View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
| PRODUCED BY THE INSIGHT TEAM
Bournemouth
Opinion Survey 2017
Boscombe West
Report
Contents
1 Introduction .......................................................................... 5
1.1 Methodology ....................................................................... 5
1.2 Results .............................................................................. 5
2 Overall satisfaction ................................................................. 6
3 Residents’ priorities ................................................................ 7
4 Service satisfaction and usage ................................................ 11
4.1 Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse ................................ 13
4.2 Refuse collection ................................................................ 14
4.3 Doorstep recycling .............................................................. 15
4.4 Local transport information ..................................................... 16
4.5 Local bus services .............................................................. 17
4.6 Sport & leisure facilities ........................................................ 18
4.7 Libraries .......................................................................... 19
4.8 Museums & galleries ........................................................... 20
4.9 Theatres & concert halls ....................................................... 21
4.10 Parks & open spaces ........................................................... 22
4.11 Seafront .......................................................................... 23
5 Your community .................................................................. 24
5.1 People from different ethnic backgrounds get on well together ........... 25
5.2 People in this local area pull together to improve the local area .......... 26
5.3 Satisfaction with home ......................................................... 27
5.4 Unpaid help ...................................................................... 28
6 Community safety ................................................................ 29
6.1 Feeling safe after dark .......................................................... 29
6.2 Feeling safe during the day .................................................... 30
6.3 Safety at home .................................................................. 31
7 Anti-social behaviour ............................................................ 32
7.1 Overall perceptions of anti-social behaviour ................................. 32
7.2 Noisy neighbours and loud parties ............................................ 35
7.3 Rubbish or litter lying around .................................................. 36
7.4 Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage ............................ 37
7.5 People using or dealing drugs ................................................. 38
7.6 People being drunk or rowdy in public places ............................... 39
7.7 Groups hanging around the streets ........................................... 40
7.8 Abandoned cars ................................................................. 41
7.9 Untidy gardens and other private land ....................................... 42
7.10 Police and public services ..................................................... 43
8 Communication ................................................................... 46
8.1 Improvements to Boscombe ................................................... 47
9 Local decision making ........................................................... 49
10 Health and wellbeing ............................................................. 52
10.1 Social contact .................................................................... 53
10.2 Satisfaction with life ............................................................. 54
11 Conclusion ......................................................................... 55
Appendix 1: Respondent profile ........................................................ 57
Appendix 2: Table of figures ............................................................ 58
5 Insight Team
1 Introduction
Bournemouth Borough Council conducted the Bournemouth Opinion Survey in September
and October 2017. The results for the ward of Boscombe West are reported in this
document.
As part of the Backing Boscombe campaign under the Boscombe Regeneration Partnership
the survey results allow the regeneration team to monitor Boscombe West resident’s
perceptions about the area that they live in. The Boscombe Regeneration Team have
carried out residents’ surveys since the 2008 Place Survey to ensure that the Partnership is
focussing on the issues that matter most to the residents, to establish baseline figures to
set targets against and to monitor changes in residents’ perceptions over time.
1.1 Methodology
The Bournemouth Opinion Survey (BOS) 2017 was mailed to 9,200 households selected at
random from the council’s address database on Tuesday 5 September. This included over
sampling in Boscombe West and West Howe in order to have a larger number of responses
on which to base separate reports for these areas. Whilst it was a paper survey,
respondents had the option to complete it online.
A reminder postcard was sent on Tuesday 26 September and the survey was re-administered
to those who had not responded on Tuesday 17 October to boost response. The survey
fieldwork was due to close on Tuesday 31 October, but forms were accepted up until Monday
6 November as questionnaires were still arriving during the week.
In total, 1974 surveys were sent to residents living in Boscombe West.
1.2 Results
Overall, 474 responses were received from Boscombe West which equates to a 24%
response rate. The number of responses is sufficient that we can have a reasonable level
of confidence in the results. On an observed statistic of 50%, the 95% confidence interval is
+/-4.3%. This means that we can be reasonably confident that if we surveyed the whole
population of Boscombe West the result would fall between 45.7% and 54.3%.
As with the BOS and previous Boscombe West residents’ surveys, the results have been
weighted by age group, gender, disability and ethnicity. The results within this report have
been weighted to reflect the population of Boscombe West. Therefore, the results within this
report may vary slightly to the Boscombe West results within the BOS report which were
weighted to reflect the Bournemouth population.
