Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07/07/1992, 1A - HUMAN NEEDS ASSESSMENT
MEETING DATE: �i�H��n�ii�IIIIIIIII� ���I11 city of San . AS OBISPO 7-7-99 COUNCIL - - COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 14 FROM: Ken Hampian, Assistant City Administrative Officer Prepared By: Deb Hossli, Administrative Analyst SUBJECT: Human Needs Assessment CAO RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file Human Needs Assessment prepared by the Human Relations Commission. DISCUSSION: Background During the 1991-93 financial planning process, the City Council set aside $10,000 to conduct a Human Needs Assessment and charged the Human Relations Commission (HRC) with responsibility for carrying it out. The purpose of conducting the Assessment is to identify the community's priorities for human services. The City last conducted an assessment of this nature in 1978. This document was not kept current, and as such, is no longer useful to the Commission. The Commission intends to use the information gained from the Assessment to assist with the allocation of the annual Grants-In-Aid funding (as did happen in the 1992-93 process) and lay the ground work for future HRC work programs. The results of the Assessment will also be used by the human service community to document the need for their services. It is important to add that in the initial conception phase, it was the City's intention to contribute our $10,000 to a comprehensive countywide assessment effort that would be headed by the United Way. Because of timing and funding constraints of other agencies, the United Way was not able to move forward with a comprehensive countywide assessment. As such, with Council approval, the Commission pursued our own assessment with the understanding that we would model our process after the United Way's formal assessment method, COMPASS. By taking this approach, our assessment results could ultimately be incorporated into any future countywide assessment taken on by the United Way. Methodology In order to identify the community's human service priorities, the HRC, with assistance from a local consulting firm, conducted public workshops, surveyed 268 randomly selected city residents, held round-table discussions with community leaders (referred to as key informants in the report), and surveyed human and social service providers that serve our City. The Commission also relied heavily on the services of a Technical Advisory Body (TAB) and a Citizens Advisory Body (CAB) to oversee the preparation of the report. The TAB was composed, of individuals with knowledge in the area of social and human services. The CAB was made up of leaders in the fields of business, education and the media. Both were instrumental in making sure that the process A—/ Ilillu711i�Iti��IIII�IlII►�illll �� city Of San i ' °S OBISPO x1111 COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT remained on track and focussed on the appropriate issues. A membership listing for both advisory bodies can be found on page 48 of the Assessment. It is important to emphasize that in preparing the Assessment, the Commission used the telephone survey of 268 randomly selected households as a baseline of information for the Assessment. The Commission then relied on the TAB and CAB, key informant interviews, social service surveys and public workshops to serve as a check on the community's responses. The"check" process helped the Commission to develop a more refined final listing of issues. Report Findings Using the information gained from the surveys, interviews, and workshops, the Commission developed the following listing of the top seven issues viewed as pressing ! by the community (the listing has been placed in priority order): * Not Enough Affordable Housing * Homelessness * Unemployment * Lack of Affordable Medical and Mental Health Care * Drug and Alcohol Abuse Problems * Lack of Affordable, Quality Child Care * Teen Pregnancy The report itself provides a very detailed interpretation of the Assessment's findings and conclusions. However, in reviewing the report, it.is important to keep in mind that the Assessment is intended to focus on what the community perceives as human service priorities as opposed to relying solely on the input of human service "experts". This distinction becomes important when the Assessment findings are analyzed in greater detail. As an example, the telephone survey (which served as the baseline of information for the Assessment) concluded that the average resident believes that very few major social problems actually exist in San Luis Obispo. Consequently, the ranking reflects the community's human service priorities, but it only identifies the top two priorities (affordable housing and homelessness) as major problems to the average resident. In fact, of the 24 problems presented to residents in the telephone survey, the majority were not considered to be problems at all. In contrast, a typical human service provider would agree with the priority listing, but not with the community's perceptions regarding their level of severity. ! What's Next The Commission has already used the priorities identified in the draft Human Needs I Assessment to assist them in developing 1992-93 Grants-In-Aid recommendations. Upon Council approval of the Human Needs Assessment, however, it would be Commission's intention to reconvene the Human Needs Assessment Subcommittee to develop an implementation plan for the Assessment that would be included in HRCs annual work plan. As an example, now that we have identified affordable housing, unemployment, „Ir lulilllilll�����lllilllllll `I CTL / Of SM 1' SIS OBI SPO ,11111 COUNCIL. AGENDA REPORT homelessness, etc. as priority issues int a commun , is there more the City can do to encourage improvement in these areas? Clearly, the City cannot take full responsibility for solving all the community's high priority human service issues. We can, however, I continue in our role of assisting in these areas (e.g., continuing our annual contribution of $120,000 to the Homeless Shelter and assisting with their neighborhood relations; continuing to pursue outside grants for high priority human service programs as has been the case with the Women's Shelter and Homeless Shelter; continuing to evaluate affordable housing strategies through the Land Use Element and Housing Element Updates now underway, etc.). The Commission would also like to formulate a process that will allow for an annual updating of the Assessment so that it remains current and can be used to assist with allocating future Grants-In-Aid funding cycles. Once the Council has approved the Human Needs Assessment, the Commission will have the report re-printed, bound and distributed to appropriate agencies in the City and County. Thus, the report will be of benefit to other agencies and levels of government that are involved in evaluating and prioritizing social service programs. FISCAL IMPACT: Acceptance of this report will not result in any cost to the City at this time. Preparation of an implementation plan for the Assessment could, however, result in a future request from the Commission for additional funding. Obviously, given the current fiscal environment, the City's ability to fund additional programs will be severely limited. However, the Needs Assessment can still be very valuable in terms of investing whatever City resources are available in priority areas. ATTACHMENTS: Final Draft Human Needs Assessment i i A- City of San Luis Obispo Draft Human Needs Assessment CONTENTS Section Page I. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 III. Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 IV. The Questions, The Specific Answers, and Who Gave Them 4 A. Community Workshop Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 B. Household Survey Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 C. Key Informant Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 D. Service Provider Survey Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 VI. Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Appendix A: Summary of Workshop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Appendix B: Household Survey and Summary of Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Appendix C: Summary of Key Informant Roundtable Discussions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appendix D: Data Tables on Social Service Providers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Appendix E: Assessment Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 I. Introduction The city prepared its first Human Needs Assessment in 1978. The voluminous document has never been updated. Although the first document contained a lot of good information, it was difficult for city staff and commissioners to use in planning and decision making. The Human Relations Commission undertook this 1992 Human Needs Assessment to help the city identify the human services needs of the community today, and to see how well those needs are being met. The commission also wanted to find out which of the community's human-social service needs are not currently being met. And finally,the commission wanted to know what barriers people see between themselves and the services they need. This 1992 Human Needs Assessment is intended to help the city in future decision making on a variety of fronts, from grant disbursement to city planning issues. The commission also hopes that anyone living in the City of San Luis Obispo who is interested in human service issues will be able to pick up a copy of this report, read it, and come away with some useful information. II. Methodology To prepare this report, the commission worked through 1991 with the aid of a consulting firm, Crawford, Multad & Starr. This report is the result