-
PB 1
SIGNPoStS IIA Survey of the Social Issues and Needs of Calgarians
Prepared for:
-
SIGNPoStS II *A survey of the social issues and needs of Calgarians
Survey design & execution: HarGroup Management Consultants, Summer 2009
Analysis and report preparation: Goss Gilroy Inc., March 2011
Report design and distribution: United Way of Calgary and Area, June 2011
Project Team: Loreen Gilmour (United Way of Calgary and Area)
Derek Cook (City of Calgary)
Melissa Van Hal (City of Calgary)
Tere Mahoney (City of Calgary)
Charla Vall (United Way of Calgary and Area)
For further information on the Signpost series – including a similar survey conducted in 2006 – please contact [email protected].
* Data used in this publication were collected in 2009
-
CoNTeNTSIntroduction 1
Key Findings 1
executive Summary
Top 10 Summary 4
Calgary, as a whole 7
Individual & Community Quality of Life 7
Community Inclusion 8
Health 10
Physical Well-being 10
Mental Well-being and Addictions 12
Relationships 13
Financial Well-being 15
Security 16
Inclusion 18
Calgary through the lens of populations of interest 20
Age Groups 20
Length of Residency in Calgary 25
Family Composition 28
Immigrants 33
Recent Immigrants 35
Aboriginal Persons 38
Persons with Disabilities 41
Social Districts 45
Issues of Concern/Service use 45
Map of Social District 49
Social District Community Groupings 50
Social District Data Tables 51
Trends 2006 – 2009 64
Appendix A: Demographics 66
Appendix B: 2009 Questionnaire 68
Appendix C: Interpreting the Data 75
-
Figure 1: Top 10 – issues of concern 4Figure 2: Top 10 – service use 5Figure 3: Top 10 – perceived service needs 5Figure 4: Top barriers to accessing services 6Figure 5: Individual & Community Quality of Life 7Figure 6: Issue of concern – not having parks or green space available in the community 7Figure 7: Social inclusion – number of people known in the neighbourhood 8Figure 8: Social inclusion – number of people known well enough to ask a favour 8Figure 9: Involvement in neighbourhood events or activities 8Figure 10: Average monthly time volunteering for organizations in Calgary 9Figure 11: Members of their local community association 9Figure 12: General perceptions of health 10Figure 13: Physical well-being – issues of concern 10Figure 14: Physical well-being – service use 11Figure 15: Physical well-being – service need 11Figure 16: Mental well-being and addictions – issues of concern 12Figure 17: Mental well-being and addictions – service use 12Figure 18: Mental well-being and addictions – service need 13Figure 19: Relationships – issues of concern 13Figure 20: Relationships – service use 14Figure 21: Relationships – service need 14Figure 22: Financial well-being – issues of concern 15Figure 23: Financial well-being – service use 15Figure 24: Financial well-being – service need 16Figure 25: Security – issues of concern 16Figure 26: Security – service use 17Figure 27: Security – service need 17Figure 28: Inclusion – issues of concern 18Figure 29: Inclusion – service use 19Figure 30: Inclusion – service need 19Figure 31: Age groups – issues of concern 21Figure 32: Age groups – service use 23Figure 33: Length of residency in Calgary 25Figure 34: Length of residency – issues of concern 26Figure 35: Length of residency – service use 27Figure 36: Family composition – issues of concern 28Figure 37: Family composition – service use 30Figure 38: Family composition – service need 32Figure 39: Immigrants – issues of concern 33Figure 40: Immigrants – service use 35Figure 41: Recent immigrants – issues of concern 35Figure 42: Recent immigrants – service use 37Figure 43: Aboriginal persons – issues of concern 38Figure 44: Aboriginal persons – service use 40Figure 45: Persons with disabilities – issues of concern 41Figure 46: Persons with disabilities – service use 43 Figure 47: Social district comparison to the average – issues of concern 45Figure 48: Social district comparison to the average – service use 47Figure 49: Trend – Calgary is a good place to live 64Figure 50: Trend – Calgary is a safe place to live 64 Figure 51: Trend – Issues of concern – being unemployed 65Figure 52: Trend – Issues of concern – not having parks or green spaces available in the community 65Figure 53: Trend – Service use – recreation and leisure programs and services 65
LIST oF FIGUReS
-
11
Signposts is an extensive survey of the social issues of concern to Calgarians as well as their service needs. The purpose of the
survey is to understand what issues Calgarians are facing in their daily lives, what services they use and need to address those
issues, and what barriers might prevent them from getting the services they need.
The information from Signposts provides an understanding of the changing and different needs of various groups of people and
parts of the city over time. This report provides results from the 2009 survey, a follow-up to the first Signposts Survey conducted
in 2006. In 2009 a total of 3,000 Calgarians over the age of 18 were surveyed, providing a high level of reliability and confidence
in the results.
Signposts will be of interest to anyone seeking to understand the social fabric of Calgary. It will be especially useful to those who
plan and deliver programs and services to meet the social service needs of our growing and changing population.
Key Findings
• In2009,95%ofCalgarianssaidthattheyaresatisfiedwiththeirlifeasawholeandover90%statedthatCalgaryisagood
place to live. Between 2006 and 2009, however, the percentage who “strongly agreed” that Calgary is a good place to live
fellsharplyfrom71%to52%.
• Overthree-quarters(76%)ofCalgariansagreedthatCalgaryisasafeplacetolive.Between2006and2009,however,the
proportionthat“stronglyagreed”fellsignificantlyfrom46%to26%.
• 83%ofCalgariansfeelthatthereareenoughcommunityfacilities,programsandservicesinCalgarytomeettheirneeds.
• ThemostprevalentissuefacingCalgariansin2009wasbeingstressed,with61%concernedabouttheirlevelofstress,while
almosthalf(49%)wereconcernedaboutlackingsleep.
• Overhalf(53%)ofCalgarianswereconcernedaboutnotsavingmoneyforthefuture,and41%wereconcernedabouthaving
toomuchdebt.Meanwhile,almostone-third(31%)wereconcernedaboutnothavingenoughmoneyforhousing,andone-
in-five about not having enough money for food.
• Between2006and2009,concernsaboutfinancialsecuritydidnotchangesignificantly,thoughconcernsaboutbeing
unemployed rose markedly.
• MedicaldoctorserviceswerethemostcommonlyusedservicesinCalgary,usedby87%ofCalgarians.Atthesametime,9%of
Calgariansreportedthattheyhadanunmetneedformedicaldoctorservices,themostfrequentlyreportedunmetneed.
• Recreationandleisurefacilities,programsandserviceswerethesecondmostcommonlyusedservices,withtwo-thirds
of Calgarians reporting their use. The proportion who reported using recreation facilities, programs or services, however,
fell significantly between 2006 and 2009 while recreation services were the third most commonly reported unmet service
need in 2009.
INTRoDUCTIoN
-
2
Issues of concern
City-as-a-whole• ThemostprevalentissuesofconcernreportedbyCalgariansoverallwerebeingstressed(61%)andnotsavingmoneyfor
thefuture(53%).
• Foreveryindicatorofcommunityandindividualwellness-includingoverallsatisfactionwithCalgary,satisfactionwithlifeas
awhole,feelingsofbelongingness,communitysafetyandsecurity-over80%ofrespondentsweresatisfied.
• Thevastmajorityofsurveyrespondentsreportedgood,verygoodorexcellenthealth(88%).
Trends• Over90%ofrespondentsindicatedthatCalgarywasagoodplacetoliveinboth2006and2009;however,respondentswere
lesslikelytostronglyagreewiththisstatementin2009(52%)thanin2006(71%).
• AlthoughthevastmajorityofrespondentsagreedthatCalgarywasasafeplacetolivein2006and2009,respondentswere
lesslikelytostronglyagreewiththisstatementin2009(26%)incomparisonto2006(46%).
• Concernsregardingunemploymentincreasedoverthethree-yearperiod.Respondentsweremorelikelytoreportbeing
concerned that someone in their household would be unemployed in 2009 in comparison to 2006 with rates of concern
almost10percentagepointshigher(37%vs.29%).
Populations of interest• Significantlyfewerseniorsreportedissuesofconcernincomparisontoyoungadultsandmiddle-agedrespondents.In
particular, fewer seniors reported concern about being stressed and not having enough money for food and housing than
non-seniors did.
• Respondentslivinginsingleparentfamiliesweremorelikelytobeconcernedabouthavingtoomuchdebt,nothaving
enough money for food, and not saving money for the future than respondents living in families of other compositions.
• Significantlymoreimmigrantswereconcernedaboutbeingdiscriminatedagainst,beingavictimofdomesticviolenceand
being unemployed than those who were born in Canada.
• Significantlymorerecentimmigrantswereconcernedaboutbeingsuicidal,beingavictimofdomesticviolence,nothaving
safe housing conditions and not having enough money for housing than non-recent immigrants.
• Aboriginalpeopleweremorelikelytoreporthealthandsecurityrelatedconcerns.Inparticular,Aboriginalpeoplewere
more likely to report being concerned about lacking self-esteem, lacking sleep, being depressed, not having safe housing
conditions and not having enough money for housing in comparison to non-Aboriginal people.
• Peoplewithdisabilitiesweremorelikelytoreportconcernsaboutbeinglonely,stressed,depressed,lackingself-esteem,
lacking sleep and not being able to care for themselves as they age than those without a disability.
eXeCUTIVe SUMMARY
-
3
Social districts• RespondentsfromSocialDistricts3,6and10reportedhigherthanaverageconcernforbeingunemployed,stressed,a
victimofcrimeinthehomeorcommunity,discriminatedagainst,andnotsavingmoneyforthefuture.Furthermore,28%of
respondents from Social District 3 reported being very concerned about being unemployed, almost 13 percentage points
higher than the city average.
Service Use
City-as-a-whole• Medicaldoctors(87%),recreationorleisureservices(66%),andpublictransitservices(65%)hadthehighestreportedusage
during the 12 months prior to the survey.
Trends• Respondentswerelesslikelytoreportusingrecreationandleisureprogramsandservicesin2009thanin2006,withratesof
usealmost10percentagepointslower(65%vs.74%).
Population of interest• Seniorsweresignificantlylesslikelytoreportusingrecreationorleisurefacilities,programsandservices,mentalhealth
services or counselling, food banks, police, and adult educational services than non-seniors.
• RecentCalgarians,definedasthosewhoresidedinCalgaryforfiveyearsorlessatthetimeorthesurvey,wereoverfour
times more likely to report using immigrant programs and services than non-recent Calgarians. In addition, the reported
rate of public transit usage in the past 12 months was 10 percentage points higher for recent Calgarians in comparison to
non-recent Calgarians.
• Respondentslivinginsingleparentfamiliesweresignificantlymorelikelytoreportusingsupportiveservicesincludingfood
bank services, self-help or support groups and subsidized housing than those living in other family compositions.
• Immigrantswerelessthanhalfaslikelytoreportusingmentalhealthservicesorcounsellingandtwiceaslikelytoreport
using subsidized housing as those born in Canada.
• Aboriginalrespondentsweremorelikelythannon-Aboriginalrespondentstoreportusingfamilyormarriagecounselling,
food bank services, and self-help or support programs during the 12 months prior to the survey.
• Respondentswithadisabilitywereoverthreetimesaslikelyasthosewithoutadisabilitytoreportusinglegalaid,mental
health services, and subsidized housing during the year prior to the survey.
Social districts• RespondentsfromSocialDistrict10weremorelikelytoreportusingfoodbankservicesandrespondentsfromSocialDistrict
6wasmorelikelytoreportusingjobsearchortrainingprogramsandservicesthanaverage.Inaddition,4%ofrespondents
fromSocialDistrict10reportedusinghomelesssheltersduringtheyearpriortothesurveycomparedtotheaverageof1%.
-
4 5
Perceived Service Need
City-as-a-whole• Medicaldoctors(9.2%),publiclibraries(6.3%),andrecreationorleisureservices(5.3%)hadthehighestreportedneed
among Calgarians who had not used these services during the year prior to the survey.
Population of interest• Respondentslivinginsingleparentfamilieswhoreportedtheydidnotusepubliclibraryprogramsandservices,family
or marriage counselling, food bank services, or financial counselling were more likely to report perceived need for these
services relative to those living in other family compositions.
Top 10 Summary
This is a summary of the top issues of concern, services used and perceived need for services, facilities and programs reported
by the 3,000 individuals surveyed for Signposts 2009. of note, those who responded “do not know” or “not applicable” were
excluded from the percentages.
AsillustratedinFigure1,beingstressed(61%),notsavingmoneyforthefuture(53%)andlackingsleep(49%)werethemost
common issues of concern reported. Very little variability was found between the 4th and the 10th most common issues of
concern, with a difference of 3.1 percentage points.1
Figure 1: Top 10 – issues of concern
1 Of note: the number of respondents answering each survey item (n) were not included in figures as there was very little variability in number of responses. Overall, 3,000 individuals were surveyed.
9%
10%
14%
13%
13%
14%
15%
13%
18%
15%
30%
31%
26%
27%
29%
27%
27%
36%
35%
46%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Gaining or losing too much weight
Being physically inactive
Having to care for a family member
Not being able to care for yourself as you age
Being a victim of crime in your home or community
Having too much debt
Dealing with the loss of a family member or friend
Lacking sleep
Not saving money for the future
Being stressed
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
-
12%
12%
14%
16%
20%
46%
57%
65%
66%
87%
Nutrition counselling or education programs
Ambulance services
Job search or training programs and services
Adult education or training programs and services
Police services
Hospital services
Public library programs and services
Public transit
Recreation or leisure facilities, programs and services
Medical doctor services
1.1%
1.1%
1.1%
1.2%
1.7%
1.7%
1.9%
2.4%
5.3%
6.3%
9.2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Self-help or support groups and programs
Legal aid
Family or marriage counselling
Job search or training programs and services
Adult education or training programs and services
Financial counselling or education programs
Nutrition counselling or education programs
Public transit
Recreation or leisure facilities, programs and services
Public library programs and services
Medical doctor services
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
4 5
There was greater variability in the top 10 services used during the 12 months prior to the survey. As shown in Figure 2, the majority of
respondentsreportedusingmedicaldoctorservices(87%),recreationorleisurefacilities,programsandservices(66%)andpublictransit
services(65%)duringthespecifiedtimeframe.
Figure 2: Top 10 – service use
The respondents who did not report using a service during the year prior to the survey were asked whether there were any
circumstancesinwhichtheyneededthatserviceduringthesametimeframe.AsillustratedinFigure3,9.2%ofrespondentsreported
needingmedicaldoctorservices,6.3%reportedneedingpubliclibraryprogramsandservicesand5.3%reportedneedingrecreationor
leisure facilities, programs and services.
Figure 3: Top 10 – perceived service needs
-
Don't Know
No time to get assistance
Took care of things ourselves
Not aware of any facilities/services being available
Costs too much
Haven't got around to it/Expect to use soon
Busy/No time
There is nothing organized/available
The services are not very good/poor quality
The types of services available do not meet my needs
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
21%
16%
15%
13%
13%
9%
8%
6%
6%
5%
6 7
Figure 4: Top barriers to accessing services
Respondentswhoreportedneedforaservicewereaskedafollow-upquestionaboutwhytheyhadnotusedthatservice.Figure4
highlights the most commonly reported barriers for all types of services. Time, awareness, cost and the ability to take care of needs
independentlyeachaccountedforover10%ofthereportedreasonsfornotusingaservice.However,mostrespondentswereunableto
identifyaspecificbarriertoserviceuse,withdon’tknowaccountingfor20%ofthe486responses.
