Public opinion research study:
Emergency Preparedness Awareness Campaign

Findings Report

Prepared for Public Safety Canada

Supplier: Ipsos

Contract Number: 0D160-212871/001/CY

Contract Value: $223,215.96 (including HST)

Award Date: November 2020

Delivery Date: January 2021

Registration Number: POR 054-20

For more information on this report, please contact Public Safety Canada at

ps.communications-communications.sp@canada.ca

 

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français

This public opinion research report presents the results from focus groups and a representative survey conducted by Ipsos on behalf of Public Safety Canada.

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre Recherche sur l’opinion publique: Campagne de sensibilisation à la préparation aux situations d’urgence - Rapport des résultats. .

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from Public Safety Canada. For more information on this report, please contact Public Safety Canada at ps.communications-communications.sp@canada.ca.

 

Public Safety Canada

269 Laurier Ave. W., 13th Floor

OTTAWA

Ontario

K1A0P8

 

Catalogue Number: PS4-280/2021E-PDF 

 

International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-38724-6 

Related publications (registration number): POR 054-20 

·         Catalogue Number PS4-280/2021F-PDF - (Final Report, French)   

·         ISBN 978-0-660-38725-3 

 

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Public Works and Government Services, 2021

Political Neutrality Statement

I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ipsos that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. 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.

Mike Colledge
President
Ipsos Public Affairs

 

 

Table of contents 

Table of contents. 4

1.      Executive Summary. 5

1.1 Background. 5

1.2 Research Objectives. 5

1.3 Methodology. 5

1.4 Key Findings. 7

2.      Detailed Qualitative Findings. 9

2.1 ‘Jumping into Action’ 9

2.2 ‘Prepared not Scared’ 11

2.3 ‘Walking Disaster’ 12

2.4 Information Needs. 13

2.5 Implications of the COVID-19 context. 14

2.5 Note on Subgroup Differences. 15

2.6 Counts on Sentiment Check Questions. 15

3.      Detailed Quantitative Baseline Survey Findings. 17

3.1. Current level of emergency preparedness. 17

3.2  Expectations of government. 22

3.3  Covid-19 and emergency preparedness. 25

3.4  Adaptative capacity after experiencing a natural disaster. 27

3.5  Willingness to become prepared. 28

3.6  Public alerting & national Search and Rescue Program (SAR). 31

3.7  Advertising & resources on emergency preparedness. 32

Appendix A: Qualitative Recruitment Screener and Discussion Guide. 34

A.1 Qualitative Recruitment Screener. 34

A.2 Qualitative Discussion Guide. 41

Appendix B.1: Quantitative Baseline Survey. 44

B.1 Survey Methodology. 44

B.2 Survey Questionnaire. 47

 

]

1.   Executive Summary

This report presents finding from qualitative and quantitative research conducted on public attitudes to emergency preparedness.

1.1 Background

In January 2019, Federal, Provincial and Territorial (FPT) Ministers Responsible for Emergency Management approved The Emergency Management Strategy for Canada (EMS). The EMS established five priority areas for action in order to strengthen the resilience of Canadian society by 2030, including two areas to be supported by a national advertising campaign: improving understanding of disaster risks in all sectors of society, and increasing focus on whole-of-society disaster prevention and mitigation activities.

A key element in building a stronger, more resilient Canada is empowering citizens to educate themselves and to take action to mitigate risks to their property and personal safety. A national advertising campaign will seek to educate and inform a broad swath of Canadians about the risks they could potentially face in their region. The national campaign will feature the relaunch of the successful Get Prepared campaign (2006) and allow for a refresh of the brand and its existing assets, for a new cohort of parents and homeowners.

In support of this advertising campaign, Public Safety Canada commissioned a program of public opinion research comprising qualitative research, a quantitative baseline survey and ACET pre-post campaign online surveys.

1.2 Research Objectives

The objectives by methodology have been outlined in the table below.

Methodology	Objectives
Qualitative research	·         Qualitatively evaluate three concepts developed for the forthcoming emergency preparedness campaign
Quantitative baseline survey	·         Establish a quantitative baseline of the state of public opinion on the issue of emergency preparedness including awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours when it comes to emergency preparedness
ACET pre-post campaign online surveys	·         Provide data to evaluate the effectiveness of the emergency preparedness campaign

1.3 Methodology

1.3.1 Qualitative Research

Three created concepts were developed – namely, ‘Jumping into Action’; ‘Prepared not Scared’; and ‘Walking Disaster’. The concepts were tested in 10 online focus group discussions held between December 8th – 16th, 2020. As shown in the table below, the research elicited views of Canadians from across the country and in both official languages. Canadians aged 25 to 55 years old and parents of children under 17 were classified as low risk. The high-risk category included seniors; persons with a disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income Canadians; persons with lower levels of educational attainment; women-only households; newcomers; and cultural minorities. A copy of the recruitment screener has been appended.  

Group number	Province	Level of risk	Language	Number of participants
1	Ontario	Low	English	6
2	Ontario	High	English	8
3	Quebec	Low	French	8
4	Quebec	High	French	8
5	Atlantic Canada	Low	English	7
6	Atlantic Canada	High	English	8
7	Alberta	Low	English	7
8	Alberta	High	English	7
9	British Columbia	Low	English	6
10	British Columbia	High	English	7

The discussions were hosted virtually and each discussion lasted 90 minutes. During the discussions, participants were shown the concepts in video animatic format and asked to provide their reactions by typing in their answers, taking part in a verbal discussion and ‘voting’ in closed-ended questions. A copy of the discussion guide has been appended. An incentive of $100 was offered for participation in the study.

The findings presented in section 2 of this report are qualitative in nature meaning that their value is in understanding the factors and interplay between factors behind attitudes and reactions to the concepts. Counts from the closed-ended questions used in the discussions to gauge participants’ reactions to the concepts have been included. These counts should be interpreted as a summary of the weight of opinion in the discussions only and should not be extrapolated as representative of the wider population.

1.3.2         Quantitative Baseline Survey

A representative sample of n=2,022 Canadians age 25-55 was surveyed online between December 16-30, 2020.  The natural fallout by age and parents/non-parents allowed for a relatively large sample of parents with children age 5-18, which is intended to be a focus of the future preparedness campaign, to be included in the sample (n=580).  Over-sampling was also used to ensure a minimum of n=100 of each of the following groups were included in the sample: Indigenous Canadians (n=164), immigrants <10 years in Canada (n=124), and immigrants 10+ in Canada (n=234).

The survey was offered in both official languages and averaged 18 minutes in length.

More details on the methodology are provided in Appendix B.1.

Notes to reader:

·         The term Canadian is used throughout the report to denote survey respondents.

·         All results in the report are expressed as a percentage, unless otherwise noted.

·         Throughout the report, percentages may not always add to 100% due to rounding or if respondents were permitted to give more than one response i.e. select all that apply.

·         Due to rounding, some percentages in the report may not match those presented in the tabulated data (available under separate cover).

·         Unless otherwise stated, base sizes shown in the tables embedded in the report are weighted.

 

1.4 Key Findings

This report presents the findings from the qualitative research and the quantitative baseline survey only.

1.4.1 Qualitative research

·         ‘Jumping into Action’ performed the strongest of the three concepts tested due to the concept’s straight-to-the-point nature first and foremost, followed by its instructional and aspirational qualities.

·         There was broad consensus that ‘Prepared not Scared’ has potential in “getting stuck in one’s head” but it had a more polarising effect. On the one hand, participants could see how the “catchy” and “cheesy” “jingle” could become an earworm. However, the concept came across as “childish” and this was very off putting for a few participants.

·         ‘A Walking Disaster’ emerged as the weakest concept across the board with several participants finding it confusing upon initial viewing. The analogy drawn between a natural disaster and an unwelcome guest did not come through clearly and often enough.

1.4.2      Quantitative Baseline Survey

·         Most Canadians (74%) believe they live in a low- (53%) or moderate-risk (22%) area. Two in ten (21%) don’t know about the specific level of risk (12%) or have never thought about it (9%).  Only 4% of Canadians believe they live in an area that is at high risk.

·         Most Canadians (76%) are unconcerned (29%) or unaware (47%) of specific risks of weather-related emergencies and natural disasters.  Only one in ten Canadians (11%) have taken steps to reduce the risk of their home being affected by a weather-related emergency or natural disaster such as flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold. This includes only 2% that have also taken steps to help their community. 

·         Past experience with natural disaster, or living in a moderate to high-risk area, has little bearing on future preparedness. The survey found that past natural disaster experience does not strongly influence future preparedness. While Canadians who have experienced a natural disaster in the past are more likely to be aware of the risks to their community, and are more likely to have taken steps to protect themselves than the average Canadians, still only 20% say they have taken steps to protect themselves from future risk.  This is the case even though 41% of them say the previous event require repairs to their home and 84% did not move out of the area. 

·         Nearly all Canadians (98%) have at least some emergency safety items in the home, but very few (27%) report taking most or all of the necessary specific measures mentioned in the survey to protect their home.[1] One-quarter (23%) report taking some necessary measures and 50% report taking none of the necessary measures. 

·         Canadians are more likely to expect government to provide rescue services than financial support. Half of Canadians age 25-55 (51%) definitely think the government has an obligation to provide rescue services and an additional 41% say it depends on the type of event or emergency or the extent of the impact on their life.  Only 3% do not feel the government is obliged to provide rescue services in the event of an emergency.  In contrast, only 27% of Canadians age 25-55 definitely think the government has an obligation to provide financial aid to cover your immediate needs in an emergency.  However, depending upon the type of event or emergency or the extent of the impact on their life, a majority may expect financial support for government.

·         Half of Canadians (55%) say the experience of COVID-19 has affected the way they prepare for emergencies, including storing additional food and essential items (34%) and putting money, or more money, aside for unexpected expenses (29%).  The data suggests that those who say COVID-19 has affected their preparedness tend to be those who are already preparing (e.g. have an emergency plan 68% vs. 49%). 

·         There is little consensus for how long it is possible to survive at home during an emergency. A significant minority think they could last at least a week (39%) including 11% who think they can last 2 weeks and 15% who think they can last more than 2 weeks. 

·          When it comes to credible sources of information and resources on emergency preparedness, Canadians find all of the organizations measured in the survey credible.  Between them, more Canadians find local first responders very credible compared with the others, but credibility is high for each of the organizations measured as well:  federal, provincial and municipal levels of government.

 

 

2.    

3.   Detailed Qualitative Findings

2.1 ‘Jumping into Action’

‘Jumping into Action’ performed the strongest of the three concepts tested due to the concept’s straight-to-the-point nature first and foremost, followed by its instructional and aspirational qualities.

Participants across all groups gravitated to the simple (no guesswork required unlike ‘Walking Disaster’) and concise way (unlike the considerably lengthier ‘Prepared not Scared’) of delivering the main message of preparing for a natural disaster. This approach was deemed as appropriate given the topic and the fact that the government of Canada is the campaign sponsor, though it was acknowledged that such an approach runs the risk of the campaign being unmemorable.  

I thought this one was less childish and it was a lot more straightforward and direct, and it’s definitely something that I would expect of a government of Canada ad on TV. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Ce que j’ai aimé c’est qu’on nous montre quelques actions à prendre, justement, en cas de crise ou au cas où on doive effectuer le plan de prévention, donc avec des couvertes, les numéros à appeler en cas d’urgence, donc des actions qui sont vraiment plus concrètes que de chanter des chansons. – Participant in Québec, Low-Risk Group

The use of the emergency alert in the opening scene – combined with the thunder clapping – was on balance effective in drawing attention to the concept and a shorthand that the campaign relates to a natural disaster event. Still, it is worth noting that hearing the sound can be “anxiety inducing” and participants in Quebec pointed out that overuse could result in desensitization of the sound. On the topic of sounds still, the use of the “upbeat” music that reminded participants of the Mission Impossible/James Bond movies had the positive effect of capturing and holding the attention of participants.  

I agree with Cory that it does spark some anxiety however it got my attention right away so it might be the one out of the three that I might be inclined to watch and also, you know, it executed the issue and gave you a solution at the same time, so I would agree that it was the most effective of the three. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

I felt like the James Bond music was, it kind of drew me in, and I feel like for me, that alarm sound at the beginning, I don’t know why, but I automatically thought of an amber alert, when they send you those amber alerts on your phone or the radio. So, I feel like hearing that would make me focus on the TV, and make me focus on this ad. So, it grabbed my attention that way. – Participant in Ontario, Low-Risk Group

The check-list approach of showing all the items that could be part of an emergency preparedness kit was very well-received. It serves the function of both educating those who do not have one on what a kit comprises and a quick mental review for those who already have something in place.  For the former group, it was comforting to know that putting a kit together could be an affordable and manageable affair. It was suggested that more clarity could be provided on what is in the backpacks.

