London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Notice of Meeting ...
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011 · 2018-05-23 · London Borough of...
Transcript of London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011 · 2018-05-23 · London Borough of...
Cover Page
Research
Report
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
Prepared for: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents
Survey 2011
Prepared for: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham
Prepared by: BMG Research
December 2011
Produced by BMG Research
© Bostock Marketing Group Ltd, 2011
www.bmgresearch.co.uk
Project: 8530
Registered in England No. 2841970
Registered office:
7 Holt Court North
Heneage Street West
Aston Science Park
Birmingham
B7 4AX
UK
Tel: +44 (0) 121 3336006
UK VAT Registration No. 580 6606 32
Birmingham Chamber of Commerce Member No: B4626
Market Research Society Company Partner
ESOMAR Member (The World Association of Research Professionals)
British Quality Foundation Member
Market Research Quality Standards Association
ISO 9001/2000; The International quality mark for organisational excellence
ISO 9001/2008; The provision of Market Research services which incorporates ISO 20252/2006
Investors in People Standard - Certificate No. WMQC 0614
Interviewer Quality Control Scheme (IQCS) Member Company
Registered under the Data Protection Act - Registration No: Z5081943
The; Market Research Society Code of Conduct
The BMG Research logo is a trade mark of Bostock Marketing Group Ltd
Table of Contents
1 Key Findings 2011 ......................................................................................................... 1
2 Trends over time ............................................................................................................ 3
2.1 National Indicator (NI) Summary ............................................................................. 3
2.2 Comparisons on wider measures ............................................................................ 4
3 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Background and method ......................................................................................... 5
3.2 Report contents ...................................................................................................... 5
3.3 Data reporting ......................................................................................................... 6
4 Views on the local area .................................................................................................. 7
4.1 Local priorities ......................................................................................................... 7
4.1.1 Younger respondents ....................................................................................... 8
4.1.2 Older respondents ........................................................................................... 8
4.1.3 Families ........................................................................................................... 8
4.1.4 Homeowners.................................................................................................... 8
4.2 Areas for improvement ............................................................................................ 9
4.2.1 Female respondents ...................................................................................... 10
4.2.2 Age of respondents ........................................................................................ 10
4.2.3 Families ......................................................................................................... 10
4.2.4 Ethnicity ......................................................................................................... 10
4.3 Mapping priorities and improvements.................................................................... 11
4.4 Overall satisfaction with the local area (NI 5) ........................................................ 13
4.5 Neighbourhood belonging (NI 2) ........................................................................... 14
4.6 Satisfaction with the home as a place to live ......................................................... 14
5 Local public services .................................................................................................... 16
5.1 Satisfaction with public services ............................................................................ 16
5.2 Overall satisfaction with the council ...................................................................... 17
6 Local decision making and involvement ....................................................................... 18
6.1 Influence on local decision making (NI 4) .............................................................. 18
6.2 Helping out (NI 6) .................................................................................................. 19
6.3 Getting involved (NI 3) .......................................................................................... 20
6.4 Communicating with the Council ........................................................................... 21
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
7 Respect and cohesion.................................................................................................. 22
7.1 Cohesion (NI 1 and NI 23) .................................................................................... 22
7.2 Support for older people (NI 139) .......................................................................... 24
7.3 Satisfaction of those aged 65 or over with home and neighbourhood as a place to
live (NI 138) ..................................................................................................................... 24
8 Community safety ........................................................................................................ 25
8.1 Safety in the local area ......................................................................................... 25
9 Anti-social behaviour .................................................................................................... 26
9.1 Perceptions of anti-social behaviour (NI 17; NI 41; NI 42) ..................................... 26
9.2 The response of local services to ASB (NI 27; NI 21) ............................................ 27
10 Health services ......................................................................................................... 31
10.1 Use of health services ........................................................................................... 31
10.2 Health and wellbeing (NI 119) ............................................................................... 33
10.2.1 Levels of smoking .......................................................................................... 33
11 Respondent profile – weighted ................................................................................. 34
12 Appendix One – Definitions of National Indicators .................................................... 39
13 Appendix Two – Questionnaire ................................................................................. 40
Key Findings 2011
1
1 Key Findings 2011
Respondents feel that the most important factors in making somewhere a good
place to live are the level of crime, clean streets, and health services. Issues
which are considered to be in most need of improvement are the level of crime,
followed closely by road and pavement repairs, then activities for teenagers,
clean streets and job prospects.
Around two thirds of respondents are satisfied overall with their local area as a
place to live.
Just over two fifths of respondents report feeling a strong sense of belonging to
their immediate neighbourhood, and this tends to increase with age.
More than three quarters are satisfied with their home as a place to live.
In terms of universal services, respondents are most satisfied with local bus
services, refuse collection and libraries. However, around half are dissatisfied
with road and pavement repairs, activities for teenagers and facilities for young
people.
Just over half of respondent express satisfaction with the way the council runs
things.
Nearly four in ten respondents agree that they can influence local decision
making.
Although the majority of respondents have not been involved with any
volunteering work in the past year (seven in ten), around one in eight volunteer at
least monthly.
Around one in eight respondents have participated in civic activities/groups in the
past 12 months.
Letter is the preferred method in which the majority of residents would like the
council to communicate with them.
Just over half of respondents agree that their local area is a place where people
from different backgrounds get on well together; just under half disagree.
Amongst BME respondents nearly three quarters agree that their local area is a
place where people from different backgrounds get on well together.
Nearly six in ten respondents feel that there is a problem in the local area with
people not treating each other with respect and consideration.
A quarter of respondents feel that older people in the area are able to get the
support they need to continue to live at home, while the majority (six in ten) don’t
know.
During the day around seven in ten respondents feel safe outside. At night this
proportion falls to around a third.
The majority of respondents feel that anti-social behaviour issues are fairly
unproblematic in their local area. The issue which is perceived to be most
problematic across all areas is teenagers hanging around the streets.
Approaching two fifths agree the police and other local public services seek
people’s views on anti-social behaviour (ASB) issues, while nearly a third
disagrees.
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
2
A third agrees that police and other local public services deal with ASB issues
successfully and just over a quarter disagree.
In terms of local health services, respondents that have used these services are
most satisfied with their dentist, followed by their GP.
Around seven in ten consider their health in general to be good.
Trends over time
3
2 Trends over time
2.1 National Indicator (NI) Summary
The 2011 Place Survey provided eighteen national indicators for local authorities.
These indicators are shown below, including scores dating from the 2006/7 BVPI
Survey to the current Residents’ Survey.
2006/7 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11
NI1: % of people who believe people from different backgrounds get on well together in their local area
48 49 56 52
NI2: % of people who feel that they belong to their neighbourhood
- 45 46 43
NI3: Civic participation in the local area - 13 11 12
NI4: % of people who feel they can influence decisions in their locality
39 37 36 38
NI5: Overall / general satisfaction with local area 48 57 54 64
NI6: Participation in regular volunteering - 16 15 13
NI17: Perceptions of anti-social behaviour - 39 40 30
NI21: Dealing with local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime issues by the local council and police
- 30 26 33
NI23: Perceptions that people in the area treat one another with respect and consideration
74 59 56 58
NI27: Understanding of local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime issues by the local council and police
- 32 30 37
NI41: Perceptions of drunk or rowdy behaviour as a problem
36 46 46 40
NI42: Perceptions of drug use or drug dealing as a problem
61 52 50 46
NI119: Self-reported measure of people’s overall health and well-being
- 70 71 69
NI138: Satisfaction of people over 65 with both home and neighbourhood
- 63 59 71
NI139: The extent to which older people receive the support they need to live independently
- 29 30 24
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
4
2.2 Comparisons on wider measures
The table below shows scores that were not National Indicators in the 2011 Place
Survey but nevertheless provide a useful picture of trends over time on a number of
key measures.
2006/7 2008/9 2009/10 2010/11
% overall satisfaction with the way the authority runs things
55 49 52 53
% satisfied with local area as a place to live 48 57 54 64
% satisfied with public transport information 58 57 58 65
% satisfied with local bus service 69 68 67 77
% satisfied with sports and leisure facilities 56 52 54 66
% satisfied with libraries 67 64 71 73
% satisfied with museums/galleries 29 31 30 28
% satisfied with theatres/concert halls 34 36 36 34
% satisfied with parks and open spaces 66 67 66 70
% who feel level of crime needs to be improved 61 49 46 42
% agree can influence decisions affecting local area
39 37 36 38
Introduction
5
3 Introduction
3.1 Background and method
This report summarises the results of the 2011 London Borough of Barking and
Dagenham (LBBD) Residents Survey, which was carried out in September 2011 via
self-completion postal questionnaire.
The target population for the survey was the adult population (18+) of LBBD and the
sample was drawn from the Postcode Address File (PAF) sample frame, on the same
basis as that supplied by the Audit Commission for the original Place Survey in 2008.
A random sample of 4,000 was used in this survey, plus an additional mailing of 1,500,
after it became clear that response rates had declined somewhat since the Place
Survey and BMG would need to boost the total number of responses to achieve the
target 1,100.
In total 1,208 completed useable questionnaires were returned, which, excluding 55
addresses that were not found, represents an adjusted response rate of 22%. On an
observed statistic of 50%, a sample size of 1,208 is subject to a maximum confidence
interval of +/-2.82 at the 95% level of confidence.
3.2 Report contents
This report contains a written summary of the findings of the 2011 Residents’ Survey.
In most instances, respondents who answered ‘don’t know’ or who did not answer the
relevant question have been excluded from the sample, resulting in a reduced
unweighted sample base. The title of each table or graph will state whether data has
been run on all responses or if certain responses have been removed (valid responses
only).
Results have been presented rounded to 0 decimal places, which may mean that
some totals exceed 100%. This also has implications for the appearance of summary
percentages; for example, if 25.4% of respondents are very satisfied and 30.3% of
respondents are fairly satisfied, these figures are rounded down to 25% and 30%
respectively. However, the sum of these two responses is 55.7% which is rounded up
to 56%, whereas the individual rounded responses suggest this total should be 55%.
This explains any instances of where summary text does not match a graph or table it
is referring to.
All data included in this report has been weighted. Weighting is a statistical technique
used to counteract the deviations that occur in survey samples against the population
as a whole. In this case, weighting has been used to ensure that the sample used here
corresponds to the overall population of LBBD.
The weighting process was carried out in line with the 2008 guidance received from
the Audit Commission, using the variables household size, age, gender and ethnicity in
order to provide a sample that is representative of LBBD.
It should be noted that the total sample includes only 26 respondents who are aged
18-24 years old. A sample base of this size is not considered large enough to be
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
6
representative of all 18-24 year olds in LBBD; therefore in analysis of respondent
subgroups references to this age group have generally been avoided.
Statistically significant differences between subgroups at the 95% level of confidence
are noted in the text.
3.3 Data reporting
A separate data report is available, containing cross-tabulations by the following:
Age;
Gender;
Tenure of home;
Number of children in household;
Economic activity/employment status;
Disability status;
Ethnicity;
Overall satisfaction with local area;
Overall satisfaction with council;
Religion.
Views on the local area
7
4 Views on the local area
4.1 Local priorities
Residents were asked which of the issues below they would say are most important in
making somewhere a good place to live. More than half of those providing a valid
response think that the level of crime (58%) is important, followed by clean streets
(50%) and health services (43%), as the second and third most mentioned aspects. A
third of residents consider affordable decent housing important (34%), while more than
a quarter think job prospects (28%) and public transport (27%) are amongst the most
important aspects in making somewhere a good place to live.
Figure 1: Q1. Most important factors in making somewhere a good place to live (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 924
58%
50%
43%
34%
28%
27%
25%
24%
22%
20%
19%
18%
17%
17%
13%
11%
11%
10%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
The level of crime
Clean streets
Health services
Affordable decent housing
Job prospects
Public transport
Activities for teenagers
Education provision
Getting on with your neighbours
Road and pavement repairs
Parks and open spaces
Facilities for young children
Shopping facilities
Wage levels and local cost of living
Access to nature
Activities for over 60s
Sports and leisure facilities
Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums)
Race relations
The level of traffic congestion
Community activities
Getting involved in your neighbourhood
The level of pollution
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
8
Issues that are most likely to be chosen as important vary amongst subgroups of
respondents as outlined below.
4.1.1 Younger respondents
Younger respondents (those aged 25 to 44) are more likely than others to mention the
following:
Facilities for young children (26% compared to 18% of the total sample).
4.1.2 Older respondents
Older respondents (aged 65 and over) are more likely to cite the following:
Health services (57% compared to 43% total sample);
Road and pavement repairs (33% compared to 20%);
Activities for over 60s (26% compared to 11%).
4.1.3 Families
Unsurprisingly, education provision is particularly important to those with children in
their household (36% compared to 18% of those without children). Families are also
more likely than respondents without children to mention activities for teenagers (32%)
and facilities for young children (31%).
4.1.4 Homeowners
Those who own their home are more likely than others to mention the following:
The level of crime (66% compared to 58% of the total sample);
Public transport (32% compared to 27%).
Views on the local area
9
4.2 Areas for improvement
Respondents were then asked which issues are in most need of improvement in their
local area. For this and all other relevant questions, the local area was defined as the
area within 15-20 minutes walking distance from the respondent’s home.
The most common response was the level of crime (42%), followed closely by road
and pavement repairs (41%), then activities for teenagers (38%), clean streets (36%)
and job prospects (34%). Very few respondents considered ‘getting on with your
neighbours’ (6%) and ‘getting involved in your neighbourhood’ (6%) to be in need of
improvement.
Figure 2: Q2. Things that most need improving in the local area (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 959
42%
41%
38%
36%
34%
22%
21%
21%
21%
19%
16%
14%
12%
12%
12%
11%
11%
10%
10%
9%
8%
6%
6%
The level of crime
Road and pavement repairs
Activities for teenagers
Clean streets
Job prospects
Facilities for young children
The level of traffic congestion
Affordable decent housing
Wage levels and local cost of living
Health services
Shopping facilities
Community activities
Parks and open spaces
Race relations
Education provision
Public transport
Sports and leisure facilities
The level of pollution
Activities for over 60s
Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums)
Access to nature
Getting on with your neighbours
Getting involved in your neighbourhood
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
10
Respondents’ views regarding the issues that most need improving vary amongst
subgroups of respondents as outlined below.
4.2.1 Female respondents
Female respondents were more likely than males to mention job prospects (38%
compared to 28% of male residents) and shopping facilities (20%; 12%) as being in
need of improvement.
4.2.2 Age of respondents
Respondents aged 45-64 years were more likely than other age groups to mention job
prospects (40% compared to 34% of the total sample). Whilst older respondents
(those aged 65+) are more likely to report activities for over 60s as being in need of
improvement (21% compared to 10% of the total sample).
4.2.3 Families
Amongst households with children the proportion that considers education provision in
need of improvement increases to a fifth (19%, compared with 12% amongst the total
sample).
4.2.4 Ethnicity
White respondents are significantly more likely than BME respondents to consider
road and pavement repairs to be in need of improvement (46%; 29%), while education
provision is mentioned significantly more by BME respondents (27%) than by White
respondents (7%).
Views on the local area
11
4.3 Mapping priorities and improvements
Figure 3 overleaf plots the factors that respondents deem as most important against
the factors that are described as in most need of improvement. This will provide the
London Borough of Barking and Dagenham with further evidence in deciding where to
focus policies and resources.
Mo
st
ne
ed
s im
pro
vin
g
Calls for improvement
Critical areas for improvement
Maintain Effort
Maintain Strength
Most important
Issues that are regarded as both important and as most in need of improvement are:
The level of crime;
Clean streets;
Job prospects;
Activities for teenagers.