of that year-long process. It included public workshops, a telephone survey of nearly 300 randomly-selected city residents, a survey of social service providers, two roundtable discussions with people active in San Luis Obispo community issues,and follow-up interviews with those people. Those people are called°Key Informants"in this report. In addition, the commission also received the help of a Technical Advisory Body (TAB), and a Citizens Advisory Body(CAB). The TAB was made up of people who provide social services for city and county residents. The CAB was made up of leaders in the fields of business, education and the media. Both were instrumental in preparing the questions that needed to be asked of the community, and getting the community involved in the survey. Data collected for the Human Needs Assessment is available on computer diskette through the Human Relations Commission at City Hall, 990 Palm Street, (805)-781-7151. Page 2 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment III. Summary of Findings: The Answers The good news is that most San Luis Obispo residents say this is a good place to live. Most were satisfied with their community and the services it provides. Even when answering questions about problems in the community, city residents surveyed by phone were most likely to respond that the city's problems were moderate, and few. The bad news is those most satisfied with the community were also those with the most money. Those at the low end of the economic spectrum were most likely to be having a variety of problems, and to see the city - and themselves - as having major social service needs. The social service providers and Key Informants who help social service users generally noted the same problem issues as their clients. However, all people surveyed generally agreed when it came to ranking the most pressing human problems in the city-the problems which are affecting everyone, top and bottom of the economic spectrum alike. The surveys, discussion groups, and interviews pointed to the following areas as those seen by the community as most pressing for San Luis Obispo: 1. Not Enough Affordable Housing 2. Homelessness 3. Unemployment 4. Lack of Affordable Medical and Mental Health Care 5. Drug and Alcohol Abuse problems 6. Lack of Affordable, Quality Child Care 7. Teen Pregnancy (Problems are ranked with the worst at the top.) It is important to note that though the community and key informants differed slightly as to what the cause of the pressing problems were, both groups identified essentially the same problems. Key Informants and providers were more likely to feel that a lack of Mental Health and drug and alcohol treatment programs were the most pressing human service issues facing the city. The issue of'homelessness" ranked by other citizens as the number two human service problem in San Luis Obispo, key informants said, was really an issue of "mental health." Much of the homeless population in the city, Key Informants felt, were people in need of in-patient psychiatric or substance abuse treatment. But there are simply not enough institutional beds to hospitalize people who can't pay for psychiatric and drug addiction treatment, they said. What mental health institutions we do have can take only the most urgent cases, Key Informants said. On top of that, there are not enough drug and alcohol detoxificiation programs to help low-income people with substance abuse problems. And there are not enough counseling and psychiatric services available to help low-income and uninsured people with their emotional and mental health difficulties, Key Informants said. In contrast, city residents of all income levels, as well as social service users, felt that lack of affordable housing, homelessness, and unemployment were the biggest human problems facing the city. Employed citizens of all economic levels want more affordable housing. Social Service users wanted an affordable apartment or house, babysitters for their children, and jobs. i w.9 Page 3 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment It is important to stress that low-income city residents facing unemployment or underemployment have very few housing choices in the city. Paying for the housing they do find can leave them with precious few dollars to spend on other scarce city resources like health care, counseling and child care - other areas where human services are lacking in this city, according to those surveyed. And it is also important to note that when pressed, several Key Informants and social service providers said housing was a primary need of their clients, "co-equal" with mental health needs. "You can't think about yourself"or counseling for your problems, said one Key Informant and mental health provider, "until you get a roof over your head and food for your family." The Human Needs Assessment did find some good news for those city residents needing social service help. The survey of local social service providers shows that there is at least one agency aiming to help people in all seven human service problem areas residents listed. However,the commission discovered that certain groups of city residents, most notably low-income households, face barriers in getting to those social service agencies. Low-income households surveyed often did not know there was an agency providing the service they needed, or lacked the most information about the agency. The people who need human services also often thought it would cost them too much to seek help from social service agencies, or doubted that the agencies would provide them with quality service, the commission found. The commission also found that the most commonly provided services in the City were in the areas of information, education and financial assistance. Page 4 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment IV. The Questions, The Specific Answers, and Who Gave Them. Four different sources were surveyed to come up with the answers to the commissions' questions on human service needs. The sources differed slightly in ranking the most pressing problems of the community - but all four groups came up with the same list of top problems. The following are the specific answers from the four different source groups. Readers will find some eye-opening response rates, as well as confirmation of the several top problems people feel face city residents. A. The Workshop Group. The city held a community workshop on May 1, 1991 to ask people the following questions: What human or social needs do you feel are Being adequately met in San Luis Obispo? What human or social needs do you feel are not being adequately met in San Luis Obispo? Why do you think these needs are not adequately being met? Workshop participants were briefed on the purpose of the Human Needs Assessment and then split into discussion groups. A facilitator asked the groups the above listed questions, steered discussions, and noted group responses. Following are the answers given by the public workshop participants (it's interesting to note that some needs were listed by the participants as both being met and not being met). The numbers in parenthesis represent the number of participants giving that answer. A complete summary of responses appears in Appendix A. Needs Being Met: Recreation (6) Programs for children and teens (5) Education (5) Information and referral (for social services) (4) Senior Programs (3) Needs Not Being Met: Health Care (8) Public transportation (8) Education (6) Housing — affordable for renting and buying (6) Programs for children and teens (5) Gang prevention and intervention (4) Homelessness (4) Mental Health — affordable services (4) Multi-lingual services for ethnic groups (4) Substance abuse treatment -- affordable (3) Page 5 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment The participants came up with the following reasons why these needs are not being met: Reasons: Apathy on the part of the community at large —both lack of interest and lack of awareness of problems (7) Lack of money (3) Bureaucracy — government red tape getting in the way of help (2) Unstable employment base (2) Language barriers (2) The participants made the following recommendations to better meet the needs noted: Possible Solutions: Develop a comprehensive,coordinated human services delivery system. The system should include a 'one-stop" location or delivery point for all human services available. The location or delivery point should be accessible to the entire region. Provide comprehensive hotline.services Make the community at large aware that some problems do exist in San Luis Obispo. The participants felt that the community as a whole was°in denial'about the existence of real problems here, preferring to concentrate on the many assets and attributes of the city as a good place to live. After the May workshop, participants were mailed a summary of workshop responses, containing the above list of needs being met, needs not being met, and possible solutions. They were asked to rank the top 10 areas they felt most critically in need of improvement. This written"mini survey" showed that after some time and reflection, 10 of the participants ranked Affordable Housing as the most critical need facing the city. The remaining half of the participants split their responses almost evenly among the remaining nine problem areas. B. The Residents - Household Survey Group. The consulting firm performed a survey of 268 city households between May 16 and June 7, 1991. The households were selected from a list of randomly generated phone numbers provided by the city. The survey consisted of four sections, and was designed to be completed in 10 to 15 minutes. (A copy of the survey is provided in Appendix B.) The survey was designed to seek answers to the same four basic questions asked at the workshop. In the first survey section, respondents were presented with a list of 24 problems or issues. They were asked to rate each issue as either 1) Not a problem facing the community as a whole;2) A minor problem; 3)A moderate problem; or 4) A major problem. In the second section, respondents were presented with a list of 24 problems or issues,and asked if those problems were affecting their household, specifically. Again,they were asked to rank the issue as being not a problem, a minor problem, a moderate problem, or a major problem for the household. �y4,10 Page 6 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment In the third section, respondents were presented with a list of 17 barriers or difficulties and asked if they,or someone in their household, had encountered those barriers when seeking help for a problem. The last section asked respondents to describe their income and other demographic characteristics of their households. Survey Results: The responses suggest that residents generally think few social problems exist in San Luis Obispo. In tabulating the survey results, each of the 24 problems was assigned a numerical score - a response of "major problem" translated to a 4. A response of 'not a problem" translated to a 1. According to the phone survey, the residents saw most issues as minor problems, or not a problem at all. All but seven of the 24 problem areas scored below 2 in resident responses. The seven issues residents did see as problems elicited scores between a 2.12 and a 3.5 -a ranking which means people saw them as slightly more serious than a minor problem, ranging on up to almost a major problem. The exceptions to the "not a problem-minor problem" trend were the issues of a lack of affordable housing and homelessness. The average citizens reached by the telephone survey ranked the lack of affordable housing at a 3.5 -the closest thing to a Major Problem in San Luis Obispo. 100 percent of people living alone-single people listing their household size as one person- said lack of affordable housing was a moderate to major problem. 91 percent of residents between the age of 35 and 54 said lack of affordable housing was a moderate or major problem. And 89 percent of households with children said it was a major or moderate problem, as did 89 percent of respondents under 35 years old. Some 89 percent of men surveyed said it was a moderate or major problem,and 88 percent of women gave the same answers. The survey statistics show that this single issue-affordable housing-is worrying no less than 85 percent of the representative community in every age and income bracket surveyed. The only other issue which came close to lack of affordable housing as a wont' spot for average city residents was a closely-related one: Homelessness. An average of 70 percent of respondents in all income and family size categories ranked homelessness as a moderate to major problem in San Luis Obispo. Eighty-six percent of people between the ages of 55 and 64, 78 percent of women polled, 74 percent of households with children polled, 79 percent of families receiving aid, and 75 percent of households making less than $10,000 a year considered homelessness a problem. Seventy-four percent of respondents with children also ranked homelessness as a problem. While low-income families and households receiving aid may be concerned about homelessness because they fear housing costs may force them to join the ranks of the homeless, the survey shows other city residents at higher income levels are concerned about the problem as well. l�l� Page 7 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Families with children, who are more apt to use city parks which are daytime homes for the homeless were concerned about the issue, according to the survey. Older residents, who may eye the homeless on the streets with some fear - or who may have the time to be actively volunteering to help the homeless and see their problems firsthand, are also concerned about the problem, according to the survey. Affluent citizens are concerned as well about the homeless issue. Some 71 percent of families making more than $50,000 a year ranked it as a moderate to major city problem; 70 percent of families making $30,000 to $40,000 a year ranked it as a moderate to major problem. Lack of affordable housing and homelessness were far and above the most pressing concerns of residents, according to the questionnaire. No other issues came close to matching the concern residents of all income and age levels felt about those two issues. However, in one subgroup, Childcare scored higher than Homelessness as a pressing concern. Eighty percent of respondent households receiving government income aid ranked a lack of quality child care as a moderate or major problem in the city. Only affordable housing was a bigger issue to this group of city residents. The residents receiving aid ranked a lack of childcare ahead of homelessness as a major problem facing the city. Interestingly, the working poor, the middle income groups, and the affluent have similar concern levels when it comes to quality childcare. 61 percent of respondents making more than $50,000 a year said quality childcare was a moderate to major problem in the city, as did 60 percent of families making between $20,000 and $30,000 a year, and 67 percent of families making between $10,000 and $20,000 a year. Four other areas also caused more than 50 percent of respondents to label them moderate or major problems for the community. All seven areas are ranked, along with their average numerical survey score, below. Again, a score of 4 would represent a major problem, a score of 1 would represent a "not a problem" answer. Most Pressina Problem Areas, Phone Survey: 1. Not Enough Affordable Housing 3.50 2. Homelessness, Lack of Housing 2.98 3. Unemployment 2.80 4. Lack of Affordable Health Care 2.76 5. Drug and Alcohol Abuse Problems 2.71 6. Lack of Quality Child Care 2.63 7. Teen Pregnancy 2.59 A Additional notes about the top 7 scoring problem areas: 1. Eighty-nine percent of all respondents felt that the lack of affordable housing was a "moderate" or "major" problem for the city. Low-income households and single adults were largely those who felt this was a major problem. 2. Seventy percent of all respondents felt that homelessness or tack of housing was a "moderate" or "major' problem. Older people (89 percent) and women (78 percent) were most concerned about this problem. Page 8 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment 3. Sixty-six percent of all respondents said unemployment was a"moderate"or"major" problem. Though it ranked as the third biggest problem in the city, and though almost all of the problems on the list involve people not having enough money for the things they want and need„ unemployment was most keenly felt as a major problem by three groups. They were those with children, those making between $10,000 and $20,000 a year, and single adults. Roughly three-quarters of the respondents in those groups felt it unemployment was a major or moderate problem. 4. Sixty-Four percent of all respondents felt that the lack of affordable health care was a"moderate"to"major" problem facing the community. This was seen as a greater problem by respondents between the ages of 35 and 64 years of age (71 percent) than for persons over 65 years old. 5. Sixty-two percent of respondents felt drug and alcohol abuse were "moderate" or "major" problems in the city. More single people(74 percent),women (69 percent) and households making less than$30,000 a year(72 percent)felt drug and alcohol abuse were "moderate" or "major" problems. 6. Fifty-seven percent of all respondents said that a lack of quality child care was a "moderate" problem. As expected, households with children (68 percent) and households in the 35-54 age group (65) percent were most likely to label this a problem. And 80 percent of families receiving government aid labeled this area a "moderate" or "major" problem. 7. Fifty-seven percent of all respondents felt teen pregnancy was a "moderate" to "major" problem. Many more women (70 percent) than men (42 percent) labeled teen pregnancy as a "moderate" or "major" problem. Some 27 percent of households receiving government aid said it was a moderate or major problem. The findings of the 1992 survey are compared below with the top seven issues identfled in the 1978 Human Needs Assessment. 1992 Survey: 1978 Assessment: 1. Not Enough Affordable Housing 1. Housing 2. Homelessness, Lack of Housing 2. Education 3. Unemployment 3. Crisis Intervention, Support Services 4. Lack of Affordable Health Care 4. Legal Aid Services 5. Drug/Alcohol Abuse 5. Equal Opportunity (discrimination) 6. Lack of Quality Affordable Child Care 6. Child Care 7. Teen Pregnancy 7. Employment Detailed tables regarding the percentages of people who ranked the top seven problem issues as"moderate or"major"for the city appear on the following two pages(Tables 1 and 2). The entire telephone survey, with all 24 issues which respondents were asked about, plus the answers they gave, appears in Appendix B. ! co cc co � U! P, w s (D e B § § b \ [ t . $ � § % ( § - § inale oe co § to . � an ID ID w 10 . • B ca ai § mak ® % % f § § a22 & § LD kLU k b � LU § k £ a m zm ■ & 0 .1i ale Fo ae . « | 2 § z coto co 01 Go C%I co w e Lu2 0 0 § . U.z | 0c Q � � ' � § _ . LU 222 a — 2 G " IL 2 ■ . ■� ] 2 � § X40 k j k % cob K ■ z ° CX k / e . in § k a � a §§' ) f pB � ) ) J■ )k© ,(D ; )7 c 0) =0 kz t CD £ § � 1 2 \ § % � § $ aCC / � cc E ` k �2 § t [ b % § [ b o . I § ® U) z § 0 \ B § " � -0` § ( om . ■ 0 - / C C E - % 0020 Ce C� , (0 § [ to = W - 0 § £ to� cr cn , k t § rol 'lot u . Be aq IR q 0 LLD ■ a � ■ ) co ( LnC9 0 in co 2 � tBae e s OD L . 2k a � . ■ ■ a � � , . ar § ; � § c2 _ Lu I » $ § 2 \ ( co § . o � z ) g2 | ( # J 7 . 5 a (L ± § . .._A_je, Page 11 Gly of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Household Issues The next section of the survey asked residents about the same 24 issues and whether they were affecting them personally. The scores to the answers residents gave indicate most people felt they had only minor problems on a personal level. Only three out of 10 respondents considered any of the 24 issues to be a "moderate" or "major' problem at home. However, the survey did show the highest "personal problem" response scores among lower income households and households consisting of younger persons(age 35 or younger). People in the lower income groups were more likely to identify issues relating to affordability and standards of living as "moderate" or "major' problems. Some 50 percent of households with incomes under$10,000 said that not having enough money to pay for medical care was a "moderate" or "major' problem. Lower income households also had significantly more problems finding work (49 percent), more frequently experienced stress and depression (50 percent) and had a higher incidence of physical conflict in the home (16 percent among low income groups,as opposed to 4 percent for the average of all respondents). The top seven issues people listed as being problems in their own houses were: Problem Area Score 1. Anxiety, stress or depression 1.91 2. Not Able to Find Work 1.79 3. Can't Qualify for, Or Afford Medical Insurance 1.72 4. Not Enough Money for Doctor or Prescriptions 1.66 5. Can't Afford Recreational Activities 1.66 6. Not Enough Money for Housing 1.66 7. Not Able to Afford Legal Help 1.61 Most of the problems respondents said they were having at home revolve around money. People are worried about getting or keeping a job, getting medical insurance, not having enough money for housing or doctors or anything fun to do. Of the top seven household concerns, six involve a lack of money and lack of ability to afford both essentials and recreation. Barriers to Service The next section of the survey asked people about their experiences in getting help for their problems. On the whole, respondents said they hadn't faced many barriers when they were trying to get what they needed - though they were worried they couldn't pay for it Only 20 percent of the respondents thought that there were"moderate"or"major"barriers to getting help. But 28 percent of the respondents thought that the help they needed or were seeking would cost too much for them to afford. However,the survey showed definite barriers for city residents at the lower end of the economic ladder. The survey turned up the following portrait of concerns for low-income residents: Almost half of the respondents who made less than$10,000 a year said they felt they could not afford the service or help they needed for the problems they faced. Younger households also noted the greatest problems with ability to pay for services. Page 12 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment • Almost a third of younger city residents (29 percent of respondents under the age of 35) didn't know where to tum for help, even though it is available in the community. That 29 percent cited lack of information about the available social services here as a "moderate" or"major" problem. Men were less likely to know about what help was available than women. Some 24 percent of men labeled lack of information a "moderate" or "major" problem, compared with 16 percent of women. • People who need social services the most were least likely to know what kind of help is available. Some 64 percent of respondents who receive govemment aid said the lack of information on available services was a "moderate" or "major" problem for them. Fifty- seven percent of those receiving aid felt the cost of human services was a "major" or "moderate" problem for them. • People of color were more likely to think that the quality of social services offered was a problem than white.people. Demoaraohics The 268 households surveyed closely match the overall population of the city in ethnic makeup, age, and income levels, according to 1990 census data. That is, the overwhelming majority were white, between the ages of 20 -34, living in households comprised of just two adults with no children,and making between$30,000 to more than$50,000 a year. However, a significant portion (roughly a little more than a third) had annual incomes of less than $10,000 and up to $20,000 a year. The middle income levels were least represented. Families making between$30,000 and$50,000 a year made up the smallest percentage of respondents. A summary of more specific respondent data: Almost all households (225) were white, followed by Asian households (17), Hispanic households (15), black households (4), American Indian households (3), and households of other ethnic makeups (3). More detailed graphs on demographic data about the people who answered the telephone survey appear in Appendix D (see Tables 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19). C. Key Informants - Their Assessments The fourth group surveyed about the city's human service needs were the Key Informants - people active in community affairs, some of them also providers of human services. The commission held two°roundtable"discussions with a total of 13 Key Informants in October, 1991. The Key Informants were asked: • What social or human needs are being met in San Luis Obispo? • What needs are not being met? Page 13 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment What barriers do you think are keeping those needs from being met? The Key Informants participating in the roundtable discussions were: Brenda Dreschler, Rape Crisis Center, David Garth, SLO Chamber of Commerce; Dan Herron, SLO Area Coordinating Council; Betty Nielsen, People's Kitchen; Cindi Griffith, Family Services Center; Rick Cohen, HOTLINE; Jim Gardiner, SLO Police; Betty Van Gorden, American fled Cross; Dave Supleffer, Friendship School; Shirley McIntyre Bird, HOTLINE; Biz Steinberg, Economic Opportunity Commission;Harry Manhoff,Ministerial Association;George Rowland,County Health Department. What They Had To Say: While the Key Informants differed slightly when listing the needs which are being met,they were very much in agreement on the majority of needs they feel are not being met. The Key Informants responses closely mirror-and help confirm-the findings of the citizens surveyed by phone. Most of the Key Informants, however, felt that Mental Health was a human service most acutely needed in San Luis Obispo -- coequal to affordable housing. Key Informants felt the "homelessness" issue ranked second by city residents was really a "mental health" issue in disguise. "People aren't going to say, 'I'm tired of seeing those bums on the streets and the winos talking to themselves and asking me for money. I wish they'd get them out of here or get them help,'"said one Key Informant."They're going to say,'I'm concerned about homelessness.` Key Informants pointed to the lack of in-patient capacity at county Mental Health hospitals as the reason for an overflow of mentally troubled homeless people. The problem has been worsening over the past five years, Informants felt. Key Informants not in the business of providing mental health services also recognized the link between homelessness and psychiatric and drug and alcohol treatment availability. Those Key Informants outside the mental health field also felt the problem had been worsening noticeably, generally during the past three to four years. Key Informants in the mental health field often cited the lack of federal funding as a major problem underlying the lack of mental health services. 'These people were deinstitutionalized and sent to the community, and the money to treat them was supposed to trickle down to the community. It never did," said one Key Informant. The federal funding shortage means county Mental Health hospitals can take only the worst cases -others are sent away and referred to agencies such as the Family Services Center. Low-income families who can't afford the $60 to $100 an hour fees charged by private therapists must compete with those abandoned by federal funding for scarce non-profit counseling services, Key Informants said. At the same time, Informants noted that affordable housing was a key issue for people also in need of counseling. Low-income city residents in need of counseling or mental health treatment ha®e a"co-equal" need for housing they can pay for, Key Informants felt. "You can't concentrate on yourself (or your problems) until you have a roof over your head and food," said one. Below is a listing of the Key Informant's most pressing issues in the city (the issues are listed alphabetically as the Key Informants did not formally prioritize issues): " Affordable Child Care " Affordable Health Care Page 14 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment • Affordable Housing • Emergency Shelter • In-patient care for substance abuse In-patient mental health services Homelessness (seen as interrelated problems) • Lack of bilingual services Lack of well-paying jobs Mediation services Transportation for disabled/elderly The two groups of Key Informants also largely agreed when talking about what barriers are keeping people from having these pressing needs met. Both groups highlighted the following reasons on their lists of barriers: • Lack of Community Awareness • Apathy and denial of the existence of community problems • The political process - a lack of political will to address the problems • Land use issues - barriers to locating centers to help with these problems These responses also mirror the responses of the participants in the community workshop. Another