The whole idea of the emergency kit […] they didn’t go to a special closet and get a special kit per se, except for the backpack, they were able to pull stuff off their shelves, so it gave me more of a feeling that […] I would be more prepared just having my regular stuff and maybe adding a couple of things. More realistic especially on a budget. I know I can go out and buy a go-bag, but I don’t have the 300 dollars. But I can go get groceries and add more canned goods or extra batteries or extra toilet paper. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

Moreover, the family’s level of preparedness and calmness while they were gathering key items resulted in inspiring several participants to take action so they too can react in such manner in the event of an emergency. Related to this point, there was a feeling of “if they can do it, I can do it” that resulted from watching this concept. The overly happy facial expressions however were highlighted as unrealistic. There was some minor pushback on the concept from a handful of participants in the Ontario groups who felt that the family appeared to be somewhat OCD. All in all, this concept was successful in having participants reflect on their own level of preparedness.

I got that everybody had something to do. Each and every one of them had a plan. It looks like they actually sat down as a family, organized, that if something like this were to happen, some sort of an emergency, everybody knew their role. So, yes, it was very relevant to me, because I’ve never thought to do this with my family. – Participant in Ontario, High-Risk Group

I really liked how calm they were in that situation that I would be stressed out in. And they had something to do in that situation, like they went, they got their backpacks, they got their first aid kit, they got their emergency contacts […] So, seeing that plan work in action, like it actually does make a difference if you have those things, it makes me want to check the website and see what they recommend I have. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Maybe I’m dwelling too much on the graphics that were there, but all the people just like when the alarm or the alert went off, everybody just looked so happy. Like nobody looks even… and obviously I know the point is to not be stressed or super concerned, but like they seemed […] genuinely happy that this was happening. And everybody was kind of like, “La-di-da-da-da, everything’s fine”, and it didn’t seem real. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

The only other suggestion for optimising the concept related to the scene of the “mystery man” showing up at the family’s door with a package. This was very confusing, leaving one participant wondering: “Why is there a drug dealer mid commercial?”.

Recall of the website appeared to be slightly higher in this concept compared to the other two. This appeared to be aided by the clarity of the messaging from the get-go and the shorter length of the concept; in other words, participants were able to digest the call to action easier as they were not trying to link all the pieces together as in ‘Walking Disaster’ or turned off by the length or musical approach as in ‘Prepared not Scared’. There was strong interest in visiting the website to find out more but likelihood of clicking through immediately was tied to where they may encounter the concept. Unsurprisingly, seeing the concept online increases likelihood of clicking through than seeing the concept on TV.

I think that it was much more clear that if you have more questions to go to the be prepared website or whatever, that there would be more solutions or step by step guidelines for you there. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

J’ai bien aimé celle-là aussi, avec le site web à la fin, je pense que pour moi, ce genre d’annonce m’inciterait davantage à aller m’informer sur des actions concrètes à prendre, ne faut pas se limiter vraiment à l’annonce qui va chercher des batteries ou appeler telle place, on peut aller sur le site web pour aller lire tout ce qu’il y a à lire sur le sujet et être bien préparé, j’avais bien aimé ça aussi.  – Participant in Québec, Low-Risk Group

2.2 ‘Prepared not Scared’

There was broad consensus that ‘Prepared not Scared’ has potential in “getting stuck in one’s head” but it had a more polarising effect.

Participants could see how the “catchy” and “cheesy” “jingle” could become an earworm. Testament to this was the fact that younger participants pointed out that the concept reminded them of the ‘Don’t Put in in Your Mouth’ campaign from the nineties that they could still recall. The repetition of ‘be prepared not scared’ was effective in driving the message home. Meanwhile, the concept was very off putting for those who have a strong dislike of musicals.

I think it’s super catchy and […] it reminded [me] of the ‘Don’t Put in in Your Mouth’ song [I]  heard when […] now almost a 30-year-old, those songs are still with me in the front of my mind. […] because it’s so catchy it’s going to stick with people, and whether adults want it to or not.  […] if you do have a child in the house and they’re […] doing their own thing, singing it or humming it, […]. It’s going to stick, for sure.  – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

The fact that it was a little repetitious and being, you know, be prepared, be prepared, and so it’s like, “Am I prepared?”. No, I’m not prepared. Okay, what do I have to do to be prepared? So, the repetition of it really helps make you think about it, so even though it’s a little directed to children, it’s already stuck in my head. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

It’s too cutesy for me. It’s just a personal grievance I have with musicals my entire life, so that turned me right off, and something I wouldn't be interested in whatsoever. – Participant in Ontario, High-Risk Group

Ça m’a beaucoup plus parce que c’est la chanson, le rythme, il y a beaucoup de rythme dans la chanson, ça devient presqu’un ver d’oreille, c’est facile à retenir, en même temps c’est joyeux, la suite surtout, les dessins ce sera intéressant, mais déjà à la base c’est intéressant, la musique et la chanson.

The concept came across as “childish” and “juvenile”– although the main message was relevant to them, many did not feel that they were the target audience of the concept. On the one hand, this was a positive for some who could see opportunities to involve their children on the issue and / or they believed that children asking questions about things they have learnt can be a trigger for follow-up action by parents. On the flip side, the childish tone felt condescending or decreased the desire to take the message seriously.

It wasn’t fear mongering. It was light and upbeat. For kids to see something like that it would provoke them to ask questions of their parents which might cause the parents to go on the website and have that conversation with their kids. And with the songs in commercials getting stuck in your head, whether you want it or not. – Participant in Alberta, High-Risk Group

Oui, je trouve que la vidéo est trop infantilisante, on dirait que ça s’adresse aux enfants et pourtant, ça doit s’adresser à toute la population, je n’aurais pas d’intérêt à écouter la pub, je ne l’écouterais pas, je n’écouterais pas le message, je l’ai écouté et je n’ai pas d’intérêt sur ce message, le message ne va pas passer pour moi. – Participant in Québec, High-Risk Group

Ben, c’est une pub qui fait enfantin, infantilisant mais il y a comme une chanson qui peut peut-être nous rester dans la tête. –  Participant in Québec, Low-Risk Group

References to the concept’s play on the Simpson’s Monorail episode came up only a handful of times. Asked whether a more comedic or Family Guy/Simpsons approach could broaden the appeal of this concept, participants appeared mostly lukewarm with fans of such shows questioning whether it could be pulled off. The appropriateness of using a comedic tone given the devastating effects of a natural disaster was raised in one of the groups with Albertans; indeed, a participant from Fort McMurray stressed that such approach would be offensive.

The first half felt like the whole monorail thing from the Simpsons, so if they could pull it off it would be pretty grand, but they would have to be able to pull it off, I think if they fail people would remember how bad it is rather than this one genius commercial. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

The length of the concept was further raised as an issue which resulted in the main message getting somewhat lost by the end, despite having a strong opening of showing all the necessary items for getting prepared. The vocal and visual listing of items to consider as part of a preparedness plan was seen as a strength over ‘Jumping into Action’. Again, this allowed for some participants to mentally note what they are missing from their own kits.

Even if the ad ran like that, like with the little jingle, but then a summary at the end, like, “These are the four things you need to know” […] Because I felt like the last 20 seconds was kind of pointless in the ad. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Just as they were going through the ad and I was seeing the different things that they were suggesting with a nice little jingle, I thought, “Okay, we’ve got that and we’ve got that, but we don’t have this” […] It’s a good ad to get the point across. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

[…] c’est clair, on a les bonnes questions, avec la chanson, oui on rajoute un ton plus léger mais pour garder l’optique qui est la même d’avoir un plan d’urgence en cas d’intempéries ou de catastrophe […] Participant in Québec, High-Risk Group

Finally, the diversity of the characters depicted did not go unnoticed and highlighted as a plus by several participants.

2.3 ‘Walking Disaster’ 

‘A Walking Disaster’ emerged as the weakest concept across the board with several participants finding it confusing upon initial viewing.

The analogy drawn between a natural disaster and an unwelcome guest did not come through clearly and often enough. At best, some interpreted the unwelcome guest as a personification of a natural disaster and saw the humour in this. This in turn led to calls for using an animal or monster instead of a person in a suit in order for this to message come through more explicitly.

Well not so much funny but putting it as someone shows up on your door unannounced and you're not prepared for it, just like you're not prepared for a tree to fall through your window. I guess it got the point across that way which is why I liked it. Yeah, like the humour of the analogy behind it, I guess. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

I do agree that a guy showing up in a suit isn’t going to be what disaster would look like for me. Like he needs to be a little bit disheveled, at least. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

For others, this concept reminded them of an insurance commercial and this was in part a function of the type of damage depicted in the various scenes and the unwelcome guest being associated with an insurance company representative. This connection was a positive for a few participants who were reminded of the Allstate insurance commercials which feature the Mayhem character – it made them “chuckle”. In most cases the connection to insurance resulted in negative associations of “being sold something”, lacks relevancy for non-homeowners and the main message of preparing for a natural disaster being somewhat lost. 

The ad reminds me of the mayhem ads that Allstate Insurance used, and I’ve always felt that they were very clever, so I found this one to be clever. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

I just feel that because they brought that guy to the door, […] he’s the sales rep. But if they’re trying to make you purchase water insurance, then I guess they’re doing a good job. – Participant in Ontario, High-Risk Group

I was leaning more towards like I’ve got to make sure I have flood insurance on my apartment, and less that I should get a safety kit. None of the situations are really something that a safety kit would be needed. Like now your floor’s wet, you’re going to have to get a maintenance man, you’re probably going to have to get a hotel to wait for that to be dried out, or now your window’s broken, you’re going to have to get that fixed. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Le petit clin d’œil, l’assurance du monsieur, comment il s’affiche dans la maison, il rentre, il est comme ‘bon, qu’est-ce qui s’est passé’ mais c’est lui la catastrophe, donc c’est comme si c’est le vendeur d’assurance qui apportait la catastrophe pour montrer aux gens ‘voilà, protégez-vous’ j’ai vraiment pris ça pour une pub d’assurance si je n’avais pas vu Services Canada à la fin. – Participant in Québec, High-Risk Group

Others still felt that the unwelcome guest was “creepy”, compounded by the guest winking. A few were reminded of “stranger danger” messaging, while several were simply at loss at the role of the guest.

This kind of made me uncomfortable like to open the door and the weird winking guy that I don’t know, like I was not for that at all. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

In terms of positives, the general lack of preparedness and discomfort of the family shown in the ad was seen as a truer reflection of some participants’ own reality. The concept however lacked “resolution” and guidance on what participants can do to avoid this situation beyond checking their insurance coverage.

After you realize this person was representing chaos, this mystery person, but the one thing that, it was simple to get I just don’t think there was any follow through. It made a lot of people feel unprepared but there was no resolution there. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

2.4 Information Needs

When asked what information should be provided on prepared.ca, participants’ suggestions covered the full spectrum of:

·         WHAT – checklist of the recommended items for “clarity’s sake” that could be tailored by household type; template print outs that could be used to check off items and compile emergency contacts; tips for how making a kit could be affordable  

·         WHY – frequency of natural disasters with ability to filter to their own geographical areas on the type of disasters and emergencies they should be preparing for; the financial implications of not preparing  

·         HOW LONG – to prepare for and how frequently they should be updating their kits 

If you make it super simple and really dumb it down for lack of a better word, you make it achievable for anybody. If it was like a printable list that you could have that you tick off that you have it, or even like an emergency plan that families could do to create like a safe spot they could go, or really build a plan together. And then even if there was another printout that had like emergency contacts, not everybody keeps the fire department number in their house or the police number, or even like ambulance. – Participant in Atlantic Canada, High-Risk Group

I think just overall information on natural disasters. What’s the disaster that affects the most people? How much does it cost in terms of financial issues? What are some of the regions that are affected the most by it? – Participant in Ontario, Low-Risk Group

Very regional, like where they live, and here‘s a list of potential disasters in your area and how to be prepared for them. Also, I think it would be really nice to know how frequently you have to check your go-bag or your equipment to make sure that it’s still good. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

How long should I… how long do I have to be prepared for on average, two weeks, two months, two days, you know? And then also how often should I be checking this kit to switch out things? – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Comme la plupart ont dit, quoi je dois avoir, la quantité, où dois-je me procurer la trousse, toutes les précisions, qu’est-ce que j’ai de besoin, si j’ai des réserves d’eau, comment je garde ça pour qu’elle reste potable, combien de temps pour que je change mon eau, etc etc . – Participant in Québec, High-Risk Group

2.5 Implications of the COVID-19 context 

The context of COVID-19 was referenced by a few participants and three key themes emerged. Firstly, the showcasing of toilet paper and other essentials in ‘Prepared not Scared’ led to a small number of participants recalling “hoarding” that took place towards the start of the pandemic. Some saw an opportunity to build on this to remind the public to not get caught out in the event of an emergency by not having essential supplies. Others meanwhile were uneasy about messaging that may encourage panic buying.

I just think that there's ways that they could just be able to show like, help us remember what we went through in the spring when everyone was panicking and grabbing like all the toilet paper off the shelf and how to be prepared to avoid those sort of situations. – Participant in Alberta, Low-Risk Group

Secondly, there was admission of preparation fatigue having set in due to oversaturation of instructions and “negative news” on how to protect oneself from the pandemic. Breaking through this noise would therefore be a challenge for this campaign.