-
55%
16%19%
10%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not at all concerned Not very concerned Somewhat concerned Very concerned
34%
36%
26%
54%
45%
52%
54%
49%
48%
60%
36%
46%
42%
40%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
There are enough community facilities, programs and services in Calgary to meet your needs
You can afford to buy the things you need
Calgary is a safe place to live
You feel like you belong in Calgary
My neighborhood is a safe place to live
Overall, Calgary is a good place to live
You are satis�ed with your life as a whole
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree
6 7
CALGARY, AS A WHoLe
Individual & Community Quality of Life
To capture information on individual and community wellness, respondents were asked to indicate their degree of agreement with a
variety of general statements regarding their satisfaction, safety, security and inclusion in Calgary.
For every indicator of community and individual wellness—including feelings of satisfaction, belongingness, community safety and security—
over80%ofrespondentsweresatisfied.AsshowninFigure5,94%ofrespondentsweresatisfiedwiththeirlivesasawholeandfeltthat
Calgarywasagoodplacetolive.Similarly,respondentsfeltsafelivingintheirneighbourhood(91%)andinCalgaryingeneral(86%).
Figure 5: Individual & community quality of life
The 2009 Signposts survey respondents were asked to indicate their level of concern regarding the availability of parks and green space
intheircommunity.AsillustratedinFigure6,themajorityofrespondents(71%)reportedthattheywereeithernotatallconcerned
(55%)ornotveryconcerned(16%)regardingtheavailabilityofparksorgreenspaceintheircommunity.
Figure 6: Issue of concern – not having parks or green space available in the community
-
8 9
Community Inclusion
The 2009 Signposts survey also assessed perceptions of social inclusion. The majority of respondents reported knowing a few people in
theirneighbourhood(67%)andknowingonetofivepeoplewellenoughtoaskafavour(58%).
Figure 7: Social inclusion – number of people known in the neighbourhood
Signposts 2009 respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with the following statement,
“Igetinvolvedinneighbourhoodeventsoractivities”.AsillustratedinFigure9,approximatelyequalproportionsofrespondents
agreed(42%)anddisagreed(44%)withthestatement.Ofnote,Signpostsrespondentsmostfrequentlyagreedthattheysomewhat
get involved.
Figure 9: Involvement in neighbourhood events or activities
6%
67%
16%11%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
14%
58%
19%9%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
None 1 to 5 6 to 10 Over 10No one A few Many Most
Figure 8: Social inclusion – number of people known well enough to ask a favour
22% 22%
14%
34%
8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Disagree completely Disagree somewhat Neither disagree nor agree Agree somewhat Agree completely
58%
19%
11%7%
4%2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
0 1-5 6-10 11-20 21-40 40+
-
8 9
on average, 2009 Signposts survey respondents reported that they volunteered for 5.4 hours per month for organizations in Calgary.
However,asshowninFigure10,themajorityofrespondentsdidnotvolunteerfororganizationsinCalgary(58%),while13%reported
volunteering for more than ten hours per month.
Figure 10: Average monthly time volunteering for organizations in Calgary
Similarly,themajorityofrespondents(70%)reportedthattheywerenotamemberoftheirlocalcommunityassociation.
Figure 11: Members of their local community association
58%
19%
11%7%
4%2%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
0 1-5 6-10 11-20 21-40 40+
30%
70%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
NoYes
-
10 11
Health
Tocaptureoverallperceptionsofhealth,the2009Signpostsquestionnaireaskedsurveyrespondentstoindicatetheirlevelofphysical,
mentalandspiritualhealth.AsillustratedinFigure12,thevastmajorityofrespondents(88%)reportedbeingingood,verygoodor
excellent health.
Figure 12: General perceptions of health
Physical Well-beingThe most common issues of concern in terms of physical well-being reported by 2009 Signposts survey respondents were lacking sleep
(49%),beingphysicallyinactive(40%)andgainingorlosingtoomuchweight(39%).
Figure 13: Physical well-being – issues of concern
3%
8%
24%
39%
25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent
5%
8%
9%
9%
9%
10%
13%
6%
15%
22%
26%
30%
31%
36%
Having an unwanted pregnancy
Having dif�culty moving around physically
Not having recreation and leisureopportunities available
Not eating healthy food
Gaining or losing too much weight
Being physically inactive
Lacking sleep
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
-
10 11
Figure 14 illustrates the reported physical health service use during the year prior to the survey among 2009 Signposts survey
respondents, as well as the number of Calgarians estimated to have used the service.2Asshown,almost90%ofrespondentsreported
usingmedicaldoctorservices,followedbyrecreationorleisurefacilities,programsandservices(65%).Thesenumberstranslatetoan
estimate of over 700,000 Calgarians using medical doctor services and around 550,000 using recreational services during the same time
frame.Markedlyfewerindividualsreportedusingnutritioncounsellingoreducationprograms(12%orabout100,000individuals)and
homecareornursingcare(7%oralmost55,000individuals).
Figure 14: Physical well-being – service use
Ofthoseindividualswhodidnotreportusingmedicaldoctorservicesduringthe12monthspriortothesurvey,9%reportedneeding
this service. This translates to almost 10,000 Calgarians who needed medical doctor services but did not receive it. Recreation or leisure
facilities,programsandserviceswerereportedasbeingneededby5%ofrespondentswhohadnotusedthisservice,translatingtoan
estimated 15,500 Calgarians in need.
Figure 15: Physical well-being – service need
2 Estimated number of Calgarians refers to the estimated number of Calgarians over the age of 18.
729,828
548,070
384,843
99,44554,848%
of
resp
onde
nts
repo
rtin
g us
e
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
1,000,000
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Medical doctor services(87%)
Recreation or leisurefacilities, programs and
services (65%)
Hospital services (46%)
Nutrition counselling oreducation programs
(12%)
Home care or nursingcare (7%)
9,899
15,465
3,262
14,058
4,881
0
8,000
16,000
24,000
32,000
40,000
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
Recreation or leisurefacilities, programs and
services (n=1,037)5%
Medical doctor services(n=384)
9%
Hospital services (n=1,616)
1%
Nutrition counselling oreducation programs
(n=2,638)2%
Home care or nursing care (n=2,792)
1%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
-
12 13
Mental Well-being and AddictionsThemostcommonissueofconcerninregardstomentalwell-beingandaddictionswasbeingstressed,which61%ofrespondents
reportedasaconcern.Thiswasfollowedbydealingwiththelossofafamilymemberorfriend,aconcernreportedby42%of
respondentsandbeingdepressed,reportedby28%ofrespondents.Respondentsweremuchlesslikelytoreportconcernforaddiction
toalcoholordrugs(13%)orgambling(9%).
Figure 16: Mental well-being and addictions – issues of concern
AsshowninFigure17,lessthan10%ofrespondentsreportedusingmentalwell-beingandaddictionservicesduringtheyearpriorto
the survey. estimated service use ranged from approximately 15,500 individuals using addictions counselling or treatment programs to
over 65,000 using mental health services or counselling.
Figure 17: Mental well-being and addictions- service use
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
4%
5%
5%
5%
6%
7%
5%
4%
8%
16%
19%
21%
Being addicted to gambling
Being suicidal
Being addicted to alcohol or drugs
Lacking self esteem
Being lonely
Being depressed
Dealing with the loss of a family member or friend
Being stressed
15%
15%
27%
46%
67,28662,988
15,624
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
0%
5%
10%
15%
Mental health services or counselling(8%)
Self-help or support groups andprograms (8%)
Self-help or support groups andprograms (2%)
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
use
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
-
12 13
AsshowninFigure18,therateofperceivedneedforrespondentsreportingonmentalhealthandaddictionservicesrangedfrom0.4%
to1%.Thistranslatestoanestimatedneedformentalhealthservicesandcounsellingbyover6,500Calgarians,self-helporsupport
groups by approximately 8,500 Calgarians and addiction counselling or treatment programs by over 3,000 Calgarians.