barrier cited less frequently by Key Informants was a lack of funding to treat pressing problems and a "divergence of City-County government priorities." Key Informants did, however, feel some human service needs were being adequately met in the community. Both roundtable groups felt that public safety (police and fire services) were being provided well in San Luis Obispo, and that the city was doing a good job of providing recreation programs for children and teens. The two groups had different opinions about what other services were well provided in the city, but both groups listed a number of other areas. An outline of all responses given by Key Informants at the two workshops is contained in Appendix C. D. The Service Providers - What They Had to Say There are 220 organizations providing some form of social services to city residents. The commission consultants mailed a survey to all of them, asking'for a description of the services they provide, their funding, staffing, and who their clients are - relating to the City of San Luis Obispo only. Of the 220, 83 responded - 34 percent. A chart on the following page (fable 3) lists those 83. Judging from the respondents, the "typical" social service provider in the city is a non-profit organization that has been serving San Luis Obispo for more than 20 years and whose primary source of funding is the federal and state governments. Page 15 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment The completeness of the responses,however,was mixed. Several questions were answered only by part of the providers, either because they did not keep records on the information requested, or declined to reveal the information, or because the questions were not applicable to their agency. RESPONDENTS TO SERVICE PROVIDER SURVEY Womens, Infants,Children Special Support Food Program SLO Drug Program Women's Shelter Special Olympics Family Services Center San Luis Literacy Council SLO Library Cal Poly Off-Campus Housing Cuesta College Disabled Students SLO County AIDS Support Network SLO Commission for Education on Alocoholism SLO Rapid Transit Authority Overeaters Anonymous Senior Nutritional Program of SLO County EOC family Planning Camp Fire Council of the Central Coast Public Guardian SLO Breastfeedery Resources American Red Cross SLO Transitions, Inc. _ Family Court Services Tri-Counties Regional Center County of SLO Health/AIDS Program Hotline of SLO County Caring Callers Rape Crisis Center Hospice of SLO County California Children's Services Probation Department of SLO County Grandmother's House Children's Center Cal Poly Children Center American Heart Association Coast Caregiver Resource Center Friends Outside SLO County Public Health Mental Health Association Alcoholics Anonymous AARP, Senior Employment Program Foothill Preschool March of Dimes TABLE 3 Page 16 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment RESPONDENTS TO SERVICE PROVIDER SURVEY City of SLO Housing Authority Disabled Student Services, Cal Poly Social Security Administration SLO Regional Ridesharing Califomai State Department of Rehabilitation Boy Scouts of America, Santa Lucia Council Maguire and Asgbaugh SLO Lions Club Friendship School Private Industry Council EOC Child Care Resource Connection State Department of Parks and Recreation Alanon Family Groups SAVE SLO County Medical Society EOC Homeless Shelter Planned Parenthood People's IGtchen SLO City Department of Parks and Recreation Cooperative Education Disabled American Veterans California Rural Legal Assistance SLO County Department of Public Health Children's Home Society Economic Crime Unit, District Attorney SLO County Department of Social Services United Methodist Church San Luis Foursquare Church First Church of Christ, Scientist Agape Christian Fellowship The Congregational Church Zion Lutheran Church Church of Religeous Science Greek Orthodox Church Vineyard Christian Fellowship Nativity of Our Lady Church Clavary Baptist Church Unity Christ Church Meadow Park Church of Christ San Luis Obispo County Alliance for the Mentally III County Veterans Service Office TABLE 3 (cont'd) Page 17 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment The Answers from the Providers: The numbers and the money: The survey showed that most of the responding non-profit agencies serving the city are small; most are staffed by less than six part-time employees. Almost all rely extensively on volunteers to directly provide social services. The majority provide social services to residents all over the county - not just the city. The service providers with the most money are part of local government. Of the 12 social service providers with budgets of more than $950,000, eight were city or county government agencies. The budgets for other non-profit agencies went as low as $70 annually; the average amount of money all providers-government and non-profit- had each year to provide service and run their organization was $806,640. The biggest provider of social service funding in the city is the federal and state government. Appendix D provides tables on sources of funding among responding providers, number of service providers by areas served, and number of years providers have served San Luis Obispo (See Tables 9, 10, 11, and 12). What they do: The agencies were given a list of 40 service categories and asked which they provided. Many responding agencies provided several services to clients. Many could not pull out data on the number of clients served in each specific category, or give specifics on San Luis Obispo residents served. Table 4 summarizes the social services provided for city residents. Page 18 City o/San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment SUMMARY OF SERVICES PROVIDED By Service Category Service Category Providers Information and referral 33 Education 32 Financial assistance 21 Support group services 20 Transportation/Ridesharing 20 Basic needs: food 19 Recreation 19 Child care 17 Basic needs:clothing 15 Housing 13 Planning and coordinating services 13 Basic needs:temporary shelter 12 Financial counseling 12 Nutrition counseling 12 Counseling 12 Substance abuse services 11 Employment 10 Physical health services. 10 Group meals of home-delivered 10 Legal services 10 Literacy 8 Family planning 8 Respite care 7 Domestic violence services 7 Delinquency prevention 6 LandlordRenant services 5 Mediation 5 Emergency/Disaster services 5 Homemaker or chore service 4 Adult day care for mentally impaired 4 Veterans' services 4 Home health care 3 Adoption services 2 Adult day care for physically disabled 2 Crime prevention 1 Migrant worker services 1 TABLE 4 A a23 Page 19 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Who the help goes to: The providers were asked how many San Luis Obispo city residents they had helped in the past 12 months, and how many they had on waiting lists. Many had trouble splitting out city residents from residents of other areas; many because of the way they kept records. For example, several counted the number of times a service was provided, rather than the number of people service was provided to. A table on the following page lists the groups of people served, and the average and median numbers of people served in those groups. Because of the trouble providers had in giving the number of San Luis Obispo city residents served,the consultants felt the median.number (the number in the exact middle of the high and low recorded) is a better number to look at. Both median and average numbers are provided in the table. The responses from providers showed that the average social service user in this city is a white adult between the age of 19 and 55 who makes less than$20,000 a year. About equal numbers of women and men use help from social service agencies. Who's Waitina for Help Providers were also asked how many persons were on a waiting list for their services. Only 16 agencies said they had at least one service with a waiting list. However, those few services with a wafting list show a large number of people needing help and waiting a long time to get ft. The waiting lists are a strong indicator of just what kind of social service help city residents need, and mirror the perceptions people have about what the city's problems are. A table following shows a summary of waiting lists, number of people on the list, and average time spent waiting. Basically, what the answers show is that if you find that ft is a financial hardship to pay for your apartment or quality child care for your children while you go to work, you'll have to waft at least two years for the economic help that local agencies offer. The biggest line social service users face is at the City of San Luis Obispo Housing Authority. People stay on that list an average of 990 days - two and a half to three years -to get into a subsidized apartment unit. The only comparable wait was for a child care subsidy. The EOC Child Care Resource Connection reported 1100 people on its waiting list - with an average list 900 people long. Families needing financial assistance for child care face an average waft of 700 days-almost two years. People waiting to get into a major subsidized day care center - The Cal Poly Children's Center-faced a similar wait. The center has a waiting list of 200 people -and they face an average 700 day wait. Page 20 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment CLIENT DATA FROM SERVICE PROVIDER SURVEY RESPONDENTS Sub-Group Median Number of Mean Number of People Served In Each People Served In Sub-Group Each Sub-Group Age (57 responses) Pre-School(<6 years) 60 407 Children(6-12 years) 60 205 Youth(13-18 years) 60 683 Adults(19.55 years) 240 899 Seniors(> 55 years) 52 425 Gender(57 responses) Male 100 764 Female 110 1126 Race(48 responses) White 175 1139 Black 15 