I do think it’s a challenge, right, to get our attention when we’re so oversaturated already right now with negative news and, “Do this, do that” […] to protect ourselves and protect everybody […] like all these repetitive warnings all the time that I think it is a challenge for this commercial to really be effective. […] to sort of grab our attention in a way that we’ll actually take action when we feel like we’re taking so much action right now already. – Participant in BC, Low-Risk Group

Finally, the lack of adherence to public health guidelines in some of the concepts led to aggravation among a small number of participants in Quebec. This appeared to be partly a function of general dissatisfaction with the guidelines. Other participants in the same groups were more open to the fact that it is not necessary to acknowledge guidelines for a longer ‘shelf-life’ for the ad. This was a nonissue in the groups in the rest of the country. Our broader research has found that unless the messaging of a campaign is directly related to COVID-19 public health measures, there is little expectation for depicting masks, physical distancing etc. The public either assume it was filmed pre-pandemic or welcome the respite from the ‘new normal’.

2.5 Note on Subgroup Differences

On the whole, findings were broadly consistent across regions and high- vs. low-risk groups. The few notable nuances found were:

·         the type of natural disasters that came to mind varied by geography – e.g., flooding in the east coast vs. wildfires and earthquakes in the west coast

·         perceived personal risk of natural disasters, and by extension the personal relevancy of the campaign, tended to be driven by recall of recent events and a small number who lived in more urban areas admitted to feeling that the entire topic area was less relevant to them due to lack of recall

Obviously I’m biased being from Fort MacMurray. Emergency preparedness is something built into our culture. We’ve experienced multiple natural disasters in the past five years. The moment I hear the emergency alarm it’s gut wrenching, triggering for me. But it’s so important. You have to have an emergency bag. You have to know where the evacuation routes are. The ad is really important. – Participant in Alberta, High-Risk Group

2.6 Counts on Sentiment Check Questions

Counts from the closed-ended questions used in the discussions to gauge participants’ reactions to the concepts have been provided below. These counts should be interpreted as a summary of the weight of opinion in the discussions only and should not be extrapolated as representative of the wider population.

Ratings on overall reaction to each concept

Concept	Liked	Neutral	Disliked
Walking Disaster	26	17	26
Prepared not Scared	38	10	21
Jumping into Action	51	13	7

*Figures do not always add up to the same base size due to missing data

Final ballot questions

Concept	Most engaging	Most likely to look for info	Most likely to build a kit
Walking Disaster	7	5	3
Prepared not Scared	27	22	29
Jumping into Action	35	42	37

*Figures do not always add up to the same base size due to missing data

4.    

5.   Detailed Quantitative Baseline Survey Findings

3.1. Current level of emergency preparedness

Most Canadians believe they live in a low- or moderate-risk area

Half of Canadians (53%) believe they live in a low-risk area for a weather-related emergency or natural disaster and 22% believe they live in a moderate-risk area.  Two in ten (21%) don’t know about the specific level of risk (12%) or have never thought about it (9%).  Only 4% of Canadians believe they live in an area that is at high risk.

Quebec and Ontario residents are least likely to believe they live in a high- or even moderate-risk area.   There is a more mixed opinion among those living in rural areas.  Rural residents are disproportionately more likely to believe they live in a moderate-risk area (31%), compared to low-risk. However, these residents are also more likely to say they have never thought about it (16%).

Perception of the level of risk to the area

	Total	BC/ Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL
Base: All respondents	2022	265	255	125	780	473	123
I believe that I am in a high-risk area	4%	7%	5%	4%	3%	3%	7%
I believe that I am in a moderate-risk area	22%	32%	25%	37%	19%	15%	28%
I believe that I am in a low-risk area	53%	50%	53%	41%	54%	58%	46%
I have no specific knowledge about my level of risk	12%	7%	9%	7%	14%	13%	8%
I have never thought about it	9%	5%	8%	10%	10%	11%	12%

q18. To the best of your knowledge, do you believe that you live in an area that is at risk in terms of a [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17] weather-related emergency such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.) / natural disaster such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)?

 

Most Canadians are unconcerned or unaware of the potential risks of weather-related emergencies and natural disasters.

Only one in ten Canadians (11%) have taken steps to reduce the risk of their home being affected by a weather-related emergency or natural disaster such as flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, or extreme cold. This includes only 2% that have also taken steps to help their community.  The vast majority of Canadians are either unaware of the specific risks to their community (47%) or not concerned about them (29%).

There are no notable differences in preparedness attitudes and behaviour when the wording of the question refers to “weather-related emergencies” versus “natural disasters”.[2] Public Safety Canada can feel comfortable using either term to refer to floods, wildfires, tornados, hurricanes, ice storms, blizzards, or extreme cold in emergency preparedness communications.

 

 

Awareness and preparedness for emergencies

	Total	Weather-related emergencies	Natural disasters
Base:  All respondents	2022	1011	1011
I'm not aware of any specific risks to my community	47%	47%	48%
I'm aware of specific risks to my community, but not concerned	29%	30%	29%
I'm concerned about specific risks, but haven't taken steps to reduce the risk	12%	12%	13%
I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected	9%	9%	9%
I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected, AND helped others in my community do the same	2%	2%	2%

q17. Which of the following best reflects your view of the possibility of your community being affected by a [split sample: half of respondents will be shown: weather-related emergency such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.) / other half will be shown: natural disaster such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)?

Differences by sub-groups:

·         Younger Canadians are most likely to admit they are unaware of specific risks to their community (52% of those 25-34, 46% of those 35-44 and 44% of those 45-55).

·         Regionally,  Atlantic Canadians are more prepared than others across Canada, but still very few are prepared –only 19% have taken steps to reduce the risk that their home will be affected vs. only 4% of Quebec residents, 9% in Ontario and Alberta respectively, 11% in MB/SK and 13% in BC/Territories). Ontario and Quebec residents are the least aware of specific risks to their community (55% and 51% not aware respectively vs. 32% in BC/Territories, 30% in MB/SK, 42% in Alberta and 45% in Atlantic Canada.

·         Similarly, small populations and residents of rural areas are more prepared than those living in larger centers, but still very few are prepared (14% of those in rural areas with populations of less than 1,000, 13% of those in small population centres with a population of 1,000 to 29,999 vs. 7% of those in medium population centres with a population of 30,000 to 99,999, 9% of those in large urban centres with populations of 100,000-999,999 and 8% of those in metropolitan areas of 1,000,000 inhabitants or more). Furthermore, those in metropolitan and large areas demonstrate the lowest awareness (50% and 49% not aware respectively).

·         Those who believe they live in a flood plain are nearly 3 times more likely to have taken steps to prepare for an emergency than those who do not live in flood plain (28% vs. 10%) and are more likely to be concerned about specific risks (21% vs. 11%).  

·         Interestingly, the influence of living near a forested area is not as strong an influence on taking actions as living near a flood plain (14% who say they live near a forested area have taken steps vs. 7% of others).

·         Indigenous Canadians are more concerned than others (20% vs. 12%), but no more likely to have taken steps to prepare.

·         The least affluent households (<$40,000 in annual household income) are the least aware of specific risks (53% vs. 46% of those in households with annual incomes between $40,000 and <$150,000 vs. 44% of those in households with an annual income of $150,000 or more). 

·         Homeowners are twice as likely as renters to have taken steps to prepare (11% vs. 5%), but once again, both are quite low.

·         Parents of children ages 5-18 are slightly more likely than others to be aware of the risks to their community (43% unaware, vs. 49% unaware among others), but no more likely to have taken steps to prepare (12% vs. 11% respectively) or be concerned about specific risks (13% vs. 12%).

Past experience with a natural disaster and living in a moderate- to high-risk area have little bearing on future preparedness

The survey also found that experience with a natural disaster in the past does not appear to strongly influence future preparedness. While this group is much more likely to be aware of the risks to their community, and more likely to have taken steps to protect themselves than the average Canadian, still only 20% say they have taken steps to protect themselves from future risk.  This is the case even though 41% of them say the previous natural disaster required them to make repairs to their home and 84% did not move out of the area. 

On a related note, even those who have considered natural hazards (proximity to flooding areas, forest fire risk etc.) prior to purchasing or renting their residence are not more likely to say they have taken steps to prepare for an emergency (20%).

Surprisingly, even among the 4% Canadians who believe they live in a high-risk area, only 29% say they have taken steps to protect their home.  Among the 22% who believe they live in a moderate-risk area, only 22% have taken steps.

Awareness and preparedness for emergencies by experience with a past natural disaster

	Total	Affected by a past natural disaster	Not affected in the past
Base: All respondents	2022	359	1663
I'm not aware of any specific risks to my community	47%	30%	51%
I'm aware of specific risks to my community, but not concerned	29%	34%	28%
I'm concerned about specific risks, but haven't taken steps to reduce the risk	12%	16%	11%
I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected	9%	18%	7%
I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected, AND helped others in my community do the same	2%	2%	2%

q17. Which of the following best reflects your view of the possibility of your community being affected by a [split sample: half of respondents will be shown: weather-related emergency such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.) / other half will be shown: natural disaster such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)?

 

Half of Canadians have not taken any recommended measures to protect themselves

Very few Canadians (27%) report having taken most or all of the necessary specific measures mentioned in the survey to protect their home.[3] A quarter (23%) report taking some necessary measures and 50% report taking no measures.  As noted in the table below, Canadians that have experienced their home being affected by a natural disaster in the past are more likely to report taking these types of measures to protect their household (67% vs. 46%).  However, still only 23% of them say they have taken all of the necessary measures required for their household. 

Incidence of taking necessary measures to protect household

	Total	Affected by a past natural disaster	Not affected in the past	Aware of ‘Get Prepared’ website	Not aware of ‘Get Prepared’ website	Have children age 5-18	Not children age 5-18
Base: Valid respondents		318	1494	315	1372	503	1310
Yes (net)	50%	67%	46%	71%	45%	62%	45%
Yes, I have taken all of the necessary measures required for my household	12%	23%	9%	25%	9%	15%	10%
Yes, I have taken most of the necessary measures required for my household	15%	19%	14%	22%	14%	19%	13%
Yes, I have taken some of the necessary measures required for my household	23%	25%	23%	24%	23%	28%	21%
No, I have not taken any measures	50%	33%	54%	29%	55%	38%	55%

q19. Have you taken measures, such as the ones listed below, to protect yourself against potential [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17] weather-related emergency or natural disaster, such as….]?

Differences by other sub-groups (more likely to have taken at least some measures):

·          Those living near a flood-prone area (70%)

·          Those with pets (55%)

·          Those who are a caregiver to an elderly dependent (62%)

·          Those living close to a forested area (58%)

·          Those aware of the ‘Get Prepared’ website (71%)

·          Parents with children age 5-18 (62%)

 

Relatively few Canadians have an emergency plan and necessary supplies, even though most agree it is irresponsible not to have supplies ready

Most Canadians (85%) agree that it is irresponsible not to have emergency safety items ready at all times, including 28% who strongly agree.  Interestingly, the survey suggests there is a link between agreeing it is irresponsible to not have emergency safety items ready at all times and taking steps to prepare such as having a household emergency plan, taking specific measures, perception of the degree of risk to your community and perception of the actual level of risk the community faces .  That said, none of the correlations are overly strong.

Correlation with believing it is irresponsible not to have emergency safety items ready at all times

	Correlation Coefficient*
Have taken measures, such as the ones listed below, to protect yourself (Q19)	.227
Have a household emergency plan (Q20)	.209
View of the possibility of your community being affected by an emergency (Q17)	-.160**
You live in an area that is at risk in terms of an… emergency low to high (Q18)	.142
Have experienced a natural disaster in the past (Q31)	.110

*Correlation coefficient measures the strength of the relationship between two variables. It is a measure between 0 and 1.  The closer to 1, the stronger the correlation.  ** inverse correlation – those who have taken steps to reduce the risk to their home are more likely to agree it is irresponsible not to have emergency safety items, those who have unaware or unconcerned are more likely to disagree.

 

Only three in ten (29%) Canadians age 25-55 have a household emergency plan.  The incidence is higher among Indigenous Canadians (43%), those affected by a past disaster (39%) and those aware of the ‘Get Prepared’ website (56%).

Incidence of emergency plans

	Total	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous	Affected by a past natural disaster	Not affected in the past	Aware of ‘Get Prepared’ website	Not aware of ‘Get Prepared’ website
Base: All respondents	2022	161	1845	359	1663	345	1540
Yes	29%	43%	27%	39%	27%	56%	23%
No	66%	55%	67%	55%	68%	40%	73%
Don't know	5%	2%	6%	6%	5%	4%	5%

q20. Do you have a household emergency plan? (Emergency plans may include an emergency exit/evacuation plan, photocopies/electronic copies of important documents, and/or a list of emergency contact numbers)

Although many do not have an emergency plan, nearly all (98%) have at least some emergency safety items in the home.  Most have the following items prepared for emergency: flashlight (87%), face mask (82%), matches/lighter (80%), food (80%), hand sanitizer (79%), blankets (76%), water (73%) and first aid materials (70%). Only two in ten have a battery-operated wind transistor, wind up radio (18%), alternate heat source (18%), alternate power source/generator (16%), alternate water sources (8%), or water tablets (7%).

Notably, immigrants to Canada, particularly those that immigrated within the past 10 years, are less likely than others to have many of these items prepared. For example, fewer have first aid materials, a flashlight, matches or a lighter, water, blankets and a battery-operated wind transistor, or wind up radio.