Figure 18: Mental well-being and addictions – service need
Relationships
Between22%and40%ofrespondentsindicatedconcernforoneofthevariousrelationshipissuesofconcernincludedintheSignposts
2009 survey. As illustrated in Figure 19, being able to care for yourself as you age and having to care for a family member were the most
frequentlyreportedrelationshipissuesofconcern(40%).Ofnote,although22%ofallrespondentsreportedconcernregardingaccess
tochildcareservices,31%ofrespondentswithchildrenreportedthisconcern.
Figure 19: Relationships – issues of concern
Over10%ofrespondentsreportedusingchildcareservicesduringthe12monthspriortothesurvey,representinganestimateof
almost90,000Calgariansand7%ofrespondentsreportedusingbeforeorafterschoolchildoryouthcareprogramsandservices,
representing an estimate of over 55,000 Calgarians. All other relationship services, including pregnancy counselling or education,
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
6,6308,601
3,347
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
0%
1%
2%
3%
Mental health services or counselling(n=2,753)
1%
Self-help or support groups and programs(n=2,766)
1%
Addictions counselling or treatmentprograms (n=2,936)
0.4%
9%
7%
14%
13%
13%
19%
26%
27%
Not being able to access child care services
Having relationship problems with members of your immediate family
Having to care for a family member
Not being able to care for yourself as you age
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
-
14 15
familyormarriagecounsellingandrespitecareorservices,werereportedasbeingusedby5%ofrespondentsorless.Ofnote,20%
of respondents with children, including couples with a child living at home and single parents, reported using child care programs and
servicesduringtheyearpriortothesurveyand11.5%reportedusingbeforeorafterschoolchildoryouthcareprogramsandservices.
Figure 20: Relationships – service use
Perceivedneedforrelationshiprelatedservicesrangedfrom0.3%to1.1%.Thistranslatestoanestimateofbetweenapproximately
2,500 and 9,000 people who needed relationship services but who had not used them during the 12 months prior to the survey.
Although0.8%ofallrespondentswhohadnotusedchildcareprogramsandservicesperceivedaneedforthemduringtheyearprior
tothesurvey,twiceasmanyparents(1.6%)perceivedaneedfortheseservices.Similarly,although0.9%ofrespondentswhohadnot
used before or after school child or youth care programs and services during the 12 months prior to the survey perceived a need for
them,twiceasmanyparents(1.8%)perceivedaneedfortheseservices.
Figure 21: Relationships – service need
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
use
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
89,475
56,36746,019
39,974
23,482
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
0%
5%
10%
15%
Child care programs andservices (11%)
Before or after schoolchild or youth care
programs and services(7%)
Pregnancy counsellingor education programs
(5%)
Family or marriagecounselling (5%)
Respite care or services(3%)
6,536 7,013
5,400
9,101
2,688
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
0%
1%
2%
3%
Child care programs and services (n=2,659)
0.8%
Before and after schoolchild or youth care
programs and services(n=2,773)
0.9%
Pregnancy counsellingor education programs
(n=2,799)0.6%
Family or marriagecounselling (n=2,849)
1.1%
Respite care or services(n=2,866)
0.3%
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
-
14 15
Financial Well-being
AsillustratedinFigure22,over40%ofrespondentsreportedhavingconcernswithrespecttoeithernotsavingenoughmoneyforthe
future or having too much debt. Furthermore, being unemployed and not having enough money for housing was reported as an issue
ofconcernbyover30%ofrespondents.
Figure 22: Financial well-being – issues of concern
Useoffinancialservicesrangedfrom1%to14%.Theseratesrepresentbetween8,000and119,000Calgariansusingthevarioustypes
offinancialservicesavailable.Over10%ofrespondentsreportedusingfinancialcounsellingoreducationalprogramsandjobsearchor
trainingprogramsandservicesduringthepreviousyear.Only1%ofrespondentsreportedusinghomelessshelters.
Figure 23: Financial well-being – service use
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
9%
12%
15%
14%
18%
12%
19%
22%
27%
35%
Not having enough money for food
Not having enough money for housing
Being unemployed
Having too much debt
Not saving money for the future
119,148
81,852
36,17524,692 21,641
8,167
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Job search ortraining programs
and services (14%)
Financialcounselling or
education programs(10%)
Food bank services(4%)
Legal aid (3%) Subsidized housing(3%)
Homeless shelters(1%)
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
use
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
-
16 17
Lessthan2%ofrespondentsperceivedaneedforthefinancialservices—includinghomelessshelters,subsidizedhousing,legalaid,
food banks, financial counselling or job search or training. As illustrated in Figure 23, the most commonly reported perceived need
amongthefinancialserviceswasforfinancialcounsellingoreducationprograms(1.7%).
Figure 24: Financial well-being – service need
Security
Surveyquestionsrelatedtosecurityissuesincludedperceptionsofcrime,safehousingconditionsanddomesticviolence.Themost
commonissueofconcernreportedbyrespondentswasbeingavictimofcrimeintheirhomeorcommunity(42%),followedbynot
havingsafehousingconditions(21%).
Figure 25: Security – issues of concern
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
8,886
12,940
5,120
8,864
3,253
122
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
0%
1%
2%
3%
Job search ortraining programs
and services(n=2,562)
1.2%
Financialcounselling or
education programs(n=2,700)
1.7%
Food bank services(n=2,864)
0.6%
Legal aid(n=2,903)
1.1%
Subsidized housing(n=2,914)
0.4%
Homeless shelters(n=2,963)0.0001%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
6%
8%
13%
5%
13%
29%
Being a victim of domestic violence
Not having safe housing conditions
Being a victim of crime in your home or community
-
16 17
of the security related services included in the survey, police services were the most commonly used. one out of five respondents
reportedusingpoliceservices,representinganestimatedserviceusageofover170,000Calgarians.Furthermore,12%ofrespondents
reportedusingambulanceservices,5%usedfireprotectionservices.
Figure 26: Security – service use
Lessthan1%ofrespondentsindicatedthattheyneededtheseserviceseventhoughtheydidnotusethem.Thisrepresentsan
estimated unmet need for security services ranging from approximately 550 to over 4,000 Calgarians
Figure 27: Security – service need
170,522
101,538
38,645
3,181
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
0%
10%
20%
30%
Police services(20%)
Ambulance services(12%)
Fire protection services(5%)
Women’s shelters(0.04%)
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
use
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
4,369
4,071
1,468548
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
Police services (n=2,385)0.7%
Ambulance services (n=2,628)0.6%
Fire protection services(n=2,855)
0.2%
Women’s shelters (n=2,972)0.1%
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
-
18 19
Inclusion
Thetopissueofconcernrelatedtoinclusionwasnotcontributingenoughtothecommunity(39%).AsillustratedinFigure28,27%of
respondentswereconcernedaboutnotbeingabletoeasilyaccesstransportation.Inaddition,although22%ofallsurveyrespondents
wereconcernedaboutdiscrimination,35%ofimmigrantswereveryconcernedorsomewhatconcernedaboutthisissue.
Figure 28: Inclusion – issues of concern
AsshowninFigure29,themajorityof2009Signpostssurveyrespondentsreportedusingpubliclibraryprogramsandservices(57%,an
estimateof479,116Calgarians)andpublictransit(65%,anestimateof544,750Calgarians).Markedlyfewerindividualsreportedusing
the remaining inclusion related services- immigrant services, senior centres, general supportive services for persons with disabilities,
and adult education training programs and services.
Althoughonly7%ofallsurveyrespondentsreportedusingseniorscenters,programsandservicestheyearpriortothesurvey,24%
ofrespondentsovertheageof65reporteddoingso.Similarly,threetimesasmanyimmigrants(12%)andsixtimesasmanyrecent
immigrants3(24%)reportedusingimmigrantprogramsandservicesincomparisonto4%ofsurveyrespondentsoverall.