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
12
Figure 3: Most important issues compared to priorities for improvement (all respondents)
Sample base = 1208
Figure 4: Key for Figure 3 above
The level of crime A Shopping facilities M
Clean streets B Wage levels and local cost of living N
Health services C Access to nature O
Affordable decent housing D Sports and leisure facilities P
Job prospects E Activities for over 60s Q
Public transport F
Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums)
R
Activities for teenagers G Race relations S
Education provision H The level of traffic congestion T
Getting on with your neighbours I Community activities U
Road and pavement repairs J
Getting involved in your neighbourhood V
Parks and open spaces K The level of pollution W
Facilities for young children L
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O P
Q
R S
T
U
V
W
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Mo
st
need
s
imp
rovin
g
Most important
Views on the local area
13
4.4 Overall satisfaction with the local area (NI 5)
All respondents were asked to indicate how satisfied they are with their local area as a
place to live.
Two thirds of those who provided a valid response are satisfied with their local area as
a place to live (NI 5: 64%), although most of these are fairly (54%) rather than very
(10%) satisfied. A quarter of respondents are dissatisfied (25%).
Figure 5: Q3. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1190
Dissatisfaction with their area as a place to live increases to a third amongst residents
aged 45-64 years (32%)
10%
54%
12%
16%
9%
Very satisfied
Fairly satisfied
Neither
Fairly dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
14
4.5 Neighbourhood belonging (NI 2)
Respondents were asked how strongly they feel they belong to their immediate
neighbourhood.
Around four in ten of those providing a valid response (NI 2: 43%) feel they belong to
their immediate neighbourhood. However, three in ten feel they do not belong to their
neighbourhood very strongly (34%), and nearly one in four (23%) said they do not feel
a strong sense of belonging at all.
Figure 6: Q5. How strongly do you feel you belong to your immediate neighbourhood (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1086
Older respondents are more likely to feel a strong sense of belonging to their
immediate neighbourhood (53% of those aged over 65, compared to 43% of those
aged 45-64 and 39% of those aged 25-44).
There is a link between overall satisfaction with the local area and feeling a sense of
belonging. The majority (53%) of those who are satisfied with their local area also feel
a strong sense of belonging to the immediate neighbourhood; of those who are
dissatisfied with the local area, only 21% feel a strong sense of belonging.
4.6 Satisfaction with the home as a place to live
More than three quarters of those providing a valid response (78%) are satisfied with
their home as a place to live, including 31% of respondents who are very satisfied.
Around one in seven (14%) express dissatisfaction with their home.
10%
32%
34%
23%
Very strongly
Fairly strongly
Not very strongly
Not at all strongly
Views on the local area
15
Figure 7: Q4. Satisfaction with the home as a place to live (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1186
Although most respondents are happy with their home, older age groups are especially
likely to be satisfied (89% of those aged 65 and over compared with 79% of those
aged 25-44 and 76% of those aged 45-64).
Looking at responses by tenure, home owners are significantly more likely to be
satisfied (87%) than those in social housing (69%) or those with other arrangements
(67%).
31%
47%
7%
8%
6%
Very satisfied
Fairly satisfied
Neither
Fairly dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
16
5 Local public services
5.1 Satisfaction with public services
Respondents were asked to indicate their satisfaction in relation to a number of public
services. All of those who provided a valid response are included in the analysis.
Around three quarters of respondents are satisfied with local bus services (77%),
refuse collection (75%) and libraries (73%). Around two thirds or more are satisfied
with parks and open spaces (70%), doorstep recycling (69%), local tips / household
waste recycling centres (67%), sport/leisure facilities (66%) and local transport
information (65%). However, around half are dissatisfied with road and pavement
repairs (52%), activities for teenagers (50%) and facilities for young people (46%).
Figure 8: Q6. Satisfaction with universal services (valid responses only)
Sample bases vary
11%
16%
9%
17%
15%
15%
15%
11%
16%
38%
26%
39%
52%
26%
25%
46%
50%
11%
9%
18%
13%
16%
19%
19%
24%
25%
13%
35%
26%
13%
39%
46%
28%
33%
77%
75%
73%
70%
69%
67%
66%
65%
59%
49%
39%
35%
35%
34%
28%
26%
18%
Local bus services
Refuse collection
Libraries
Parks and open spaces
Doorstep recycling
Local tips/Household waste recycling centres
Sport/leisure facilities
Local transport information
Education provision
Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse
Social care
Affordable decent housing
Road and pavement repairs
Theatres
Museums
Facilities for young people
Activities for teenagers
Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied
Local public services
17
5.2 Overall satisfaction with the council
Respondents were asked how satisfied they are with the way the council runs things.
Of those providing a valid response, just over half (53%) are satisfied with the way that
the council runs things, while over a fifth are dissatisfied (22%) and a quarter provided
a neutral response (25%).
Figure 9: Q7. Satisfaction with the way the council runs things (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1161
Satisfaction with the way the council runs things is strongly linked to satisfaction with
the local area. Amongst those satisfied with their local area 69% are satisfied with the
way the council runs things, compared with just 23% of respondents dissatisfied with
their local area. Amongst those dissatisfied with their local area 58% are also
dissatisfied with the way the Council runs things.