Base numbers are shown on charts to indicate the size of the sample on which the result is
based. The smaller the base, the less confidence we have in the result. This is particularly
pertinent when comparing different demographic groups; where the base number is small,
caution should be used when comparing results to the wider population. The text
commentary with each chart will indicate which results are statistically significant (i.e. we
have a reasonable degree of confidence that there’s an actual difference of opinion).
Where applicable, the 2017 results have been compared to previous Boscombe West
results. Figures in this report are presented as a percentage of respondents who answered
the question i.e. excluding ‘don’t know’, ‘not applicable’ and ‘no reply’. The percentages in
this report will not always add up to 100% this can be because of rounding or because
respondents are allowed to select more than one response.
6 Insight Team
2 Overall satisfaction
Residents were asked “Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as
a place to live.” The local area is defined as the area within 15-20 minutes’ walk from
where you live. Satisfaction with the local area has increased significantly by 9% since
2016. Dissatisfaction with the local area has nearly halved over the last four years, from
29% in 2013 to 15% in 2017.
Figure 1: Overall satisfaction with local area (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents from other white backgrounds are significantly less satisfied with the local
area compared to white British respondents.
Figure 2: Satisfaction with local area by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
57%
55%
61%
62%
71%
80%
14%
19%
17%
16%
14%
10%
29%
26%
22%
22%
15%
11%
Boscombe West 2013 (339)
Boscombe West 2014 (494)
Boscombe West 2015 (463)
Boscombe West 2016 (486)
Boscombe West 2017 (435)
Bournemouth 2017 (2622)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
71%
74%
67%
71%
71%
69%
67%
62%
78%
69%
69%
75%
62%
61%
All respondents (435)
Female (189)
Male (224)
35-44 (65)
16-34 (164)
45-54 (52)
65+ (50)
55-64 (39)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
No disability (316)
White British (278)
White Other (95)
BME (40)
7 Insight Team
3 Residents’ priorities
Residents were asked which things are most important in making somewhere a good place
to live. They were asked to identify up to five issues from a list of twenty-two as well as
having the option to tick an ‘other’ box.
The table below shows how responses compare to 2016. Figures in bold show where a
difference is statistically significant.
The top five things that respondents identified as being the most important in making
somewhere a good place to live has remained consistent since 2016 although the order has
changed. The top five things were the level of crime (53%), affordable decent housing
(53%), health services (45%), clean streets (45%) and parks and open spaces (33%).
Although the level of crime remains as the most important thing in making somewhere a
good place to live, it has decreased significantly from 68% in 2016 to 53% in 2017.
Affordable decent housing and health services have remained in the top five but have
increased significantly by 9% and 10% respectively. Other significant changes include the
importance of shopping facilities which has decreased by 13% since 2016 and parks and
open spaces and public transport which have both deceased by 7% since 2016.
Table 1: Things making somewhere a good place to live (% selected as one of top 5)
Things that are most important in making somewhere a good place to live
2017 2016 Difference
The level of crime 53% 68% -15%
Affordable decent housing 53% 44% 9%
Health services 45% 35% 10%
Clean streets 45% 46% -1%
Parks and open spaces 33% 40% -7%
Access to nature 29% 26% 3%
Care services / supporting older, disabled and vulnerable people
25% - -
Wage levels and local cost of living 24% 18% 6%
Job prospects 24% 26% -2%
Shopping facilities 22% 35% -13%
Public transport 22% 29% -7%
Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums) 15% 16% -1%
Education provision 15% 14% 1%
Road and pavement repairs 14% 15% -1%
Sports and leisure facilities 13% 13% 0%
The level of traffic congestion 11% 13% -2%
The level of pollution 11% 7% 4%
Community activities 8% 9% -1%
Race relations 6% 6% 0%
Facilities/activities for teenagers aged 13-19 4% - -
Facilities for families with children aged 5-12 3% - -
Facilities for families with young children aged 0-4
2% - -
BASE: All respondents
8 Insight Team
Residents were also asked, from the same list, which things most needed improving in the
local area. The top five things that respondents identified as most needing improvement
has remained consistent since 2016 although the order has changed. The top five things
were the level of crime (58%), affordable decent housing (42%), road and pavement repairs
(37%), clean streets (36%), and the level of traffic congestion (32%).
Although the level of crime remains as the thing that most needs improving, it has
decreased significantly from 67% in 2016 to 58% in 2017. Clean streets has remained in
the top five but has decreased by 6%. Other significant changes include the wage levels
and local cost of living which has decreased by 10% since 2016 and race relations which
has decreased by 6% since 2016.