Incidence of emergency items ready at home

	Total	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada
Base: All respondents	2022	133	228	1661
First aid materials	71%	63%	64%	72%
Flashlight	87%	69%	80%	89%
Matches or a lighter	80%	64%	73%	83%
Food	80%	75%	77%	80%
Water	73%	67%	74%	74%
Water tablets	7%	8%	7%	7%
Blankets	76%	67%	71%	78%
SOS signs	5%	4%	4%	5%
Alternate power source or generator	16%	13%	11%	16%
Alternate water source	8%	7%	4%	9%
Battery-operated wind transistor, or wind up radio	18%	10%	15%	19%
Alternate heat source	18%	12%	10%	19%
Hand sanitizer	79%	79%	80%	79%
Face mask	82%	81%	82%	83%
None of these	2%	4%	2%	2%

q21. Do you own any of the following emergency safety items?

While most Canadians age 25-55 have a smoke detector in their home (95%), fewer (61%) have a carbon monoxide detector and not even as many (57%) have a fire extinguisher. Only 7% have an automatic fire suppression.  Similar to emergency materials, immigrants are less likely to have a carbon monoxide detector and fire extinguisher in their home.

Incidence of fire safety devices at home

	Total	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada
Base: All respondents	2022	133	228	1661
Smoke detector	95%	87%	91%	96%
Carbon monoxide detector	61%	54%	58%	62%
Fire extinguisher	57%	38%	43%	60%
Automatic fire suppression (ceiling-mounted water sprinklers /sprinkler system)	7%	14%	6%	7%
None	2%	5%	5%	1%

q22. Do you have the following fire safety devices in your home?

Fire detection device preparedness – differences by sub-groups

The incidence of carbon monoxide detectors and fire extinguishers in the home is lower among:

·         Younger Canadians aged 25-34 (57% and 50% respectively)

·         Less affluent households (<$40,000: 47% and 44%; $40,000-<$80,000: 53% and 51%)

·         Those living in larger communities (47% of those living in a major metropolitan area have a carbon monoxide detector)

·         Renters (46% and 40%)

·         Households without children (57% and 55%)

·         Households where the primary language spoken is neither English nor French (41% report having fire extinguishers)

·         Households where the primary language spoken is French (38% have a carbon monoxide detector) and those living in Quebec (36% report having a carbon monoxide detector)

·         Households with fewer people (46% of single-person households report having a carbon monoxide and fire extinguisher respectively)

Emergency contacts

In case of emergency, half (51%) of Canadians age 25-54 have identified a family member, a neighbour, or someone from the community to bring them supplies, bring them medication, or provide an alternative place to stay.  However, this is much higher among those with a household emergency plan (71%), and those aware of the ‘Get Prepared’ website (66%).

3.2  Expectations of government

Canadians are more likely to expect government to provide rescue services than financial support

Half of Canadians age 25-55 (51%) definitely think the government has an obligation to provide rescue services and an additional 41% say it depends on the type of event or emergency or the extent of the impact on their life.  Only 3% do not feel the government is obliged to provide rescue services in the event of an emergency.  Those who have immigrated to Canada are more likely to say the government has an obligation for rescue services than those born in Canada.

Perceived obligations for government to provide rescue services

	Total	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous
Base: All respondents	2022	133	228	1661	161	1845
Yes, definitely	51%	59%	57%	49%	52%	50%
It depends upon the type of event or emergency	31%	23%	23%	32%	31%	31%
It depends upon the extent of the impact on my life	10%	10%	11%	10%	9%	10%
No, it is my responsibility to have insurance and be prepared for these types of events or emergencies	3%	1%	4%	3%	4%	3%
Don't know	6%	8%	6%	5%	3%	6%

q26_2. [rescue services to get you out of an emergency] In the event of [keep same split sample groups from Q17: natural disaster/weather-related emergencies], do you believe that the government has an obligation to provide you with the following types of response support?

 

 

One-third of Canadians (35%) have taken a first aid course or CPR class.  Those under age 45 are more likely than those 45-55.  Those living in Alberta and Atlantic Canada report higher incidence of first aid/CPR training.

Incidence of taking a first aid course or CPR class

	Total	25-34	35-44	45-55	BC/Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL
Base: All respondents	2022	638	618	766	265	255	125	780	473	123
Yes	35%	39%	36%	30%	36%	42%	38%	33%	30%	44%
No	65%	61%	64%	70%	64%	58%	62%	67%	70%	56%

q35. Have you taken a first aid course or a CPR class within the last 5 years?

 

Six in ten Canadians report having medical insurance or coverage for short- and/or long-term injuries or disability, 31% do not have this coverage and 6% are unsure. Coverage is more common as Canadians get older, rising from about half (56%) among those 25-34 to 67% among those 45-55. Immigrants are less likely to have coverage (including those who immigrated more than 10 years ago). There is a direct correlation with household income – only 28% of households earning <$40,000 have medical coverage. This figure rises to 86% among those earning $150,000 or more.

Incidence of medical coverage

	Total	25-34	35-44	45-55	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada
Base: All respondents	2022	638	618	766	133	228	1661
Yes	63%	56%	64%	67%	59%	53%	64%
No	31%	36%	31%	27%	37%	41%	29%
Don't know	6%	8%	5%	6%	4%	6%	6%

q28. Do you have medical insurance or coverage for short- and/or long-term injuries or disability?

In contrast to rescue services (where 51% perceived government obligation), only 27% of Canadians age 25-55 definitely think the government has an obligation to provide financial aid to cover your immediate needs in an emergency.  However, depending upon the type of event or emergency or the extent of the impact on their life, a majority may expect financial support for government.  Only 10% feel that the government does not have an obligation and that it is their responsibility to have insurance and be prepared, and 6% are unsure.  

·         Those who have immigrated to Canada, particularly within the last 10 years are more likely to say the government has an obligation for financial support than those born in Canada.

·         Indigenous Canadians are also more likely to say the government has an obligation for financial support.

 

Perceived obligations by government to provide financial support

	Total	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous
Base: All respondents	2022	133	228	1661	161	1845
Yes, definitely	27%	38%	32%	26%	44%	26%
It depends upon the type of event or emergency	42%	37%	32%	43%	31%	42%
It depends upon the extent of the impact on my life	15%	14%	20%	14%	12%	15%
No, it is my responsibility to have insurance and be prepared for these types of events or emergencies	10%	3%	10%	11%	8%	11%
Don't know	6%	8%	6%	6%	5%	6%

q26_1. [Financial aid to cover your immediate needs during an emergency] In the event of [keep same split sample groups from Q17: natural disaster/weather-related emergencies], do you believe that the government has an obligation to provide you with the following types of response support?

 

Canadians are more likely to expect government to provide rescue services than financial support

Two-thirds of Canadians aged 25-55 feel they could be able to pay for unexpected emergency expenses of about $1,000. However, a significant minority would have to consider borrowing money or simply don’t know how they would cover this expense. 

Indigenous Canadians are more likely to struggle to cover this unexpected expense and there is a direct correlation to household income with only 39% of households earning <$40,000 indicating they could pay $1,000 out of pocket for unexpected emergency expenses. Persons with a disability are also least likely to say they could readily cover $1,000 unexpectedly (45%).

 

 

 

 

Ability to pay for unexpected emergency expenses

	Total	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous	Household income <$40K	Household income $40K-<$80K	Household income $80K-<$150K	Household income $150K+
Base: All respondents	2022	161	1845	364	511	664	226
Yes, I would pay with my own readily accessible money	64%	42%	66%	39%	60%	74%	87%
Somehow, I would have to borrow, and I do have access to the necessary credit	22%	28%	22%	24%	25%	22%	15%
Not really, I would have to borrow money but don't have access to credit	8%	16%	7%	16%	9%	4%	1%
I don't know how if I would find $1000 for this purpose	10%	20%	9%	24%	9%	3%	1%

q27. If you had to relocate temporarily during a weather-related emergency or a natural disaster that cost you about $1,000 of unexpected expenses,                              would you be able to pay for these expenses without significant hardship?

 

3.3 Covid-19 and emergency preparedness

The pandemic has motivated half of Canadians to be better prepared for emergencies.

Half of Canadians (55%) say the experience of COVID-19 has affected the way they prepare for emergencies, this includes storing additional food and essential items (34%) and putting money, or more money, aside for unexpected expenses (29%).  Only ten percent have spoken with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies and nearly as many (7%) have created a tangible plan with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies.  Nearly half (45%) say the pandemic has not affected their planning.

The data suggests that those who say COVID-19 has affected their preparedness tend to be those who are already preparing (e.g. have an emergency plan 68% vs. 49% no emergency plan).  

Impact of COVID-19 on preparedness

	Total	Have an emergency plan	No emergency plan	Affected by a past natural disaster	Not affected in the past	Aware of ‘Get Prepared’ website	Not aware of  ‘Get Prepared’ website
Base: All respondents	2022	584	1329	359	1663	345	1540
Yes, I am now putting money, or more money, aside for unexpected expenses	29%	39%	25%	33%	29%	44%	26%
Yes, I am now storing additional food and essential items	34%	43%	30%	42%	32%	47%	32%
Yes, I have spoken with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies	10%	18%	7%	20%	8%	22%	8%
Yes, I have created a tangible plan with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies	7%	13%	4%	11%	6%	11%	5%
I have registered as a volunteer for my community in case of an emergency	1%	2%	0	2%	1%	3%	0
No	45%	32%	51%	30%	48%	24%	50%

q29. Has the current Covid-19 pandemic affected the way that you prepare for emergencies?

 

Conversely, while 28% of Canadians 25-55 say COVID-19 did not impact their preparedness for future emergencies because they are already well prepared – most unaffected by COVID-19 are simply not worried about emergencies and will make due when the time comes (32%) or simply haven’t gotten around to making plans (18%).  In fact, only 13% of Canadians say COVID-19 did not influence their preparations for an emergency because they don’t have extra money, space to stockpile emergency items, enough money to stockpile food or don’t have a support system to call upon in an emergency. Women are more likely than men to say they don’t have extra money available to put away (27% vs. 19%).

Reasons for not becoming more prepared

	Total	Have a disability	Do not have a disability	Have an emergency preparedness plan	Do not have an emergency plan
Base: Pandemic has not affected the way you prepare for emergencies	913	126	768	185	682
I don't have any extra money available to put into an emergency savings plan	23%	39%	20%	15%	26%
I don't have the space to stockpile emergency items	17%	24%	15%	12%	17%
I don't have enough money to stockpile food	16%	37%	12%	10%	18%
I don't have a support system to call upon in an emergency	13%	27%	10%	7%	15%
I haven't given it much thought yet, but plan to	18%	14%	19%	9%	20%
I am not worried about emergencies; I will make do when the time comes	32%	21%	34%	16%	37%
I was already very prepared for emergencies	28%	29%	29%	65%	19%

q30. You indicated that the pandemic has not affected the way you prepare for emergencies. Which of the following best describes why this is the case?

Younger Canadians (25-34) are more inclined to say the pandemic has affected their preparedness for future emergencies. Regionally, there are not major differences, however, Ontarians are slightly more inclined to say their approach to emergency preparedness has been affected COVID-19 than those in Quebec and Manitoba/Saskatchewan.

Impact of pandemic of preparedness by age and region

	Total	25-34	35-44	45-55	BC/ Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL
Base: All respondents	2022	638	618	766	265	255	125	780	473	123
Yes, I am now putting money, or more money, aside for unexpected expenses	29%	36%	28%	25%	28%	29%	18%	34%	27%	26%
Yes, I am now storing additional food and essential items	34%	35%	33%	35%	34%	35%	27%	37%	30%	38%
Yes, I have spoken with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies	10%	10%	11%	11%	10%	13%	8%	12%	8%	7%
Yes, I have created a tangible plan with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies	7%	7%	6%	7%	6%	5%	7%	7%	6%	5%
I have registered as a volunteer for my community in case of an emergency	1%	1%	1%	1%	1%	2%	2%	1%	0	-
No	45%	40%	47%	47%	49%	45%	55%	40%	50%	44%

q29. Has the current Covid-19 pandemic affected the way that you prepare for emergencies? Note: response under 1% not shown.

 

3.4 Adaptative capacity after experiencing a natural disaster

In total, 18% of Canadians ages 25-55 report being affected by a natural disaster or weather-related emergency (or both) in Canada either personally or their home.  Persons with a disability are likely to have had experienced such an event, particularly a personal one than those that do not have a disability.

Incidence of previous experience with an emergency

	Total	Have a disability	No disability	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous
Base: All respondents	2022	277	1701	161	1845
Yes, I have been personally affected	12%	24%	10%	23%	11%
Yes, my home has been affected	9%	13%	8%	18%	8%
No	82%	68%	84%	65%	84%

q31. Have you/, or has your primary residence ever been affected by a natural disaster or weather-related emergency in Canada?                                                                 (i.e. flood, wildfire, earthquake)

 

A strong minority of Canadians whose primary residence was affected by a natural disaster made repairs to them home afterward (41%).   The incidence of making repairs is higher among owners than renters and higher among those with children in the household than without (52% vs. 34%).