Satisfaction with the way the council runs things is higher amongst older respondents
(66% of those aged 65+ are satisfied, compared with 53% of the total sample).
Dissatisfaction with the way the council runs things is higher amongst respondents
with a disability (32%) than amongst those who do not have a disability (21%).
8%
45%
25%
14%
8%
Very satisfied
Fairly satisfied
Neither
Fairly dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
18
6 Local decision making and involvement
6.1 Influence on local decision making (NI 4)
The Government aims to build communities where individuals are empowered to make
a difference to their own lives and to the area in which they live. Respondents were
asked whether they agree or disagree that they can influence decisions in their local
area.
The majority of those providing a valid response (62%) disagree that they can
influence local decision making. Just under four in ten (NI 4: 38%) agree.
Figure 10: Q8. Influence on local decision making (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 925
Families with children in the household are more likely than those without children to
agree that they can influence local decision making (44%; 33%).
9%
29%
38%
23%
Definitely agree
Tend to agree
Tend to disagree
Definitely disagree
Local decision making and involvement
19
6.2 Helping out (NI 6)
Local government has an important role to play in creating a culture in which
individuals are able to contribute to their communities by volunteering. To assess the
level of volunteering in Barking and Dagenham, respondents were asked to think
about any group(s), club(s) or organisation(s) that they had been involved with during
the last 12 months.
One in five (20%) of those providing a valid response have given unpaid help to
groups, clubs or organisations in the last 12 months, and one in ten have given unpaid
help but as an individual rather than a group (10%). Seven in ten respondents (70%)
have not given any unpaid help during the last 12 months.
The proportion of respondents participating regularly in voluntary activities i.e. at least
once a month in the past 12 months is 13%, which is indicator NI 6 (NI 6: 13%).
Figure 11: Q10. Provision of unpaid help in the last 12 months (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 920
9%
4%
7%
10%
70%
At least once a week
Less than once a week but at least once a month
Less often
I give unpaid help as an individual only and not through groups(s), club(s) or organisation(s)
I have not given any unpaid help at all over the last 12 months
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
20
6.3 Getting involved (NI 3)
Civic participation is one of the principal means by which individuals exercise and
increase their empowerment for the benefit of the locality. Given the benefits of
resident involvement, respondents were asked to indicate whether in the last 12
months they have been involved with any of seven different types of decision making
groups.
Very few respondents have been involved with any of these groups over the past 12
months (88% have had no involvement). Among those who have been involved, the
most common type of involvement was being a member of another group making
decisions on services in the local community (5%).
Figure 12: Q9. In the last 12 months have you…? (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 920
Around one in ten respondents state that they have taken part in at least one of the
above activities above in the last 12 months, which is indicator NI 3 (NI 3: 11.8%).
1%
4%
4%
4%
3%
4%
5%
88%
Been a local councillor (for the local authority, town or parish)
Been a member of a group making decisions on local health, social care or education services
Been a member of a decision-making group set up to regenerate the local area
Been a member of a decision-making group set up to tackle local crime problems
Been a member of a tenants' group decision-making committee
Been a member of a group making decisions on local services for young people
Been a member of another group making decisions on services in the local community
None of the above
Local decision making and involvement
21
6.4 Communicating with the Council
In 2011, respondents were also asked which methods they would most prefer the
council to use to inform them, or communicate with them, about issues that may affect
them.
The majority said they would most prefer to be contacted by letter (60%), whilst around
one in ten said they would prefer a face to face visit (11%) or a local newspaper /
magazine (11%). Fewer respondents mentioned any other methods, and less than
0.5% mentioned text messages as their preferred method of contact.
Figure 13: Q20. Which methods respondents would prefer the council to use to inform them or communicate with them (Valid responses only)
Sample base: 1103
60%
11%
11%
7%
6%
2%
1%
<0.5%
By letter
Face to face visit
Local newspaper/ magazine
By email/Internet
Leaflets/posters
Via Residents/Tenants groups and forums
By telephone call
Text message
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
22
7 Respect and cohesion
This section reports respondents’ views about issues of community cohesion.
7.1 Cohesion (NI 1 and NI 23)
As a measure of community cohesion, respondents were asked to what extent they
agree or disagree that their local area is a place where people from different
backgrounds get on well together.
Considering all responses, just 1% of respondents feel that there are too few people in
the area to answer this question, while 1% feel that in their area people are all from the
same background. For further analysis, these and any others not providing a valid
response have been removed.
Among those providing a valid response, just over half agree that the local area is a
place where people from different backgrounds get on well together (NI 1: 52%), and
most of these answered that they tend to agree rather than definitely agree. Half of
respondents (48%) disagree with the statement.
Figure 14: Q11. The extent to which respondents agree or disagree that people from different backgrounds get on well together (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 898
Amongst BME respondents agreement that the local area is a place where people
from different backgrounds get on well together is significantly higher, at 72%,
compared with 46% amongst white respondents.
Responses also differ by religion; agreement that the local area is a place where
people from different backgrounds get on well together is highest amongst Muslim
respondents at 65%, compared with 39% amongst Christians, 41% amongst other
religions and just 26% amongst those with no religion.
18%
29%
42%
10%
Definitely disagree
Tend to disagree
Tend to agree
Definitely agree
Respect and cohesion
23
Over half of those providing a valid response feel there is a problem in their local area
with people not treating one another with respect and consideration (NI 23 58%).
Around a quarter of respondents (26%) feel this issue is a very big problem. Just one
in ten feels that this is not a problem at all in their local area (9%).
Figure 15: Q12. The extent to which respondents feel there is a problem with people not treating each other with respect and consideration in their area (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1017
Respondents aged under 65 years of age are more likely to feel there is a problem in
their local area with people not treating one another with respect and consideration
(62%; 45% of respondents aged 65+).
Respondents with a disability are more likely than those who do not have a disability to
think this is a problem in their local area (72%; 56%), as are white respondents (62%)
compared with BME respondents (46%).
26%
33%
33%
9%
A very big problem
A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem
Not a problem at all
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
24
7.2 Support for older people (NI 139)
In terms of support for older people, respondents were asked whether they feel that
older people in their local area are able to get services and support they need, in order
to continue to live at home for as long as they want to. This includes help or support
from public, private or voluntary services, or support from family, friends and the wider
community.
A quarter of those providing a valid response feel such support is available to older
people in their area (NI 139: 24%). Around one in six respondents do not feel that
support is available (15%), but the most frequent response is ‘don’t know’, provided by
six in ten respondents (61%).
Figure 16: Q13. Whether respondents feel that older people in the area are able to get the support they need to continue to live at home (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1159
Respondents aged 65 and over are more likely than younger respondents to agree
that older people in the area do get the support they need to continue to live at home
(41%, compared with 20% of those aged 25-64 years).
7.3 Satisfaction of those aged 65 or over with home and neighbourhood
as a place to live (NI 138)
The other indicator relating to older age groups is NI 138, which measures satisfaction
of those aged over 65 years with the overall quality of their home and neighbourhood.
Just over seven in ten older respondents are satisfied with these aspects (NI 70.9%).
Yes 24%
No 15%
Don't know 61%
Community safety
25
8 Community safety
8.1 Safety in the local area
In order to assess perceptions of neighbourhood safety, respondents were asked to
indicate on a five point scale how safe they feel in their local area during the day and
after dark.
During the day, almost three-quarters of those providing a valid response (71%) report
feeling safe. At night this proportion falls to around a third (35%), with half (51%)
reporting that they feel unsafe after dark.
Figure 17: Q14/Q15. How safe or unsafe respondents feel when outside during the day and when outside after dark (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample bases in parenthesis
Male respondents are more likely than female respondents to report feeling safe after
dark (42%; 29%), while during the day there is virtually no difference (71% and 70%
respectively).
By age 45-64 year olds are most likely to feel unsafe during the day (27%, compared
with 11% of 25-44 year olds and 18% of 65+ year olds), while after dark those aged 45
and over are more likely than younger respondents to feel unsafe (59% of 45-64 year
olds and 56% of 65+ year olds, compared with 42% of 25-44 year olds).
Respondents with a disability are more likely to feel unsafe after dark (69%) and during
the day (33%) than compared with respondents that do not have a disability (47% and
15% respectively).
17%
53%
11%
15%
4%
4%
32%
14%
29%
22%
Very safe
Fairly safe
Neither
Fairly unsafe
Very unsafe
During the day [1181] After dark [1145]
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
26
9 Anti-social behaviour
Anti-social behaviour (ASB) is a high profile national priority for Government. Local
authorities are the key partner in tackling ASB and have statutory duties to enforce
ASB legislation. Several questions in the Place Survey explore the issue of anti-social
behaviour, and these questions inform three National Indicators.
9.1 Perceptions of anti-social behaviour (NI 17; NI 41; NI 42)
In order to explore perceptions of local anti-social behaviour issues, respondents were
asked about seven ASB issues, in terms of how much of a problem there is with each
issue in their local area.
The biggest problem area is teenagers hanging around the streets, considered a
problem by over half (58%) of those providing a valid response. Around half of
respondents perceive problems with rubbish or litter lying around (52%), people using
or dealing drugs (46%), or vandalism/graffiti (45%). Two in five said there were
problems with people being drunk or rowdy (40%), and fewer said there are problems
with noisy neighbours or loud parties (30%), or with people abandoned or burnt out
cars (14%).
Figure 18: Q16. Seriousness of various anti-social behaviour issues (valid responses only)
Sample bases vary
11%
23%
13%
19%
20%
33%
50%
31%
31%
35%
36%
40%
37%
36%
31%
22%
29%
24%
22%
19%
8%
27%
24%
22%
21%
18%
11%
7%
Teenagers hanging around the streets
People using or dealing drugs
Rubbish or litter lying around
Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles
People being drunk or rowdy in public places
Noisy neighbours or loud parties
Abandoned or burnt out cars
Not a problem at all Not a very big problem
A fairly big problem A very big problem
Anti-social behaviour
27
The 2011 data on perceptions of anti-social behaviour informs three national
indicators:
Around three in ten respondents perceive a high level of anti-social behaviour in
their local area (NI 17: 29.9%). This proportion combines the responses each
respondent gives across all seven aspects of anti-social behaviour, scoring them
to provide a total out of 21. The percentage represents the proportion of
respondents who score 11 or over on this basis, which is regarded as a high
perception of ASB.
Two fifths of respondents feel that drunk or rowdy behaviour is a very or fairly big
problem in the local area (NI 41: 40.1%); this is an indicator in its own right
because local authorities are responsible for licensing of premises and for
securing and designing environments that reduce the likelihood of drunk and
rowdy behaviour.
