TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................. 3

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES & METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................ 3

KEY FINDINGS....................................................................................................................................................................... 4

 

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 7

OBJECTIVES.......................................................................................................................................................................... 7

METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................................................................................... 8

 

DETAILED FINDINGS................................................................................ 10

SECTION 1: RESPONDENT PROFILE............................................................................................................................ 10

SECTION 2: FCAC’S PERFORMANCE......................................................................................................................... 134

SECTION 3: FCAC EVENTS PERFORMANCE.............................................................................................................. 17

SECTION 4: FCAC COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS PERFORMANCE.......................................................... 23

SECTION 5: FCAC TOOLS PERFORMANCE................................................................................................................. 29

SECTION 6: OTHER FCAC INTERACTIONS.................................................................................................................. 33

 

APPENDIX A: DETAILED METHODOLOGY.......................................... 36

 

APPENDIX B: RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS.......................................... 37

 

 

 

 

       

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Nielsen is pleased to present this report of research findings to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC). The purpose of this research is to assess initiatives undertaken by FCAC to strengthen collaboration and coordination with financial literacy stakeholders. The results of this study will be used to help inform FCAC’s stakeholder engagement methods and strategies. 

 

This stakeholder survey will support government and Agency priorities and benefit Canadians in the following manner:

 

•       It will provide a baseline measure for stakeholder perceptions regarding FCAC’s efforts to strengthen collaboration and coordination. It will help FCAC determine if its initiatives related to greater collaboration and coordination are successful or if they could be improved; 

•       It will provide information to empower the Commissioner and Financial Literacy Leader to optimize the

Agency’s role as a federal collaborator with key stakeholders;

•       It will support the National Strategy for Financial Literacy by deepening FCAC’s understanding of stakeholder perceptions and interests related to what activities hold the most value for them; and

•       It will help raise awareness of FCAC collaborative initiatives. (e.g. Financial Literacy Month, National Conference on Financial Literacy, liaison with regional financial literacy networks, and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database).

 

The total amount contracted was $47, 645.32 (Including HST).

 

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES & METHODOLOGY

Nielsen conducted research for FCAC to assess the initiatives undertaken by the Agency to strengthen collaboration and coordination with financial literacy stakeholders. The specific research objectives of this study include gaining an understanding of the following:

 

•       Stakeholder perspectives related to FCAC’s collaboration and coordination efforts;

•       Areas to improve FCAC’s collaboration and coordination efforts.

 

The research program consisted of a quantitative online survey and a series of qualitative in-depth telephone interviews with FCAC financial literacy stakeholders who have participated in, are members of, and/or use the following activities: 

 

•       FCAC events including Financial Literacy Month (FLM), National Conference on Financial Literacy and the National Research Symposium 

•       FCAC committees or working groups which consist of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy, Research Sub-Committee of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy,

Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy (ICFL), the Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy and the Regional Financial Literacy Networks 

•       FCAC tools including the Financial Literacy quarterly newsletter and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)

•       Finally, a section is included which covers a range of other FCAC coordination and collaboration interactions that are not covered in these activities (such as meetings and partnership for special project).

 

 

Nielsen conducted a 15-minute online survey with 154 FCAC stakeholders between November 29 and December

12, 2017. FCAC provided a list of 855 financial literacy stakeholders who were all invited to complete the survey. From that, a total of 154 FL stakeholders completed the online survey. The margin of error for a sample of 154 from the sample list is +/- 7.2 percentage points, in 19 out of 20 samples (margin of error is greater for subgroups). The overall completion rate of the online survey was 18%.

 

After the quantitative research, a series of telephone in-depth interviews were conducted by Nielsen. In most cases, the interviews served as a follow-up conversation to the quantitative survey that was completed. A total of 10 interviews were completed between January 29 and February 2, 2018. The interviews were conducted by Nielsen moderators and averaged 30 minutes in length. The information was obtained from members of a target population through unstructured or semi-structured moderated individual interviews; conducted by telephone; with no definitive or statistical extrapolation to a broader population. Incentives were not provided to those who participated in the follow-up phone interviews.


NB: The report is owned by the Government of Canada. Nielsen understands the report will be posted on the LAC website.

 

KEY FINDINGS

FCAC OVERALL

Results show that FCAC is well regarded for its efforts and initiatives that contribute to greater collaboration and coordination among stakeholders that play a role in strengthening financial literacy of Canadians. On average, sixty-nine percent of stakeholders rate FCAC’s overall collaboration and coordination efforts as “good” to “excellent”.

 

The majority of financial literacy stakeholders agree or strongly agree that the FCAC is trusted (87%) and is a valued collaborator (78%). Further, the overwhelming majority consider the FCAC to have an important role in coordinating financial literacy efforts in Canada (83%) and that it is stakeholder focused (70%). This is reinforced in the in-depth interviews where stakeholders report that FCAC is positively perceived in fostering collaboration and coordination of work and is in regular communication with stakeholders. Perceptions are positive across all sectors, although financial institutions and the private sector lag slightly.

 

The qualitative interviews revealed that FCAC is highly regarded for its leadership in fostering collaboration in particular. By proactively and continuously reaching out and following up, the efforts made by FCAC to constantly keep the industry up-to-date and engaged are widely recognized and appreciated. FCAC efforts are overall regarded as useful, purposeful, meaningful, productive and consultative.  Furthermore, FCAC is seen as enabling collaboration at multiple levels: geographical (national and regional), across disciplines (literacy, education, research, policy) and audiences (communities, professionals, researchers).

 

FCAC’s role in facilitating environments wherein financial literacy stakeholders can create partnerships, coordinate their efforts, and work together is consistently identified as a way to enhance stakeholder collaboration and coordination. Stakeholders report that FCAC does very well in bringing stakeholders together through its financial literacy activities and committees, however, stakeholders would like more focus in identifying stakeholders of interest to be able to better facilitate and enhance working together.

 

FCAC EVENTS

Results indicate that the vast majority of financial literacy stakeholders that responded to the survey participated in Financial Literacy Month (81%), two-thirds attended the National Conference on Financial Literacy (63%), and just over 1-in-10 participated in the National Research Symposium (13%). In fact, almost all of the financial literacy survey respondents participated in at least one of these events (96%).

 

In terms of coordination and collaboration activities, stakeholders who participated in Financial Literacy Month (FLM) agreed that it facilitates the sharing of information (73%) and helps build momentum and awareness of financial literacy (72%) but fewer felt that it assists in identifying potential collaborators (64%).  Many reported that the National Conference supported the sharing of information and the exchange of ideas (93%), provided an opportunity to network (93%) and helped them remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information (85%). 

For the National Research Symposium, participants agreed or strongly agreed that this event helped them to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information (95%).  

 

These results were reinforced by the in-depth interviews, which revealed that stakeholders find such events to be particularly strong for networking, collaborating, and keeping up-to-date.  However, some stakeholders felt that having more frequent conferences and having a collaborative mechanism to identify other stakeholders prior to the actual event would be beneficial in helping them connect in a purposeful way at the event itself.  Others said that it would be useful to focus on fostering collaboration during and between events, as there is limited time to work together. Other proposed formats included creating smaller collaboration groups with a common interest and purpose. This could involve communicating through online communities, interactive/discussion-oriented workshops, or other one-on-one or group conversations, where in-person connections are made with like-minded people interested in sharing knowledge (e.g. brain dates). Finally, seeking more direct input from stakeholders for event themes/topics was seen as a way to help make future activities more relevant.

 

FCAC COMMITTEES/WORKING GROUPS

Approximately one-third (31%) of financial literacy stakeholders that participated in the survey participated in at least one committee or working group. All FCAC committees and working groups were rated fairly well by financial literacy stakeholders in terms of their collaboration and coordination opportunities. 

 

Among the committees and groups, the largest share of stakeholders who were surveyed reported that they were members of either a regional network (16%) or the Interdepartmental Committee (8%).  The liaison with regional networks was seen as supporting the sharing of information (75%) and helping stakeholders to remain up-to-date (75%). A slightly smaller share (62%) felt that this helped give their network more visibility.  Similarly, the Interdepartmental Committee helped enhance the sharing of information on initiatives (92%) and provided opportunities to network (75%).  About two-thirds (66%) reported that it helped coordinate activities at the federal government level.

 

As expected, fewer respondents were members of other committees such as the National Steering Committee

(5%), the Workplace Working Group (5%) or the Research Sub-Committee (3%).  The National Steering Committee was most strongly seen by members as providing an opportunity to network (100%) and work with others (76%).  Interestingly, only about fifty percent of members felt that the committee helps to coordinate initiatives towards the achievement of the National Strategy goals.  The Research Sub-Committee was viewed by all members as providing an opportunity to network (100%), enhancing the sharing of information on research findings (100%), and helping better coordinate activities and reduce duplication (100%).  Finally, members of the Workplace Working Group felt most strongly that this group provided an opportunity to network (89%) and supported the sharing of information on initiatives (89%).  Providing an opportunity to work with others was less commonly cited as a key aspect of this group (67%).

   

However, the qualitative research found that some stakeholders feel that the meetings could be more productive if more in-person meetings were held, and more time was available for discussion. Stakeholders also recognized a need for on-going communication within the groups/committee members through conferences or remote meetings as a means to stay updated. 

 

FCAC TOOLS

The Financial Literacy quarterly newsletter and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD) are widely used by the financial literacy stakeholders that were surveyed.  In fact, about thirty-three percent received the Financial Literacy quarterly newsletter and forty-two percent used the CFLD.  Over half (55%) of stakeholders surveyed reported using at least one of these tools.

