Representative Surveys

CommunitiesThrive® strives to be the most advanced provider of representative community surveys. Conducted by phone, internet and face to face, our surveys feature AI and other innovations that increase depth of understanding.

Our Difference

Following are our key points of difference in the delivery of surveys:

Representative sampling via accessible channels	We achieve a statistically valid sample via mobile phone, landline, internet, and face-to-face engagement. The face-to-face engagement can target hard-to-reach residents who, for example, are: (a) of First Nations or culturally- and linguistically-diverse background; (b) in remote areas; (c) in residential care; (d) in school, via or under the supervision of teachers; and (e) users of specific spaces and amenities.
Better benchmarking	We achieve relevant benchmarks by conducting a parallel survey of paid respondents in other comparative areas (with the same council classification or conditions as yours). In our view, non-current data from non-comparative areas are not sufficiently relevant for benchmarking; and questions previously asked elsewhere might not be right for your unique community.
Better driver analysis	We recognise that the key local drivers of community satisfaction, quality of life and well-being must be accurately identified to inform strategy, and that they are complex, interrelated, and nonlinear. Therefore, we employ deep learning techniques to model and benchmark them using IBM’s Watson® artificial intelligence (AI) platform and supercomputing. Compared to linear-only regression methods such as Shapley, our method has superior explanatory and predictive power.
Better reporting	Our reports feature contemporary data visualisation that is easy to understand, including ‘heat maps’ that show the variability of each issue by suburb.
Solutions, not just problems	Working closely with your organisation, we select three or more key issues from the survey findings. Then we undertake a review of relevant scientific literature, reporting on evidence-informed interventions that you may wish to consider.

Having reviewed dozens of community surveys as part of our strategic planning work, we have identified many limitations of their design and methods that lead to ill-informed decision-making and resource allocation. To improve community and organisational outcomes, we have developed innovative solutions to these limitations.

The discussion that follows is framed as a response to the requirements of councils in relation to Community Perceptions Surveys and similar; however, our solutions can create value for all organisations seeking to undertake representative engagement. Whilst the full benefit of our solutions is delivered through a comprehensive package that includes original survey design and data collection, we can also apply our advanced analytical techniques to your existing data to provide new insights.

1. Survey Design

Designing our community surveys with the end in mind, we ensure that they: (1.1) provide a balanced undertaking of all relevant issues and requirements; (1.2) provide clarity and depth of understanding; (1.3) support evaluation and prioritisation; (1.4) support representative sampling and analysis; and (1.5) foster ongoing engagement and trust.

#	Aim and Common Limitations	Our Solution
1.1	Provide a balanced understanding of all relevant issues and requirements Commonly limited by lack of strategic context and peer review	We undertake a desktop review of your council’s integrated planning and other guiding documents to develop an understanding of the strategic context of your project; and we work closely with your council to ensure balanced inclusion of all pertinent issues and requirements. To ensure that nothing has been missed, we then circulate the draft survey to our network of Associates for peer review. Optionally, we can first undertake a Local Opportunities Review to develop a deeper understanding of the context of your project.
1.2	Provide clarity and depth of understanding Commonly limited by lack of methodological rigour and diversity	We leverage our expertise to ensure precision of language and an appropriate mixed-methods design, typically including a combination of qualitative and quantitative questions. Then we conduct a staged Survey of Comparative Areas to ensure that responses from all segments are clear and fit for purpose (pilot stage), and to establish benchmark data (completion stage). NB: The Survey of Comparative Areas is completed online by paid respondents from other comparative areas with the same council classification or conditions as yours. In our view, non-current data from non-comparative areas are not sufficiently relevant for benchmarking; and questions previously asked elsewhere might not be right for your unique community.
1.3	Support benchmarking, evaluation, and prioritisation Commonly limited by not differentiating satisfaction from importance, and not supporting benchmarking or driver analysis	First, we ensure that questions distinguish between satisfaction and perceived importance where required. Second, we review standardised surveys and your council’s previous surveys to identify benchmarkable questions for inclusion; and we survey comparative areas to establish additional benchmark data (via the Survey of Comparative Areas). Third, to support the identification of each factor’s contribution to overall satisfaction, quality of life and well-being, we include appropriate questions for driver analysis.
1.4	Support representative sampling and analysis Commonly limited by not including Census-informed questions and quotas, and by inaccessibility	We ensure the inclusion of appropriate Census-informed demographic and geographic questions and quotas for representative sampling and weighting to the local population profile; we ensure compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (W3C 2018); and we provide multilingual options where required.
1.5	Foster ongoing engagement and trust Commonly limited by not providing opportunities for further participation, and by unethical practices	We ensure the inclusion of appropriate ‘opt-in’ questions to provide opportunities for ongoing engagement, evaluation and information provision; and we review the overall survey design and process against the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (NHMRC 2018).

2. Data Collection

As part of our data collection process, we work to: (2.1) engage your whole community; (2.2) achieve optimal response and completion rates; (2.3) comply fully with all applicable legislation; (2.4) meet your timeframe; and (2.5) minimise your costs.