3 Recent immigrants defined as those who immigrated to Canada during the past five years.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very concerned Somewhat concerned
7%
9%
9%
10%
4%
5%
13%
18%
24%
35%
Not being able to read or write
Being discriminated against
Not having easy access to transportation
Getting more education or training
Not contributing enough to your community
-
18 19
Figure 29: Inclusion – service use
Perceivedneedamongthosewhodidnotuseinclusionservicesintheprevious12monthsrangedfrom0.6%to6.3%.Thistranslates
to an estimated need for immigrant programs and services by almost 5,000 Calgarians, adult education or training by over 12,000
Calgarians and public library programs and services by over 22,000 Calgarians.
Furthermore,2.7%ofsurveyrespondentsovertheageof65whodidnotuseseniorscentres,programsandservicesandsupportservices
forpersonswithdisabilitiesduringtheyearpriortothesurveyperceivedaneedfortheseservicesincomparisonto0.8%ofrespondents
overall.Similarly,threetimesasmanyimmigrantrespondents(1.8%)andovertentimesasmanyrecentimmigrantrespondents(6.4%)
reportedperceivinganeedforimmigrantprogramsandservicesincomparisonto0.6%ofsurveyrespondentsoverall.
Figure 30: Inclusion – service need
544,750479,116
129,81863,908 59,496 33,141
0
160,000
320,000
480,000
640,000
800,000
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Public libraryprograms andservices (57%)
Adult education ortraining programs
and services (16%)
General supportservices for persons
with disabilities(8%)
Seniors centres,programs andservices (7%)
Immigrant programsand services (4%)
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
use
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
Public transit (65%)
22,410
19,779
12,004
6,163
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
Public libraryprograms and
services (n=1,283)6.3%
Public transit(n=1,045)
2.4%
Adult education ortraining programs
and services(n=2,528)
1.7%
Seniors centres,programs and
services (n=2,776)0.8%
General supportservices for persons
with disabilities(n=2,763)
0.6%
Immigrant programsand services(n=2,872)
0.6%
% o
f re
spon
dent
s re
port
ing
need
Est
imat
ed n
umbe
r of
Cal
gari
ans
4,804 4,810
-
20 21
To capture information on important sub-groups within the population and to gain a richer and more comprehensive insight into
the findings, analysis was conducted on the following populations of interest4,5 :
• Agegroups
• LengthofresidencyinCalgary
• Singleparents
• Immigrants
• Aboriginalpersons
• Personswithdisabilities
Age Groups Survey respondents were divided into three groups based on age: young adults (18-34 years), middle-aged adults (35-64 years)
and seniors (65+ years).6,7
As shown in Figure 31, the three sub-groups differed significantly on multiple issues of concern. Seniors were less likely to report
beingconcernedonthemajorityofissues.Forinstance,37%ofseniorsreportedconcernaboutbeingstressedincomparison
to65%ofyoungadultrespondentsand63%ofmiddle-agedrespondents.Seniorswerealsohalfaslikelytoreportbeing
concerned about not having enough money for food and housing as middle-aged and young adult respondents.
4 Significance testing was run on all populations of interest. Chi-square significance testing was run at the (p < 0.05) level to determine whether these groups differ significantly in terms of their issues of concern, service usage, or perceived service need.
5 Of note: significance testing was run on gender; however, no results warranted mention in the report.6 Further statistical testing was conducted to determine where young adults and middle-aged adults differed from the reference group (seniors). Asterisks (*)
denote statistical significance in comparison to seniors. For example, significantly more young adults reported concern regarding having to care for a family member than seniors.
7 N for young adults = 980 N for middle-aged adults = 1,631 N for seniors = 354
CALGARY THRoUGH THe LeNS oF PoPULATIoNS oF INTeReST
-
20 21
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Having to care for a family member
12%
15%
14%
15%
30%
24%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Rate of Concern
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Lacking sleep 7%
14%
14%
26%
38%
37%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Rate of Concern
Being stressed 7%
16%
16%
30%
47%
50%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Not having easy access to transportation 6%
8%
11%
13%
18%
19%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Rate of Concern
Figure 31: Age groups – issues of concern
-
22 23
Not eating healthy food
7%
8%
11%
12%
28%
29%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Rate of Concern
Being a victim of crime in your home or
community 8%
14%
12%
23%
32%
25%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Not having safe housing conditions 5%
8%
9%
7%
13%
14%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Not having enough money for food 3%
9%
11%
8%
11%
14%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
-
22 23
Service use also differed significantly by age group, with seniors being less likely to report using a variety of services than non-seniors.
As shown in Figure 32, young adults and middle-aged respondents were more likely to report using recreation or leisure facilities,
programs and services in the past 12 months than seniors were with rates of use over 20 percentage points higher. In addition, seniors
werelessthanhalfaslikelytoreportusingmentalhealthservicesorcounselling(3.3%)thanyoungadults(7.7%)ormiddle-aged
respondents(9.3%).Similartrendswereevidentinreporteduseoffoodbanks,police,andadulteducationalservice.
Figure 32: Age groups – service use
Not having enough money for housing
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Having too much debt 7%
14%
17%
10%
30%
30%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
7%
8%
11%
12%
28%
29%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
Recreation or leisure facilities,
programs and services 46%
68%
68%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Rate of Service Use
-
24 25
Food bank services
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Seniors
Middle-aged
Young adults*
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Mental health services or counselling
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Police services
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Public transit
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
Adult education or training programs and services
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Seniors
Middle-aged*
Young adults*
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
8%
17%
16%
49%
66%
69%
10%
22%
21%
3%
9%
8%
2%
4%
6%
-
24 25
Length of Residency in Calgaryon average, survey respondents reported living in Calgary for 25 years, however, reported length of residency in Calgary ranged
from one to 87 years. The distribution of reported length of residency in Calgary is shown below in Figure 33. As illustrated, over
onequarterof2009Signpostssurveyrespondents(26%)reportedresidinginCalgaryfortenyearsorless,whilethemajorityof
respondents(58%)reportedlivinginCalgarybetween11and40years.
Figure 33: Length of residency in Calgary
For the purpose of this section, survey respondents were divided into two sub-groups: those who had resided in Calgary for
five years or less at the time of the survey, entitled recent Calgarians, and those who had resided in Calgary for over five years
at the time, entitled non-recent Calgarians.8 As illustrated in Figure 34, recent Calgarians were more likely to report a variety of
concerns than those who resided in Calgary for longer than five years. In particular, significantly more recent Calgarians were
concerned about not having easy access to transportation, not having enough money for housing and not being able to access
child care services than those who were considered non-recent Calgarians.
13% 13%
23%
20%
15%
9%7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
1-5 6-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51+
Years in Calgary
8 N for recent Calgarians = 384 N for non recent Calgarians = 2,589
-
26 27
Figure 34: Length of residency – issues of concern
Not contributing enough to your community
3%
7%
34%
40%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Not having easy access to transportation
8%
15%
17%
21%
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Being unemployed
14%
25%
22%
21%
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Not having enough money for housing
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
11%
17%
19%
26%
Non-recent Calgarians
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Recent CalgariansGetting more education
or training 10%
15%
23%
30%
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
-
26 27
Service use also differed significantly by length of residency in Calgary. As shown in Figure 35, recent Calgarians were over four times
more likely to report using immigrant programs and services than non-recent Calgarians. In addition, the reported rate of public transit
usage was over 10 percentage points higher for recent Calgarians in comparison to non-recent Calgarians and recent Calgarians were
four times less likely to report using seniors centres, programs and services than non-recent Calgarians.
