Middlesex County Resident Life Survey TM May 10, 2017 Cara A. Finn Director of Economic Development “Great survey, should be done more often, and hoping to see results and what others in my community have to say!” -- Middlesex County Resident
Presentation Roadmap I. Introduction II. Survey Design III. Results ▶ Demographics ▶ Attraction, Satisfaction, and Deterring Factors ▶ Additional Feedback & Open Dialogue IV. Conclusions V. Questions
I. Introduction - Background Points ▶ Survey closed January 31 st ▶ 1,148 responses County wide ▶ Municipal Reports Contain data from just one municipality ▶ ▶ Have been distributed to all municipal offices for dissemination ▶ County Report ▶ Contains data from all municipalities Makes comparisons between proximal and peripheral ▶ municipalities Presentation to County Council May 23, 2017 and available to ▶ all local municipalities
Introduction - Survey Context ▶ Dynamic and diverse population of 71,511 in Middlesex County (Statistics Canada, 2016) ▶ 2011 to 2016 saw 1.1% in population growth County-wide with growth taking place in those municipalities closest to London ▶ Many municipal differences (e.g. demographics and economics) ▶ Also big differences in the needs and beliefs of residents based on where they live in the County ▶ Future developments must consider all unique aspects of each municipality to accommodate and attract an increasing population ▶ The needs and beliefs are especially important for resident accommodation, attraction, and retention
Introduction – Primary Objective Learn more about residents in each municipality by finding out: 1. What attracted residents to live in Middlesex County? (Attraction factors) 2. Why do residents continue to live in Middlesex County? (Satisfaction factors) 3. What would cause current residents to relocate outside of Middlesex County? (Deterring factors)
II. Survey Design - Question Overview ▶ Survey reliability maximized with numerous proven methods (Dillman, Smyth, & Christian, 2014a) ▶ 18 questions ▶ Designed in partnership between Department of Economic Development, Middlesex County; and survey design students under direction of their Psychology Professor, Donald Saklofske PhD
Survey Design - Distribution and Response Rate After testing, survey distributed online via multiple ▶ means (e.g. by municipal representatives, community organizations, social media, and in-person) Residents only allowed to complete survey once ▶ Response rate: 1.6% of all Middlesex County ▶ residents responded to survey (1% required for survey validity) Response rate in Southwest Middlesex: 2.3% ▶
Responses per Municipality Adelaide Metcalfe 44 Lucan-Biddulph 80 Middlesex Centre 328 Newbury Village 6 North Middlesex 83 Southwest Middlesex 130 Strathroy-Caradoc 275 Thames Centre 202
Survey Design - Limitations ▶ Two Limitations 1. Representativeness : reflects how closely respondents to the survey match the whole County population ▶ Likely only small decrease in accuracy of results 1. Overall confidence level and margin of error: ▶ Varies depending on response rate and is a guide ▶ Middlesex County : Confidence Level: 90% and Margin of Error: 2% ▶ Interpretation : 31% of residents indicated that they were in part attracted to Middlesex County by its clean environment. Therefore, 90% likelihood that the actual percentage is approximately between 29 and 33% for all of Middlesex County
III. Results Overview 1. Demographics 2. Attraction Factors 3. Satisfaction Factors 4. Deterrence Factors 5. Additional Feedback
1. Demographics Age Figure presents the age distributions of the whole population of Southwest Middlesex and respondents to the Resident Life Survey from the municipality Gender From Statistics Canada, the gender distribution of the Municipality of Southwest Middlesex was 50% female and 50% male in 2011. The distribution of the respondents to the survey from the municipality was 68% female and 32% male.
Demographics Type of Residence A considerable number of Southwest Middlesex residents that responded to the survey defined their type of home as a detached house (72% of respondents) and farm (21%). The types of residences of survey respondents are close to the distribution of the whole population; this demonstrates that the results of the survey will also be representative of residents that live in all types of residences.
Demographics Duration of Residency in the Municipality 11-15 Yrs 16-20 Yrs 12% 5% 6-10 Yrs 9% 1-5 Yrs 15% >20 Yrs 55% <1 Yr 4% 72% of the local population has been living in SWM for at least 11 years. 55% of the population has been living here for over 20 years.
Demographics Previous Residency London – 16.2% Other Municipalities in Middlesex County – 12.3% Elsewhere in Ontario – 26.9% Outside of Ontario – 6.2% A greater number of individuals choosing to relocate to SWM are coming from outside the immediate area.
2. Attraction Factors 100% 80% RESIDENTS (%) 60% 48% 48% 41% 33% 40% 31% 30% 30% 22% 20% 20% 18% 13% 20% 5% 4% 0% ATTRACTION FACTORS The great majority of residents came to SWM to be closer to family and friends and see the community as a great place to raise children. They enjoy the pace of lifestyle that SWM offers.
3. Satisfaction Factors Residents noted that they are moderately satisfied with the environment and housing in SWM. They are also reasonably satisfied with the roads, community events and education that they access in SWM. Local politics received a neutral reaction from respondents. Residential and commercial development, shopping and taxes scored slightly below average. Employment was rated lowest in terms of resident satisfaction.
Reasons for travelling outside the municipality • 88% of SWM residents noted that they leave for shopping. 79% are leaving for entertainment. • Health care access (55%), employment (45%) and sports and recreation (41%) are also reported by SWM residents as being key reasons for them to have to travel outside the local municipality.
Resident Engagement While in keeping with County averages, SWM residents have reported that they are moderately engaged in local community events and volunteer organizations but, not as active in sports and recreation and local politics.
Desire for Future Development 1 = “A lot less”; 3 = “Neither more nor less”; 5 = “A lot more” SWM residents have reported strong desires for an increase in jobs, small business and community events over the next 5 years. They are also supportive of growth of large businesses, residential growth and in franchise operations coming to town.
100% 80% 65% RESIDENTS (%) 52% 55% 57% 60% 48% 49% 47% 42% 38% 33% 30% 40% 25% 23% 22% 17% 20% 10% 0% Middlesex County DETERRING FACTORS Southwest Middlesex
Additional Feedback “Please use three words to describe your municipality. ” Southwest Middlesex
Open Dialogue SWM Respondents shared the following themes with respect to their open comments in the survey: A concern over the future access to quality and accessible education. Support for commercial and residential growth including incentives for small business development. Fear over continued loss of basic needs and services. Social services, gas stations. Need for increased employment.
IV. Conclusions 1. Survey results are derived from a representative and demographically varied group of residents, enabling the results to be extended to the whole population of the municipality with a reasonable margin of error. 2. Residents are most attracted to the municipality because of the proximity to their family and friends, and they view it as a positive place to raise children. 3. Residents are generally satisfied with various aspects of life in SWM, although some aspects, such as employment opportunities, may be improved. 4. SWM residents travel for multiple reasons, especially shopping and entertainment. Development efforts of the municipality may try to address these travel habits as a means to expanding the local economy and providing more convenience to residents. 5. Resident engagement levels are higher for community events than for volunteer organizations, and sports and recreation. 6. Satisfaction levels for any aspect may be improved by concentrating on increasing the engagement level among local residents for the aspect being reviewed. 7. Residents made it clear that they want to see more jobs, small businesses, and community events in the Municipality of Southwest Middlesex. 8. Increased residential development is welcomed by the current population of SWM. 9. Resident retention efforts in the municipality should likely be focused on the retention and growth of basic services, and ensuring the crime rate and any other compelling deterrence factor does not rise exponentially.
V. Questions?
Recommend
More recommend