Incidence of making repairs after a natural disaster

	Total	Own a home	Rent	Have children at home	No children at home
Base: Primary residence affected by a natural disaster	359	239	120	145	214
Yes	41%	46%	32%	52%	34%
No	59%	54%	68%	48%	66%

q31a. Did you have to make any repairs to your home as a result of a natural disaster?

Fifteen percent of Canadians 25-55 have made additional changes to their home since the natural disaster.  And only 3% changed their residence permanently after the disaster.  The most common reason for not making additional changes to further protect the home or moving out of the home is that these Canadians are not worried about another natural disaster occurring.  This is more common in Quebec.  There are several other reasons that include a lack of finances to move or make additional changes to the home, lack of time or lack of knowledge in how to protect the home any better (12% of those who have faced damage to their home due to a natural disaster).

Reasons for not repairing or moving after a natural disaster

	Total	BC/ Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada
Base: Did not repair home or move to another location due to natural disaster	1696	228	217	105	648	401	98*	103*	194	1400
I'm not worried about another natural disaster	46%	39%	44%	44%	44%	53%	43%	31%	49%	46%
I wanted to stay in my home, even if I don't feel safe from another natural disaster	7%	7%	7%	10%	7%	8%	5%	16%	10%	6%
I didn't know how to better protect my home	12%	15%	14%	13%	14%	7%	8%	23%	11%	11%
I didn't have the financial resources to better protect to my home	12%	16%	14%	16%	12%	9%	17%	17%	13%	12%
I didn't have the financial resources to move	12%	15%	9%	13%	13%	8%	17%	10%	7%	12%
I didn't have the time to think about how to better protect my home	11%	8%	9%	8%	11%	15%	4%	19%	14%	10%
Other	22%	26%	22%	23%	23%	17%	23%	16%	16%	23%

q32. Why did you decide to stay in your home without making any additional changes ...?

 

3.5 Willingness to become prepared

There is little consensus for how long it is possible to survive at home during an emergency, mixed interest in purchasing a basic emergency kit

There is little consensus among Canadians when it comes to how long they think they could survive in their home should an emergency occur that prevents them from accessing anything outside of their home.  A significant minority think they could last at least a week (39%) including 11% who think they can last 2 weeks and 15% who think they can last more than 2 weeks.  At the other end, two in ten think they could last only 3 days and as many say 3-5 days.  One in ten say 5-7 days.  There is little difference of opinion across the country, although a disproportionately higher percentage (28%) of those in Saskatchewan or Manitoba say they might only last up to 3 days.

Estimated survival time at home during an emergency

	Total	BC/Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL
Base: All respondents	2022	265	255	125	780	473	123
1 to < 3 days	18%	16%	17%	28%	18%	17%	17%
3 to < 5 days	22%	26%	20%	22%	22%	21%	20%
5 to < 7 days	13%	13%	16%	9%	14%	11%	20%
1 week	13%	12%	15%	13%	14%	10%	14%
2 weeks	11%	13%	8%	9%	11%	11%	7%
More than 2 weeks	15%	15%	17%	9%	12%	19%	14%
Don't know	8%	5%	7%	11%	9%	10%	6%

q24. How long do you think that you could survive in your home should an emergency occur that prevents you from accessing anything outside of your home? (Assume that this takes place during the winter months and that you have lost power)

Canadians who have a household emergency plan are twice as likely to say that could last 2 week or more than those without such a plan (20% vs. 13%).  However, despite having a plan, nearly half do not believe they could last for a week (47%).

Six in ten Canadians (59%) say that would ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ invest in a basic emergency kit is available for about $100.  Only 8% say they would ‘definitely not’ buy such a kit either because they don’t need one, don’t think it would be worth the cost or doubt they can buy one for $100.  There are some Canadians who would prefer to make their own (15%) and of course some already have one (5%).

Differences by sub-group:

·         Parents of children ages 5-18 are more likely that others to invest in a kit (65% including 31% who say they would ‘definitely’ buy one), as are households with any children (31% definitely)

·         Immigrants to Canada within the last 10 years are also more likely to invest in a kit (77% including 32% who say they would ‘definitely’ buy one)

·         Indigenous Canada are more likely to say they would ‘definitely’ buy one (34%)

·         More affluent Canadians are more likely to they would ‘definitely’ buy one (14% of those earning <$40,000, 23% of those earning $40,000 < $80,000, 27% of those earning $80,000-<$150,000 and 31% of those earning $150,000+

Willingness to invest in a basic emergency kit (if available for about $100)

	Total	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada	Indigenous	Non-Indigenous	Children in the household	No children in the household
Base: All respondents	2022	133	228	1661	161	1845	708	1314
Definitely	24%	32%	21%	24%	34%	23%	31%	20%
Probably	35%	45%	38%	34%	31%	35%	35%	35%
Probably not	12%	10%	18%	12%	9%	13%	12%	13%
Definitely not, I would make my own	15%	3%	12%	17%	16%	15%	12%	17%
Definitely not, I don't need one	3%	2%	2%	3%	1%	3%	1%	3%
Definitely not, I already have one	5%	2%	5%	6%	3%	6%	3%	7%
Definitely not, I don't think it is worth the cost	2%	3%	2%	2%	4%	2%	3%	2%
Definitely not, I think it's way more expensive than $100	3%	3%	3%	3%	3%	3%	2%	4%

q33. A basic emergency kit for you and your family that includes first aid supplies, a battery-operated radio and dried goods costs about $100. At this price, would you consider purchasing one?

A significant minority of Canadians would be willing (‘definitely’ or ‘probably’) to increase their current premiums by 10% given the option to purchase additional insurance on their home to cover damage from natural disasters or weather-related emergencies for $120 per year.  One-quarter would be willing to increase their premiums by 15% for $180 per year and only 14% would be wiling to increase their premiums by 20% for $240 per year.

Willingness to increase insurance premiums

	10% increase in your current premium (i.e. $120 per year more on a $1200 premium	15% increase in your current premium (i.e. $180 per year more on a $1200 premium)	20% increase in your current premium (i.e. $240 per year more on a $1200 premium)
Base: All respondents	2022	2022	2022
Definitely	10%	4%	3%
Probably	32%	20%	11%
Probably not	29%	37%	35%
Definitely not, I don't think I am at risk	11%	15%	20%
Definitely not, I already have this insurance	6%	6%	6%
Definitely not, I don't think it is worth the cost	12%	18%	24%
Summary
‘Definitely’ or ‘Probably’	42%	24%	14%
‘Definitely not’ (bottom 3)	29%	39%	50%

q34_1. If you had the option to purchase additional insurance on your home to cover damage from natural disasters or weather-related emergencies, how likely would you be to buy it? at the following price levels?

Differences by sub-group:

·         Those with children in the household are more likely to increase their premiums for additional coverage (49% @ $120 per year, 31% @ $180 per year, 20% @ $240 per year)

·         Immigrants to Canada within the last 10 years are also more likely to increase in their premiums for additional

coverage (55% @ $120 per year, 35% @ $180 per year, 22% @ $240 per year)

Six in ten Canadians (59%) would consider relocating from your current home if it was determined to be located in an area that was deemed vulnerable or at greater risk to certain natural hazards, however, most of this group is not ready to say that would definitely would consider it (43%).  Canadians living in larger communities (Metropolitan areas, larger and medium urban areas (63%, 62% and 59% respectively) are more likely to consider relocating then those living in smaller or rural areas (52% and 48% respectively).

Willingness to consider relocating

	Total	Major metropolitan	Large urban centre	Medium population centre	Small population centre	Rural area
Base: All respondents	2022	700	612	289	283	138
Definitely would consider it	16%	17%	17%	11%	16%	17%
Probably would consider it	43%	46%	45%	48%	36%	30%
Probably would not consider it	19%	16%	18%	18%	24%	29%
Definitely would not consider it	6%	6%	6%	7%	8%	6%
Don't know	15%	15%	15%	15%	16%	18%
Summary
‘Definitely’ or ‘Probably’	59%	63%	62%	59%	52%	48%
‘Probably would not’ or ‘definitely would not’	25%	22%	23%	26%	32%	35%

q36. Would you consider relocating from your current home if it was determined to be located in an area that was deemed vulnerable or at greater risk to certain natural hazards?

Differences by sub-group:

·         Parents of children age 5-18 are more likely to consider relocating than others (67% vs 57%)

·         Those aware of the ‘Get Prepared’ website are more likely to consider relocation than others (74% vs. 57%)

3.6 Public alerting & national Search and Rescue Program (SAR)

One in ten Canadians are outside of cellphone coverage range without another way to communicate in an emergency at least once a year

Most Canadians (85%) have a cellphone that receives emergency alerts.  Lower income households are less likely to have one, but even among the lowest earners 72% report having one. Four in ten Canadians (38%) say they engage in outdoor activities that are outside of cellphone coverage range once or twice a year or more often – this includes 17% that do so monthly or more often. Conversely 55% say they are rarely or never outside of their cellphone coverage range. Canadians living in BC/territories are outside of cellphone coverage range more frequently (54% once or twice a year or more often) than those in Ontario (33%) or Quebec (30%).

Differences by sub-groups (once or twice a year or more often):

·         Men are outside of cellphone coverage range more frequently than women (41% vs. 35%)

·         Canadian 25-34 are outside cellphone coverage range more frequently (43%, vs. 39% of those 35-54 and 33% of those 45-55).

·         Indigenous Canadians engage in activities outside of cellphone coverage range more frequently (57% vs. 36% non-Indigenous) including 28% of Indigenous Canadians who do so monthly or more often.

Only 31% of Canadians who engage in activities outside of cellphone coverage range once a year or more often, carry another type of communication or alerting device, such as a personal locator beacon. Women are much less likely to carry another type of device than men (61% vs. 49% say never). Interestingly, those age 45-55 are less likely than those 25-34 (65% vs. 49% say never).

Frequency of engaging in outdoor activities that are outside of cell phone coverage range

	Total	BC/ Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL
Base: All respondents	2022	265	255	125	780	473	123
Daily	5%	4%	8%	8%	5%	4%	4%
Weekly	6%	10%	4%	7%	5%	5%	5%
Monthly	6%	9%	6%	9%	4%	7%	6%
Once every few months	11%	19%	13%	11%	10%	7%	15%
Once or twice a year	9%	12%	15%	9%	8%	5%	11%
Rarely	35%	31%	36%	30%	39%	32%	37%
Never	20%	11%	13%	17%	22%	27%	19%
Don't know what my cell coverage is	7%	4%	5%	9%	6%	11%	2%
Summary
Once or twice a year or more often	38%	54%	46%	44%	33%	30%	42%

q38. How often do you engage in outdoor activities that are outside your cell phone coverage range?

Similarly, just over half of Canadians (57%) say they always or sometimes adequately prepared with the essential equipment when they are outside of cellphone coverage range, which may include items such as a whistle, extra water, extra food, extra clothing, etc. BC/territories and Alberta residents are more likely than others to indicate they are always or sometimes adequately prepared (70% and 65% respectively). Indigenous Canadians are also more likely than others to bring essentials always or sometimes (66% vs 56% non-Indigenous).

3.7 Advertising & resources on emergency preparedness  

One-quarter of Canadians (27%) say they have looked online for resources and information to help prepare themselves against weather-related emergencies or natural disasters.  This is significantly lower among Quebec residents than others across the country (19%).  On the other, the proportion is higher among new immigrants to Canada <10 years (41%).  Of those who have looking for these resources online, 91% say they found what they were looking for.

 

Incidence of looking for online resources for emergency preparedness

	Total	BC/ Territories	AB	MB/SK	ON	QC	ATL	Immigrated to Canada less than 10 years ago	Immigrated to Canada more than 10 years ago	Born in Canada
Base: All respondents	2022	265	255	125	780	473	123	133	228	1661
Yes	27%	36%	33%	28%	26%	19%	29%	41%	19%	27%
No	73%	64%	67%	72%	74%	81%	71%	59%	81%	73%

q41. Have you ever looked for online resources and information to help prepare yourself against [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17:] 'weather-related emergencies/natural disasters' specifically?

 

When it comes to credible sources of information and resources on emergency preparedness, Canadians find all of the organizations measured in the survey credible.  Between them, more Canadians find local first responders “very credible” than the others, but credibility is high for each of the organizations.

 

 

Credibility of government sources of information on emergency preparedness

	% Very credible	% Somewhat credible	% Very or somewhat credible
Base: All respondents	2022	2022	2022
Government of Canada	43%	43%	86%
Your provincial government	37%	49%	86%
Your municipal government	35%	51%	86%
Your local first responders including Police or Fire department	57%	37%	94%

q43. Many different organizations provide the public with information about preparing for weather-related emergencies/natural disasters. How credible do you find each of the following in providing information on how to prepare for emergencies?

Differences by sub-groups:

·         Credibility of provincial governments is high across the country, but the percentage ‘very credible’ is higher in BC (43%) and lower in Alberta (27%) and Ontario (35%).