 

The Financial Literacy quarterly newsletter is well regarded as a communications channel among those who reported receiving it.  Sixty-two percent of stakeholders that receive the newsletter said that it helped them to remain up-to-date and sixty-four percent found that it supported sharing of information and the exchange of ideas.  However, only forty-six percent felt that it was very useful for identifying potential collaborators.  Qualitative interviews with stakeholders suggested two possible changes: 1) simplify the organization of the newsletter so that it is less overwhelming, and; 2) relay updated and new information/events more clearly.

 

The CFLD did receive lower scores compared to the newsletter. Relatively few (under 52%) agreed or strongly agreed that the CFLD achieved its key coordination goals related to eliminating duplication, helping to remain up-to-date, identifying potential collaborators, or extending the reach of stakeholders resources to potential users. Qualitative interviews indicated that even though user-friendliness has improved over the years, the CFLD can still be overwhelming.  Stakeholders were uncertain as to whether or not the CFLD is used to its potential and suggested enhancing the layout to make it easy to read and navigate. Furthermore, they agreed that further promotion of the tool, as well as providing new and updated information, may increase usage.

 

The qualitative research indicated that tools must evolve with the times and leverage today’s technology in order to be accessible to a larger audience. Stakeholders indicated that additional new tools such as webinars and online portals/communities would help strengthen and enhance collaboration and coordination of work on financial literacy. These formats are seen as convenient and effective for information-sharing on a larger scale and can also act as platforms for two-way discussions in real time. Finally, some suggested that a continuously updated shared drive would help create a powerful platform.

 

OTHER FCAC INTERACTIONS

In addition to the formal work that FCAC does with committees and working groups, a substantial share (44%) of surveyed stakeholders reported having other less formal interactions with FCAC. A large number of these stakeholders reported that these types of activities supported the sharing of information (75%), helped them to remain up-to-date (71%), and improved their ability to connect with potential collaborators (67%). Qualitative interviews indicated that FCAC can improve by identifying stakeholders with common interests to support purposeful and meaningful collaboration and coordination.

 

Research Firm: Nielsen

Contract Number: 5R000-170637-001-CY

Contract Award Date: September 15, 2017

 Nielsen certifies that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications

Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

 

 

Cynthia Pachovski, VP

Nielsen

                                                             

INTRODUCTION

The Financial Literacy Leader, within the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC), has a mandate to strengthen the financial literacy of Canadians. To accomplish this aim, a National Strategy for Financial Literacy was developed, including a collaborative approach where stakeholders from all sectors and all regions have a role to play. Therefore, collaboration with stakeholders is key, and for effective results, a coordinated approach is required.

 

FCAC has undertaken a number of initiatives to increase collaboration with and among stakeholders. Through these initiatives, FCAC is working to better coordinate efforts by helping stakeholders with similar interests to connect and work together instead of competing or duplicating efforts. 

 

FCAC’s financial literacy collaboration and coordination stakeholder initiatives undertaken and evaluated in this survey include:

 

•       The National Conference on Financial Literacy

•       Financial Literacy Month

•       The Research Symposium

•       The Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy

•       The National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy

•       The Research Sub-Committee

•       The Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy

•       Liaison with the Regional Financial Literacy Networks 

•       The Financial Literacy Newsletter

•       The Canadian Financial Literacy Database

 

Nielsen is pleased to present this final report of research findings to the FCAC. This research involved quantitative and qualitative research among FCAC financial literacy stakeholders to understand their perceptions around the collaboration and coordination initiatives mentioned above.

 

Results will support FCAC’s strategic objective of strengthening collaboration and engagement with stakeholders and gain insights and feedback from stakeholders in terms of impressions and suggestions for improvements of FCAC programs and activities.

 

 

OBJECTIVES

Nielsen conducted research for the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) to assess the initiatives undertaken by FCAC to strengthen collaboration and coordination with financial literacy stakeholders. The specific research objectives of this study include gaining an understanding of the following:

 

•       Stakeholder perspectives related to FCAC’s collaboration and coordination efforts;

•       Areas to improve FCAC’s collaboration and coordination efforts.

 

The research program consisted of a quantitative online survey and a series of qualitative in-depth telephone interviews with FCAC stakeholders who have participated in, are members of, and/or used the following activities and tools: 

 

•       FCAC events including Financial Literacy Month (FLM), National Conference on Financial Literacy and the National Research Symposium 

•       FCAC committees or working groups which consist of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy, Research Sub-Committee of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy,

Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy (ICFL), the Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy and liaison with the Regional Financial Literacy Networks 

•       FCAC tools including the Financial Literacy quarterly newsletter and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)

•       Finally, there is a section which covers a range of other FCAC coordination and collaboration interactions that are not covered under activities related to events, committees, working groups or tools.

 

METHODOLOGY

Nielsen was tasked with conducting a two-part research program for FCAC during the fall/winter of 2017/2018. The research program consisted of a quantitative online survey and a series of qualitative in-depth telephone interviews with FCAC stakeholders. This approach was in line with FCAC’s expectations.

 

Quantitative – Online Survey

FCAC provided a list of financial literacy stakeholders who were all invited to complete the survey, this consisted of 855 contacts. From this list, Nielson conducted the 15-minute online survey between November 29 and December 12, 2017. On November 29, 2017, Nielsen began fieldwork with a slow launch and contacted a random selection of 250 financial literacy stakeholders. From that, a total of 10 stakeholders completed the survey (a participation rate of 4%). The remaining 605 financial stakeholders were contacted on November 30, 2017 and a total of 3 reminders were sent throughout data collection. Of the 605, 144 financial stakeholders completed the survey for a participation rate of 24%. In total, 154 FCAC financial literacy stakeholders were surveyed. The margin of error for a sample of 154 from the sample list is +/- 7.2 percentage points, in 19 out of 20 samples (margin of error is greater for subgroups). The data was not weighted. The overall completion rate of the online survey was 18%.

 

Participation rate/response rate =

Responses (154)

Total Number of Eligible Cases (855)

Participation rate/response rate =

18%

 

For some initiatives, caution should be exercised when interpreting findings with fewer than 30 participants from the total sample. Such findings should be treated as directional and not generalizable to the population. For cases such as the National Steering Committee, the Research Sub-Committee and the Workplace Working Group, these small sample sizes are to be expected since these groups have a very limited membership (i.e. less than 30 members).  

 

In the quantitative analysis, the “top 2 box” scores (or “T2B” in the graphs) represent the share of respondents who selected 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale. Further, percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. Sub-groups that were analyzed include: years working on financial literacy, years working with FCAC, and organization scope. Significant variances between subgroups were noted in cases where there were at least 30 stakeholders represented in a sub-group.

 

 

Non-Response Bias

In order to maximize the response rate, the following steps were taken:

·         The survey was pre-tested in the form of a soft launch to help identify and mitigate any issues with the questionnaire that would pose barriers to participation;

·         Reminders were sent throughout the course of the field period to FL stakeholders who were invited to but had not yet attempted to complete the survey;

·         The data was monitored internally on a daily basis throughout the field period, allowing for targeting to increase completes in initiatives with a lower completion rate; and

·         Respondents were able to complete the survey in multiple sessions by picking up where they left off if they were unable to complete the survey in one session.

By implementing the above strategies, the risk of non-response bias was mitigated.

 

In order to investigate whether non-response bias may be having an impact on the results, typically the sample profile is compared to the universe profile to identify any differences and, where any may exist, to provide Financial Consumer Agency of Canada with the ability to examine whether these had a statistically significant impact on the findings. As there is no universe profile to compare the collected data against, this test could not be undertaken.

 

A more detailed description of the methodology is presented at the back of the report (see Appendix A) with specificities in data collection and reminders, along with a copy of the questionnaire in both official languages (see Appendix B). Quantitative research tables are provided as part of the submission under a separate cover (Appendix C). 

 

Qualitative – Phone Interviews

To complement the quantitative research, Nielsen conducted a series of 10 telephone in-depth interviews with financial literacy stakeholders between January 29 and February 2, 2018. The interviews served as a follow-up conversation to the quantitative surveys that were completed. The interviews were conducted by Nielsen moderators and averaged 30 minutes in length.  Stakeholders were asked for suggestions that could help FCAC improve existing initiatives and create new solutions for greater collaboration and coordination of efforts among financial literacy stakeholders. Questions for the qualitative interviews were divided into four categories: 

 

•       The overall perception of FCAC in their efforts to foster collaboration and coordination among financial literacy stakeholders; 

•       How FCAC events foster collaboration and coordination among financial literacy stakeholders; 

•       How FCAC committees and working groups foster collaboration and coordination among financial literacy stakeholders; and 

•       How FCAC tools foster collaboration and coordination among financial literacy stakeholders. 

 

Appended to this report is the discussion guide (see Appendix B). Because of the nature of the qualitative interviews, findings should be viewed as directional only.

 

 

NB: For the purposes of this report, it is important to note that qualitative research is a form of scientific, social, policy and public opinion research. The information was obtained from some members of a target population through unstructured or semi-structured moderated procedures, such as individual interviews; conducted by telephone; with no definitive or statistical extrapolation to a broader population.

 

 

             

DETAILED FINDINGS

The detailed findings are divided into six sections. The first section provides a profile of the stakeholders who responded to the survey. The second section looks at stakeholders’ perceptions of FCAC’s overall performance. Sections 3-5 focus on stakeholders’ perspectives on specific FCAC collaboration or coordination activities such as events, committees/working groups, and tools.  Finally, the sixth section considers stakeholders’ views regarding their other types of interactions with FCAC. Within each section, a discussion of the quantitative data is followed by a summary of the qualitative findings and suggestions for improvement. 