Table 2: Things that most need improving (% selected as one of top 5)
Things that most need improving 2017 2016 Difference
The level of crime 58% 67% -9%
Affordable decent housing 42% 39% 3%
Road and pavement repairs 37% 36% 1%
Clean streets 36% 42% -6%
The level of traffic congestion 32% 27% 5%
Wage levels and local cost of living 31% 21% 10%
Job prospects 20% 19% 1%
Care services / supporting older, disabled and vulnerable people
17% - -
Health services 16% 11% 5%
Shopping facilities 14% 15% -1%
Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums) 13% 10% 3%
Community activities 12% 7% 5%
Facilities/activities for teenagers aged 13-19 11% - -
Parks and open spaces 10% 9% 1%
Sports and leisure facilities 10% 10% 0%
The level of pollution 9% 4% 5%
Public transport 6% 6% 0%
Race relations 6% 12% -6%
Access to nature 3% 2% 1%
Education provision 3% 5% -2%
Facilities for families with young children aged 0-4
3% - -
Facilities for families with children aged 5-12 3% - -
BASE: All respondents
9 Insight Team
The graph below shows the things that respondents see as important plotted against the
things that they see as most in need of improvement.
Figure 3: Importance vs. Improvement (% respondents)
BASE: All respondents
A Access to nature M Other
B Affordable decent housing N Parks and open spaces
C Care services / supporting older, disabled and vulnerable people
O Public transport
D Clean streets P Race relations
E Community activities Q Road and pavement repairs
F Cultural facilities (e.g. libraries, museums) R Shopping facilities
G Education provision S Sports and leisure facilities
H Facilities for families with children aged 5-12
T The level of crime
I Facilities for families with young children aged 0-4
U The level of pollution
J Facilities/activities for teenagers aged 13-19
V The level of traffic congestion
K Health services W Wage levels and local cost of living
L Job prospects
A
B
C
D
E F
GHI
J
K
L
M
N
OP
Q
R
S
T
U
V W
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Most
needs im
pro
vin
g
Most important
Segment 1 Segment 2
Segment 4
Segment 3
10 Insight Team
When respondents’ perceptions of importance and improvement are plotted against each
other, four segments are created which can help inform priorities for improvement. The four
segments are as follows:
Segment 1: Things respondents see as most in need of improvement and as most
important
• The level of crime
• Affordable decent housing
• Clean streets
• Wage levels and local cost of living
• Job prospects
Segment 2: Things respondents see as most needing improving but not as important
• Road and pavement repairs
• The level of traffic congestion
Segment 3: Things ranked below average improvement but are above average in
importance
• Care services / supporting older, disabled and vulnerable people
• Health services
• Shopping facilities
• Parks and open spaces
• Public transport
• Access to nature
Segment 4: Things which are ranked below average importance and improvement
• Cultural facilities
• Community activities
• Facilities/activities for teenagers aged 13-19
• Facilities for families with children aged 5-12
• Facilities for families with young children aged 0-4
• Sports and leisure facilities
• The level of pollution
• Race relations
• Education provision
11 Insight Team
4 Service satisfaction and usage
The majority of services have seen an increase in satisfaction since 2016 and many are
above the average for Bournemouth. The most notable increases were in museums and
galleries (31% increase), sport and leisure facilities (21% increase) and theatres and
concert halls (18% increase). Satisfaction with each service is reported in more detail later
in this section.
Figure 4: Satisfaction with Council services (% satisfied)
BASE: All respondents
91%
77%
67%
46%
50%
78%
58%
51%
71%
69%
31%
88%
82%
80%
67%
68%
79%
56%
62%
64%
70%
62%
88%
83%
77%
72%
70%
66%
65%
61%
60%
59%
59%
Seafront
Parks and open spaces
Libraries
Sport/leisure facilities
Theatres/concert halls
Local bus services
Doorstep recycling
Keeping public land clear of litter & refuse
Refuse collection
Local transport information
Museums/galleries
Bournemouth 2017 Boscombe West 2017 Boscombe West 2016
12 Insight Team
Overall usage of the majority of council services have seen a small decrease since 2016
although many remain above the Bournemouth average. The most notable decreases were
in the use of parks and open spaces and sport and leisure facilities which have both seen a
decrease of 5% since 2016.