Figure 35: Length of residency – service use
Not being able to access child care services
8%
12%
12%
20%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Immigrant programs and services
3%
12%
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Seniors centres, programs and services
8%
2%
Public transit
64%
76%
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Non-recent Calgarians
Non-recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
Recent Calgarians
-
28 29
Family Composition This analysis was conducted to compare the concerns, service use and service need of two groups based on family composition: those
living in single parent households and those living in dual parent households with children in the home.9
Significance testing illustrated greater levels of concern by respondents living in single parent households in comparison to their dual
parent counterparts. This is especially true on issues regarding financial concern. As shown in Figure 36, respondents living in single
parent households are more likely to report concern for not having enough money for food, with rates of concern approximately 20
percentagepointshigher(55%vs.23%).Inaddition,respondentslivinginsingleparenthouseholdsweremorelikelytoreportconcern
for lacking self-esteem and being lonely, with rates of concern approximately 15 percentage points higher in both cases. of note,
significantlymoresingleparentsreportedbeingconcernedaboutstress(77%)incomparisontorespondentslivinginadualparent
householdwithchildren(66%).
Figure 36: Family composition – issues of concern
Being lonely
6%
13%
14%
23%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Having relationship problems with members
of your immediate family 8%
11%
20%
31%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Not being able to care for yourself as you age
12%
19%
27%
32%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
9 N for single parent households = 139 N for dual parent households = 1,200
-
28 29
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Being stressed
15%
25%
51%
52%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Lacking self-esteem
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
5%
4%
16%
31%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Not having easy access to transportation
10%
12%
18%
28%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Concern
Not eating healthy food 9%
17%
29%
38%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Not having enoughmoney for food
10%
20%
13%
22%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Not having enough money for housing
12%
24%
21%
22%
Couple living with child
Single parents
-
30 31
Respondents living in single parent households were also more likely to report having used supportive services during the year prior
to the survey. For example, respondents living in single parent households were over three and a half times more likely to have used
food bank services and legal aid, and over four times as likely to report having used subsidized housing than respondents living in dual
parent households with children.
Figure 37: Family composition – service use
Having too much debt
14%
32%
34%
28%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Concern
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Concern
Not saving money for the future
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
19%
28%
39%
46%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Subsidized housing
2%
10%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Family or marriage counselling
6%
14%
Legal aid
2%
9%
-
30 31
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Food bank services
4%
15%
Addictions counselling or treatment programs
Rate of Service Use0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
2%
4%
Mental health services or counselling
8%
20%
Self-help or support groups and programs
7%
19%
-
32 33
Respondents in single parent households were much more likely to perceive a need for public library programs and services,
family or marriage counselling, and financial counselling. As illustrated in Figure 38, respondents in single parent households
were five times more likely to report a need for family or marriage counselling services and four times more likely to report a
need for financial counselling or education programs than respondents living in dual parent households with children.
Figure 38: Family composition – service need
Needed public library programs and services
7%
18%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Rate of Service Need
Rate of Service Need
Rate of Service Need
Needed family or marriage counselling
1%
5%
Couple living with child
Single parents
Needed �nancial counselling or education programs
2%
8%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
Couple living with child
Single parents
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
-
32 33
ImmigrantsFor the purpose of this section, survey respondents were divided into two sub-groups: immigrants and those born in Canada.10
As illustrated in Figure 39, immigrants were more likely to report concerns than those who were born in Canada. In particular,
significantly more immigrants were concerned about being discriminated against, being a victim of domestic violence, and
being unemployed, than those who were born in Canada.
Figure 39: Immigrants – issues of concern
10 N for immigrants = 712 N for those born in Canada = 2,264
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Not having easy access to transportation
7%
14%
17%
20%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Being discriminated against7%
14%
11%
20%
Having an unwanted pregnancy
4%
8%
6%
8%
Having to care for a family member
12%
21%
27%
26%
-
34 35
Being a victim of domestic violence
5%
10%
5%
8%
Being unemployed
12%
25%
22%
22%
Not having enough money for food
8%
13%
10%
16%
Not having enough money for housing
10%
17%
19%
22%
Not being able to read or write
5%
11%
4%
9%
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
-
34 35
As shown in Figure 40, immigrants were less than half as likely to report using mental health services or counselling, and twice as
likely to report using subsidized housing as those born in Canada.
Figure 40: Immigrants – service use
Recent Immigrants Respondents who were immigrants were further divided into two sub-groups: recent immigrants – defined as those who immigrated
to Canada during the past five years – and non-recent immigrants – defined as those who immigrated more than five years before the
survey.11 As illustrated in Figure 41, recent immigrants were more likely to have concerns than those who immigrated to Canada over
five years prior to the survey. In particular, recent immigrants were more likely to report concern regarding being suicidal, being a victim
of domestic violence, not having safe housing conditions and not having enough money for housing than non-recent immigrants, with
rates of concern at least 10 percentage points higher.
Figure 41: Recent immigrants – issues of concern
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Born in Canada
Immigrants
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Mental health services or counselling
9%
4%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Subsidized housing
2%
4%
11 N for recent immigrants = 128 N for those non-recent immigrants = 584
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrantsHaving an unwanted
pregnancy6%
14%
6%
13%
-
36 37
Rate of Concern0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Being a victim of domestic violence
Rate of Concern0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Being suicidal
5%
14%
4%
6%
9%
16%
7%
11%
Not having safehousing conditions
11%
20%
14%
20%
Being unemployed
23%
34%
21%
25%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Not having enoughmoney for housing
16%
25%
20%
30%
Not being able toread or write
10%
16%
7%
15%
Getting more educationor training
14%
26%
24%
29%
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
-
36 37
As shown in Figure 42, recent immigrants were over two and a half times more likely than non-recent immigrants to report using
immigrantprogramsandservices(24%vs.9%)andfoodbankservices(11%vs.4%).Inaddition,recentimmigrantsweremore
likely to report using job search or training programs and services during the year prior to the survey with rates of use over 10
percentage points higher than non-recent immigrants.
Figure 42: Recent immigrants – service use
Immigrant programsand services
9%
24%
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Non-recent immigrants
Recent immigrants
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
Food bank services
4%
11%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Job search or trainingprograms and services
17%
31%
Public transit
67%
83%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
-
38 39
Aboriginal PersonsIn this analysis, survey respondents were divided into two sub-groups: Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people.12 As illustrated in
Figure 43, Aboriginal people were more likely to report having health and security related concerns. For example, Aboriginal people
were more than twice as likely to report being very concerned about not having safe housing conditions and not having enough money
for housing in comparison to non-Aboriginal people. In addition, Aboriginal people were more likely to report being concerned about
lacking self-esteem, lacking sleep and being depressed than non-Aboriginal people.
Figure 43: Aboriginal persons – issues of concern
12 N for Aboriginal persons = 62 N for non-Aboriginal persons = 2,907
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Not contributing enoughto your community
3%
14%
35%
50%
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Lacking self-esteem 5%
15%
16%
14%
Lacking sleep 13%
30%
36%
27%
Being depressed 7%
16%
21%
22%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
-
38 39
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
14%
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
36%
Not having safe housing conditions
8%
19%
12%
17%
Not having enoughmoney for housing
11%
25%
19%
22%
Having too much debt 14%
23%
27%
36%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
-
40 41
In comparison to non-Aboriginal respondents, Aboriginal respondents were almost three times as likely to report using family
or marriage counselling, food bank services and self-help or support programs in the 12 months prior to the survey. In addition,
Aboriginal respondents reported rates of use for job search and training programs that were 20 percentage points higher than
the rates for non-Aboriginal respondents.
Figure 44: Aboriginal persons – service use
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Non-Aboriginal persons
Aboriginal persons
Family or marriagecounselling
5%
14%
Food bank services
4%
12%
Self-help or supportgroups and programs
7%
20%
Job search ortraining programs
and services 14%
34%
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Rate of Service Use
-
40 41
Persons with DisabilitiesIn this section, respondents were divided into two sub-groups: persons with a disability and those without a disability.13
Respondents with a disability were more likely to report mental health related concerns. As illustrated in Figure 45, people with
a disability were more likely to report concern for being lonely, stressed, depressed and lacking self-esteem than those without a
disability. Furthermore, people with a disability were twice as likely to report being very concerned about lacking sleep and not
being able to care for themselves as they age.