#	Aim and Common Limitations	Our Solution
2.1	Engage your whole community Commonly limited by engaging a subset of the community that is too small, self-selected and homogeneous to be representative	We ensure representativeness of your whole community by conducting a list-assisted random mobile phone and landline survey that a margin of error of 3-5% (based on budget) at the 95% confidence level for the local population profile, typically requiring a sample size of n=400 or larger. As part of this, we source mobile phone and landline lists for your area directly (we do not require access to your council’s records). In parallel, we conduct an accessible internet survey, and face-to-face targeted intercept engagement, to ensure that all residents are provided the opportunity to participate. The face-to-face engagement can target hard-to-reach residents who, for example, are: (a) of First Nations or culturally- and linguistically-diverse background; (b) in remote areas; (c) in residential care; (d) in school, via or under the supervision of teachers; and (e) users of specific spaces and amenities. Optionally, we can conduct the survey in multiple languages and send mass SMS text messages inviting recipients to participate.
2.2	Achieve optimal response and completion rates Commonly limited by interviewers lacking skills, and interviews taking too long	We ensure that all interviewers are highly skilled in engagement and are native speakers of English, and that respondents can answer all questions in under ten minutes if they wish; and we provide a local number for display and call back purposes.
2.3	Comply fully with all applicable legislation Commonly limited by non-compliance	We ensure that our data collection process is compliant with all applicable legislation, including calling time, disclosure, and minimum age requirements.
2.4	Meet your timeframe Commonly limited by supplier capacity	Leveraging our Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) partners’ capacity for rapid data collection, we can meet your council’s timeframe no matter how tight.
2.5	Minimise your costs Commonly limited by not leveraging economies of scale and scope	Our CATI partners are among the world’s largest and most advanced data collection companies. Working across industries and regions from their call stations in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom, their economies of scale and scope ensure great value for your council and community.

3. Analysis and Reporting

In our analysis and reporting, we: (3.1) provide context for the findings; (3.2) examine the frequency, interrelatedness and socio-spatial variability of the findings; (3.3) provide options to address the identified issues; (3.4) support effective and transparent communication with all audiences; and (3.5) ensure clear and impactful communication to each audience.

#	Aim and Common Limitations	Our Solution
3.1	Provide context for the findings Commonly limited by lack of relevant benchmarks and driver analysis	In our reporting, we compare the findings to relevant benchmarks, including data from: (a) our Survey of Comparative Areas; (b) standardised surveys where available; and (c) your council’s previous surveys where available. As part of this, we control for between-group differences in demographic composition. Additionally, we report on the differences of satisfaction and perceived importance where measured (gap analysis), and on each factor’s contribution to overall satisfaction, quality of life and well-being (driver analysis using AI). NB: We employ deep learning techniques to model and benchmark these contributions using IBM’s Watson® artificial intelligence (AI) platform and supercomputing. Compared to linear-only regression methods such as Shapley, our method has superior explanatory and predictive power (as evidenced by our models’ significantly higher R² and lower RMSE values in holdout validation).
3.2	Examine the frequency, interrelatedness, and socio-spatial variability of the findings Commonly limited by lack of analytical depth and sophistication	For qualitative findings, we report on the number of times that each identified issue was raised (frequency distribution analysis). For quantitative findings, we append a breakdown of each finding by demographic characteristics such as age, background, and socioeconomic status (cross-tabulation analysis); and we append a ‘heat map’ of each finding by suburb (spatial mapping). Further, we report on the gap and driver analyses discussed above, and provide breakdowns by channel throughout (phone, internet, and face to face).
3.3	Provide options to address the identified issues Commonly limited by lack of literature review	Working closely with your council, we select three or more key issues from the findings. Then we undertake a review of relevant scientific literature, reporting on evidence-informed interventions that your council may wish to consider.
3.4	Ensure clear and impactful communication to each audience Commonly limited by ‘one-size-fits-all’ reporting that lacks summary, visualisation and transparency	Our reports feature: a ‘punchy’ two-page executive summary that clearly and concisely presents all of the key issues and options for consideration; and contemporary World Bank-informed data visualisation that is easy to understand, including ‘heat maps’ that show the variability of each issue by suburb. We prepare tailored reports and for each audience, including: (a) comprehensive reports for councillors and council staff; (b) community issues and priorities reports for local services and other stakeholders; and (c) high-level summary reports for public consumption. Then we present and workshop the reports in person, by video conference and/or by pre-recorded video. We ensure transparency by describing our methods and findings clearly and fully, and by providing our raw de-identified data.
3.5	Identify opportunities for further engagement Commonly limited by not acknowledging gaps in knowledge	Our reports highlight gaps in knowledge for your council’s consideration in relation to future engagement activities.

We’d love to talk to you about how we can help your community and organisation to thrive. Please Contact Us to start the conversation.

© CommunitiesThrive® 2019 | ABN 48 789 494 281
25 King Street, Melbourne VIC 3000, Australia
hello@communitiesthrive.com.au