Figure 5: Usage of Council services (% used in the last twelve months)
BASE: All respondents
99%
96%
87%
81%
61%
69%
60%
43%
96%
91%
84%
80%
64%
64%
63%
47%
95%
94%
80%
76%
66%
66%
60%
40%
Seafront
Parks and open spaces
Local bus services
Local transport information
Theatres/concert halls
Sport/leisure facilities
Libraries
Museums/galleries
Bournemouth 2017 Boscombe West 2017 Boscombe West 2016
13 Insight Team
4.1 Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse
Just over six in ten respondents (62%) are satisfied with keeping public land clear of litter
and refuse. This is a significant increase of 11% when compared to 2016 but satisfaction
levels are lower than they were in 2015 and 2013.
Figure 6: Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 16 to 34 are significantly more satisfied than those aged 55 to 64 in
relation to keeping public land clear of litter and refuse.
Figure 7: Satisfaction with keeping public land clear of litter and refuse by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
65%
53%
67%
51%
62%
61%
14%
19%
9%
20%
9%
11%
21%
28%
24%
29%
29%
28%
Boscombe West 2013 (338)
Boscombe West 2014 (483)
Boscombe West 2015 (455)
Boscombe West 2016 (475)
Boscombe West 2017 (450)
Bournemouth 2017 (2763)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
62%
65%
59%
69%
67%
57%
55%
48%
64%
63%
59%
74%
62%
61%
All respondents (450)
Male (232)
Female (195)
16-34 (163)
65+ (51)
45-54 (54)
35-44 (73)
55-64 (42)
Yes disability - limited a lot (53)
No disability (330)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
BME (42)
White Other (86)
White British (301)
14 Insight Team
4.2 Refuse collection
Just under three quarters of respondents (64%) are satisfied with refuse collection. This is a
significant decrease of 7% since 2016 and 15% since 2015. However, Bournemouth overall
has also seen a large decrease in satisfaction with refuse collection which could be due to
the move to fortnightly collections.
Figure 8: Refuse collection (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 65 and over are significantly more satisfied with refuse collection than
any other age group.
Figure 9: Satisfaction with refuse collection by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
81%
71%
79%
71%
64%
60%
8%
13%
10%
17%
10%
11%
11%
15%
11%
13%
25%
30%
Boscombe West 2013 (331)
Boscombe West 2014 (480)
Boscombe West 2015 (454)
Boscombe West 2016 (477)
Boscombe West 2017 (438)
Bournemouth 2017 (2765)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
64%
68%
61%
81%
64%
61%
57%
56%
68%
64%
63%
65%
65%
64%
All respondents (438)
Female (197)
Male (221)
65+ (52)
16-34 (148)
45-54 (55)
55-64 (43)
35-44 (73)
Yes disability - limited a little (47)
No disability (317)
Yes disability - limited a lot (51)
BME (38)
White British (300)
White Other (82)
15 Insight Team
4.3 Doorstep recycling
Satisfaction with doorstep recycling has continued to decrease and is currently at its lowest
recorded level. Satisfaction has decreased by 4% since 2016 although this is a not a
significant decrease. Respondents in Boscombe West are more likely to have a neutral
view on recycling compared to Bournemouth overall.
Figure 10: Doorstep recycling (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with recycling than male respondents.
Respondents aged 65 and over are significantly more satisfied than any other age group.
Respondents with a disability which limits them a little are significantly more satisfied than
those without a disability.
Figure 11: Satisfaction with doorstep recycling by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
65%
64%
64%
58%
56%
65%
18%
21%
20%
24%
24%
17%
17%
15%
16%
18%
20%
18%
Boscombe West 2013 (286)
Boscombe West 2014 (451)
Boscombe West 2015 (405)
Boscombe West 2016 (443)
Boscombe West 2017 (394)
Bournemouth 2017 (2497)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
56%
65%
47%
79%
54%
53%
50%
49%
72%
60%
53%
56%
56%
53%
All respondents (394)
Female (175)
Male (202)
65+ (43)
35-44 (68)
45-54 (42)
55-64 (37)
16-34 (149)
Yes disability - limited a little (38)
Yes disability - limited a lot (45)
No disability (293)
White British (262)
BME (36)
White Other (81)
16 Insight Team
4.4 Local transport information
Seven in ten respondents (70%) are satisfied with local transport information. Satisfaction
with transport information has remained fairly consistent since 2013 and is well above the
Bournemouth average. Usage of transport information has remained consistent since 2013.
Figure 12: Local transport information (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents with a disability which limits them a lot are significantly more dissatisfied with
transport information compared to those without a disability.