171 Hispanic 34 338 American Indian 10 40 Asian/Pacific Islander 9 36 Annual Income(40 responses) <$10,000 200 808 $10,000-$20,000 80 770 $20,000-$30,000 50 1173 $30,000-$40,000 40 53 $40,000-$50,000 20 36 > $50,000 16 563 TABLE 5 Page 21 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment SUMMARY OF WAITING LISTS FROM SERVICE PROVIDER SURVEY RESPONDENTS Service Provider Waiting List Number of Number of Average People on People Typically Time On Waiting List on List List(Days) Family Services Center Mental health Counseling 12 12 17 Head Start Pre-school 18 20 90 EOC Family Planning Female Sterilization 20 20 180 American Red Cross Education 25 30 60 Caring Callers In home visiting 7 Rape Crisis Center Counseling 35 30 45 Hospice of SLO County In-home care 4 2 2 Grandmother's House Education 35 45 10 Children's Center Cal Poly Children Center Childcare 200 200 700 Coast Caregiver Respite 31 700 Resource Center Housing Authority, Public housing 360' 990 City of SLO Private Industry Employment 67 39 40 Council, SLO County EOC Child Care Financial assistance 1100 900 700 Resource Connection SLO County Medical Peer review 7 7 90 Society Children's Home Home Studies 10 10 Society of California Waiting list is dosed. TABLE 6 Page 22 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Twelve other providers with waiting lists reported less than a three month gap between the time someone comes in for help, and the time they can get ft. One other agency with a critical waiting list, however, was the EOC Family Planning Center. It reported a six-month wait for female patients who were seeking sterilization. The average number of women on the waiting list was 20, and their average waft was 180 days. Providers were also asked to estimate how many people they turned away over the past 12 months. Only 26 of the 83 responding agencies answered this question. Two providers said they turned away less than five people in the past year. Six answered that 6 to 50 people were turned away. And six agencies answered that they turned away between 51 and 500 people. Eight said no one was turned away. The following service providers reported the highest number of persons turned away: The San Luis Obispo City Housing Authority 5,000 people SLORTA (the Runabout bus) 3,100 people California Rural Legal Assistance 2,300 people Friends Outside 1,500 people The Housing Authority stated that they have no way to determine how many of the 5,000 people on its wafting list live in the City of San Luis Obispo. Most agencies said they simply didn't have the room,the money, or the overall capacity in their program to handle everyone who requested help. This was the case for SLORTA,the Senior Nutrition Program, the American Red Cross, Friends Outside, EOC Child Care, and the EOC Homeless Shelter. Some agencies also said they had to turn away people because they were ineligible for services - most often at the SLO Committee for Education on Alcoholism ("Middlehouse")and the Private Industry Council.Planned Parenthood indicated that 200 people were turned away because they were unable to afford clinic fees. The group was the only provider to note this reason for having to tum away clients. What the Clients Sav The city also asked social service providers to give one their clients a copy of the telephone survey, and ask them to fill it out. A total of 50 responses were received. The results showed that social service users had the same concerns as the average city residents contacted by the phone survey. The social service users listed the same top five problems the phone surrey citizens did -though the social service users were more likely to list them as major problems facing the city. A lack of affordable housing topped the social service users' problem list. Users then ranked lack of affordable health care, homelessness, lack of affordable child care, and unemployment as the top problems facing the city - and them. This is how social service users ranked the problems facing the city,compared with how phone survey residents ranked them. �I¢�IrO Page 23 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Top Problems, Ranked by Social Service Users: 1. Not Enough Affordable Housing 2. Lack of Affordable Health Care 3. Homelessness 4. Lack of Quality Child Care 5. Unemployment 6. Lack of Affordable Legal Services 7. Mental Illness or Emotional Problems Top Problems, Ranked by Residents in Phone Survey: 1. Lack of Affordable Housing 2. Homelessness 3. Unemployment 4. Lack of Affordable Health Care 5. Drug and Alcohol Abuse Problems 6. Lack of Quality Child Care 7. Teenage Pregnancy The biggest difference between the citizens contacted in the phone survey and social service users was the perception of a lack of affordable legal services as a problem. Social service users gave this issue a 3.13 rating - a moderate to major problem. Phone survey residents gave this issue an average score of 2.1 - a minor problem. 0 Pogo 24 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment = APPENDICES Page 25 City of San Luis Obispo Hanan Needs Assessment APPENDIX A Summary of Workshop Responses Participants Rick Cohen Cindi Griffith Marion Wolff Fred Garcia Catherine Owens George Brudney Joan Lawrence George Moylan Susie Steiner Pete Jenny Rabbi Harry Manhoff Roy McMaster Allan and Evelyn Johnson Sandy Simon Karl Bareither Claire Maxworthy Vicki Hofaling Dorothy Yelita Ann Travers I. What human and social services needs are well met in the City of San Luis Obispo? A. Recreation (6) Youth and adult recreation (1) Kids (elementary age) (1) Ballfields and sports programs (1) At schools (1) Community pools (1) YMCA (1) B. Children/Youth (5) School age childcare (1) Pre-school childcare (1) Head Start (1) Shelter programs for children (1) Residential runaway program (1) C. Education (5) K-College system (1) Public elementary (1) Magnet schools (i.e., Teach School) (1) General programs for students with no special problems (1) Education for the handicapped (1) D. Information and Referral (4) Hotline (3) Suicide prevention (1) E. Seniors (3) General senior services (2) Senior programs for the financially capable (1) F. Family Planning (2) Planned Parenthood (1) EOC's Family Planning (1) Page 26 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment G. Hospice (2) H. Mental Health (2) Group homes for the mentally ill (1) Family Counseling (1) I. Community Events (1) (Parades, Farmer's Market, etc.) J. Community Facilities (1) (Libraries, etc.) K Friendship School (1) L Homeless Shelter (1) M. Legal Referral (1) N. Libraries/Information (1) O. Medical Service Information (1) P. Ombudsman (1) 11. What human and social services needs are not well met in the City of San Luis Obispo? A. Medical/Health Care (8). Health programs/medical care for low income groups (2) Don't allow doctors to refuse Medicare/Medical patients (1) Need for proactive AIDS campaign/increased awareness of AIDS (2) More AIDS medical counseling/support groups (1) Lack of affordable health insurance (1) Independent living arrangements for the disabled (1) B. Transportation (8) Public/alternative transportation (5) Transit for seniors (3) C. Education (6) Special programs for the mentally ill (1) Programs for those who need counseling (1) Programs for bright kids (1) Literacy (1) s Multi-bilingual services (1) Dyslexic students (1) D. Housing (6) Affordable housing for the workforce population (5) Target population housing (ie, mentally ill, transitional housing) (1) Page 27 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment E. Seniors (6) Access to services (1) Increased awareness/outreach (1) Daycare for the elderly (1) Respite care for the elderly and handicapped (1) In-home housekeeping care (1) Affordable legal services (1) F. Children/Youth (5) Lack of coordinated children's and adult services (1) Child protective services (1) Licensed child care for infant and toddlers (1) Child care for all (1) Teen programs (1) G. Gangs (4) Gang intervention (1) Not enough public information on gangs (1) Connection with drug problems (1) "Denial" that they exist locally (1) H. Homeless (4) Homeless in general (1) Permanent location for people's kitchen (1) Food for homeless (1) Access to food giveaway programs (1) I. Mental Health (4) General mental health services (2) Adult education for the mentally ill (1) In-patient, long-term mental illness facility (1) J. Multi-lingual/Multi-ethnic services (4) Literature, information,flyers on social services (2) Interpreters/speakers (especially Spanish-speaking) (1) Services/access for minorities (address cultural, attitudinal, language barriers) (1) K Substance Abuse (3) Adult and adolescent (1) Residential treatment (1) Denial that there is a drug problem locally (1) L Employment (2) Job training (1) Underemployment/unemployment (1) M. Community Awareness of Needs (1) N. Coordination of Public Services (1) O. Environmental services (1) Page 28 City of San Luis Obispo Htnnan Needs Assessment P. Family Planning Services (1) Q. Landlord/tenant mediation (1) R. Mediation in General (1) S. Too Much Bureaucracy (1) Ill. Why are the needs not being met? Apathy/lack of interest/lack of awareness (7) Lack of money (3) Bureaucracy (2) Unstable employment base (2) Language barriers (2) State regulation (1) Lack of knowledge about the availability of resources (1) Lack of emphasis (1) Other priorities (1) Small population (1) Lack of volunteers (1) Press (print media) (1) Reactive rather than proactive attitude (1) Politics (1) Need for better communication among public agencies/governments (1) Lack of access due to transportation (1) Lack of access due to financial capabilities (1) Lack of access due to location of services (ie, downtown vs. neighborhoods) (1) IV. What suggestions for change do you have in order to better