Awareness (potential visits) of the ‘Get Prepared’ website may inspire preparedness

 While awareness of the website was what was measured in the survey, we may infer that at least some visited the website and not just heard about the website without visiting it. Seventeen percent of Canadians say they are aware of the Government of Canada website, 'Get Prepared'. This website offers information on how to prepare for and protect yourself against natural disasters.  Canadians with a disability are statistically more likely to be aware of the website (24% vs. 16% of those who do not have a disability). Parents with children 5-18 are also slightly more likely to be aware of the website compared with others (21% vs. 16%). Those who are aware of the website are more likely to indicate they have a household emergency plan (56% vs. 23% of those who are unaware of website).

The survey found that those who are aware of the Government of Canada website, 'Get Prepared' are more than 50% more likely to be aware of the specific risks in their community and twice as likely to have taken steps to prepare themselves (20% have taken steps to reduce the risk of their home being affected vs. 9% of those not aware of the website - per Q17).  These respondents are also more likely to say that have taken at least some, if not all, of the necessary measures required for their households per the items listed in Q19 – 70% vs. 45% who are not aware of the website.

 

Appendix A: Qualitative Recruitment Screener and Discussion Guide

A.1 Qualitative Recruitment Screener

 

INTERVIEWER: _______________ DATE: _____________ INTERVIEW TIME: ______ minutes

Level of risk	Province	Number and target participants	LANGUAGE	Date
Mix of communities at lower risk of natural disasters	ON 3-4 from GTA, rest should be from rest of ON and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	3-4 Parents of children under 17 3-4 Younger Canadians (25-55)	English	Dec 9 5:30 – 7:00 PM ET
Mix of communities at higher risk of natural disasters	ON 3-4 from GTA, rest should be from rest of ON and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	Aim for a mix from following categories with no more of 2 per category per group and at least 2-3 per category ACROSS all the groups: seniors; persons with disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income residents; persons with low literacy levels; women only households; new immigrants; and cultural minorities.	English	Dec 9 7:15 – 8:45 PM ET
Mix of communities at lower risk of natural disasters	QC 3-4 from Montreal, rest should be from rest of QC and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	3-4 Parents of children under 17 3-4 Younger Canadians (25-55)	French	Dec 10 5:30 – 7:00 PM ET
Mix of communities at higher risk of natural disasters	QC 3-4 from Montreal, rest should be from rest of QC and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	Aim for a mix from following categories with no more of 2 per category per group and at least 2-3 per category ACROSS all the groups: seniors; persons with disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income residents; persons with low literacy levels; women only households; new immigrants; and cultural minorities.	French	Dec 10 7:15 – 8:45 PM ET
Mix of communities at lower risk of natural disasters	Atlantic Canada 3-4 from Halifax, rest should be from rest of Atlantic Canada and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	3-4 Parents of children under 17 3-4 Younger Canadians (25-55)	English	Dec 14 5:30 – 7:00 PM AT
Mix of communities at higher risk of natural disasters	Atlantic Canada 3-4 from Halifax, rest should be from rest of Atlantic Canada and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	Aim for a mix from following categories with no more of 2 per category per group and at least 2-3 per category ACROSS all the groups: seniors; persons with disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income residents; persons with low literacy levels; women only households; new immigrants; and cultural minorities.	English	Dec 14 7:15 – 8:45 PM AT
Mix of communities at lower risk of natural disasters	AB 3-4 from Calgary or Edmonton, rest should be from rest of AB and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	3-4 Parents of children under 17 3-4 Younger Canadians (25-55)		Dec 15 5:30 – 7:00 PM MT
Mix of communities at higher risk of natural disasters	AB 3-4 from Calgary or Edmonton, rest should be from rest of AB and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	Aim for a mix from following categories with no more of 2 per category per group and at least 2-3 per category ACROSS all the groups: seniors; persons with disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income residents; persons with low literacy levels; women only households; new immigrants; and cultural minorities.	English	Dec 15 7:15 – 8:45 PM MT
Mix of communities at lower risk of natural disasters	BC 3-4 from Metro Vancouver, rest should be from rest of BC and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	3-4 Parents of children under 17 3-4 Younger Canadians (25-55)	English	Dec 16 5:30 – 7:00 PM PT
Mix of communities at higher risk of natural disasters	BC 3-4 from Metro Vancouver, rest should be from rest of BC and no more than 2 recruits per city/town	Aim for a mix from following categories with no more of 2 per category per group and at least 2-3 per category ACROSS all the groups: seniors; persons with disability; indigenous communities; medically dependent persons; low-income residents; persons with low literacy levels; women only households; new immigrants; and cultural minorities.	English	Dec 16 7:15 – 8:45 PM PT

Good morning/afternoon/evening (Bonjour), my name is __________________________ and I am calling from Ipsos, a national marketing research organization.  First off, let me assure you that we are not trying to sell you anything. We are a professional public opinion research firm that gathers opinions from people.  From time to time, we solicit opinions by talking with people in a group discussion setting with up to 8 participants.

We are preparing to conduct a series of these discussions on behalf of Public Safety Canada to test some communications on emergency preparedness and would like to know if you would be willing to participate.  All those who participate will receive an $100 honorarium as a thank you for their time.

As part of these discussions you will be asked to review and provide feedback on communication materials in an online focus group setting. Do you feel comfortable doing this?

·         Yes

·         No (THANK AND TERMINATE)

 

Please be assured, your participation is voluntary and should you agree to participate your identity will remain confidential. The information collected will be used for research purposes only and handled according to the Privacy Act of Canada. PROVIDE IPSOS PROJECT MANAGER CONTACT DETAILS IF MORE DETAILS REQUIRED

Now, I would like to ask you a few questions to see if you qualify to attend.  This will take about 5 minutes.

1.                   Do you or does anyone in your household work in any of the following industries? (READ LIST) IF "YES" TO ANY - THANK AND TERMINATE

·         Market Research or Marketing

·         Public Relations or Media (TV, Print, Radio, Film/video production)

·         Advertising and communications

·         An employee of a political party

·         An employee of a government department or agency

·          

2.                   Have you ever attended a consumer group discussion, completed an interview or a survey which was arranged in advance and for which you received a sum of money?

[AIM FOR 2 EACH GROUP WHO SAY NO]

ONLY ASK Q3-Q5 IF YES AT Q2

3.                   How many focus groups have you attended in the past five years?

TERMINATE IF MORE THAN 4

4.                   What were the main topics of these discussions? Answer: ___________________________

IF RELATED TO ADVERTISING TESTING, THANK AND TERMINATE

 

5.                   Have you attended a discussion group or a market research focus group in the past six months? IF "YES" - THANK AND TERMINATE

 

Now, I would like to ask you a few questions to see if you qualify to attend.  This will take about 5 minutes.

6.                   I am going to read you some age categories, please stop me when I get to the one that applies to you.

·         18-24 years old [ONLY ELIGIBLE IF THEY HAVE CHILD UNDER 17]

·         25-35 years [ELIGIBLE AS YOUNGER CANADIAN]

·         36-45 years [ELIGIBLE AS YOUNGER CANADIAN]

·         46-55 years [ELIGIBLE AS YOUNGER CANADIAN]

·         56-64 years [ONLY ELIGIBLE IF THEY HAVE CHILD UNDER 17]

·         65 years or more [ELIGIBLE AS SENIOR, MAX 2 SENIORS PER HIGH-RISK GROUP, ELIGIBLE FOR LOW-RISK GROUPS IF THEY HAVE CHILD UNDER 17]

 

7.                   We are looking to speak to parents with children 17 or younger. May I check that this applies to you?

·         Yes [ELIGIBLE AS PARENT FOR LOW-RISK GROUP]

·         No

·          

8.                   What is/are the age/s of the child/children in your household?

·         0-6 years old

·         6-11 years old

·         12-13 years old

·         14-15 years old

·         16-17 years old

·         Prefer not to say [THANK AND TERMINATE]

·         AIM FOR GOOD MIX OF AGES

 

9.                   Which gender do you identify with?

·         Male

·         Female

·         Gender Diverse

·         Other

·         Prefer not to answer

·         DO NOT TERMINATE IF GENDER DIVERSE OR OTHER GENDER, AIM FOR 50/50 GENDER MIX IN ALL GROUPS

·          

10.               And which of the following applies to you?

Single, never married [IF ALSO FEMALE, ELIGIBLE FOR SINGLE FEMALE HOUSEHOLD QUOTA]

Married / domestic partnership

·         Widowed [IF ALSO FEMALE, ELIGIBLE FOR SINGLE FEMALE HOUSEHOLD QUOTA]

·         Separated [IF ALSO FEMALE, ELIGIBLE FOR SINGLE FEMALE HOUSEHOLD QUOTA]

·          

11.               What was your household’s total income for 2019 after tax? Was it…?

·         $24,999 OR LESS

·         Between $25,000 and $34,999

·         Between $35,000 and $39,999

·         Between $40,000 and $59,999

·         Between $60,00 and $79,999

·         Between $80,00 and $99,999

·         $100,000 and above

·         ELIGIBLE FOR LOW INCOME FAMILY QUOTA IF:

·         IF SINGLE / WIDOWED OR SEPARATED, MUST CODE $24,999 OR LESS

·         IF MARRIED/DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP, MUST CODE $34,999 OR LESS 

·          

12.               What is the highest level of education you have attained?  (Do not read list).

·         Some high school or less

·         Completed high school

·         Post-secondary technical training

·         Some college/university

·         Completed college/university

·         Post-graduate studies

·         ELIGIBLE FOR LOW LITERACY QUOTA IF COMPLETED HIGH SCHOOL OR LESS

·          

13.               Current employment status?

·         Working full-time

·         Working part-time

·         Self-employed

·         Retired

·         Unemployed

·         Student

·         Other

·         FOR LOW-RISK COMMUNITY GROUPS, MAX OF 2 RETIRED, UNEMPLOYED, STUDENT OR OTHER PER GROUP

·          

14.               Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

·         Yes [ELIGIBLE FOR INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES QUOTA]

·         No

·         Prefer not to say

·          

·         DO NOT ASK Q15-Q16 IF INDIGENOUS

15.               Were you born in Canada, or in another country?

·         Canada GO TO Q17

·         Another country CONTINUE TO Q16

·          

16.               What year did you arrive in Canada?

IF ARRIVED 2010 OR LATER ELIGIBLE AS NEWCOMER

·          

17.               What is the language that you regularly speak at home?

·         English

·         French [ELIGIBLE FOR QC GROUPS]

·         Other WRITE IN [ELIGIBLE FOR LOW LITERACY QUOTA]

 

18.               We are all Canadians, but our ancestors come from all different parts of the world. What would you say are the ethnic or cultural origins of your ancestors? If you prefer, I can read you a list of ethnic and cultural identities to choose from.

·         English/Scottish/Irish

·         French

·         Indigenous (First Nations, Metis, Inuit)

·         Chinese

·         Hispanic (Chilean, Argentinean, Peruvian, Mexican, etc.)

·         Italian

·         South Asian (East Indian, Pakistani, Tamil, Punjabi or Sri Lankan, etc.)

·         Caribbean or from the West Indies (Jamaican, Trinidadian, Barbadian, etc.)

·         Black African or African American (Ethiopian, Nigerian, Eritrean, etc.)

·         German

·         Greek

·         Korean

·         Polish

·         Portuguese

·         Dutch

·         Vietnamese

·         Filipino

·         Ukrainian

·         Arab (Jordanian, Lebanese, Egyptian, etc.)

·         Jewish

·         West Asian (Syrian, Turkish, Afghani, Armenian, Iranian)

·         Other (specify________)

·         Prefer not to say

·         IF SELECT ANY NON-WHITE ETHNICITY, ELIGIBLE FOR CULTURAL MINORITY QUOTA

·          

19.               Do you identify as a person with a disability? A person with a disability is a person who has a long-term or recurring impairment (such as vision, hearing, mobility, flexibility, dexterity, pain, learning, developmental, memory or mental health-related) which limits their daily activities inside or outside the home (such as at school, work, or in the community in general).

·         Yes [ELIGIBLE FOR PERSON WITH DISABILITY QUOTA]

·         No

·          

·          

20.               We are also looking to include people who take a regular prescription medication in the study. Does this apply to you?

·         Yes [ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICALLY DEPENDENT PERSONS QUOTA]

·         No

·          

21.               Participants in discussion groups are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts.  How comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others?  Are you… (READ LIST)?

 

                Very comfortable                                             1              MINIMUM 4 PER GROUP

                Fairly comfortable                                           2              CONTINUE

                Comfortable                                                      3              CONTINUE

                Not very comfortable                                     4              THANK AND TERMINATE

                Very uncomfortable                                       5              THANK AND TERMINATE

                DK/NR                                                                  9              THANK AND TERMINATE

 

22.               Sometimes participants are asked to read text and/or review a video during the discussion.  Is there any reason why you could not participate?  

 

                Yes                                                                         1              THANK AND TERMINATE

                No                                                                          2              CONTINUE

                DK/NR                                                                  9              THANK AND TERMINATE

 

23.               You will need access to a telephone AND a laptop or PC that is connected to the internet. You will be asked to take part in a verbal discussion over the telephone AND provide typed comments on the computer. Will you be comfortable with both of these components?