Figure 13: Satisfaction with local transport information by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
72%
68%
70%
69%
70%
59%
14%
26%
17%
26%
22%
30%
14%
6%
13%
5%
7%
12%
Boscombe West 2013 (289)
Boscombe West 2014 (448)
Boscombe West 2015 (409)
Boscombe West 2016 (449)
Boscombe West 2017 (401)
Bournemouth 2017 (2416)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
70%
71%
69%
75%
73%
68%
68%
66%
72%
71%
62%
82%
76%
66%
All respondents (401)
Female (178)
Male (199)
65+ (47)
16-34 (135)
45-54 (49)
35-44 (69)
55-64 (35)
Yes disability - limited a little (42)
No disability (287)
Yes disability - limited a lot (49)
BME (36)
White Other (81)
White British (260)
17 Insight Team
4.5 Local bus services
Just under eight in ten respondents (79%) are satisfied with local bus services. With the
exception of an increase in 2014, levels of satisfaction with local bus services has remained
fairly consistent since 2013. Usage of local bus services has gradually decreased, from
90% in 2013 to 84% in 2017 but is still above the Bournemouth average.
Figure 14: Local bus services (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
With the exception of respondents aged 16 to 34, satisfaction with local bus services
increases with age. Respondents from other white backgrounds are significantly more
dissatisfied with local bus services compared to white British respondents.
Figure 15: Satisfaction with local bus services by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
79%
83%
77%
78%
79%
66%
6%
11%
13%
15%
14%
19%
15%
6%
9%
7%
8%
15%
Boscombe West 2013 (303)
Boscombe West 2014 (461)
Boscombe West 2015 (434)
Boscombe West 2016 (472)
Boscombe West 2017 (423)
Bournemouth 2017 (2456)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
79%
80%
77%
87%
82%
80%
76%
70%
87%
78%
76%
91%
79%
77%
All respondents (423)
Male (212)
Female (188)
65+ (49)
55-64 (37)
16-34 (149)
45-54 (52)
35-44 (67)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
No disability (304)
Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
BME (37)
White Other (86)
White British (278)
18 Insight Team
4.6 Sport & leisure facilities
Just over two thirds of respondents (67%) are satisfied with sport and leisure facilities which
is a significant increase of 21% when compared to 2016. Just under three quarters of
respondents (64%) have used sport and leisure facilities in the last twelve months which is
a decrease of 5% compared to 2016 and back in line with previous usage levels.
Figure 16: Sport and leisure facilities (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 55 to 64 are significantly less satisfied with sport and leisure facilities
compared to respondents in the oldest and youngest age groups. Respondents with a
disability which limits them a lot are significantly less satisfied with sport and leisure
facilities compared to those without a disability.
Figure 17: Satisfaction with sport and leisure facilities by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
55%
44%
58%
46%
67%
72%
27%
31%
27%
35%
22%
21%
18%
25%
15%
19%
12%
7%
Boscombe West 2013 (266)
Boscombe West 2014 (443)
Boscombe West 2015 (377)
Boscombe West 2016 (446)
Boscombe West 2017 (382)
Bournemouth 2017 (2337)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
67%
67%
66%
73%
73%
68%
66%
50%
70%
70%
53%
72%
66%
65%
All respondents (382)
Male (188)
Female (173)
65+ (33)
16-34 (137)
35-44 (68)
45-54 (50)
55-64 (34)
Yes disability - limited a little (41)
No disability (280)
Yes disability - limited a lot (39)
White Other (69)
White British (260)
BME (33)
19 Insight Team
4.7 Libraries
Eight in ten respondents (80%) are satisfied with libraries which is a significant increase of
13% when compared to 2016. Dissatisfaction is at its lowest recorded level at just 2%. Over
three fifths of respondents (63%) have used libraries in the last twelve months which is
fairly consistent with 2016 and 2015.
Figure 18: Libraries (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents from BME backgrounds are significantly more satisfied with libraries
compared to white British respondents and those from other white backgrounds.