meet these needs? Comprehensive, coordinated human services delivery system (by service);"one-stop"shopping for services that is regional and accessible (1) Mega-Hotline (a comprehensive hotline-type service) (1) Half of all housing would be low-income absorbed throughout the community (1) Change in attitudes (1) Provide more outreach and intervention (prevention services) (1) Make people pay per person for item or service (1) Change "denial" attitudes by increasing awareness (1) Change °denial" attitudes by increasing involvement of the public and the individual (1) Change"denial" attitudes by increasing the involvement of the recipients; increase their feeling of ownership in the programs (1) Change program design (1) Page 29 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment APPENDIX B Household Survey Results Average Response Scores I. Community Issues A. Thinking about your community, what kind of place is it to live? Would you describe it as: Excellent 35.8 % Good 50.7 % Fair 11.2 % Poor 1.0 % People sometimes run into problems in their community. In the next few minutes I'm going to list a variety of common problems. For each one, I'd like you to tell me 'If you believe it is not a problem, is a minor problem, a moderate problem or a major problem in San Luis Obispo. Average Score Percentthat said Problem 1 = Not a Problem was"Major"or"Moderate" 2 = Minor Problem "Moderate" 3 = Moderate Problem 4 = Major Problem 2 Shortage of recreational programs or facilities 2.17 .39 3 Lack of affordable legal services 2.21 39 4 Inadequate library services 1.60 16 5 Inadequate schools 2.04 34 6 Inadequate public transportation 1.84 24 7 Racial or ethnic problems 1.81 24 8 Lack of bi-lingual services 1.81 23 9 Gime/gang problems 2.04 30 10 Not enough quality child care 2.63 57 11 Lads of affordable health care 2.76 64 12 Mental illness or emotional problems 2.29 44 13 Family members hurting one another physically or emotionally 2.16 38 14 Lady of women's services,such as rape counseling 2.11 36 15 Lads of support groups (for those with AIDS, MS, dyslexia, etc.) 2.12 37 16 Drug abuse problems,including alcoholism 2.71 62 17 Teenage pregnancy 2.59 57 Page 30 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment 18 lack of family planning services 2.14 38 19 Shortage of food or clothing 1.99 28 20 Inability to read and/or write 2.16 33 21 Unemployment 2.80 66 22 Homelessness, lack of housing 2.98 70 23 Not enough affordable housing 3.50 89 24 Substandard housing 2.22 39 25 Overcrowded housing 2.41 46 26 How much opportunity do you have to change things you would like changed in your community? A lot of opportunity 13.4% Some opportunity 42.5% Little opportunity 34.3% No opportunity 9.3% II. Household Issues In this next part of the survey, I'm going to list a variety of household problems that people often need help with. For each one, I'd like you tell me whether or not it has been a problem for you or anyone in your household during the past year. If it has been a problem, please describe it as being a minor problem, a moderate problem or a.major problem. Average Score Percent that said 1 = Not a Problem Problem was 2 = Minor Problem "Major"or"Moderate" 3 = Moderate Problem 4 = Major Problem 27 Having enough room in your home for all the people who live there 1.43 12 28 Living in housing that needs major repairs 1.52 14 29 Not having enough money to buy needed clothing and shoes 1.50 15 30 Not having enough money to pay for a doctor or buy prescriptions 1.66 21 31 Not having enough money to buy food 1.39 9 32 Not having enough money for housing 1.66 22 33 Not having financial or credit counseling 1.41 11 34 Not being able to afford recreational activities 1.66 20 35 Not being able to find work 1.79 26 36 Not being able to pay the utility bills 1.45 13 37 Not being able to afford legal help 1.61 19 38 Not being able to qualify for or afford medical insurance 1.72 24 l A Page 31 City of San Luis Obispo Hmnan Needs Assessment 39 Not being able to get adult day care for someone with a disability or serious illness 1.36 10 40 Not being able to get home health care for someone with a disability or serious illness 1.36 11 41 Not being able to get special transportation for a disabled or elderly person 1.34 9 42 Not being able to find or afford child care 1.55 18 43 Not being able to find or afford afterschool child care 1.48 15 44 Having a lot of anxiety, stress or depression 1.91 30 45 Experiencing an alcohol and/or drug problem 1.34 9 46 Experiencing physical conflict in the home 1.21 4 47 Children or teenagers experiencing behavioral or emotional problems 1.23 5 48 Difficulty reading 1.41 2 49 Difficulty reading or speaking English 1.41 3 50 Tenant/landlord problems 1.40 12 Page 32 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment III. Barriers To Services We're also interested in learning more about the difficulties people have when trying to find help for their problems. In this next part of the survey I'm going to list a variety of barriers or difficulties which you or someone in your household may have had when seeking help for the problems we just discussed. For each one, please describe it as being not a problem,a minor problem, a moderate problem or a major problem in getting help. Average Score Percent that said 1 = Not a Problem Problem was"Major" 2 = Minor Problem or"Moderate" 3 = Moderate Problem 4 = Major Problem 51 Lacking information on available services 1.69 20 52 Service needed was not available 1.43 12 53 Was not eligible for service 1.52 16 54 Could not afford service 1.60 20 55 Thought service would cost too much 1.81 28 56 Had problems with transportation to service 1.29 6 57 Service lacked handicap access 1.2 45 58 Services were too far away 1.31 8 59 Lacked child care 1.29 9 60 Hours of service were not convenient 1.46 13 61 Had difficulty understanding English 1.09 2 62 Did not like service 1.35 7 63 Worried about the quality of the service 1.58 17 64 Had a prior bad experience 1.43 13 65 Had to wait too long to get help 1.47 12 66 Concerned that the agency would tell others about the problem 1.26 7 67 Did not want to go outside of family for help 1.21 6 68. Other: Page 33 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment IV. The following questions will help us be certain that we have included a valid sampling of people. 69. How many adults 65 years of age or older,including yourself, live in your household? 70. Which of the following best describes your household? 1. Two or more adults without children 2. Two or more adults with at least one child (age 17 or younger) 3. One adult with at least one child (age 17 or younger) 4. One adult living alone 71. What is your age? 1. 19 or younger 2- 20-34 3. 35-54 4. 55-64 5. 65=74 6. 75 or over 72. Are you 1. Male 2. Female 73. What do you consider to be your primary racial,ethnic or national group? 1. White 2. Black 3. Hispanic 4. American Indian S. Asian or Pacific Islander 6. Other: 74. Counting income from all sources(including earnings from jobs,unemployment insurance,pensions,welfare,etc.) and counting income from everyone living in your home,which of the following ranges did your income fall into last year? 1. less than$10,000 S. $40,000-$50,000 2. $10,000-$20,000 6. $50,000 or above 3. $20,000-$30,000 7. don't know 4. $30,000-$40,000 8. did not answer 75. Does anyone in your household receive welfare such as Aid to Dependent Children (AFDC or ADC),food stamps,or Supplemental Security Income (SSI)? 1. Yes 2. No /-p-38 Page 34 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Complete List of Telephone Survey Results In Descending Order By Average Response Scores 1=Not a Problem 2=Minor Problem Question 3=Moderate Problem Number 4=Major Problem COMMUNITY ISSUES 23 3.50 Not enough affordable housing 22 2.98 Homelessness, lack of housing 21 2.80 Unemployment 11 2.76 Lack of affordable health care 16 2.71 Drug abuse problems, including alcoholism 10 2.63 Not enough quality child care 17 2.59 Teenage pregnancy 25 2.41 Overcrowded housing 12 2.29 Mental illness or emotional problems 24 2.22 Substandard housing 3 2.21 Lack of affordable legal services 2 2.17 Shortage of recreational programs or facilities 13 2.16 Family members hurting one another physically or emotionally 20 2.16 Inability to read and/or write 18 2.14 Lack of family planning services 15 2.12 Lack of support groups(for those with AIDS,MS,dyslexia,etc.) 14 2.11 Lack of women's services, such as rape counseling 5 2.04 Inadequate schools 9 2.04 Crime/gang problems 19 1.99 Shortage of food or clothing 6 1.84 Inadequate public transportation 7 1.81 Racial or ethnic problems 8 1.81 Lack of bi-lingual services 4 1.60 Inadequate library services Page 35 Cify of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment 1=Not a Problem 2=Minor Problem Question 3=Moderate Problem Number 4=Major Problem HOUSEHOLD ISSUES 44 1.91 Having a lot of anxiety, stress or depression 35 1.79 Not being able to find work 38 1.72 Not being able to qualify for or afford medical insurance 34 1.66 Not being able to afford recreational activities 32 1.66 Not having enough money for housing 30 1.66 Not having enough money to pay for a doctor or buy prescriptions 37 1.61 Not being able to afford legal help 42 1.55 Not being able to find or afford child care 28 1.52 Living in housing that needs major repairs 29 1.50 Not having enough money to buy needed clothing and shoes 43 1.48 Not being able to find or afford after-school child care 36 1.45 Not being able to pay the utility bills 27 1.43 Having enough room in your home for all the people who live there 49 1.41 Difficulty reading or speaking English 48 1.41 Difficulty reading 33 1.41 Not having financial or credit counseling 50 1.40 Tenant/landlord problems 31 1.39 Not having enough money to buy food 40 