Very comfortable [MIN 3 PER GROUP]

Fairly comfortable

Not very comfortable [THANK AND TERMINATE]

Very uncomfortable [THANK AND TERMINATE]

 

TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY OR TAKE PART IN THE DISCUSSION IN ANY WAY, SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM.

ALSO TERMINATE IF YOU HAVE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT PARTICIPANTS ABILITY TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE LANGUAGE TO BE USED DURING SESSION.

 

****(FOR EACH GROUP, PLEASE ENSURE 8 PARTICIPANTS ARE RECRUITED FOR 6-8 TO SHOW)****

 

[Read to Stand-by Respondents]

 

Thank you for answering my questions. Unfortunately, at this time, the group you qualify for is full. We would like to place you on our stand-by list. This means that if there is an opening in the group, we would then call you back and see if you are available to attend the group. May I please have a daytime contact number, an evening contact number an email address, if you have one, so that we can contact you as soon as possible if an opening become available?  [RECORD CONTACT INFO]

 

[Read to Screened in Respondents]

Wonderful, you qualify to participate in one of these group discussions which will take place on, (DATE) @ (TIME) for no more than 2 hours. The Government of Canada is sponsoring this research.

 

During the discussion, you will be audio-taped. This taping is being done to assist us with our report writing. Government of Canada staff, including members of the staff from the department that sponsored this research, will be listening to the discussion live. This is standard research procedure to get a first-hand look at the research process and to hear first-hand your impressions and views on the research topic. Do you agree to be observed for research purposes only? Do you agree to be observed for research purposes only?

 

Yes                         1              THANK & GO TO INVITATION

No                          2              THANK & TERMINATE

 

As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. As we have invited you to participate based on the questions we went through a moment ago, we ask that you do not send a representative on your behalf should you be unable to participate. IF FOR SOME REASON YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE CALL SO THAT WE MAY GET SOMEONE TO REPLACE YOU.  You can reach us at 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx at our office.  Someone will call you the day before to remind you about the discussion.

 

·         What email address can we reach you on?

·         What would be a good time to reach you?

·         And at what telephone numbers?

·         May I please get your name?  ON FRONT PAGE

 

Thank you for very much for your help!

 

A.2 Qualitative Discussion Guide

 

INTRODUCTIONS (10 MINS)

 

·         Thank participants

·         Introduce self & Ipsos and study sponsor – Government of Canada

·         Explain purpose – to obtain views on some EARLY DEVELOPMENT advertising concepts, recording, observers (from Government of Canada and agency), confidentiality 

·         Introductions: name, where you live; who else is in your household; one word a good friend or family member will use to describe you

INDIVIDUAL CONCEPT REVIEW (20 MINS PER CONCEPT)

 

As I mentioned at the start, the ad I’d like to get your thoughts on is at an early development stage. I am going to show you a rough video with someone reading the ad script over some illustrations. For the final ad, the intention is to do a full professional production i.e. hire a director and actors to film each scene. Please don’t get hung up on the illustrations too much and use your imagination a bit.

 

FOR CONCEPT O EXPLAIN: As I mentioned at the start, the ads I’d like to get your thoughts on are at an early development stage. I am going to show you a rough video with someone reading the ad script over some illustrations. This final ad will be shot as an animation in a musical style, but the illustrations will be polished off along with the singing, music etc. Please don’t get hung up on the illustrations too much and use your imagination a bit. Think Broadway style musical.

 

PLAY CONCEPT TWICE

 

I’d like to start off with your immediate reactions and thoughts by typing in your answers into the platform.

 

[TYPED FEEDBACK FROM ALL PARTICIPANTS]

 

Complete the following sentences:

This ad makes me think……………………………………………………………………………………………………………

This ad makes me feel……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

 

Which of the following best sums up your overall reaction to the ad?

Liked it very much

Liked it somewhat

Neutral

Disliked it somewhat

Disliked it very much

 

[VERBAL DISCUSSION PROBES]

 

Help me understand your reactions to it. What did you like / dislike about it?

FOR CONCEPT O CLARIFY HAS NEEDED: This spot begins as a family meeting about being ready for emergencies, but quickly escalates into a full-blown show-stopping Broadway-style musical-comedy production featuring not only the family, but the whole community being ready for anything. It is animated so that we can show this all in a fun and entertaining way, bringing in over-the-top visuals like top-hats, fireworks — and even a moose. 

 

 

We’re going to focus on the 3 key components of these ads:

1.            The main message, what they’re trying to say to you

2.            The creative approach, how they’re trying to say/present that message to you

3.            The call-to-action, what they’re trying to get you to do or think

 

MAIN MESSAGE VERBAL PROBES

What is the main message in this ad, what were they trying to say to you? Can you describe it to me in your own words?

Is the main message…

Clear? Why/why not? IF CONFUSION: What parts were confusing and why?

Relevant to you? Why / why not?

Important to you? Why / why not?

New information for you? Why/ why not?

 

CREATIVE IDEA VERBAL PROBES

What did you think of the creative idea they are planning to use to get this message across to you? PROBE:  Describe it to me in your own words

How would you describe the tone of it? Is this appropriate given message? FOR CONCEPT O: Is the tone right or would a more comedic/funny tone make you more receptive to getting prepared?

Is the creative approach unique / attention grabbing? What was your eye drawn to? Specific visuals, script, etc.?

What, if anything, would you change about this creative idea? Why is that?

FOR WALKING DISASTER/CONCEPT X: Should the character that represents the disaster be a man, woman or even an animal? What makes you say that?

 

CALL TO ACTION

What are they trying to get you to do or think? Would you? Why / why not?

What, if anything, would you do after seeing this concept in its final form once it is aired? How come?

Did the concept do enough to persuade you…

·         that you and your family could be at risk from a natural disaster? Do you really think there’s a risk for you personally or is it more relevant for other people in other circumstances?

·         to build or buy an emergency kit for yourself and your family? Realistically, how likely are you to build or go out and buy an emergency kit from seeing this ad?

·         to make an emergency plan with your family, including visiting the website getprepared.ca to learn how to prepare yourself from natural disasters?

 

BALLOT & CLOSING QUESTIONS (20 MINS)

 

[BALLOT VOTING QUESTION]

 

Natural disasters happen frequently in Canada. They can hit anyone, anywhere, and it’s important to be prepared for them. This advertising campaign aims to encourage Canadians to look up the risks in their area and take action to mitigate these risks.

 

Of the three concepts, which ONE would you be MOST likely to pay attention to or is generally more engaging?

CONCEPT X

CONCEPT O

CONCEPT L

 

Of the three concepts, which ONE is MOST effective in encouraging you to visit the website or generally look for more information about how to get prepared for emergencies?

CONCEPT X

CONCEPT O

CONCEPT L

 

Of the three concepts, which ONE is MOST effective in getting you to build an emergency kit for yourself and you family?

CONCEPT X

CONCEPT O

CONCEPT L

 

Help me understand your preferences. PROBE TO COMPARE AND CONTRAST BETWEEN CONCEPTS

Are there ways they could optimise the concepts? Is there anything that you would change about the one you prefer the best that we have not already discussed that would make it better or clearer or more impactful as far as you are concerned?

What are some of the top questions you’d like answered if you were to visit the website shown on the ad?

What final advice would you give to the folks who create these concepts?

 

THANK AND CLOSE

 

 

Appendix B.1: Quantitative Baseline Survey

B.1 Survey Methodology

The survey was conducted online with a representative sample of n=2,022 Canadians age 25-55.

Sample frame

The online sample was drawn from Ipsos’ online and partner panels (non-probability sample, no margin of sampling error is reported).    Online survey respondents were selected from registered members of an online panel. Since the samples used in online panel surveys are based on self-selection and are not a random probability sample, no formal estimates of sampling error can be calculated. Although opt-in panels are not random probability samples, online surveys can be used for general population surveys provided they are well designed and employ a large, well-maintained panel.

Quotas were set by age, gender, and region to make that sample closely reflects the composition of the population. The natural fallout by age and parents/non-parents allowed for a relatively large sample of parents with children age 8-15 to be included in the sample (n=580).  As well, over-sampling was used to ensure a minimum of n=100 of each of the following groups were included in the sample: Indigenous Canadians (n=164), immigrants <10 years in Canada (n=124), and  immigrants 10+ in Canada (n=234).  The sample was statistically weighted to ensure matches this population according to the most recently available Census information (region, age, gender). 

Non-response bias analysis

The table below presents a profile of the final sample, compared to the actual population of Canada (2016

Census information). As is the case with most surveys, the unweighted sample underrepresents younger Canadians, which is a typical pattern for public opinion surveys in Canada.   However, the gap is reasonably small, and therefore is unlikely to represent a systemic bias in responses.

 

Target Audience	Unweighted sample counts	Unweighted sample %	Weighted sample counts	Weighted sample %
Total annual household income
Under $40,000	362	18%	364	18%
$40,000 to just under $80,000	500	25%	511	25%
$80,000 to just under $150,000	662	33%	664	33%
$150,000 and above	235	12%	226	11%
Prefer not to say	263	13%	257	11%
Community size (self-reported)
Major metropolitan area pop of 1M +	682	34%	700	35%
Large urban centre with pop 100,000 - < 1M	616	31%	612	30%
Medium population centre with pop 30,000 and 99,999	292	14%	289	14%
Small population centre with pop 1,000 and 29,999	289	14%	283	14%
Rural area with pop of less than 1,000	143	7%	138	7%
Language spoken at home
English	1636	81%	1611	80%
French	369	18%	402	20%
Other	168	8%	178	9%

 

Target Audience	Unweighted sample counts	Unweighted sample %	Weighted sample counts	Weighted sample %
Gender
Men	1041	48%	1017	49%
Women	969	52%	985	50%
Gender diverse	12	<1%	20	1%
Age
25-34	482	24%	638	32%
35-44	580	28%	618	31%
45-55	960	47%	766	38%
Region
British Columbia/Territories	273	13%	265	13%
Alberta	262	13%	255	13%
Saskatchewan	66	3%	58	3%
Manitoba	81	4%	68	4%
Ontario	788	39%	780	39%
Quebec	430	21%	473	23%
New Brunswick	30	1%	30	1%
Nova Scotia	59	3%	59	3%
Prince Edward Island	8	<1%	8	<1%
Newfoundland and Labrador	25	1%	26	1%

 

Questionnaire design

Public Safety Canada provided Ipsos with material on emergency preparedness. Ipsos then designed a questionnaire in consultation with Public Safety Canada to ensure its research objectives were met. Upon approval of the English questionnaire, Ipsos arranged for the questionnaire to be translated into French by professional translators. The survey was programmed and tested online and telephone. Prior to finalizing the survey for field, a pre-test (soft launch) was conducted in English and French via both methodologies.  As no changes were required following the pre-test, these responses have been included in the final data set. The final survey questionnaire is included in Appendix B.2. Note: Q19 was edited after the first day of fieldwork and therefore the base since is reduced (n=1814).

Fieldwork

The survey was conducted using a secure, fully featured web-based survey environment between December 16-30, 2020. The average interview length was 18 minutes. All respondents were offered the opportunity to complete the surveys in their official language of choice -- 84% of respondents completed the survey in English, and 26% answered in French.  All research work was conducted in accordance with the Standards for the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research – Online Surveys and recognized industry standards, as well as applicable federal legislation (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, or PIPEDA). The data from this survey are statistically weighted to ensure the sample is as representative of this population as possible according to the most recently available Census information.

 

Completion results

The completion results are presented in the following table.

Contact disposition online

Disposition	N
Total invitations (c)	8168
Total completes (d)	2027
Qualified break-offs (e)	31
Disqualified (f)	101
Not responded (g)	109
Quota filled (h)	761
Contact rate = (d+e+f+h)/c	36%
Participation rate = (d+f+h)/c	35%

 

 

 

B.2: Survey Questionnaire

2020 Public Opinion Research on Emergency Preparedness Awareness Questionnaire

V4 FORMATTED FOR ONLINE (November 30, 2020)

 

 

ONLINE LANDING PAGE

Please select your preferred language for completing the survey.

English

French

 

Welcome to this survey about weather-related emergencies and natural disasters. The survey is being conducted by Ipsos, an independent research company, on behalf of Public Safety Canada, and will take about 15-20 minutes of your time.

Please note: this survey is specific to weather-related emergencies and natural disasters.  There are one or two questions about COVID-19, but the main focus is unrelated to COVID-19 or any other health pandemic.

Your participation is entirely voluntary, and all of your answers will be kept completely confidential and anonymous.

If you wish to verify the legitimacy of this research, please link to CRIC registration contact Ipsos (Daniel Kunasingam Daniel.kunasingam@ipsos.com)

Thank you in advance for your participation.

SCREENING QUESTIONS

1.        In what year were you born?   - DROP DOWN LIST

[Range 1965 -1995]

Prefer not to answer

[If the respondent prefers not to provide a precise birth year, ask Q2, otherwise skip Q3]

 

[IF UNDER 25 THANK AND TERMINATE]

2.       If you would prefer not to provide your precise birth year, would you be willing to indicate in which of the following age categories that you belong?

