Report 4: Interim Evaluation

C.1 Method

In addition to these questions, questions were also asked in the host boroughs resident survey on perceptions of: the local area; community cohesion; access to jobs; green issues and sustainability; satisfaction with the Olympic Park legacy plans and the consultation process; and how long people had lived in the area. These questions were taken from a range of sources with some replicating those previously asked in the DCLG Place Survey or other local borough surveys.

This survey does differ from the standard Taking Part methodology in that it is currently a one-off survey (as opposed to a rolling annual collection) and that it was just focused on the six host boroughs (as opposed to England as a whole).

The survey was carried out using a quota sample, with sample points selected by a random location methodology. Random location is a tightly controlled form of face to face quota sampling where sample points are drawn from a small set of homogenous streets within a local authority. As 200 interviews were required within each of the six Local Authorities (LAs), the survey sample selection can be viewed as six random location selections (one within each Olympic Borough). Sample units were selected randomly, with the probability of each sampling unit being selected proportional to its population.

For each selected sample unit all of the addresses were printed out in a street list and sent to interviewers. Interviewers could only interview residents of these pre-selected addresses. This meant that interviewers were given very little choice in the selection of respondents, eliminating some of the selection bias that may be present in other forms of quota sampling.

Interviews were carried out on weekdays from 2pm-8pm and at the weekend to ensure that the achieved sample was not biased towards those who are more likely to be at home during the day. Quotas were set within each borough by age, gender and working status. This ensured adequate representation of harder-to-reach people in the sample – such as full-time workers and younger people. The quotas set on age and gender were based on ONS Mid 2010 Population Estimates and those set on working status were based on the latest available ONS Annual Population Survey (Jul 2010-Jun 2011). All interviewers had to leave 3 doors between each successful interview, to minimise the clustering of the achieved sample.

In total 1,320 adults responded across the six boroughs which gives an approximate level of confidence at the 95% level on the whole sample of +/-2.7%. But, in terms of sub-sample analysis (ie at the individual borough level) the approximate level of confidence at the 95% level rises to +/- 7.5%. Given this, results that focus on a particular sub-sample should therefore be viewed with a degree of caution.

C.2 Results

(i)Respondent demographics

Figure C-2: Gender of survey respondent	Figure C-3: Age of survey respondent
Figure C-4: Ethnicity of survey respondent	Figure C-5: Housing tenure of survey respondent
Figure C-6: Employment status of survey respondent	Figure C-7: Occupational grouping of survey respondent

(ii)Mobility to the new area

Respondents were asked how long they had lived at their current address with the majority (60%) stating that they had lived there for over 5 years, 41% of whom had lived there for more than 10 years. Only 14% had lived at their current address for less than a year.

As can be expected there appears to be a correlation between the length of time at the current address and tenure: with 79% of owners living at their current address for more than 5 years, 58% of whom had lived there for more than 10. As well as a correlation with the age of the respondent: with 85% of the respondents aged over 45 living at their current address for more than five years 73% of whom had lived there for more than 10 years (see Figure C-8).

Figure C-8: Length of time at current address – all respondents and those aged 45+	Figure C-9: Length of time at current address – all respondents and owners

Looking at the results for each of the six host boroughs it would appear that respondents living in Newham and Tower Hamlets are more 'mobile' than those in Barking and Dagenham and Greenwich: a fifth of the respondents who lived in Newham (20%) and Tower Hamlets (19%) had lived at their current address for less than a year compared to only a tenth in Barking and Dagenham (10%), Greenwich (9%); and at the other end of the scale 43% and 48% of respondents had lived in Barking and Dagenham and Greenwich respectively for more than 10 years compared to only 39% in Newham and 34% in Tower Hamlets. There will be a number of factors behind these results including – but not limited to – the nature of the existing housing stock, the number of new homes being built and the proximity to central London.

Figure C-10: Length of time at current address – host boroughs

Of those who had lived at their current address for less than 5 years (40% of all respondents), just over a third (38%) had lived in the same borough for more than 5 years, of which a quarter (24%) had lived there for more than 10 years. A finding, which means that in total three-quarters of respondents (75%) had lived in the same borough for more than 5 years. This 'total' figure mirrored the pattern noted above in terms of the individual boroughs with respondents in Greenwich (82%) and Barking and Dagenham (78%) more likely to have lived in the borough for more than five years than those in Newham (70%) or Tower Hamlets (68%).

The respondents who had moved into the borough they currently live in within the last 5 years were asked how important the regeneration of the area as a result of the 2012 Games was in making them decide to move to the borough. A fifth (19%) felt that it was 'important' with 51% saying that it was 'unimportant'. This pattern was broadly reflected across the host boroughs with the exception of Newham where 41% of respondents felt that the regeneration resulting from the Games was 'important' in their decision to move into the area.

Figure C-11: Importance of regeneration in decision to move into Borough

Interestingly, of those who felt that the 'regeneration of the area was important' in their decision to move to the borough 52% had lived in the area for less than a year. Although only based on small sample of responses, this finding may suggest that as the regeneration effects of the Games have become more visibly apparent they have yielded a bigger influence on people's decision making with regard to moving into the area.

For those who felt that the regeneration effects of the Games were an 'important' factor in their decision making, the three most commonly cited factors were the improvements to infrastructure/facilities that had resulted (20%); the role the Games played in increasing money/revenue/business and being generally good for the economy (17%); and the transport improvements (14%).

Directory: images -> publications
images -> New embedded S
images -> Creating Buy-In – Building Relationships
images -> Deadline: Saturday, March 12th, 2016
images -> News items from Raising Our Voices
images -> Last year four of the best Afrikaans Christian singers joined forces to tour Down Under with the production ‘Manne wat Glo’
images -> World-renowned vocal ensemble sweet honey in the rock
images -> Peoples Voice Café History
publications -> Recipients of tickets for the olympic opening ceremony
publications -> Greetings from the iehp atlantic Connection Steering Committee

Download 1.96 Mb.

Share with your friends: