Listening Survey – Making sure that improvements meet the needs of the local residents
Key contacts: Gillian Smith
Address: Raploch Community Partnership, Community Partners Room, Raploch Community Campus, Drip Road, Raploch, Stirling, FK8 1SD
Telephone: 01786 272304
Email: Gillian Smith
Web address: Listening Survey
In a nutshell
We operate in an area that is undergoing extensive regeneration. We wanted to make sure that the community was at the heart of all these changes. We therefore undertook one of the largest community engagement exercises ever seen in Scotland. We visited about 800 households – going door to door - to identify any concerns from residents. We used this information to tell the agencies that are involved in regeneration what the community thought about the changes and what they wanted to see in the future. At the same time, we were able to answer any questions that residents had about the changes. And we could alert them to opportunities open to them – by signposting them to a number of agencies.
The issues
Some people are harder to engage – especially those who don’t belong to any community groups. We felt that the traditional methods of informing and involving people were not enough. People had become detached and couldn’t see the benefits that regeneration could have on their lives. We wanted to know how the wider community felt and what they wanted to see happening in their neighbourhoods. Many traditional methods did not involve this positive outreach approach.
How we got started
Those involved were:
• Raploch Urban Regeneration Company (URC), who provided funding;
• the URC’s Enhanced Community Support Project; and
• the Raploch Community Partnership (a community organisation).
We asked Community Renewal – a not for profit organisation that specialises in community participation – to help us conduct the Listening Survey. We had heard about their work in engaging communities in other places and felt that their approach was appropriate and very interesting.
We advertised in the local press for local people to become community ‘animators’ to undertake the door to door surveys. Four local people were appointed. Community Renewal trained the animators in how to ask questions, record information and respond to any issues. We used Community Renewal’s database to record the findings from the survey. To make sure that it suited our needs we suggested some changes to the database that were then incorporated.
The Listening Survey was carried out between 2006 and 2007, lasting just over one year.
How it works
The process is designed to give a voice to those who often do not become involved. We used local people – ‘animators’ - to carry out the surveys. They know the area and the issues that might affect the community. They can also take a non judgemental approach to the community’s views. Animators were paid on a part-time basis.
It is called the Listening Survey because it is an open ended listening process. Animators go with a set of questions but are open for any discussion. It is about identifying any issues and concerns that people may have. The animators support them in identifying what they would like to change in their community and in their own lives.
As part of the process, animators are able to refer people to other agencies that can help them in some way. This might be about benefits, employment or health issues.
We visited each household on several occasions. This allowed us to record any changes in the circumstances of the household and also changes in the views about what they felt. It meant that people were involved throughout the process not just at the ‘recording’ stage.
The information that the animators gathered is entered into a database. Every month we produced reports based on the information that we had gathered. Any issues that were identified were taken straight to the organisations that could help solve the problems. We used the views as evidence that things could be changed.
Our outcomes
The Listening Survey has been a real success. We have been able to:
• Reach the wider community. We have given 800 households the opportunity to tell us what they think about the changes in their area and how it is affecting them.
• Evidence need for change. The views and the feedback we have received has allowed us to inform a range of agencies and show that the community would like to see improvements in particular areas.
• Work on the relationships we have with other agencies. By giving feedback to agencies, we have created a stronger link to those that can help us solve any issues that the community is facing.
• Create links between service providers and the community. Our animators have been trained to be able to refer people to appropriate agencies that can help people improve their lives in terms of for example health and employment.
• Help build individual confidence. By taking part in this project our animators have learnt how to work in a team and gather and present information. Their own self-esteem has also benefited from being able to be part of a process that helps others.
All outcomes are recorded. We have had 42 positive outcomes where we (or agencies we have spoken to) have been able to change something for the better. Of these, 25 have been about helping people become more engaged and thirteen have helped people move towards employability.
One great thing – our database
The database is a fantastic tool. It has been developed to take our needs into consideration. It has allowed us to record a wide range of information. It includes both soft and hard indicators - from aspirations and issues to solutions.
Importantly, it is more than a tool to record information. We can draw a number of reports out from the database. We can, for, example say that nearly one fifth of those we spoke to said that youth disturbance was a problem in the area. And a quarter said that they wanted to see more activities being developed for young people. This sets out the problem and offers a solution.
The animators also record what information people ask for – identifying gaps in information. From the report in January 2007, we know that 21 people asked the animators about what was happening in their area in terms of regeneration and that eight people wanted to know more about being involved in activities in the community.
Lessons learnt
We have learnt a great deal from carrying out this project and speaking directly to individuals.
• Although traditional methods, such as organising meetings or sending out postal surveys have their benefits, it is important to reach out to the wider community. We learnt that each neighbourhood have their own issues they are concerned about. It is harder to identify these using more traditional ways of engaging people.
• Using local people to carry out the surveys encouraged a more trusting relationship between us and people in the community. They were seen to be ‘independent’ and outside council structures. People felt more comfortable opening up to the animators to say what they really felt.
• It is useful to look around for other good practice to include in a project like this. We used some of the principles of ‘appreciative inquiry’. We asked people what they liked in their communities and what they would like to see in the future, instead of focusing on the negatives.
• It is vital that you offer enough support for the animators to do their job. We gave all animators counselling training. It is also important to train them not to become too involved. In the beginning, our animators tried to do too much for people.
• Don’t promise things you can’t deliver – it is important that you know what is possible. At the end of the day, we rely on other agencies and organisations to take action on the issues that we identify.
• Develop and keep working on the relationships you have with agencies that can deal with the issues that the community has raised. If there has been a positive outcome, feed this back to the agency and let them know how their involvement has made a difference.
• Make sure that the set of questions that are being asked are clear and simple. While they are good to kick start a discussion, the person you are speaking to should ‘set the agenda’ of your conversation. People are then able to highlight any issues – small or large. It isn’t just about the larger regeneration work and the overall direction of these. For example, several people pointed out how a gate for the children’s play area had been fitted the wrong way. When this was explained to the service provider, it was changed. This made a big difference to everyone using the park.
• If we were able to carry out the survey again, we would like to set up a formal practitioners’ group involving people from key agencies. This could make the process more straightforward and effective.
What next?
We currently do not have funds to continue the Listening Survey. We are, however, in the process of trying to secure additional funding as we believe this was an invaluable project and should be carried out on a continuous basis.