 

SECTION 1: RESPONDENT PROFILE

Before delving into the specifics of FCAC’s activities, the online quantitative survey started by asking respondents which initiatives they have participated in, received, or used. As noted above, the options included a range of events, committees/working groups, tools and other interactions with FCAC. Respondents were able to select all that applied to them.  Respondents had to select at least one of the initiatives or committees/working group to proceed with the survey. 

 

Years working on financial literacy issues and the FCAC

Out of the 154 stakeholders who participated in the survey, many (63%) have been working on financial literacy issues for at least five years. Only about a third (35%) have been more recently introduced to the field with less than five years of experience. Despite this, a majority of the stakeholders responding to the survey have only recently started working more closely with FCAC – over two-thirds (68%) started working with FCAC within the past five years. 

             

Organization type and location

Stakeholders were represented from a range of sectors.  Almost half of the stakeholders surveyed were part of a non-governmental organization/community group (28%), education (11%) or some other types of association (6%).  The remaining were mainly either in a government organization (19%) or in the private sector or a financial institution (19%).   

 

 

 

 

 

About half (53%) of the stakeholders that participated in the survey represented organizations with a national scope. The remaining were evenly split among local (21%) and provincial (19%) organizations. Finally, while a large share of the stakeholders surveyed were based in Ontario (53%), there was a range of representatives from Western Canada (20%), Quebec (13%), and Atlantic Canada (6%).

 

             

 

Participation in FCAC coordination and collaboration activities

Stakeholders indicated that they participated in a range of FCAC coordination and collaboration activities.  Ninety-six percent of the stakeholders reported that they had participated in FCAC events, thirty-one percent participated in an FCAC committee or working group, and fifty-five percent used FCAC tools.

 


 

 

In terms of FCAC events, the vast majority of financial literacy stakeholders (81%) had participated in Financial Literacy Month (FLM), about two-thirds (63%) attended the National Conference on Financial Literacy, and just over 1-in-10 participated (13%) in the National Research Symposium. Generally, event participation was higher among stakeholders who have worked with FCAC or on financial literacy issues for at least five years. 

 

Approximately one-third (31%) of financial literacy stakeholders participated in a committee, working group or regional network.  Sixteen percent (16%) of stakeholders reported being involved with regional networks followed by participation in the Interdepartmental Committee (8%). Participation in other committees and working groups was less common due to more limited membership – these include the National Steering Committee (5%), the Workplace Working Group (6%) and the Research Sub-Committee (3%). As anticipated, participation in committees and working groups was higher among stakeholders who have worked on financial literacy issues for five or more years. 

 

Over half (55%) of financial literacy stakeholders used at least one of FCAC’s coordination and collaboration tools.  There is considerable overlap in the usage of the newsletter and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD) among stakeholders.  Thirty-three percent of respondents received the financial literacy quarterly newsletter and forty-two percent used the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD). Interestingly, use of FCAC’s tools was more common among stakeholders who were newer to FCAC and financial literacy issues (2 – 5 years). The research also revealed that it took time for stakeholders to become familiar with these tools: stakeholders who worked with FCAC for under two years were less likely to have received the newsletter or used the CFLD. 

 

In addition to the formal work that FCAC does with committees and working groups, a substantial share (44%) of stakeholders reported having other less formal interactions with FCAC.

 

 

 

SECTION 2: FCAC’S PERFORMANCE

There is a shared view among the majority of financial literacy stakeholders that FCAC performs well in terms of its overall collaboration and coordination efforts with financial literacy organizations. Approximately three-in-ten (29%) stakeholders rated FCAC’s performance as “excellent” and another four-in-ten (40%) reported it as “good”; and relatively few (9%) rated FCAC’s performance as “poor” or did not know (3% provided a rating of 1, 3% provided a rating of 2, and 3% did not know). It appears that financial literacy stakeholders who are more heavily involved with FCAC had a higher rating for the Agency’s overall coordination and collaboration activities.  For example, those who participated in at least one committee or working group provided higher positive ratings (84%) with no negative ratings (although 1% did not know) compared to the overall population of stakeholders. This includes those who attended events (70%) or used FCAC tools (69%). Six percent of those who attended events had a poor rating (3% rate 1; 3% rate 2) while three percent did not know. Among those who used FCAC tools, seven percent rated FCAC’s performance as “poor” (5% provided a rating of 1, 2% provided a rating of 2) and one percent did not know.

Further, the vast majority agreed that FCAC is a trusted collaborator (87%) and relatively few stakeholders held a “neutral position (6%), disagreed (3% provided a rating of 2, and less than 1% provided a rating of 1), and four percent did not know. Those who have worked with FCAC for more than five years are more likely to “strongly agree” (75%) with the statement than those who have worked with FCAC for five years or less (54%) and those who are new to working with FCAC (less than two years, 47%).  

 

Approximately four-in-five (78%) stakeholders agreed that FCAC is a valued collaborator. Some stakeholders held a “neutral position (12%) although few disagreed (5% provided a rating of 2, and 2% provided a rating of 1), and 3% did not know. A significantly higher number of people who have been working with FCAC for 2-5 years agreed (88%) that FCAC is a valued collaborator, compared to those who have been working with the Agency for less than two years (71%).

 

A similar proportion (83%) of stakeholders agreed that FCAC plays an important role in coordinating financial literacy efforts in Canada and nearly half (45%) strongly agreed. Nine percent of stakeholders held a “neutral position, few disagreed (5% provided a rating of 2, and 3% provided a rating of 1), and less than one percent did not know. There seems to be marginally stronger agreement amongst those who have been working with financial literacy issues for less than two years (93%), compared to those who have been working on the same for two to five years (85%) and five years or more (80%).

 

Over two-thirds (70%) agreed that FCAC is a stakeholder-focused organization – thirty-six percent strongly agreed. Nineteen percent of stakeholders held a “neutral position, few disagreed (2% provided a rating of 2, and 2% provided a rating of 1), and seven percent did not know. Stakeholders who have been working with FCAC for

2 – 5 years are more likely to “strongly agree” (51%) that the FCAC is a stakeholder-focused organization than those who have a newer relationship with the Agency (33%), and significantly more when compared to those with a longer work relationship with FCAC (27%). 

 

Interestingly, those who participated in committees or working groups gave the highest ratings for FCAC being a trusted and valued collaborator that is stakeholder-focused and plays an important role in coordinating financial literacy efforts.

 

             

Perceptions of FCAC are positive across different sectors.  Overall, stakeholders in the education sector rated FCAC’s coordination and collaboration activities the highest (82% ranked them good or excellent).  This is followed by stakeholders in the Community/NGOs (74%), Government (70%), and other Associations (69%). Respondents from financial institutions (53%) and the private sector (60%) lag slightly in their overall ratings of FCAC coordination and collaboration activities.  

 

FCAC

Evaluation  

(Top-2 Box)

Total (n=154)

Government (n=30)

Association (n=16)

Community/NGO

(n=43)

Education (n=17)

Financial

Institution

(n=15)

Private

Sector

(n=15)

FCAC

Overall

68%

70%

69%

74%

82%

53%

60%

Is a trusted collaborator

87%

100%

88%

88%

88%

80%

67%

Is a valued collaborator

78%

90%

94%

77%

82%

73%

67%

Plays an important

role to coordinate efforts

83%

87%

94%

88%

82%

87%

67%

A stakeholder focused organization

70%

77%

81%

77%

65%

64%

50%

 *Cautionary note: Small base (<30); interpret with caution.

             

A Qualitative Perspective on FCAC’s overall Coordination and Collaboration Efforts

Stakeholders have many positive things to say about FCAC. A snapshot of these perspectives includes:

•       FCAC fosters collaboration and coordination by bringing together like-minded people and organizations. Through its initiatives, it provides stakeholders with a platform where they are able to make connections, discuss ideas, and share knowledge. As a result, FCAC presents stakeholders with opportunities to work together with others from varied backgrounds.

•       FCAC stays connected with stakeholders, ensuring constant communication. FCAC’s efforts to stay in touch keep stakeholders interested and updated with current news. This contributes to strengthening collaboration between stakeholders and FCAC. By doing so, stakeholders are kept up to date on relevant financial literacy issues and work/priorities.

•       Financial literacy stakeholders felt that FCAC is a collaborative organization. FCAC is highly regarded for its efforts to collaborate with organizations, as well as to make connections between organizations. FCAC is seen as a group where stakeholders and organizations can promote activities to wider networks.  

 

In their words…

 

“They make a tremendous effort to collaborate with individual organizations but also to foster collaboration amongst them.”

 

“We see them as an umbrella group that promotes everyone else’s activities. As we develop new programs, they will be one way we can promote these to a wider network across the country as we hope to promote activities online.”

 

“I do think that they do encourage us to collaborate and work together towards national priorities, not just local priorities. I think they do a good job.”

 

“In terms of collaboration with other stakeholders, their conference is an excellent touchpoint to meet other stakeholders. Connections we have made have been very organic as a result of the conference.”

 

“In terms of what they do well, they are in constant communication. I find they do a good job of reaching out.”

 

“They also are more than willing to come to us at our meetings and bring news to interested parties within our organization.”

 

“I think they’re doing very well. In the last two or three years, I’ve seen a big change in them reaching out.”

    

SECTION 3: FCAC EVENTS PERFORMANCE

 

Financial Literacy Month

Financial literacy stakeholders were asked to what extent they agree or disagree that FLM delivers on key coordination and collaboration objectives. Overall, FLM performs relatively well in terms of facilitating the sharing of information (73%) and helping to build momentum and awareness (72%). Relatively few stakeholders disagreed or did not know that FLM facilitates the sharing of information (4% provided a rating of 2, 2% provided a rating of 1, and 2% did not know).