Figure 19: Satisfaction with libraries by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
74%
70%
75%
67%
80%
77%
16%
23%
18%
28%
18%
19%
9%
7%
7%
6%
2%
4%
Boscombe West 2013 (302)
Boscombe West 2014 (437)
Boscombe West 2015 (406)
Boscombe West 2016 (444)
Boscombe West 2017 (388)
Bournemouth 2017 (2368)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
80%
80%
79%
87%
86%
81%
76%
72%
82%
78%
71%
94%
79%
75%
All respondents (388)
Female (178)
Male (189)
16-34 (131)
65+ (41)
55-64 (33)
45-54 (48)
35-44 (69)
No disability (274)
Yes disability - limited a little (43)
Yes disability - limited a lot (50)
BME (36)
White British (251)
White Other (80)
20 Insight Team
4.8 Museums & galleries
Just over three fifths of respondents (62%) are satisfied with museums and galleries
which is double the level of satisfaction in 2016. Satisfaction with museums and libraries
also increased in Bournemouth overall. However, it is worth noting that this question
changed in 2017 to include the example of Russell Cotes. Usage of museums and
galleries has increased from 43% in 2016 to 47% in 2017 which is back to the same
usage levels of 2014 and 2015.
Figure 20: Museums and galleries (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with museums and galleries compared
to male respondents. Respondents aged 65 and more satisfied than any other age group.
Respondents from BME backgrounds are significantly more dissatisfied than white British
respondents.
Figure 21: Satisfaction with museums and galleries by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
51%
25%
47%
31%
62%
59%
33%
46%
23%
45%
26%
30%
16%
29%
30%
24%
12%
10%
Boscombe West 2013 (267)
Boscombe West 2014 (409)
Boscombe West 2015 (348)
Boscombe West 2016 (409)
Boscombe West 2017 (369)
Bournemouth 2017 (2188)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
62%
67%55%
80%62%61%
58%58%
63%62%
55%
65%58%
54%
All respondents (369)
Female (166)Male (182)
65+ (38)45-54 (42)35-44 (68)
16-34 (131)55-64 (32)
No disability (270)Yes disability - limited a lot (44)
Yes disability - limited a little (41)
White British (241)BME (34)
White Other (75)
21 Insight Team
4.9 Theatres & concert halls
Satisfaction with theatres and concert halls has increased significantly, from 50% in 2016 to
68% in 2017. Usage of theatres and concert halls has increased steadily since 2014 and is
back to the same level as 2013 (64%).
Figure 22: Theatres and concert halls (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with theatres and concert halls than
male respondents. White British respondents are significantly more satisfied than
respondents from BME backgrounds.
Figure 23: Satisfaction with theatres and concert halls by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
69%
44%
61%
50%
68%
70%
22%
34%
25%
33%
20%
22%
9%
22%
14%
17%
12%
8%
Boscombe West 2013 (288)
Boscombe West 2014 (427)
Boscombe West 2015 (390)
Boscombe West 2016 (440)
Boscombe West 2017 (405)
Bournemouth 2017 (2416)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
68%
73%
62%
79%
75%
72%
67%
64%
69%
64%
60%
71%
64%
52%
All respondents (405)
Female (180)
Male (203)
65+ (42)
55-64 (37)
45-54 (50)
35-44 (69)
16-34 (143)
No disability (297)
Yes disability - limited a lot (44)
Yes disability - limited a little (43)
White British (272)
White Other (75)
BME (37)
22 Insight Team
4.10 Parks & open spaces
Over eight in ten respondents (82%) are satisfied with parks and open spaces which is an
increase of 5% compared to 2016 and at its highest recorded level. Dissatisfaction with
parks and open spaces has remained fairly consistent. Usage of parks and open spaces
has gradually declined, from 97% in 2015 to 91% in 2017.
Figure 24: Parks and open spaces (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with parks and open spaces than male respondents. Respondents aged 16 to 34 are significantly more dissatisfied with parks compared to those aged 65 and over.
Figure 25: Satisfaction with parks & open spaces by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
78%
76%
78%
77%
82%
83%
12%
12%
11%
15%
8%
10%
11%
12%
11%
9%
10%
8%
Boscombe West 2013 (319)
Boscombe West 2014 (484)
Boscombe West 2015 (441)
Boscombe West 2016 (475)
Boscombe West 2017 (452)
Bournemouth 2017 (2742)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
82%
87%
76%
85%
85%
83%
81%
78%
83%
83%
72%
86%
84%
80%
All respondents (452)
Female (200)
Male (230)
55-64 (42)
35-44 (74)
45-54 (55)
65+ (49)
16-34 (165)
No disability (333)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
Yes disability - limited a lot (50)
White Other (87)
BME (45)
White British (299)
23 Insight Team
4.11 Seafront
Just under nine in ten respondents (88%) are satisfied with the seafront which is a slight
decrease compared to 2016 but satisfaction remains consistently high. