/Northwest Territory	250	+/  6.19 %	
British Columbia/Yukon	255	+/  6.20%	
Canada	2012	+/- 2.19 %	

For this study a disproportional sampling scheme was employed to provide for more accurate regional/provincial level results. Please note, that within each of the above geographically define strata NRG sampled proportionately to achieve a more or less representative sample across each of the seven macro regions.   For example, interviews in the Atlantic Provinces were proportionately spread across all four Atlantic Provinces to a total sample of 253. The same was done in the other six regions to ensure that the final sample reflected the range of opinion from across each region.  Also, the three northern territories of Yukon, Northwest Territory and Nunavut were sampled with their approximate adjacent provincial jurisdiction.  A total of 29 interviews were conducted in Canada’s North. The sample was sourced from all traditional landline telephone listings in Canada.  According to Statistics Canada’s bi-annual Residential Telecommunications Service Survey (RTSS) traditional landlines provide coverage for approximately 90-92 per cent of the households in Canada.

2.2	 Sample Source
NRG Research Group uses a product from ASDE Survey Sampler called Canada Survey Sampler for sampling the general population in Canada.  For additional information on ASDE and this software product please visit www.surveysampler.com.  This sampling software is updated quarterly, every 3 months, by ASDE and it allows NRG to develop random samples at various geography levels (e.g., Province, Economic Region, or Census Division) among landline households in Canada. These samples incorporate both listed and unlisted telephone numbers to ensure adequate coverage of all landline phone numbers in Canada.  
For this survey, NRG randomly selected un-listed phone numbers with at least a 30 per cent chance of being live (i.e., ringing in a residential household) for inclusion in a sample. In so doing, NRG incorporated new and changed phone listings as well as new neighborhoods in our sample. The unlisted numbers were, as is our normal practice restricted to 20 per cent of the overall sample for this study. In total NRG research dialed 36 473 telephone numbers for this project with just over 7,000 of these sourced from unlisted households.  All samples for a study were maintained in a custom database application. As phone numbers were added to a database they were compared against a voluntary market research national do not call list and all matches were removed from the sample prior to randomization/sample selection.  
2.3	Data Weighting and Tabulation
At the regional/provincial level sample size was selected to allow for analysis of regional level results and to improve the accuracy of regional and provincial results. The survey data have been weighted according to the most recent Statistics Canada census information to ensure that the national level data reflects the views and perceptions of the actual Canadian adult population by age, gender and region/province.  This weighting scheme is applied to both the tabulated data and the final SPSS data file.  Please note, this weighting scheme is recommended for analysis of the national level results and not for within region level analysis.  Regional level analysis should employ an alternate weighting scheme that takes into account the population characteristics of the region as opposed to the entire country.

Quality Control

As per GoC standards and guidelines a minimum of 10 per cent of all completed interviews were monitored or otherwise verified – both audio and visual verification.  A total of 36,473 telephone numbers were included in the survey sample.  All English language interviewing was completed at NRG’s main data collection facility located in Winnipeg, Manitoba. All French language interviewing was conducted in Ottawa, Ontario by Holinshed Research Group.
 
A full summary of the surveys final calling results is located in Appendix A of this document.

 Non-Response Bias 

According to the GoC’s standards and guidelines for the conduct of telephone surveys, non response bias is the systematic difference between true population values and the average result from all possible samples owing to non-response.  The analysis of non-response bias will consist of a comparison of three survey variables - region, gender, age - in the survey sample with the equivalent parameters of the population. For this survey the target population was all Canada households.  Table 2 below compares the survey sample on a regional basis to the population by gender and age. 