 

An aspect where there is room for improvement is in helping to identify and connect potential collaborators – about fourteen percent (12% provided a rating of 2 and 2% strongly disagreed) did not feel that FLM delivers well on this objective and 2% did not know. 

 

 

 

Among the stakeholders who participated in the FLM, a total of ten percent provided at least one suggestion to improve support for stakeholder partnership establishment. This ten percent combines those who suggested that FCAC strengthen efforts to involve/partner/deepen relationships with other stakeholders (5%), facilitate networking opportunities (3%), and facilitate coordination of partners attempting to work together (2%).

Furthermore, twelve percent of financial literacy stakeholders made at least one suggestion to better promote and to provide earlier notice of events, which combines those who suggested to increase public awareness (5%), more proactive/earlier notice of events (5%), and to take advantage of social media promotional tools (2%). These results stem from the open-ended portion of the online survey.

In their words…

 

“Facilitate planning among networks prior to FLM.”

 

“Could you get stakeholder hand-raisers wanting to participate, then make connections based on complementary ideas or businesses to get them to work together?  Or bring hand-raisers together to work on certain topics to force, bigger, better ideas?”

 

 

             

National Conference on Financial Literacy  

The majority (63%) of stakeholders indicated that they participated in the National Conference on Financial Literacy. Stakeholders were asked to what extent they agree or disagree that the National Conference delivers on three key aspects of collaboration and coordination. The results indicate that the National Conference is particularly effective in supporting information exchange (93% agree), providing networking opportunities (93% agree), and helping stakeholders to stay up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information (85% agree). Very few stakeholders disagree (less than 5%) that the National Conference delivers on any of these objectives. Specifically, four percent disagree or do not know that the National Conference supports the sharing of information (1% strongly disagree, 2% provide a rating of 2, and 1% don’t know). Six percent (2% strongly disagree, 1% provide a rating of 2, and 3% don’t know) disagree or do not know that the National Conference helps stakeholders remain up-to-date. Very few stakeholders (2%) disagree or do not know that the conference provides an opportunity to network (1% strongly disagree and 1% don’t know).

 

It is interesting to note that new stakeholders who have been working on financial literacy issues for less than five years especially feel that the National Conference provides an opportunity to network and establish new relationships with potential collaborators interested in similar topics (100% vs. 89% for those who have been working on financial literacy issues for five or more years). 

             

 

Approximately 1-in-5 (19%) of stakeholders who participated in the National Conference made at least one suggestion to improve stakeholder coordination whereby FCAC facilitates partnerships. This nineteen percent combines assisting stakeholders in connecting with one another (9%), partner/deepen relationships with stakeholders (6%), hold longer meetings (4%), and facilitate coordination of those trying to work together (3%). Other common suggestions for the conference include making the conference more accessible – two percent made suggestions to host the conference in a centralized location and one percent made suggestions to hold local or regional conferences.

In their words…

 

“Circulate a list of participants or some other means of sharing attendees’ information in advance/on-site so we know with whom we might seek to connect at the conference.”

 

“Facilitate maintaining connections between conferences.”

 

             

National Research Symposium  

Financial literacy stakeholders were asked to what extent they agree or disagree that the National Research Symposium delivers on three key coordination and collaboration aspects. Among the twenty stakeholders surveyed who participated in the Symposium, ninety-five percent agreed that it helped them stay up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information.  One potential area of improvement is in providing more or better opportunities to coordinate research activities since about fifteen percent either did not know how to rate this aspect or ranked it fairly low.

             

Among those who participated in the Research Symposium, forty percent made a suggestion to the open-ended question of the online survey that asked on how the Research Symposium could be improved. Common suggestions for improvement were: having an alert for updated information (5%); hosting local or regional conferences (5%) and facilitating the coordination of partners attempting to work together (5%).

 

“I wish the Symposium could be an annual event.”

 

“More discussion groups would be good.”

A Qualitative Perspective on FCAC’s Events  

Financial literacy stakeholders have high opinions of the National Conference and Symposium as these are events where stakeholders can collaborate and network. They especially appreciated the mixed format of the conference – small meetings and workshops – as this allowed for informal conversations amongst the stakeholders. While stakeholders did not necessarily feel that it is FCAC’s responsibility to maintain the connections made at events, they appreciated FCAC providing them with a platform where they can connect with other people. However, stakeholders did feel that FCAC should work with attendees to identify communities of interest for a more focused purpose. 

 

Additionally, most stakeholders were generally eager for frequent events and felt that holding the conference more frequently could enhance stakeholder collaboration and coordination (e.g. every two years). A select few who attended more than one event did not feel it was necessary. Those who attended the National Conference as well as the Symposium or participated in FLM find the frequency of the Conference sufficient.  

 

Stakeholders also indicated a need to have more opportunities for partnering and to facilitate stakeholders working together at and outside of events. Stakeholders typically attended events with a clear sense of their priorities and areas of interest to pursue at events. Providing more information or profiles of attendees in advance of the events may enhance meaningful networking and promote stakeholder coordination and collaboration. 

 

Although the content of presentations and sessions is considered useful, stakeholder participation is passive and it would be beneficial to find ways for them to be more engaged. Increasing two-way interactions by conducting workshops or break-out groups for discussion may inspire more active participation and collaboration from attendees.

 

Lastly, stakeholders prefer to be involved in the planning of events in an informal consultative manner rather than direct planning. By doing so, stakeholders feel that sessions could be more relevant and worthwhile. Suggestions for involvement include asking stakeholders for their input on topics, themes, and speakers. 

In their words…

 

“The conferences are organized very well. They have a variety of different formats for meetings and breakouts. They allow time for more informal/conversational connections. They allow tables and booths and encourage/incent participants to meet people and to do a more informal breakout. This has helped with conversations around the table.” [National Conference]

 

 “…FLM is also a good way of getting everyone together.” [Financial Literacy Month]

 

“If the goal is to enhance collaboration/coordination between stakeholders, they might look to increase frequency.” [National Conference]

 

“The one thing I’ve noticed was that their symposiums and conferences are becoming more popular and well attended.  There were people whom I didn’t know were there, but I would have sought out, had I realized they were there.  It would be useful if FCAC shared a list of attendees in advance of the symposium so that you could make a point to try to connect at the conference.” [National Research Symposium and Conference] 

 

“In terms of format, they had really interesting people speaking, but I would prefer more workshops where you’re actually going to do some work. You’re not just sitting listening to people talk about their programs.” [National Conference]

 

Proposed ways to improve coordination and collaboration for FCAC Events 

Survey results and interview comments suggest that enhancing collaborative work and partnerships during and between the events would be beneficial. Stakeholders feel that most events provided limited time to work together and were not that useful in helping to identify others with whom to work. Possible changes could include creating smaller collaboration groups with common interests.  This could include creating online communities, organizing interactive/discussion-oriented workshops, or other one-on-one or group conversations, where in-person connections are made with like-minded people interested in sharing knowledge (e.g. brain dates1). Finally, input from stakeholders for themes/topics for future events could help make them more relevant and enhance stakeholder engagement.

 

 

SECTION 4: FCAC COMMITTEES & WORKING GROUPS PERFORMANCE

 

National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy  

The National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy is a relatively small group compared to other groups organized by FCAC for coordination and collaboration purposes.  Among the eight members of the Steering Committee who participated in the survey, there was a general consensus that the NSC provided an opportunity to network with potential collaborators. Furthermore, approximately three-quarters (76%) agreed that the initiative provided an opportunity to work with others towards common objectives. One aspect that could potentially be strengthened is the NSC’s role in helping to coordinate initiatives to achieve the National Strategy goals. About half of the committee members (50%) rated the NSC as neutral in this respect.

 

1. Brain Date is a concept where members of an app, for example, spontaneously connect for brain dates (one-on-one meetups) based on what they are looking to learn or share. [E180. (2018, April 16). E180. Retrieved from https://e180.co/]

 

There were few specific answers to open-ended questions on how the NSC could enhance collaboration and further strengthen coordination. Suggestions included helping to identify and facilitate potential partnerships, and providing more time for collaboration. 

 

In their words…

 

“Leave more collaboration discussion time. Seems like a lot of share-outs without time to pick topics to work together on.”

             

Research Sub-Committee of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy  

The Research Sub-Committee is also small compared to some other groups organized by FCAC for coordination and collaboration purposes. Among those who participated in the survey, members were unanimous in their opinion that the Research Sub-Committee achieved its objectives of: helping to better coordinate research activities and reduce duplication; enhancing the sharing of information on research findings, emerging trends and issues, and best practices; and providing an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators interested in similar topics. 

There were few specific answers to open-ended questions on how the Research Sub-Committee could enhance collaboration and further strengthen coordination. Suggestions included facilitating the coordination of partnerships and providing more time for collaboration. 

 

In their words…

 

“Leave more collaboration discussion time. Seems like a lot of share-outs without time to pick topics to work together on.”

 

“I think an interdisciplinary research project conducted by the Sub-Committee would be awesome.” Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy  

Twelve members of the Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy (ICFL) participated in the on-line survey. These members indicated that the ICFL performed very well on efforts to facilitate collaboration among stakeholders, especially on the distribution of information on initiatives. The majority (92%) agreed that the ICFL enhanced sharing of information on initiatives and three-quarters (75%) agreed that it provided an opportunity to network. However, thirty-four percent did not know how to rate or did not agree that the ICFL helps to better coordinate activities at the federal government level.  

When asked for suggestions on how the ICFL could enhance collaboration and further strengthen coordination, an idea was put forward for the Committee to create a joint product or communications piece for stakeholders each year.

 

In their words…

 

“Have the ICFL create one new joint/common product/communications piece each year and launch it during FLM.”

 

             

The Workplace Working Group

Virtually all of the members of the Workplace Working Group participated in the on-line survey which asked about whether the group achieved its coordination and collaboration objectives. The majority (89%) of members agreed that the Workplace Working Group supported the sharing of information on initiatives (89%) and provided the opportunity to network. Two-thirds (67%) agreed that the Workplace Working Group provided an opportunity to work with others. 

About forty-four percent of stakeholders who participated in the Workplace Working Group provided answers to open-ended questions that asked for suggestions on how it could be improved. Suggestions included either having longer discussions/meetings or more frequent meetings. Another suggestion was to do more to engage employers.

 

In their words…

 

“Need to engage employers who drive their workplace interaction. Need to have more input from employers on reaching out to their employees.”

 

“The meetings need to be scheduled for a longer duration with fewer presentations so that the committee members can have a chance to brainstorm and/or have some good dialogues to find solutions. We always run out of time and have not yet developed anything concrete.”

             

Regional financial literacy networks  

FCAC has endeavoured to strengthen collaboration and coordination with and among the thirteen financial literacy networks across Canada through quarterly calls, and a face-to-face meeting of all networks. Regional financial literacy networks are relatively large, representing about 16% of all stakeholders. Similar to other FCAC financial literacy committees and working groups, the interactions and meetings with regional networks support coordination and the potential to collaborate. Three-quarters (75%) of stakeholders who participated in the regional networks initiatives (i.e. face-to-face meeting, and quarterly calls) agreed that these initiatives helped them to keep up-to-date on relevant information. Further, seventy-six percent said that the regional networks meeting provided a venue for sharing of information. Finally, sixty-two percent agreed that the meeting enhanced the visibility of their network, however, this is also the area where there is the most potential for improvement. 

             

Among the stakeholders who provided a suggestion as part of the open-ended portion of the questions, a total of eight percent made at least one suggestion to improve support for stakeholders who want to work together by facilitating meaningful relationships. This combines suggestions made to assist stakeholders in connecting with one another (4%) and facilitate the coordination of partners (4%). Among other suggestions from the open-ended portion of the online survey are: alerting networks when new information is available (4%) and hosting local or in person meetings (4%). 

 

In their words…
 
 

 

“It would be great if FCAC could act as a clearinghouse for regular updates from all networks and the national steering committee, roll these up into a quarterly report and disseminate to subscribers.”

 

“More time to connect with other networks besides conference.  Perhaps a quarterly conference call?”

 

A Qualitative Perspective on FCAC Committees and Working Groups

Financial literacy stakeholders who were members of FCAC committees, working groups or regional networks generally found that the meetings and sessions were sufficiently frequent and successful. Members meet on a regular basis, remotely or in-person. Stakeholders also indicated that the meetings concluded with an understanding of the work that needed to be done and the next steps required to achieve the goals that had been set. Discussions were interactive and promoted collaboration.

 

A common suggestion was to have more opportunities for in-person meetings and sessions. The majority of those interviewed relied on telephone or teleconference and felt that having in-person sessions could be more productive and engaging. To supplement the meetings, stakeholders also recognized the importance of frequent (informal) touch points to stay updated and on schedule.

 

 

In their words…

 

“We meet quarterly.  We met twice in person and twice over the phone.  They’re a great opportunity to learn about what’s happening at FCAC.” [Workplace Working Group]

 

“We did say last meeting that we did have an in-person meeting at the conference which was a good use of time… but we did say those two hours in a conference call is not as effective as if we were in person.” [Workplace Working Group]

 

“We meet both in-person and over the phone.  They’ve actually done a really good job.  We get together once in a while and then we do more targeted tasks over the phone.”[Research Sub-committee]

 

“We organized an in-person meeting for a longer period of time (10-4) so that when we are getting together, we are making a better use of our time.  We get more accomplished.” [Workplace Working Group] 

 

Proposed ways to improve coordination and collaboration for FCAC Committees/Working Groups

Survey and interview responses suggest that members feel the sessions can be modified to improve productivity by having more frequent in-person meetings and more time for networking and discussions during the meetings.  There was also a strong need for on-going touch-points among members to supplement the meetings. 

             

SECTION 5: FCAC TOOLS PERFORMANCE

 

The Financial Literacy Quarterly Newsletter

Financial literacy stakeholders were asked to what extent they agree or disagree that the quarterly newsletter delivers on its main coordination and collaboration objectives. Over 6-in-10 (64%) stakeholders who received the newsletter agreed that it supported the sharing and exchange of information, under fifteen percent disagreed (12% provided a rating of 2, and 2% strongly disagreed) and 2% did not know. A similar share (62%) indicated that it helped keep them up-to-date on relevant information but fewer (10%) disagreed and 1% did not know. 

 

The use of the newsletter as a tool for networking, however, can be further improved. In fact, less than half (46%) of those who received the newsletter found that it helped identify potential collaborators. Just under two-in-five (18%) disagreed and six percent did not know that the newsletter facilitates the identification of potential collaborators.

             

Among the stakeholders who use or receive the newsletter, a total of twelve percent provided at least one suggestion to improve support for stakeholder collaboration and coordination through establishing purposeful partnerships. This twelve percent combines those who suggested that FCAC enhance efforts to facilitate relationships with other stakeholders (4%), profile stakeholders and organizations to create purposeful connections (4%), facilitate networking opportunities (2%), or coordinate those trying to work together (2%). Other suggestions for the financial literacy newsletter stemming from the open-ended portion of the online survey include increasing the frequency of the newsletter (4%) and alerting users of new and updated information (2%).

In their words…

 

“Do more profiling of organizations who are doing financial literacy work across the country."

 

“Promote the formation of interest groups to enable collaboration on innovative projects.”

 

“Profile key stakeholder organizations.”

 

             

The Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)  

Overall, about forty-two percent of stakeholders indicated that they used the CFLD. Ratings for CFLD were not as high as those for other coordination and collaboration initiatives. For example, only fifty-two percent of users agreed that the CFLD helped to extend the reach of stakeholders’ resources to potential users. Only a modest share agreed that the CFLD helped users to: remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information (49%); identify potential collaborators (48%), or; avoid duplication (45%). Although minimal, there is a small percentage of stakeholders who do not know whether the CFLD improves the ability to avoid duplication (4%), facilitates the identification of potential collaborators (3%), or helps to extend the reach of resources (2%).

             

Among the stakeholders who use the CFLD, a total of fourteen percent provided at least one suggestion to improve information presentation. This fourteen percent combines those who suggested to have the database more user-friendly (12%) and improve presentation of information (2%). Other suggestions for CFLD stemming from the open-ended portion of the online survey include enhancing database alert systems (11%), which combined improving promotion/increase awareness (8%) and alert users to new information (3%), such that stakeholders are given notice of new and updated information.

 

In their words…

 

“An alert or curated summary function (e.g. subscribe by email to be notified of new events or users near you in topics related to your work).”

 

“I don't feel that the database helps identify collaborators - some other tools are needed beyond the database

- connections between sectors perhaps.”

 

“Difficult to navigate, needs active promotion to more audiences.”

 

“Not user friendly at all, too cumbersome to list events (three different screens per event) so not utilized well and thus not a source of information.” 

 

A Qualitative Perspective on FCAC Tools

The Financial Literacy Quarterly Newsletter is regarded as a useful tool for staying up-to-date on relevant information. However, stakeholders acknowledge that the newsletter could be enhanced to better facilitate collaboration and coordination. Suggestions include providing stakeholders with a profiling section to promote stakeholder identification and to incorporate more stakeholder programs and initiatives. Additionally, it would be helpful to set up an alert system whereby stakeholders are informed when a new edition is available. 

 

The CFLD is seen as a tool that promotes teamwork and synchronization where stakeholders can include their activities and programs. Stakeholders feel that it is well-structured (a significant improvement from years past), however, some continue to be overwhelmed by the format. Further enhancement of the layout, to make it easy-toread and navigate may be beneficial for those who are less familiar with the tool. Furthermore, stakeholders wonder whether it is being used to its full potential. Some suggest that further promotion plus new and updated information could increase usage of the tool.  

 

When asked what other ways could help strengthen collaboration and coordination, respondents suggested that

FCAC’s tools would need to evolve with the changing times to adapt to the new generation that uses technology more. They also agreed that webinars and portals would be highly beneficial as they would be accessible to all stakeholders across the country at all times. Most agreed that an online portal could be a repository of relevant documents in one place. However, some expressed concerns that in order for FCAC’s tools to remain useful and relevant it would be necessary to keep the portal maintained and up-to-date. 

 

In their words…

 

“I do read it and it’s always appreciated and I always do find some nuggets that I happily share with members of my organization.” [Quarterly Newsletter]

 

“They could ask the provinces to share information on the programs we run.  It could be a hub of information so it’s more two-way than one-way.  I know it would take them more time/resources BUT we could provide our information in both languages to help.” [Quarterly Newsletter]

 

“I don’t have a sense of when it is published – that would be helpful is to understand when it comes out.” [Quarterly Newsletter]

 

“I was looking at the CFLD, as it’s one way of fostering collaboration/coordination, and it’s really quite overwhelming. There have been quite a few changes made since the last time I looked at it a few years ago. It looks like it’s well-structured.” [CFLD]

 

“Webinars are useful given the size of our country. There is a lot of technology we can take advantage of.”

 

“The problem with the portal is that it always has to be kept up-to-date. I think it would be a great and useful tool to have. The biggest benefit is that it could house everything in one place. There are so many things going on across the country, I just don’t know how you maintain it properly.” 

 

 

Proposed ways to improve coordination and collaboration for FCAC’s Tools 

Survey and interview respondents suggested a few possible changes for the Financial Literacy Quarterly

Newsletter and the Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD).  For the Newsletter, the first suggestion was to improve its layout and organization as it was perceived to be overwhelming. The second was to use the newsletter to share more up-to-date and new information/events with stakeholders. For the CFLD, stakeholders suggested that FCAC further improve its user-friendliness and promote it to improve awareness of the tool. 

 

When asked about other ideas for collaboration and coordination in regards to FCAC tools during the in-depth interviews, stakeholders recognize the opportunity to leverage today’s technology. Tools that stakeholders feel would help strengthen and enhance collaboration and coordination of work and ideas include webinars and online portals or communities. These formats are seen as convenient and effective for sharing information on a larger scale and can also act as platforms for two-way discussions in real time. There were also suggestions for a continuously updated and maintained portal/repository to help create a powerful platform where stakeholders can find relevant work, programs, information, and other stakeholders to share their activities with. 

 

 

SECTION 6: OTHER FCAC INTERACTIONS

 

About forty-four percent of all stakeholders noted that they had been involved in other FCAC interactions that supported coordination and collaboration. Approximately three-quarters of these stakeholders agreed that these interactions helped them to keep up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information (71%) and supported the sharing of information and the exchange of ideas (75%). A small percentage of stakeholders strongly disagreed (1% or less) on these purposes of other FCAC interactions.  

 

Further, two-thirds (67%) of these stakeholders agreed that these informal interactions with FCAC helped them to make connections with potential collaborators. Still, there may be some room for improvement in this area as about thirty-three percent did not know or did not agree that they were helped to connect with potential collaborators (7% reported they did not know, 1% strongly disagreed, 5% disagreed, and 19% neither agreed nor disagreed). 

 

             

Among the stakeholders who had other interactions with FCAC, a total of nine percent made at least one suggestion to further improve the support and assistance that stakeholders receive to establish relationships among potential partners. This 9% combines those who suggested to assist stakeholders connecting with one another (4%), partner/deepen relationships with stakeholders (3%), and to facilitate coordination of those trying to work together (1%). 

 

 

 

 

 

In their words…

 
 

 

“Be inclusive of all organizations that work to serve and further the national financial literacy agenda.”

 

“They should actually collaborate and help stakeholders connect. We attempted to reach out regarding a financial literacy initiative and were simply directed to the database (after trying to explain we were looking for more than the database multiple times).”

 

Proposed ways to improve coordination and collaboration in other FCAC Interactions

The survey and qualitative interview responses indicated that FCAC can improve by identifying stakeholders with common interests to support purposeful and meaningful collaboration and coordination.

 

 

 

APPENDIX A: DETAILED METHODOLOGY

 

Quantitative Methodology

 

•       Between November 29 and December 12, 2017, Nielsen conducted a 15-minute online survey with 154 FCAC stakeholders. The margin of error for a sample of 154 from the sample list is +/- 7.2 percentage points. FCAC provided a list of 855 Financial Literacy Stakeholders. The overall completion rate of the online survey was 18%.

Participation rate/response rate =

Responses (154)

Total Number of Eligible Cases (855)

Participation rate/response rate =

18%

 

•       The survey was programmed and hosted using Nielsen’s Confirmit computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) software. The secure survey website was accessible 24 hours a day, seven days a week from any web-enabled computer. This allowed stakeholders to complete the survey at their own pace and at a time that was convenient for them. 

•       Invitations to complete the survey were sent to stakeholders with valid email addresses by Nielsen. The invitation emails provided an overview of the objectives of the research, that it was voluntary and that feedback would be provided anonymously. The invitation included a unique URL that stakeholders would click to access the survey online. 

•       On November 29, 2017, Nielsen began fieldwork with a slow launch and contacted a random selection of 250 financial literacy stakeholders. From that, a total of 10 stakeholders completed the survey (a participation rate of 4%). The remaining 605 financial stakeholders were contacted on November 30, 2017 and a total of 3 reminders were sent throughout data collection. Of the 605, 144 financial stakeholders completed the survey for a participation rate of 24%. In total, 154 FCAC financial literacy stakeholders were surveyed. During the field period, three reminder emails were sent to respondents who had not yet completed the survey on December 4, 2017, December 6, 2017. Due to an extension for fieldwork collection, it was later communicated the survey deadline extension of December 12, 2017. A final reminder was sent to stakeholders who had not yet completed the survey on December 8, 2017. 

•       Upon completion of data collection, Nielsen cleaned and coded the data. Nielsen provided a final data file and ran a series of data tables that provided results for all questions in the survey, both overall and broken down by selected “banners.” This permitted the comparison of results from various sub-group segments of interest; statistical significance testing at the 95% confidence level was shown between all banner points in the data tables.

 

Qualitative Methodology

 

•       After data collection, letters were sent by Nielsen to all FCAC stakeholders that completed the online survey to inform them of a potential 30 minute phone interview. The letter was from FCAC’s Commissioner and encouraged participation for those who would be randomly selected.

•       A series of telephone in-depth interviews (IDIs) were conducted by Nielsen to complement the quantitative research. In most cases, the IDI served as a follow-up conversation to the quantitative survey that was completed. A total of 10 IDIs were completed between January 29, 2018 and February 2, 2018. The IDIs were conducted by Nielsen moderators and averaged 30 minutes in length. Incentives were not provided to FL stakeholders who participated in the follow-up phone interviews.

             

APPENDIX B: RESEARCH INSTRUMENTS

FCAC 2017 Stakeholder Collaboration Research

Online Survey Questionnaire

November 27, 2017

 

EMAIL INVITATION

 

 

Subject Line: FCAC Stakeholder Collaboration Survey

 

Hello,

 

***Le texte français suit l’anglais***

 

ACNielsen Company of Canada (Nielsen Canada) has been commissioned by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) to conduct a Stakeholder Collaboration Survey. The survey is designed to understand financial literacy stakeholders’ views related to FCAC initiatives to strengthen collaboration and coordination.         

The results of this study will be used to inform FCAC on ways to enhance and/or improve stakeholder engagement strategies. 

 

Participation in the research is completely voluntary. Please be assured that all responses will be anonymous and will be kept strictly confidential. Your answers will be used for research purposes only. The findings will be reported in a summary format to ensure individual respondents cannot be identified, and your privacy is protected in accordance with the privacy protection laws [INSERT LINK - http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21] and Nielsen’s privacy protocols [INSERT LINK - http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/privacy-statement.html]. The final report will be made available online at the FCAC website, which will be communicated when it is published.

 

The survey is registered with the Marketing Research Intelligence Association [INSERT LINK - https://mriaarim.ca].

 

The link below will take you to Nielsen Canada’s secure Internet site hosting the survey. The survey should take 10-15 minutes to complete. 

 

[INSERT SURVEY LINK]

 

We ask that you complete this survey no later than December 6, 2017.

 

If you'd prefer not to participate in this and future FCAC surveys, please click here [INSERT OPT-OUT LINK] to remove your name from the FCAC survey list. 

 

If you experience any technical issues with the survey, please contact us at [INSERT PHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL FOR TECHNICAL SUPPORT]. Our technical support staff will help you as soon as they can.

 

If you have any question regarding this survey itself, please contact Cynthia Pachovski at Nielsen Canada, at (416) 355-6805 or Cynthia.Pachovski@nielsen.com. 

 

Thank you for your participation!

 

ACNielsen Company of Canada

LANDING PAGE

 

 

Thank you for agreeing to participate in the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada’s Stakeholder Collaboration Survey! 

 

ACNielsen Company of Canada (Nielsen Canada) has been commissioned by the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) to conduct this survey. The survey is designed to understand financial literacy stakeholders’ views related to FCAC initiatives to strengthen collaboration and coordination.

 

Participation in the research is completely voluntary. Please be assured that all responses will be anonymous and will be kept strictly confidential. Your answers will be used for research purposes only. The findings will be reported in a summary format to ensure individual respondents cannot be identified, and your privacy is protected in accordance with privacy protection laws [INSERT LINK - http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-21] and Nielsen’s privacy protocols [INSERT LINK - http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/privacy-statement.html].

 

This survey will take 10-15 minutes to complete. 

 

During the survey, please do not use your browser's FORWARD and BACK buttons. Instead, please always use the buttons below to move backward and forward through the survey.

 

Simply click on the forward arrow at the bottom of the page to begin the survey.

 

 

PARTICIPATION IN FCAC INITIATIVES ON FINANCIAL LITERACY

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

A3. Have you participated in, received, or used any of the following FCAC financial literacy initiatives? Please select all that apply. [ALLOW MULTIPLE RESPONSES]

 

 

INITIATIVES

[INSTRUCTION]

1

Financial Literacy Month (FLM)

 

2

National Conference on Financial Literacy

 

3

National Research Symposium

 

4

The Financial Literacy Quarterly Newsletter

 

5

The Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)

 

99

None of the above

EXCLUSIVE

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

A4. Have you been a member or participant in any of the following FCAC financial literacy committees, working groups, networks, or meetings/other events? Please select all that apply. [ALLOW MULTIPLE RESPONSES]

 

 

INITIATIVES

[INSTRUCTION]

1

National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy

 

2

Research Sub-Committee of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy

 

3

Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy (ICFL)

 

4

Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy

 

5

Regional Financial Literacy Network

 

6

Other interactions with FCAC

 

99

None of the above

EXCLUSIVE

 

[PROGRAMMER: TERMINATE AND THANK THE RESPONDENT IF THE RESPONDENT DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THE ABOVE INITIATIVES (A3=99 AND A4=99)]

 

 

EVALUATION OF FCAC’S COLLABORATION AND COORDINATION EFFORTS ON THE INITIATIVES

 

A. FINANCIAL LITERACY MONTH (FLM)

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=1)]

B1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

Financial Literacy Month… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT]

[SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

… facilitates the identification of potential collaborators with common interests to connect and work together on financial literacy initiatives

 

B

… facilitates the sharing of information among financial literacy stakeholders

 

C

… helps build momentum and awareness for my

organization’s financial literacy efforts and initiatives

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 – Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 – Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=1)]

B1O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how Financial Literacy Month (FLM) could further enhance collaboration among financial literacy stakeholders?  

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

B. NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FINANCIAL LITERACY

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=2)]

B2. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The National Conference on Financial Literacy… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PERSTATEMENT]

[SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…supports the sharing of information and exchange of ideas related to common challenges and potential solutions

 

B

…helps me to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including recent initiatives, best practices in the field, and new research findings

 

C

…. provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators interested in similar topics towards strengthening financial literacy in Canada

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 – Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 – Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=2)]

B2O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the National Conference on Financial Literacy could further enhance collaboration among financial literacy stakeholders?

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

C. NATIONAL RESEARCH SYMPOSIUM ON FINANCIAL LITERACY

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=3)]

B3. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The National Research Symposium on Financial Literacy… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

… provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators that share common interests

 

B

… helps me to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including emerging trends and issues, research findings, best practices in the field, and new research initiatives

 

C

… helps to better coordinate research activities to inform the National Strategy, reducing duplication and identifying gaps

 

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 – Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 – Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=3)]

B3O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the National Research Symposium on Financial Literacy could further enhance collaboration among stakeholders?

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

D. THE FCAC FINANCIAL LITERACY NEWSLETTER

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=4)]

B4. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The FCAC Financial Literacy Newsletter… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT]

 

[SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENT.]

 

 

STATEMENTS

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps me to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including recent initiatives, best practices in the field, and new research findings

 

B

…supports the sharing of information and the exchange of ideas related to common challenges and potential solutions

 

C

…facilitates the identification of potential collaborators who complement my work and the establishment of new relationships and connections towards achieving the National Strategy’s goals

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=4)]

B4O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the FCAC Financial Literacy Newsletter could further enhance collaboration among financial literacy stakeholders?

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

E. THE CANADIAN FINANCIAL LITERACY DATABASE (CFLD)

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=5)]

B5. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…improves the ability to avoid duplication, focusing on financial literacy initiatives that complement others’ work 

 

B

…helps me remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including initiatives, events, resources, and funding

 

C

…facilitates the identification of potential collaborators who complement my work and the

 

 

establishment of new relationships and connections towards achieving the National Strategy’s goals

 

D

…helps to extend the reach of my resources to potential users

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A3=5)]

B5O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the Canadian Financial Literacy Database could further enhance collaboration or allow better coordination of efforts among financial literacy stakeholders?  

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

F. NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL LITERACY

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=1)]

B6. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PERSTATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps to better coordinate initiatives to achieve the National Strategy goals, reducing duplication and identifying gaps and solutions

 

B

…provides an opportunity to work with others toward the achievement of common objectives

 

C

…provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators interested in similar topics towards achieving the National Strategy goals

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=1)]

B6O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the work of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy could further enhance collaboration or increase coordination of efforts among financial literacy stakeholders? 

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

G. RESEARCH SUB-COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL STEERING COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL LITERACY 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=2)]

B7. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The Research Sub-Committee of the National Steering Committee on Financial Literacy… [ALLOW ONE

RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps to better coordinate research activities, reducing duplication and identifying gaps

 

B

…enhances sharing of information on research findings, emerging trends and issues, and best practices

 

C

…provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators interested in similar topics

 

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=2)]

B7O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the work of the Research Sub-Committee could contribute to increased collaboration or better coordination of efforts among stakeholders?  

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

H. INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL LITERACY (ICFL) 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=3)]

B8. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy (ICFL)… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT]

[SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps to better coordinate activities at the federal government level, reducing duplication, identifying gaps and how to address Canadians’ needs

 

B

…provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators who share common interests or complement our work

 

C

…enhances sharing of information on initiatives, funding, and events that contribute to greater financial literacy in Canada

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=3)]

B8O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the work of the Interdepartmental Committee on Financial Literacy could further increase collaboration or allow better coordination of efforts among stakeholders? 

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

I. WORKPLACE WORKING GROUP ON FINANCIAL LITERACY

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=4)]

B9. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

The Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…supports the sharing of information on initiatives and best practices and the exchange of ideas related to common challenges and potential solutions

 

B

…provides an opportunity to work with others toward a common objective

 

C

…provides an opportunity to network, establish new relationships, and connect with potential collaborators who share common interests or complement our work

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=4)]

B9O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how the work of the Workplace Working Group on Financial Literacy could further increase collaboration or allow better coordination of efforts among stakeholders?  

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

J. REGIONAL FINANCIAL LITERACY NETWORKS

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=5)] B10. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

FCAC interactions with your Financial Literacy Network… [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps me to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including recent initiatives, best practices in the field, and new research findings

 

B

…supports the sharing of information and the exchange of ideas related to common challenges and potential solutions

 

C

…gives my Network visibility and improves regional stakeholders’ ability to connect with potential collaborators and share resources

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=5)]

B10O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how FCAC’s liaison with your Financial Literacy Network could further increase collaboration or coordination of efforts among stakeholders?  

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

K. OTHER INTERACTIONS WITH FCAC

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=6)] B11. To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 

 

Other interactions with FCAC (such as meetings, events or partnerships on specific initiatives)… [ALLOW ONE

RESPONSE PER STATEMENT] [SHOW IN A GRID. RANDOMIZE STATEMENTS.]

 

 

 

STATEMENT

[INSTRUCTION]

A

…helps me to remain up-to-date on relevant financial literacy information, including recent initiatives, best practices in the field, and new research findings

 

B

…supports the sharing of information and the exchange of ideas related to best practices or common

challenges and potential solutions

 

C

…improves stakeholders’ ability to connect with potential collaborators that have common interests and share resources

 

 

 

 

 

SCALE

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: RESPONDENTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS INITIATIVE (A4=6)]

B11O. In one line, do you have any suggestions on how FCAC’s interaction (such as meetings, events or special project/collaboration) could contribute to increased collaboration or better coordination of efforts among stakeholders? 

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

 

TEXT BOX

[OPEN-ENDED]

99

Don’t know/Prefer not answer

 

 

 

EVALUATION OF FCAC’S OVERALL COLLABORATION AND COORDINATION EFFORTS

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

C1. So far we have asked you to evaluate several initiatives that you participated in or were involved. Now we would like you to please think about FCAC in terms of its overall collaboration and coordination efforts with organizations like yours.

 

On a scale from 1 to 5, where 5 means excellent and 1 means poor, how would you rate FCAC’s overall collaboration and coordination efforts to contribute and support initiatives to strengthen the financial literacy of Canadians? 

 [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

5

5 - Excellent

 

4

4

 

3

3 

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Poor

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

C2. Thinking again about FCAC’s overall collaboration and coordination efforts with organizations like yours, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements? Please use the 5-point scale indicated below. [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE PER ATTRIBUTE]

 

 

 

 

 

 

[PROGRAM AS GRID. RANDOMIZE.]

 

 

ATTRIBUTE

[INSTRUCTION]

A

FCAC is a trusted collaborator

 

B

FCAC is a valued collaborator

 

C

FCAC is a stakeholder focused organization

 

D

FCAC plays an important role to coordinate financial literacy efforts in Canada

 

 

 

SCALE

 

5

5 - Strongly agree

 

4

4

 

3

3

 

2

2

 

1

1 - Strongly disagree

 

99

Don’t know/Not applicable

 

 

 

ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE

 

 

To finish up, we would like to ask a few more questions about you and your organization for statistical purposes only. Please be assured that your answers will remain completely confidential and that the results will only be used in aggregate form.

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

D1. How long would you say you have been working on financial literacy issues? [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

1

Less than 2 years

 

2

More than 2 years but less than 5 years

 

3

5 years or more

 

98

I’d rather not answer

 

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

D2. How long would you say you have been working with FCAC? [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

1

Less than 2 years

 

2

More than 2 years but less than 5 years

 

3

5 years or more

 

98

I’d rather not answer

 

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

D3. In which province or territory are you located? [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

1

Alberta

 

2

British Columbia

 

3

Manitoba

 

4

New Brunswick

 

5

Newfoundland and Labrador

 

6

Northwest Territories

 

7

Nova Scotia

 

8

Nunavut

 

9

Ontario

 

10

Prince Edward Island

 

11

Quebec

 

12

Saskatchewan

 

13

Yukon

 

98

I’d rather not answer

 

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

D4. What type of organization do you represent? [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

1

Government

 

2

Association

 

3

Community Group/Non-Governmental Organization

 

4

Education Institution

 

5

Financial Institution

 

6

Private Sector

 

77

Other (please specify): _______________

 

98

I’d rather not answer

 

 

 

[BASE: ALL RESPONDENTS]

D5. Is your organization a national, provincial or local organization? [ALLOW ONE RESPONSE]

 

 

 

[INSTRUCTION]

1

National

 

2

Provincial

 

3

Local

 

98

I’d rather not answer

 

 

 

FINAL SCREEN

 

 

This now concludes the survey. Thank you very much for your time!

 

Should you wish to discuss the survey, please contact Cynthia Pachovski at Nielsen Canada, at (416) 355-6805 or Cynthia.Pachovski@nielsen.com. 

 

[GO TO FCAC DEPARTMENT PAGE AFTER SURVEY IS SUBMITTED]

English: http://www.fcac-acfc.gc.ca/Eng/Pages/home-accueil.aspx

French: http://www.fcac-acfc.gc.ca/Fra/Pages/home-accueil.aspx

 

 

             

 

FCAC 2017 Stakeholder Collaboration Research

Follow-Up

December 14, 2017 

 

 

EMAIL FOLLOW-UP

 

 

Subject Line: FCAC Stakeholder Collaboration Survey – Thank You

 

Le francais suit l’anglais…

 

 

Dear Financial Literacy Stakeholder,

 

The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada would like to thank you for taking the time to complete the Stakeholder Collaboration Survey facilitated by AC Nielsen Canada. Your feedback and perspectives are important in shaping our stakeholder engagement and collaboration activities. Some respondents may be chosen to participate in follow-up telephone interviews to gather further information and perspectives. In those cases, we ask for a bit more of your time and cooperation in the New Year.

 

Again, we thank you for your input and contributions to this survey, and we look forward to ongoing collaboration to advance financial literacy in Canada.

 

If you have any question regarding this, please contact Cynthia Pachovski at Nielsen Canada, at (416) 355-6805 or Cynthia.Pachovski@nielsen.com.

 

Financial Consumer Agency of Canada      

 

 

 

 

 Cher(e) intervenant(e) en littératie financière,

 

L'Agence de la consommation en matière financière du Canada tient à vous remercier d'avoir pris le temps de répondre au Sondage sur la collaboration des intervenants mené par AC Nielsen Canada. Vos commentaires et vos points de vue sont importants pour influencer nos activités d'engagement et de collaboration des intervenants. Certains répondants peuvent être choisis pour participer à des entrevues téléphoniques individuelles afin de recueillir d'autres renseignements et perspectives. Dans ces cas-là, nous vous demandons un peu plus de votre temps et coopération dans la nouvelle année.

 

Encore une fois, nous vous remercions de vos commentaires et de votre contribution à ce sondage, et nous anticipons la perspective d'une collaboration continue pour faire progresser la littératie financière au Canada.

 

Pour toute question au sujet, veuillez communiquer avec Cynthia Pachovski de Nielsen Canada par téléphone au 416-355-6805 ou par courriel à cynthia.pachovski@nielsen.com.

 

Agence de la consommation en matière financière du Canada

             

FCAC 2017 Stakeholder Collaboration Research

Discussion Guide

January 9, 2018

 

 

DISCUSSION GUIDE

 

 

10 Phone In-depth Interviews 30 minutes each

 

 

[1] Introduction

•       My name is Stephanie and I am conducting this interview on behalf of the Nielsen Company, a neutral third-party Market Research firm commissioned to conduct a follow-up interview regarding the shaping of stakeholder engagement and collaboration activities for the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC). It is a follow up to the survey that you completed a few weeks ago. 

•       We are looking to gain further insights into your views related to FCAC initiatives to strengthen collaboration and coordination. Nielsen will analyze the information and present their findings to FCAC. 

•       This interview should take about 20-30 minutes to complete. 

•       This is an open-discussion, where we will be seeking in-depth opinions and perspectives from you. I can assure you that your privacy will be respected -- your responses will be kept completely confidential and anonymous so please feel free to share openly. The survey is registered with MRIA National Registration System which sets our professional standards. 

•       This interview is being audio recorded. The recording will be deleted once I have been able to use it in my analysis.

•       Do you have any questions or concerns before we begin?

 

 

[2] Overall Engagement and expectations

 

1.     Overall how would you assess FCAC’s efforts to foster collaboration and coordination between financial literacy stakeholders?

a.     Probe: What works best in their efforts to strengthen collaboration/coordination? 

§ Prompts: for each idea, prompt on the why and what

b.    Probe: What can be done better or how can some of those collaboration efforts be improved? § Prompts: for each idea, prompt on the why and what

 

2.     Do you have any suggestions of new activities FCAC can undertake to foster collaboration and coordination between financial literacy players?

a.     Probe: What are they? Why? To obtain what kind of results?

b.    Probe: How would it foster collaboration and coordination? Be the most concrete and specific you can. (Ask for each idea)

c.     Probe: Have you seen other activities elsewhere that could be a good model for FCAC to replicate in order to foster collaboration or coordination? 

d.    Do you have experiences, knowledge or ideas to share with FCAC?

 

 

             

 

 

[3.1] FCAC Events (National Conference on FL, FLM, Research Symposium)

(When probing, the interviewer to clearly identify the specific event the respondent is referring to during the discussion and record responses accordingly) 

 

1.     Do you find these initiatives successful at fostering collaboration? How can FCAC improve collaboration related to its key initiatives?  

a.     Probe: Are key initiatives such as the National Conference, Financial Literacy Month, or Research Symposium frequent enough? 

§ Prompts: Increase frequency? Decrease frequency? Fine as they are?

§ [If more or less frequent]: How frequent/often would be optimal for the National Conference? Financial Literacy Month? Research Symposium?

b.    Probe: What about the allocated time for key initiatives. Are they long enough?

§ Prompts: Increase time? Decrease time? Fine as they are? § [If more or less time]: How long would be optimal?

c.     Probe: Do you think the formats and mechanisms are sufficient to engage collaboration?

§ What other formats and/or mechanisms do you think would help improve collaboration?

d.    Probe: If no improvement is expected, why is the current state working or the right fit?

 

2.     Do you find the connections made between stakeholders at conferences/events sustainable and maintainable?

a.     Probe: How could FCAC better maintain these stakeholder connections between conferences and events? And for what purposes and benefits?

 

3.     Are you aware of any other tools or mechanisms that help strengthen collaboration between those events?

a.     Probe: Are there any specific stakeholder engagement tools or collaborative approaches/mechanisms that you deem to be successful? What are they? What made them successful?

b.    Thinking about FCAC stakeholder collaboration, which tool or mechanism would you recommend to help strengthen collaboration among FCAC stakeholders?

 

4.     Thinking about collaboration again, to what degree do you think stakeholders should be involved in planning for major initiatives coordinated by FCAC such as the Financial Literacy Month?

a.     Probe: Why do you think that? What would be the benefits?

b.    What kind of involvement do you think would be relevant and useful? And how would it improve collaboration?

§ Probe: for instance, the ability to provide feedback in early stages of planning, being on a planning committee, surveys, Microsoft Outlook voting?

c.     How could stakeholders be more engaged in the planning and lead up to major initiatives?  § Probe: At what point in the planning would you like to receive information? e.g the theme for FLM, the agenda for a conference or event.  Currently, when you receive information is it timed properly? Too early? Too late? Does it align with your organization’s planning timelines?

 

5.     Do you think FCAC should work with attendees to identify communities of interest to help facilitate collaboration?

a.     Probe: Before conferences/ meetings? At conferences/ meetings?

b.    Are there any specific methods that you would recommend?

 

 

[3.2] FCAC Committees/Working Groups (National Steering Committee, ICFL, Regional Networks)

 

1.     Are you a member of a committee?

 

2.     Do you find these committees and working groups are successful at fostering collaboration? And how can FCAC improve collaboration/coordination related to its committees/working groups?

a.     Probe: Are the interactions frequent enough? 

§ Prompts: Increase frequency? Decrease frequency? Fine as they are? § [If more or less frequent]: How frequent/often would be optimal?

 

3.     What are your thoughts on the meetings?

a.     Probe: Do the meetings promote interactivity? Do you feel all members’ views and perspectives are welcomed and sufficiently discussed? 

b.    Probe: What about the format of those meetings?  

Prompts: is the length/duration sufficient or insufficient? Is the information shared useful? Of interest? Do you have any ideas or recommendations that you think would improve the meetings? Would you prefer more time for members to present, external presentation, briefing from FCAC, brainstorming session, animated discussion, etc.?

 

4.     Do you have any idea on how collaboration can be increased between members of the committees/working groups or financial literacy networks?

 

 

[3.3] FCAC Tools (FCAC Newsletter, CFLD)

 

1.     What are your thoughts on the FCAC tools such as the Newsletter and Canadian Financial Literacy Database (CFLD)?

a.     Probe: What do you think their purpose or purposes are?

b.    Probe: Do you think the Newsletter is helping you stay up-to-date on what’s happening on the financial literacy landscape and with its players?  

c.     Do you have any ideas on how the Newsletter can help contribute to greater collaboration or coordination of efforts for stakeholders?

d.    What about the CFLD? Do you think it helps stakeholders find useful resources and avoid duplication? Do you have any other comments to make about that tool?

e.     What recommendations would you make to improve the Newsletter? The CFLD?

§ Probe if they mention user-friendliness: Are there other methods or tools that you feel would be more user-friendly? What are they?

§ Probe if they mention alert/update system: What kinds of alerts/updates would you find useful from FCAC? How frequent would be optimal?

 

2.     What do you think of the following ideas to improve collaboration/coordination? 

a.     Ideas (one by one): Information/Collaboration Portal (interactive), Webinars, Teleconference calls, video conferences, Skype audio/video calls meetings, online collaboration workspace/software, Google+, open source discussion platform

b.    Probe: Relevant? Useful? Essential? Complementary?

 

 

[4] Closing

 

1.     Do you have any other ideas, positive experiences or best practices that you’ve encountered to

“increase collaboration” that you could share? What are they?

a.     Probe: What about them works well?

 

2.     Do you have any other ideas, positive experiences or best practices that you’ve encountered to

“increase coordination” between stakeholders that you can share? What are they? 

a.     Probe: How have these led to better coordination of work between stakeholders?

 

3.     Do you have any ideas on how FCAC can help you connect with other groups with similar interests? What are they?

 

4.     Based on our conversation today, what would be the top ideas that you would consider the most important to foster collaboration? 

 

 

That is all that we have for today. Thank you for your time.