Approaching half of respondents feel that drug use or drug dealing is a very or
fairly big problem in the area (NI 42: 46.0%). This national indicator will provide
data to assess how well local authorities, working together with a wide range of
partners including the Police, health partners and others, are tackling this issue.
9.2 The response of local services to ASB (NI 27; NI 21)
Respondents were asked to consider the action that is being taken to tackle these
sorts of anti-social behaviour issues in their local area. Responses provide a proxy
measure of public confidence in the ability of local agencies to tackle community safety
issues that matter to local people (i.e. a measure of Neighbourhood Policing in the
widest sense).
Respondents were asked the extent to which they agree that police and other local
public services seek people’s views about these issues. Approaching two fifths of
respondents agree with this statement (NI 27: 36.8%), but around a third (31%)
disagree.
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
28
Figure 19: Q17. Agreement that police and other local public services seek people’s views about these issues in the local area (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1184
14%
23%
18%
23%
8%
15%
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
Neither
Tend to disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't know
Anti-social behaviour
29
Respondents were also asked about the extent to which they agree that local police
and other public services are successfully dealing with these issues. Responses are
shown in Figure 28.
A third of respondents agree that police and other local public services are
successfully dealing with ASB issues (NI 21: 32.5%), whilst just over a quarter (28%)
disagree.
Figure 20: Q18. Agreement that police and other local public services are successfully dealing with these issues in the local area (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1184
7%
26%
22%
20%
8%
17%
Strongly agree
Tend to agree
Neither
Tend to disagree
Strongly disagree
Don't know
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
30
For the 2011 survey, respondents were also asked how satisfied or dissatisfied they
are with the way the police and local council have dealt with antisocial behaviour
specifically.
Close to two in five (38%) said they are satisfied, however around a quarter (26%)
were ambivalent, and a further quarter (25%) said they were dissatisfied.
Figure 21: Q19. Satisfaction with the way the police and local council have dealt with antisocial behaviour (Valid responses only)
Sample base: 1192
8%
30%
26%
15%
10%
13%
Very satisfied
Fairly satisfied
Neither
Fairly dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
Don't know
Health services
31
10 Health services
10.1 Use of health services
Respondents were asked whether they have used a number of health services in the
past 12 months.
The vast majority (89%) have used their GP service, whilst over half (54%) have used
the local dentist.
In terms of hospitals, close to half (48%) say they have used a local hospital generally,
whilst around half (53%) have used Queens Hospital and two in five (37%) have used
King George’s hospital.
Figure 22: Q22. Whether respondents have used each of these services in the last 12 months (All respondents)
Sample base: 1208
Respondents were also asked how satisfied they are with the above services. The
chart overleaf shows satisfaction with each service amongst respondents who have
used them in the past 12 months and who provided a valid response.
Users were most satisfied with their local dentist (85%), followed by their GP (82%)
and least likely to be satisfied with Queens Hospital (65% satisfied).
89%
54%
53%
48%
37%
GP (family doctor)
Your local dentist
Queens Hospital
Local hospitals
King George's Hospital
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
32
Figure 23. Q21. Overall satisfaction with health services provided by the public service providers listed below (Where used service in past 12 months and provided a valid response)
Sample bases in parentheses
7%
13%
17%
16%
28%
7%
6%
10%
11%
7%
85%
82%
74%
73%
65%
Your local dentist [629]
GP [1090]
King George's Hospital [441]
Local hospitals [534]
Queens Hospital [608]
Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied
Health services
33
10.2 Health and wellbeing (NI 119)
The final indicator derived from the Place Survey is NI 119, which is a self-reported
measure of health and well being. Respondents were asked to consider their overall
health on a five point scale ranging from very good to very bad.
Seven in ten respondents describe their health as good (NI 119: 69%), whilst a quarter
(24%) describe it as fair. Less than one in ten (7%) report their health as bad or very
bad.
Figure 24: Q25. How is your health in general (valid responses only)
Unweighted sample base = 1194
Younger respondents are more likely to describe their health as good (82% of those
aged 25-44). Health is described as good by six in ten (61%) of those aged 46-64,
and around half (46%) of those aged over 65.
10.2.1 Levels of smoking
Respondents were also asked whether they are a smoker. Close to one in five of
those providing a valid response (19%) said they were.
This figure was higher amongst the 45-64 years age group (25%), and amongst
respondents living in social housing (32%). Respondents with a disability were more
likely than those without a disability to smoke (29%; 17%).
29%
40%
24%
7%
1%
Very good
Good
Fair
Bad
Very bad
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
34
11 Respondent profile – weighted
Figure 25: Respondent profile based on valid responses only i.e. excluding ‘not provided’ and ‘prefer not to say’
Sample base 1208
Q23. Are you male or female?
Male 48%
Female 52%
Sample base 1132
Q24. Age on last birthday
18 - 24 5%
25 - 34 27%
35 - 44 18%
45 - 54 23%
55 - 64 13%
65+ 14%
Respondent profile – weighted
35
Sample base 1175
Q27. In which of these ways does your household occupy your current accommodation?
Owned outright 19%
Buying on mortgage 36%
Rent from council 26%
Rent from Housing Association/ Trust 5%
Rented from private landlord 14%
Other 1%
Sample base 1130
Q28. How many children aged 17 or under are living here?