Figure 45: Persons with disabilities – issues of concern
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Concern
Legend Very concerned Somewhat concerned
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Being lonely
5%
17%
18%
25%
Not being able to carefor yourself as you age
11%
27%
26%
39%
Being stressed
14%
27%
46%
43%
Lacking self-esteem
4%
11%
15%
20%
13 N for persons with disability = 253 N for persons without a disability = 2,720
-
42 43
12%
24%
36%
38%
6%
17%
20%
32%
14%
26%
27%
27%
9%
14%
11%
20%
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Lacking sleep
Dealing with the lossof a family member
or friend
Not having enoughmoney for food
Being depressed
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
Rate of Concern
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
-
42 43
Respondentswithadisabilityweretwiceaslikelythanthosewithoutadisabilitytoreportusinglegalaid(6%vs.3%),threetimes
aslikelytoreportusingmentalhealthservices(21%vs.7%),andfourtimesaslikelytousesubsidizedhousing(8%vs.2%)during
the year prior to the survey.
Figure 46: Persons with disabilities – service use
3%
6%
4%
9%
7%
21%
Self-help or supportgroups and programs
7%
18%
Rate of Service Use
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Mental healthservices orcounselling Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Food bank services
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Legal aid
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
-
44 45
3%
6%
66%
51%
2%
8%
Subsidized housing
Persons without a disability
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Public transit
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Persons without a disability
Persons with a disability
Respite care or services
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Rate of Service Use
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Rate of Service Use
-
44 45
Social Districts
Figure 47 illustrates highlights in social district differences from the average on issues of concern*. of note, the bars illustrate the
percentage of respondents from each social district who were very concerned with the issue, the horizontal line illustrates the overall
average from Signposts 2009 respondents (marked Calgary Average). District bars above the line (black bars) indicate higher than
average reported concern and any district bars below the line (grey bars) indicate lower than average reported concern. As shown
below, respondents from Social Districts 3, 6 and 10 all reported higher than average concern for being unemployed, being stressed,
beingavictimofcrimeinthehomeorcommunity,beingdiscriminatedagainst,andnotsavingmoneyforthefuture.Furthermore,28%
of respondents from Social District 3 reported being very concerned about being unemployed, almost 13 percentage points higher
thanthecityaverage.Similarly,24%ofrespondentsfromSocialDistrict10reportedbeingveryconcernedaboutbeingstressedin
comparisonto15%ofrespondentsoverall.
Figure 47: Social district comparison to the average – issues of concern
Rat
e of
Con
cern
(ve
ry c
once
rned
)
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
Being unemployed
Calgary Average = 15.2%
Rat
e of
Con
cern
(ve
ry c
once
rned
)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
Being stressed
Calgary Average = 14.8%
* N for each SD = 200
-
46 47
Not saving money for the future
Calgary Average = 18.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Being discriminated against
Rat
e of
Con
cern
(ve
ry c
once
rned
)
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Social Districts
Rat
e of
Con
cern
(ve
ry c
once
rned
)R
ate
of C
once
rn (
very
con
cern
ed)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Calgary Average = 8.6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Being a victim of crime in your home or community
Calgary Average = 12.5%
-
46 47
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
Food bank services
Calgary Average = 4.3%
Rat
e of
Ser
vice
Use
20%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
As illustrated in Figure 48, Social Districts 3, 6 and 10 were also more likely than average to report using supportive services during
the year prior to the survey. The reported rate of use for food bank services was over eight percentage points higher in Social District
10 in comparison to the city average and the reported rate of job search or training programs and services was approximately eight
percentagepointshigherforSocialDistrict6thanaverage.Inaddition,4%ofrespondentsfromSocialDistrict10reportedusing
homelesssheltersduringtheyearpriortothesurveyincomparisontoa1%average.
Figure 48: Social district comparison to the average – service use
-
5%
25%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Rat
e of
Ser
vice
Use
Rat
e of
Ser
vice
Use
Job search or training programs and services
Calgary Average = 14.3%
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
Homeless shelters
Calgary Average = 1.0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Social Districts
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15Social Districts
48
-
49
SoCIAL DISTRICT MAPMAP OF SOCIAL DISTRICT
12
3
4
5 6
7
8
91011
12 13
14
15
CIA
ESH
FPK
14U13J
03I
NPK
09E
FHI
GPK
12I
CRA
TUS
VAR
ST1 ST3
SIG
SIL
SPH
EDG
PAN
ST4
02A
13GMAH
SHI
DDG
SAD
LKB
GPI
MNI
CHA
ST2
EVN
RIV
SVO
HID
EVE
BOW
03S
MCKMCT CPF
HUN
12H
STD
DIS
12F
13D
02E
SCE
AUB
ARB
AYB DOV
COV
02F
SDCBRI
WIL
ASP
SFHACA
OGD
WSP
S23
SGH
SHN
CIT
HIF
ROY
DAL
VAL
PIN
MID
ALT
13F
WIN
THO
06A
HAM
SRI
BED
13E
TAR
03P
13C
03H02B
13A
03R
BLN
CAN
BRD
ING
MOR
HAW
03D
BRE
WHI
NEB
STR
BUR
WBN
HAY
MCI
HIL
MON
ROC
REN
MRT
TEM
MRL
ALB
RUN
GRI
UOC
FLN
EFV
KIL
03V
FAL
WLD
HHB
05C
WOO
10A
MPK
SOW
SHW
LKV
CGR
OAK
01C
RAN
01B
SUN
SYV
09K
RIC
HOR
WHL
SOM
FLI
OSH
HAR
KCA
PEN
CED
PAT
ERI
MAL
GLA
BRA
DBC
PKL
03C
GBKEPK
DRN
SET
WES
SAN
COU
FAI
SAW
MLR
FVI
02C
MOP
12A
12B
FHT
KIN
ABBCRE
CHW
APP
LPK
SOV
COL
QLD
COR
EFI
MLI
FRA
VISBNF
SHG
CAP TUX
HPK
GDL
DRG
VAF
MAC
MER
DNC
SHS
STA
CAS
UMR
05B
GRE
12C
WND
HOU
SPR
NAW
01F
PKD SSD
NGM
WGTRCK
HIW
COA
UNI
CHV
SNA
PUM
SOC
COP
NHV
RAM
CAM
KEL
CHR
EYA
SKW
06B
RDL
01E
BNK
PKH
09H
GTI
MIS
MEA
QPK
13H
CRM
SKE
CHK
RED
09N
01D
DNE
BRT
EAU
BDO
13I
CLI
POI
SCA
RMT
CFLBEL
RID
DNW
MAF
LMR
ROX
PEG
MPL
RUT
DIA
ERL
09D
GRV
MAN
BYV
EAG
SSW
NHU
GBP
13B
CHN
Calgary Social DistrictsShowing Community District Boundaries
Created by City of Calgary, CNS, Social Policy & Planning, September 2008Source of base map: Statistics Canada
-
50 51
SoCIAL DISTRICT CoMMUNITY GRoUPINGSSD 1 SD 2 SD 3 SD 4 SD 5 SD 6 SD 7 SD 8 CSD 9 SD 10 SD 11 SD 12 SD 13 SD 14 SD 15
Arbour Lake Beddington HTS
Calgary International Airport
01F Banff Trail Abbeydale Aspen Woods Bowness Alyth / Bonnybrook
Albert Park / Radisson HTS
Altadore Bayview Acadia Auburn Bay 14U
Citadel Country Hills Castleridge Scenic Acres Brentwood
Marl-borough
Canada Olympic Park
Bridgeland / Riverside Beltline
Applewood Park Bankview Bel-Aire Braeside
Bonavista Downs Bridlewood
Dalhousie Country Hills Village Coral Springs
Silver Springs
Cambrian HTS
Marl-borough Park
Christie Park
Crescent HTS Chinatown Dover
CFB - Lincoln Park PMQ
Britannia Burns Industrial Canyon Meadows Chaparral
Edgemont Coventry Hills
Deerfoot Business Centre
Tuscany Capitol Hill Monterey Park Coach Hill Hillhurst Downtown Commercial Core
East�eld CFB-Currie Chinook Park Cedarbrae Copper�eld Evergreen
Hamptons Evanston Falconridge University HTS Charles-wood Pineridge
Cougar Ridge
Houns�eld HTS / Briar Hill
Downtown East Village Erin Woods Glamorgan
Cliff Bungalow
Douglasdale / Glen Cranston Legacy
Hawkwood Harvest Hills Horizon University of Calgary
Colling-wood Rundle Crestmont Mayland
Downtown West End Forest HTS Glenbrook Eagle Ridge
East Fairview Industrial
Deer Ridge Midnapore
Kincora
Harvest HillsBusiness Park
Martindale Varsity Greenview Discovery Ridge Mayland HTS Eau Claire Forest Lawn Glendale Elbow Park Fairview Deer Run Millrise
Nolan Hill Hidden Valley McCall Greenview Industrial Park
Greenwood / Greenbriar
Mont-gomery High�eld
Forest Lawn Industrial
Killarney / Glengarry Elboya
Fairview Industrial
Diamond Cove
Shawnee Slopes
Ranchlands MacEwan Glen North Airways
Highland Park
Patterson HTS Parkdale Inglewood Franklin Lakeview Erlton
Glendeer Business Park
East Shepard Industrial
Shawnessy
Rocky Ridge
Panorama Hills
Pegasus Industrial Highwood Rosscarrock
Point McKay
Manchester Industrial
Golden Triangle
Lincoln Park
Kelvin Grove Haysboro
Fish Creek Park Silverado
Royal Oak Sandstone Valley Saddle Ridge
Huntington Hills Shaganappi Renfrew Mission Meridian
North Glenmore Park
Mayfair Kingsland Lake Bonavista Somerset
Sage Hill Saddle Ridge Industrial
Mount Pleasant Signal Hill Rosedale Ramsey
Ogden Shops Richmond
Meadowlark Park
MapleRidge Mahogany Sundance
Sherwood Skyline East North Haven Springbank Hill
St. Andrews HTS Scarboro
Penbrooke Meadows
Rutland Park
Mount Royal Lower
Riverbend McKenzie Lake Walden
Symons Valley
South Airways
North Haven Upper
Spruce Cliff Sunnyside Scarboro / Sunalta West
Red Carpet / Mountview Mobil
South Calgary Oakridge
Shepard Industrial
McKenzie Towne
Stoney 1 Queens Park Village Strathcona Park
West Hillhurst Sunalta Southview
Glenmore Park Palliser Southwood
New Brighton
Stoney 3 Rosemont Valley Ridge Manchester Valley�eld Parkhill / Stanley Park Willow Park Parkland
Stoney 4 Thorncliffe West Springs Star�eld Pump Hill Ogden Queensland
Stoney 2 Tuxedo Park Westgate Great Plains Rideau Park Section 23
Sunridge Winston HTS, Mountview
Wildwood Foothills Industrials Roxboro Seton
Taradale Nose Hill Park Upper Mount Royal
South Foothills
Temple Skyline West Windsor Park Woodbine
Westwinds Vista HTS Woodlands
Whitehorn
Skyview Ranch
-
50 51
-
52 53
76 139
29 17 261
62 94 84 17 5 262
33 13 187
25 258
60 156
34 10 261
89 52 26 79 13 259
Calgary
-
52 53
Tabl
e B
2: S
ocia
l dis
trict
tabl
e - i
ssue
s of c
once
rn
Cal
gary
SD1
SD2
SD3
SD4
SD5
SD6
SD7
SD8
SD9
SD10
SD11
SD12
SD13
SD14
SD15
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
#%
Ver
y co
ncer
ned
186
6 12
4
14
7 27
11
3
5 16
5
10
8 8
5 10
6
10
7 27
11
8
4 5
6 11
5
15
5 9
6
Som
ewha
t co
ncer
ned
556
19
55
19
27
14
37
14
11
19
61
19
26
19
27
18
39
21
33
24
51
20
48
23
14
17
38
17
60
20
30
19
Not
ver
y co
ncer
ned
529
18
39
14
38
19
47
18
8 14
56
18
22
16
28
18
55
29
22
16
47
19
34
16
13
15
49
22
50
17
21
13
Not
at a
ll co
ncer
ned
1707
57
18
2 63
12
0 60
14
8 57
35
62
18
5 58
80
58
92
60
86
45
73
53
12
5 50
12
1 57
54
63
12
6 56
17
7 59
10
4 63
Bein
g lo
nely
Tota
l V
ery
conc
erne
d 19
8 7
20
7 18
9
29
11
3 5
10
3 14
10
6
4 12
6
5 4
29
12
11
5 7
9 12
6
12
4 9
6
Som
ewha
t co
ncer
ned
559
19
48
17
35
18
42
16
10
18
61
19
28
21
36
24
29
16
20
14
47
19
43
21
14
17
45
20
66
22
34
21
Not
ver
y co
ncer
ned
483
16
38
13
30
15
45
17
11
20
56
18
19
14
27
18
52
28
20
14
49
19
32
15
12
14
28
13
44
15
22
14
Not
at a
ll co
ncer
ned
1737
58
18
2 63
11
8 59
14
5 56
33
58
19
0 60
75
55
82
54
96
51
94
68
12
7 50
12
5 59
53
61
13
8 62
18
2 60
99
60
Hav
ing
rela
tions
hip
prob
lem
s with
m
embe
rs o
f yo
ur im
med
iate
fa
mily
Tota
l V
ery
conc
erne
d 25
4 9
14
5 11
6
34
13
5 8
21
7 23
17
12
8
15
8 13
9
31
12
13
6 6
7 17
8
28
9 13
8
Som
ewha
t co
ncer
ned
394
13
49
17
27
14
37
14
6 11
32
10
27
20
18
12
22
12
22
16
41
16
25
12
7
8 21
10
35
12
24
15
Not
ver
y co
ncer
ned
462
16
43
15
30
15
47
18
9 17
61
19
12
9
18
12
49
26
21
15
41
16
29
14
11
13
29
13
41
14
21
13
Not
at a
ll co
ncer
ned
1868
63
18
0 63
13
2 66
14
1 55
36
64
20
2 64
75
55
10
5 69
10
3 54
82
60
13
8 55
14
5 69
63
73
15
8 70
20
0 66
10
7 65
Bein
g di
scri
min
ated
ag
ains
t
Tota
l V
ery
conc
erne
d 10
7 4
4 2
8 4
14
6 1
2 6
2 6
4 5
4 7
4 3
3 17
7
7 4
2 2
8 4
15
5 2
2
Som
ewha
t co
ncer
ned
1032
35
12
1 43
69
35
77
30
19
33
99
31
41
30
56
36
65
34
48
36
97
39
76
36
33
39
81
37
89
29
62
38
Not
ver
y co
ncer
ned
595
20
39
14
47
24
51
20
12
21
70
22
27
20
28
18
53
28
31
23
45
18
40
19
16
18
45
20
60
20
31
19
Not
at a
ll co
ncer
ned
1225
41
11
7 42
74
37
11
3 44
25
44
14
2 45
64
46
65
42
65
34
52
39
93
37
87
41
35
41
87
39
14
1 46
67
41
Not
cont
ribu
ting
enou
gh to
you
r co
mm
unity
Tota
l V
ery
conc
erne
d 16
3 5
22
8 9
5 22
9
2 4
8 3
9 7
9 6
10
5 3
3 24
10
6