signposts ii - calgaryfor further information on the signpost series – including a similar survey...

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



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%


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%


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



0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


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%


9%

12%

15%

14%

18%

12%

19%

22%

27%

35%

Not having enough money for food

Not having enough money for housing

Being unemployed



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%


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%


6%

8%

13%

5%

13%

29%

Being a victim of domestic violence

Not having safe housing conditions


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%


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


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*


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


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


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*


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


8%

15%

17%

21%


Recent Calgarians

Being unemployed

14%

25%

22%

21%


Recent Calgarians


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

11%

17%

19%

26%



Recent Calgarians

Recent CalgariansGetting more education

or training 10%

15%

23%

30%

Rate of Concern


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%


Recent Calgarians

Rate of Concern


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%


Recent Calgarians

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



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%


Single parents


12%

19%

27%

32%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Single parents

Rate of Concern


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%


Single parents

Lacking self-esteem

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

5%

4%

16%

31%


Single parents


10%

12%

18%

28%


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%


Single parents

Not having enoughmoney for food

10%

20%

13%

22%


Single parents


12%

24%

21%

22%


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


14%

32%

34%

28%


Single parents


Single parents

Rate of Concern

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Rate of Concern


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

19%

28%

39%

46%


Single parents


Single parents


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


Single parents


Single parents


Single parents


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%


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%


Single parents

Rate of Service Need



Needed family or marriage counselling

1%

5%


Single parents

Needed �nancial counselling or education programs

2%

8%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%


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


Rate of Concern

Rate of Concern

Rate of Concern


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%


12%

21%

27%

26%

34 35


5%

10%

5%

8%

Being unemployed

12%

25%

22%

22%

Not having enough money for food

8%

13%

10%

16%


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


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


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%


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%


Recent immigrants


Recent immigrants


Recent immigrants


Recent immigrants


Recent immigrants


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%


Recent immigrants


Recent immigrants


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


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


Aboriginal persons


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%


Aboriginal persons


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%


Aboriginal persons


Aboriginal persons


Aboriginal persons


Aboriginal persons

Family or marriagecounselling

5%

14%

Food bank services

4%

12%

Self-help or supportgroups and programs

7%

20%


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


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







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%









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






Food bank services



Legal aid

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

44 45

3%

6%

66%

51%

2%

8%

Subsidized housing


Rate of Service Use

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Public transit






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%


Being stressed


* N for each SD = 200

46 47



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 15


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%



46 47

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

Food bank services


Rat

e of

Ser

vice

Use

20%


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



-1%

0%

1%

2%

3%

4%

Homeless shelters


5%

10%

15%

20%

Social 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

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

signposts ii - calgaryfor further information on the signpost series – including a similar survey...

Documents