None 61%
One 17%
Two 15%
Three 6%
Four 1%
More than four <0.5%
Sample base 1055
Q29. And how many adults aged 18 or over are living here?
One 21%
Two 44%
Three 20%
Four 10%
More than four 5%
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
36
Sample base 1135
Q30. Which of these activities best describes what you are doing at present?
Employee in full-time job (30 hours plus per week) 41%
Employee in part-time job (under 30 hours per week) 11%
Self-employed full or part-time 6%
On a government supported training programme (e.g. Modern Apprenticeship/ Training for Work) <0.5%
Full-time education at school, college or university 2%
Unemployed and available for work 7%
Permanently sick/disabled 7%
Wholly retired from work 17%
Looking after the home 6%
Doing something else 2%
Sample base 1079
Q32. Do you consider yourself to be disabled?
Yes 13%
No 87%
Respondent profile – weighted
37
Sample base 206
Q32a IF YES: In what way(s)?
Visual impairment 15%
Speech impairment 3%
Restricted mobility 58%
Learning difficulty 9%
Mental health issues 21%
Wheelchair user 10%
Hearing impairment 15%
Other hidden impairment 13%
Sample base 199
Q33. Does this disability limit your activities in any way?
Yes 85%
No 15%
Sample base 1051
Q34. What is your sexual orientation?
Heterosexual (straight) 98%
Lesbian <0.5%
Gay man 1%
Bisexual 1%
Other <0.5%
Sample base 974
Q35. Do you identify, or have you ever identified, as ‘Transgender’?
Yes 2%
No 98%
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
38
Sample base 1171
Q36. To which of these groups do you consider you belong to?
White - British 65%
White - Irish 1%
White – any other White background 12%
Mixed – White and Black Caribbean <0.5%
Mixed – White and Black African <0.5%
Mixed – Any other Mixed Background <0.5%
Black or Black British - Caribbean 2%
Black or Black British - African 7%
Black or Black British - Any other Black background <0.5%
Asian or Asian British - Indian 4%
Asian or Asian British - Pakistani 2%
Asian or Asian British - Bangladeshi 4%
Chinese <0.5%
Asian or Asian British – Any other Asian background 1%
Other ethnic group <0.5%
Sample base 1141
Q37. What is your faith?
None 20%
Christian (all denominations) 64%
Buddhist <0.5%
Hindu 2%
Jewish 1%
Muslim 9%
Sikh 2%
Any other religion 1%
Appendix One – Definitions of National Indicators
39
12 Appendix One – Definitions of National Indicators
The following table provides a summary of how each ‘National Indicator’ figure has been
calculated. It identifies whether each uses valid responses and what this means (i.e.
removing don’t knows, just removing ‘not provided’).
Question
number Description
NI1: % agree people from different backgrounds
get on well together in their local area Q11
Remove don’t knows, too few and
all the same background and not
provided
NI2: % of people who feel that they belong to their
neighbourhood Q5
Remove don’t knows and not
provided
NI3: Civic participation in the local area - % who
have taken part in at least one activity in the last 12
months
Q9 All Remove not provided
NI4: % of people who feel they can influence
decisions in their locality Q8
Remove don’t knows and not
provided
NI5: Overall / general satisfaction with local area Q3 Remove don’t knows and not
provided
NI6: Participation in regular volunteering - % saying
they volunteer at least once a month Q10
Remove don’t knows and not
provided
NI17: Perceptions of anti-social behaviour - % of
total sample saying at least one of the issues at
Q16 is a very / fairly big problem
Q16 No opinion counts as zero
NI21: % agree Council and police are dealing with
local concerns about anti-social behaviour and
crime issues
Q18 Include don’t knows, remove not
provided
NI23: % say there is a problem with people in the
area treating one another with respect and
consideration
Q12 Remove don’t knows and not
provided
NI27: % agree council and police understanding
local concerns about anti-social behaviour and
crime issues
Q17 Include don’t knows, remove NP
NI41: % say drunk or rowdy behaviour is a problem Q16g Remove not provided and no
opinion and invalid response
NI42: % say drug use or drug dealing is a problem Q16e Remove not provided and no
opinion and invalid response
NI119: % say health is good Q25 Remove not provided
NI138: % of over 65s very / fairly satisfied with both
home and neighbourhood
Q3 and
Q4 for
65yrs+
Remove not provided
NI139: The extent to which older people receive the
support they need to live independently Q13
Include don’t knows, exclude not
provided
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
40
13 Appendix Two – Questionnaire
Appendix Two – Questionnaire
41
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
42
Appendix Two – Questionnaire
43
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
44
Appendix Two – Questionnaire
45
London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Residents Survey 2011
46
Appendix Two – Questionnaire
47
Because people matter, we listen.
With some 20 years’ experience, BMG Research has established a strong reputation for delivering high quality research and consultancy.
Our business is about understanding people; because they matter. Finding out what they really need; from the type of information they use to the type of services they require. In short, finding out about the kind of world people want to live in tomorrow.
BMG serves both the social public sector and the commercial private sector, providing market and customer insight which is vital in the development of plans, the support of campaigns and the evaluation of performance.
Innovation and development is very much at the heart of our business, and considerable attention is paid to the utilisation of technologies such as portals and information systems to ensure that market and customer intelligence is widely shared.