1.36 Not being able to get home health care for someone with a disability or serious illness 39 1.36 Not being able to get adult day care for someone with a disability or serious illness 45 1.34 Experiencing an alcohol and/or drug problem 41 1.34 Not being able to get special transportation for a disabled or elderly person 47 1.23 Children or teenagers experiencing behavioral or emotional problems 46 1.21 Experiencing physical conflict in the home Page 36 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment 1=Not a Problem 2=Minor Problem Question 3=Moderate Problem Number 4=Major Problem BARRIERS TO SERVICES 55 1.81 Thought service would cost too much 51 1.69 Lacking information on available services 54 1.60 Could not afford service 63 1.58 Worried about the quality of the service 53 1.52 Was not eligible for service 65 1.47 Had to wait too long to get help 60 1.46 Hours of service were not convenient 52 1.43 Service needed was not available 64 1.43 Had a prior bad experience 62 1.35 Did not like service 58 1.31 Services were too far away 56 1.29 Had problems with transportation to service 59 1.29 Lacked child care 66 1.26 Concerned that the agency would tell others about the problem 57 1.24 Service lacked handicap access 67 1.21 Did not want to go outside of family for help 61 1.09 Had difficulty understanding English Page 37 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment APPENDIX C Key Informant Discussions Participants Betty Van Gorden, American Red Cross Biz Steinberg, Economic Opportunity Commission Dave Supleffer, Friendship School Harry Manhoff, Ministerial Association Shirley McIntyre Bird, HOTLINE George Rowland, County Health Department Key Informant Meeting 10/27/91 Needs of the community that are currently being met Religious needs Needs of disabled Needs of top students Public transportation Safety (police, fire) Good natural environment Medical needs Quality recreation Smoke-free restaurants Needs of the community that are not adeguately being met Affordable housing Housing for special groups Loss of section-8 housing due to conversion to market rate units Overcrowded homeless and women's shelter Transportation for frail elderly Jobs/underemployment Low salaries Community-based long term health care Childcare services for infants, toddlers, school-age children Parks for toddlers Middle income health care Mental health (limited inpatient facilities) High-risk families Substance abuse Sexual abuse Homosexual discrimination Barriers Political Application processes Community awareness, denial that problems exist Land use barriers (e.g. suitable locations for childcare facilities) Divergent city/county priorities Multiple surveys, lack of coordination Page 38 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment Key Informant Meeting 10/30/91 Participants Brenda Drechsler, Rape Crisis Center Cindi Griffith, Family Services Center David Garth, SLO Chamber of Commerce Rick Cohen, HOTLINE Dan Herron, SLO Area Coordinating Council Jim Gardiner, SLO Police Betty Nielsen, People's I(itchen Needs of the community that are currently beina met Public transportation Youth services and recreation Information and referral Public safety and fire services Supply of volunteer and support groups Crisis intervention Family Counseling Food supplies Needs of the community that are not adequately being met Jobs and underemployment Transportation for frail seniors Affordable housing Emergency shelters Bilingual services Affordable childcare Affordable health care especially for working poor Mental health inpatient and outpatient Home health care Legal aid and mediation Family Counseling Education of family skills Substance abuse prevention/education/treatment (de-tox centers) Alcohol-free recreation for 17-20 year olds Young teen programs Services for batter women Services for sexually abused Advocacy for seniors Coordination of human services Barriers Increased demand for services Community apathy, awareness, and denial that problems exist Limited community support Limited funding Land use issues NIMBY-ism Lack of political will Page 39 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment APPENDIX D Data Tables Page 40 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment COMPARISON OF PERCEIVED COMMUNITY ISSUES By Data Source PUBLIC WORKSHOP HOUSEHOLD SERVICE PROVIDER KEY INFORMANTS SURVEY CLIENTS Listed In descending order Listed In descending order Listed In demanding order Responses are not has on the most has on the average based on the average ranked. frequent discussion group response scores. response scores. responses. 1. Transportation 1. Not Enough 1. Not enough Affordable housing Affordable Housing affordable housing. Health care 2. Homelessness, 2. Lack of affordable Affordable health care Lack of Housing health care. 2. Housing 3. Unemployment 3. Homelessnessltack Homelessness of housing. Education 4. Lack of Affordable 4. Not enough quality Affordable child care Health Care child care. Senior needs S. Drug Abuse 5. Unemployment. Lack of well-paying Problems, Including jobs' Alcohol 3. Children/youth Transportation for . programs 6. Not Enough Duality 6. Lack of affordable impaired/elderly Child Care legal services. 4. Gang problems In-patient mental 7. Teenage Pregnancy 7. Mental illness or health services Mental Health emotional problems. Lack of bilingual Homelessness services Lack of emergency Multi-IinguaU shelter multi-ethnic services In-Patient care for substance abuse Substance abuse Mediation services Public transportation that is convenient enough for the general public so that cars are used less TABLE 7 2 V ) 0 Wm : f _ oa Cc = $ � k q ) ƒ § f ■ _ | 7 ° 2f & / ] g / ) kk \ k } ) � 7 { \ ■ � ■ E w ■ w | ' I ■ a $ ( .cc � I IX r ) \ ° cs- � � ° § f\ � M \ / j � \ 0 / § t ] 0 ji � g k � « i I@ ; ■ E w2 ■ C6 .1 li & as e = w ■ . - I 2 M 2 z - - f - a . _ _ _ d i ■ k _( § - e ° IMf �� \ /} -6 CLU § 2 2 & z | ® z z 2 z 2 z ■ -j20 0 — _ c6EEL 4 ■ L6 E- s0 sol © « _ =Lu � ) m ■ 2 # § 2 � ° C k \ ck ( \ CD \ j k \ Mo OCE 2 k } { _ - - (a cli - - . §� x _ k � } { ZQ } k } ƒ J } � a2 2 § � § & z ) ca . s - w ■ Di r= ¥ E ' EEL 62 _ 0 0 & « - = I 2 E ) - k 3 / § ■ ( 0 § ! a / ] ) a \ § � � ] f § z ] - = = z # § ] � I � e ) 16 _ a § ■ ° 2 $ ! )7 ) a a ' ■ ° § a a / ■ . s \ 0 2 ! a 2 e2 � M E § � c ) k ( . e — ! E 2 , , ee mi z = = § R � ca z a % § � I C « n lI , _ eo Q� Q} /Ad-o/k Page 42 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment SERVICE PROVIDER DATA Service Providers FurdWSmass Own Fund sWrig($1,970,190 Fees($8,658,779) City of SLO($185.440) 2.: I L'. i Federal and Stam $24,810, I � i County of SLO($15,098,608 Omar sous($,299,a28 unia3d way(51x9 940) TABLE 9 Service Providers Number or Yam.serving SLO 40, -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- 35-11/ ------------------------------------------------- ------ ----- m ------------------------- ...... -- v Q. ---------------------------------------------- ----- --- ------------------------ ------ ...... ..... ------------------------ ... ------ ...... ----- F 6 ro 10:15% 11 m 20:34% over 20:45% Years SwAng San Luis Obispo TABLE 10 Page 43 _ City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment SERVICE PROVIDER DATA Number of Service Providers By Fu&Mrr a Staff ------------------------ ..................................................... _________________________ .... -__-__._._________-_____-____ m > ______________________ __- __-_ ----- 2 ti 1 1 r ... v ... ----- .. Zem 1 9D S 6 to 10 >10 FuaTlme Employees TABLE 11 Service Providers By Lego Nee Served Otl1er.4%(3 ii!i a Censel Coast 16%(14) Neighborhood:2%(2) } o ciy:BY.(a) €isa inti:v TABLE 12 Page 44 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FROM HOUSEHOLD TELEPHONE SURVEY Households Receiving Aid x( 1 Receive Aid:S%(14) F 5 , �xf rots. Q. �W. §g +a• Do Not Reosive Aid:94'/0(252) TABLE 13 Gender x( ) 's �< —Male:48%(128) Female:S2%(139 .y TABLE 14 �'I� 4 09 Page 45 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FROM HOUSEHOLD TELEPHONE SURVEY Adufts Age 65 or Older 27%(18) 3OrNbre:0.001%(1) 1:10%(28 'fie" v o•a;on"�•,;H' ..aa' ^;M;'�>?>' # 6C'3.L£{3CZ.t B. None:82%(221) TABLE 15 Age Groups x(PASPWM*) Over 75:8%(22 <19:20/c(5) 65-74.7%(19) 55-64:9V°(24) $g��.:.�, .}nx�•'^:.M1�`�.L,.��.L:;}`:—20-34:44%(118) tX.Qvi�+• �... 35-54:309° TABLE 16 Page 46 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment DEMOGRAPHIC DATA FROM HOUSEHOLD TELEPHONE SURVEY Household Composition %(moi Two Adults With Children:25%(66) One Aduh With ChBdren:30/.(B Two Adults:SB%(1SE) One Adult.No Children:l TABLE 17 Household Income x(Re�maae) <$t 0,000:16%(44) >$50.000:249/6(63 ✓ .Y.x.n:p.: " k '<: $40,000-$50,000:7%(19 `'`'"•fir` $10,000-$20,000:20%(53) $30,OOO-$40,000:11%(29 $20,000-$30,000:13%(36) TABLE 18 /-A-SI i Page 47 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment DEMOGRAPHIC DATA . FROM HOUSEHOLD TELEPHONE SURVEY Race - •%imr AsiaNPacific Islander 6%(M ' American Irk ian:1%(3) Other.1%(3) Hisp c:6%(15) - Emadc 1%(4) White:84%(225) TABLE.19 t Page 48 City of San Luis Obispo Human Needs Assessment APPENDIX E Human Needs Assessment Preparation City Council Ron Dunin, Mayor Penny Rappa, Vice Mayor Bill Roalman Jerry Reiss Peg Pinard Human Relations Commission Marion Wolff, Chair Don Green* Fran Fura* Joan Lawrence* Randy Baudendistel Linda Barra George Brudney 'Human Needs Assessment Subcommittee Technical Advisory Body John Stettler Jim Jacobson Floyd Cummings George Moylan Linda Long Pat Gomez Citizen Advisory Body Hazel Scott Maggie Cox Lee Ferraro . Mary McCreedy Betsey Nash Harry Manhoff Missy Hobson Crawford. Multari and Starr Teresa Marian! - Editor With grateful acknowledgement of the students from Cal Poly and Cuesta College who participated in the random household survey. I w r'S