 

18 to 24

25 to 34

35 to 44

45 to 55

56 to 64

65 or older

Prefer not to answer

 

[IF UNDER 25 and over 55 THANK AND TERMINATE]

3.       In what province or territory do you live?   - DROP DOWN LIST

British Columbia

Alberta

Saskatchewan

Manitoba

Ontario

Quebec

New Brunswick

Nova Scotia

Prince Edward Island

Newfoundland and Labrador

Yukon

Northwest Territories

Nunavut

 

3a.        What are the first three digits of your postal code?

[               ]

 

 

4.       What is your gender? [select one]

 

Female

Male

Gender diverse

Prefer not to answer

 

5.       Were you born in Canada?

 

Yes

No

 

[IF NO CONTINUE, OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q7]

 

6.       How long have you lived in Canada?

 

Less than 5 years

5 years to less than 10 years

10 years to less than 20 years

20 years or more

 

7.       Are you First Nations, Métis, or Inuk (Inuit)?

 

Yes

No

Prefer not to answer

 

[IF YES CONTINUE, OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q9]

 

8.       Do you live on a reserve?

 

Yes

No

Prefer not to answer

 

9.       Do you identify as a person with a disability? A person with a disability is a person who has a long-term or recurring impairment (such as vision, hearing, mobility, flexibility, dexterity, pain, learning, developmental, memory or mental health-related) which limits their daily activities inside or outside the home (such as at school, work, or in the community in general).

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

Prefer not to answer

 

10.   What language do you speak most often at home? [select all that apply]

 

English

French

Other

Prefer not to answer

 

[heading not to be shown:  Home environment]

 

11.   What is the size of the community you live in?

 

Major metropolitan area with population of 1,000,000 or more

Large urban centre with population of 100,000 or more

Medium population centre with population of between 30,000 and 99,999

Small population centre with population between 1,000 and 29,999

Rural area with population of less than 1,000

 

12.   Is your primary residence...? [select one]

 

A single detached house

A semi-detached house

A duplex, attached row or townhouse

A condominium bungalow

A condominium apartment

An apartment

A mobile home

Other

 

13.   Prior to purchasing or renting your primary residence, did you consider any of the following? [select all that apply]

 

Building-related hazards (meeting building codes)

Natural hazards (proximity to flooding areas, forest fire risk etc.)

Age of the home/building structure

Quality of structure or state of structural repairs

None of these

 

14.   Do you own or rent your primary residence?

 

Own

Rent

 

15.   As far as you know is your home located in a flood-prone area?  

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

16.   Do you live close (within 10km?) to a forested area? 

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

[heading not to be shown:  Your knowledge on natural disasters/emergencies in Canada]

 

17.   Which of the following best reflects your view of the possibility of your community being affected by a [split sample: half of respondents will be shown:  weather-related emergency such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.) / other half will be shown: natural disaster such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)?  [select one only]

 

I’m not aware of any specific risks to my community

I’m aware of specific risks to my community, but not concerned

I’m concerned about specific risks, but haven’t taken steps to reduce the risk

I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected

I have taken steps to reduce the risk that my home will be affected, AND helped others in my community do the same

 

[heading not to be shown:  Your current level of emergency preparedness]

 

18.   To the best of your knowledge, do you believe that you live in an area that is at risk in terms of a [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17:]  weather-related emergency such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)  / natural disaster such as (flood, wildfire, tornado, hurricane, ice storm, blizzard, extreme cold etc.)?  [select one only]

 

I believe that I am in a high-risk area

I believe that I am in a moderate-risk area

I believe that I am in a low-risk area

I have no specific knowledge about my level of risk

I have never thought about it

 

19.   Have you taken measures, such as the ones listed below, to protect yourself against potential [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17] weather-related emergency or natural disaster]?  Examples: installing a sump pump in the basement to prevent flooding; renovating the exterior of the structure of my residence with fireproof materials; installing shutters or other window coverings to mitigate damage from storms, tornadoes and hurricanes; installing a one-way backflow valve in the basement drain; improving the grading around the foundation of the house to facilitate water run off; removing dead wood from the property; extending downspouts to divert rain water from the foundation; etc.)

 

Yes, I have taken all of the necessary measures required for my household.

Yes, I have taken most of the necessary measures required for my household.

Yes, I have taken some of the necessary measures required for my household.

No, I have not taken any measures.

20.   Do you have a household emergency plan? 

 

[split sample – half of sample are show description and half are not shown any description]

(Emergency plans may include an emergency exit/evacuation plan, photocopies/electronic copies of important documents, and/or a list of emergency contact numbers.)

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

21.   Do you own any of the following emergency safety items? (select all that apply)

 

First aid materials

Flashlight

Matches or a lighter

Food

Water

Water tablets

Blankets

SOS signs

Alternate power source or generator

Alternate water source

Battery-operated wind transistor, or wind up radio

Alternate heat source

Hand sanitizer

Face mask

None of these

 

22.   Do you have the following fire safety devices in your home? [select all that apply]

 

Smoke detector

Carbon monoxide detector

Fire extinguisher

Automatic fire suppression (ceiling mounted water sprinklers /sprinkler system)

None

 

23.   Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following?

 

I think that it is irresponsible to not have emergency safety items ready at all time.

 

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

 

24.   How long do you think that you could survive in your home should an emergency occur that prevents you from accessing anything outside of your home (assume? (Assume that this takes place during the winter months and that you have lost power)?

 

1 to < 3 days

3 to < 5 days

5-to < 7 days

1 week

2 weeks

More than 2 weeks

Don’t know

 

25.   In the case of an emergency, have you identified a family member, a neighbour, or someone from the community that you could rely on to bring you supplies, bring you medication, or provide an alternative place to stay?

Yes

No

 

26.   In the event of [keep same split sample groups from Q17:  natural disaster / weather-related emergencies],  do you believe that the government has an obligation to provide you with the following types of response support?

 

[Grid rows]

Financial aid to cover your immediate needs during an emergency

Rescue services to get you out of an emergency

 

[Grid columns]

Yes, definitely

It depends upon the type of event or emergency

It depends upon the extent of the impact on my life

No, it is my responsibility to have insurance and be prepared for these types of events or emergencies

Don’t know

 

27.   If you had to relocate temporarily during a weather-related emergency or a natural disaster that cost you about $1,000 of unexpected expenses, would you be able to pay for these expenses without significant hardship? [select all that apply]

 

Yes, I would pay with my own readily accessible money

Somehow, I would have to borrow, and I do have access to the necessary credit

Not really, I would have to borrow money but don’t have access to credit

I don’t know how if I would find $1000 for this purpose

 

28.   Do you have medical insurance or coverage for short- and/or long-term injuries or disability?

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

[heading not to be shown: Covid-19 and Emergency Preparedness]

 

29.   Has the current Covid-19 pandemic affected the way that you prepare for emergencies?  [select all that apply]

 

Yes, I am now putting money, or more money, aside for unexpected expenses

Yes, I am now storing additional food and essential items

Yes, I have spoken with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies

Yes, I have created a tangible plan with family, neighbours, and/or community members about how we can support, or better support each other through emergencies

I have registered as a volunteer for my community in case of an emergency

Other (specify)

No [EXCLUSIVE]

 

[IF NO ASK Q30, OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q31]

 

30.   You indicated that the pandemic has not affected the way you prepare for emergencies.  Which of the following best describes why this is the case?  [select all that apply]

 

[randomize order]

I don’t have any extra money available to put into an emergency savings plan

I don’t have the space to stockpile emergency items

I don’t have enough money to stockpile food

I don’t have a support system to call upon in an emergency

I haven’t given it much thought yet, but plan to

I am not worried about emergencies; I will make do when the time comes

I was already very prepared for emergencies

 

[heading not to be shown: Adaptative Capacity]

 

31.   Have you/,or has your primary residence ever been affected by a natural disaster or weather-related emergency in Canada? (i.e. flood, wildfire, earthquake) [select all that apply]

 

Yes, I have been personally affected

Yes, my home has been affected

[EXCLUSIVE] No

 

 [IF YES TO EITHER, CONTINUE OTHERWISE SKIP TO 31B]

 

31a. Did you have to make any repairs to your home as a result of a natural disaster?

 

Yes

No

 

 

31b. Above and beyond these required repairs, did you make any additional changes to your home to better protect you?

Yes

No

 

              31c. Did you permanently move to another location as a result of a natural disaster?

 

Yes

No

 

[IF NO TO 31b AND 31c ASK Q32 OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q33]

 

32.   Why did you decide to stay in your home without making any additional changes…?  [select all that apply]

 

I’m not worried about another natural disaster

I wanted to stay in my home, even if I don’t feel safe from another natural disaster

I didn’t know how to better protect my home

I didn’t have the financial resources to better protect to my home

I didn’t have the financial resources to move

I didn’t have the time to think about how to better protect my home

Other

 

[Heading not to be shown: Your willingness to become prepared]

 

33.   A basic emergency kit for you and your family that includes first aid supplies, a battery-operated radio and dried goods costs about $100.  At this price, would you consider purchasing one? [select one only]

 

Definitely

Probably

Probably not

Definitely not, I would make my own

Definitely not, I don’t need one

Definitely not, I already have one

Definitely not, I don’t think it is worth the cost

Definitely not, I think it’s way more expensive than $100

 

34.   If you had the option to purchase additional insurance on your home to cover damage from natural disasters or weather-related emergencies, how likely would you be to buy it? at the following price levels?

 

[GRID ROWS]

10% increase in your current premium (i.e. $120 per year more on a $1200 premium)

15% increase in your current premium (i.e. $180 per year more on a $1200 premium)

20% increase in your current premium (i.e. $240 per year more on a $1200 premium)

 

Definitely

Probably

Probably not

Definitely not, I don’t think I am at risk

Definitely not, I already have this insurance

Definitely not, I don’t think it is worth the cost

 

35.   Have you taken a first aid course or a CPR class within the last 5 years?

 

Yes

No

 

36.   Would you consider relocating from your current home if it was determined to be located in an area that was deemed vulnerable or at greater risk to certain natural hazards?

 

Definitely would consider it

Probably would consider it

Probably would not consider it

Definitely would not consider it

Don’t know

 

[Heading not to be shown: Public Alerting & National Search and Rescue Program (SAR)]

 

37.   Do you have a cellphone that receives emergency alerts?

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

38.   How often do you engage in outdoor activities that are outside your cell phone coverage range?

 

Daily

Weekly

Monthly

Once every few months

Once or twice a year

Rarely

Never

Don’t know what my cell coverage is

 

[IF ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR OR MORE OFTEN ASK Q39, OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q40]:

 

39.   When engaged in outdoor activities outside of your cell phone coverage range, do you carry another type of communication or alerting device, such as a personal locator beacon?

 

Always

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

 

40.   When engaged in outdoor activities outside of your cell phone coverage range, are you adequately prepared with the essential equipment for the activity? (These may include items such as a whistle, extra water, extra food, extra clothing, etc.)

 

Always

Sometimes

Rarely

Never

 

[Heading not to be shown: Advertising & Resources on emergency preparedness]

 

41.   Have you ever looked for online resources and information to help prepare yourself against [keep split sample groups the same as they were in Q17] ‘weather-related emergencies/natural disasters’ specifically?

 

Yes

No

 

[IF YES, ASK Q42 OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q43]

 

42.   Did you find what you were looking for?

 

Yes

No

43.   Many different organizations provide the public with information about preparing for weather-related emergencies/natural disasters.  How credible do you find each of the following in providing information on how to prepare for emergencies?

 

GRID ROWS

[RANDOMIZE ORDER]

Government of Canada

Your provincial government

Your municipal government

Your local first responders including Police or Fire department

 

GRID COLUMNS

Very credible

Somewhat credible

Not very credible

Not at all credible

 

44.   Have you ever heard of the Government of Canada website, “Get Prepared”? This website offers information on how to prepare for and protect yourself against natural disasters.

 

Yes

No

Don’t know

 

45.   How many people live in your household?

 

[Range 1-19] 

 

46.   How many children under the age of 18 are living in your household? Please reference only the children for which you are the parent or legal guardian.  (If there are no children under 18 in your household, please type 0) [Range 0-9]

 

[IF > 0 ASK 47 OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q48]

 

47.   Please provide the age of the children under the age of 18 in your household. Please reference only the children for which you are the parent or legal guardian.

 

Child 1  { }

Child 2  { }

Child 3  { }

Child 4  { }

Child 5  { }

 

48.   Are you a caregiver to an elderly dependent?

 

Yes

No

 

49.   Which of the following categories best describes your current employment status?  [select one only]

 

Working full-time, 30 or more hours per week

Working part-time, less than 30 hours per week

Self-employed

Unemployed, but looking for work

A student attending school full-time

Retired

Not in the workforce [Full-time homemaker, unemployed and not looking for work]

Other—[Do not specify]

Prefer not to answer

 

50.   Which of the following best describes your total household income last year, before taxes, from all sources for all household members?  [select one only]

 

Under $20,000

$20,000 to just under $40,000

$40,000 to just under $60,000

$60,000 to just under $80,000

$80,000 to just under $100,000

$100,000 to just under $150,000

$150,000 and above

Prefer not to answer

 

 

51.   Do you have any pets?

 

Yes

No

 

This completes the survey. On behalf of Public Safety Canada, thank you for your valuable input. In the coming months, the results of this survey will be available on the Library and Archives Canada website.