Table 2
STRATA	Gender	Age	
	M
POP	M
SAM	F
POP	F
SAM	18-34
POP	18-34
SAM	35-54
POP	35-54
SAM	55 plus
POP	55 plus
SAM	
BC/ YK	48.4%	45.88%	51.6%	54.12%	26.7%	6.3%	39.5%	36.9%	33.8%	56.9%	
AB/NWT	49.7%	47.81%	50.3%	52.19%	32.7%	13.5%	40.5%	41.4%	26.8%	45.0%	
SK	48.4%	45.08%	51.6%	54.92%	28.5%	16.7%	37.3%	36.7%	34.2%	46.7%	
MB/NV	48.4%	45.74%	51.6%	54.26%	29.1%	11.6%	38.3%	34.1%	32.6%	54.3%	
ON	48.0%	45.18%	52.0%	54.82%	28.2%	12.1%	40.0%	39.9%	31.8%	48.1%	
QB	48.3%	50.00%	51.7%	50.00%	26.9%	16.4%	39.2%	38.1%	33.9%	45.5%	
AC	47.8%	44.27%	52.2%	55.73%	25.6%	11.1%	39.4%	41.5%	35.0%	47.4%	

Table 2 shows Men and Women were sampled more or less to their proportions in each region.    Across the three major age categories some sampling bias is present as Canadians in the oldest age category (55+) are over-represented while those in the youngest age grouping (18-34) are under-represented in this survey’s final sample.  
The amount of bias this has introduced to the survey can be measured to some degree by examining the per cent change in the survey’s weighted and un-weighted findings.   Our analysis reveals that the survey’s final un-weighted sample reflects the Canadian population by gender with some bias towards older Canadians.  For example, the age bias manifests itself in the top of mind issue question but on a very limited level and the data weighting offers some correction to this bias.  As was the case in November, this age bias has almost no impact on Canadians’ views of the performance of the Canadian and their respective provincial economies and very little impact on Canadians’ views of the United States economy. Table 3 compares the demographic characteristics of the November 2010 sample to that of January 2011.
Table 3
STRATA	Gender	Age	
	M
NOV	M
JAN	F
NOV	F
JAN	18-34
NOV	18-34
JAN	35-54
NOV	35-54
JAN	55 plus
NOV	55 plus
JAN	
BC/ YK	48.6%	45.9%	51.4%	54.1%	7.6%	6.3%	37.5%	36.9%	53.8%	56.9%	
AB/NWT	44.0%	47.8%	56.0%	52.2%	15.2%	13.5%	34.0%	41.4%	49.2%	45.0%	
SK	44.2%	45.1%	55.8%	54.9%	15.8%	16.7%	32.5%	36.7%	50.8%	46.7%	
MB/NV	47.3%	45.7%	52.7%	54.3%	12.2%	11.6%	40.5%	34.1%	47.3%	54.3%	
ON	47.5%	45.2%	52.5%	54.8%	13.1%	12.1%	34.6%	39.9%	52.0%	48.1%	
QB	50.0%	50.0%	50.0%	50.0%	15.5%	16.4%	40.5%	38.1%	43.3%	45.5%	
AC	47.8%	44.3%	52.2%	55.7%	10.8%	11.1%	43.4%	41.5%	45.4%	47.4%	
Average	47.0%	46.3%	52.9%	53.7%	12.9%	12.5%	37.5%	39.0%	48.8%	48.5%	

Our analysis reveals that the January survey’s final un-weighted sample is similar to November’s sample by gender and age.   

Appendix A: Call Dispositions

Table 3: Final Calling Dispositions
Final Call Disposition	Totals	%	
No Answer	12269	33.6%	
Line In Use/Busy Signal	661	1.8%	
Not in Service	7250	19.9%	
Quota Full/Over Quota	122	0.3%	
Not Qualified (No Eligible Respondent in Household)	82	0.2%	
Refused to Respond	4842	13.3%	
Unresolved Callback	1859	5.1%	
Business Listing	282	0.8%	
Fax/Modem	749	2.1%	
Language Barrier	529	1.5%	
Answering Machine	5816	15.9%	
Completed Interview	2012	5.5%	
Total Numbers Attempted	36473	100.0%