The survey invitation can be delivered directly to young people through different community channels. Young people who have taken the survey report that the primary way they learn about it is through a family member, so reaching their parents should be one part of your strategy. Young people also get connected to the survey through friends, organizations they are involved with, teachers and relevant social media channels.

The community approach has a number of advantages:

1. The process can appear more trustworthy to potential participants, in that completing the survey is optional and not brokered or “compelled” by an institutional intermediary like school.
2. Distribution can spread organically to a potentially large and diverse group of participants.
3. It is low-cost and relatively easy to implement.
4. It reduces institutional and administrative barriers.
5. The data may be more readily shared with a wider range of potential users, including young people.

This approach also has some potential downsides compared to an institutional approach, such as school-based delivery:

1. There are fewer guarantees regarding the ultimate sample size and potentially fewer youth respondents to optimize representation or diversity.
2. Potential partners and users of the data may feel, therefore, that the data lacks rigour.
3. Comparability of the results to other data sets and to subsequent repeats of the survey is less certain.

The local school system is one option for distribution. To build on the considerations above, depending on the community, school-based distribution may be more or less difficult to secure and may present advantages as well as disadvantages. Often school administrators, who are regularly requested to provide access to students for research purposes, are highly protective of classroom time and disinclined to add another burden to educators. They may place restrictions on data-sharing and may have school climate surveys they prefer to distribute. Young people may perceive that participation is compelled rather than voluntary and may harbour concerns about responding to certain questions if they believe that there might be repercussions from school authorities. As well, school surveys will not include young people who are not in school and who may be among the most vulnerable. 

Of course, approaches to distribute the survey can be combined in a number of ways. For example, if schools are unwilling to dedicate classroom time to administering the survey, they can still use their communications infrastructure to reach students and their parents with information about the survey and links to it online. Ultimately, the options should be considered with youth perspectives, as with other decisions related to the survey. At a minimum, the timing of the community survey should avoid overlapping with in-school surveys. If the survey is delivered at school, mid-year may be an opportune time to allow for some school experiences to be reflected in the survey responses and to provide sufficient time for sharing and acting on results during the school year.

Promoting youth participation

Each young person who completes the Child and Youth Well-being Survey strengthens the data and ads to the project’s credibility within your community. 

Being successful at this stage is as much about working smart as it is about working hard. Youth have incredibly sensitive filters for messaging they find inauthentic. The ways they share information are highly specialized, and the platforms they engage with are constantly shifting. For this stage, young people must be actively engaged in the creation and distribution of communications content and engagement tactics. 

A stand-alone committee or work team focused on building youth participation is a good way to invite input from a larger and more diverse group of youth. The commitment can be short term, and its leaders can focus on creating an environment that is welcoming, creative and fun. Another approach is to convene a “Youth Lab,” bringing young people together for an hour or two to ideate messages, media and messengers that will reach, resonate with and include diverse community youth. This committee or Youth Lab could also provide ideas and input to a range of survey decisions to help engage young people in this stage of the data cycle, including the graphic design elements; online content and format; social media messages and platforms; video; “merch”; activities like survey completion parties; and incentives. 

See Appendix for a Youth Lab outline.

Youth Animators

For youth engagement, consider recruiting Youth Animators (who may be youth ambassadors from partner organizations) to reach other organizations and youth in their networks through social media (messages, videos, Instagram takeovers, etc.), hosting “survey parties” (in libraries, youth clubs, etc.), and raising awareness in their youth clubs and groups inside and outside school. 

See Appendix for a guide for Youth Animators.

Street Teams

A Street Team is a means for youth to engage other youth in spaces where they are. Street Teams of young people go out into the community in twos or threes to promote awareness of the survey and any related youth activities, such as survey parties. Preparation involves practising interviews or planning street art (e.g., performances or chalked information about how to access the survey), preparing materials (e.g., sandwich boards, flags, posters and costumes) and planning locations, agreeing in advance on routes and times that consider safety and reach. The youth in Street Teams should work within their communities or neighbourhoods.

See Appendix for a Street Team playbook.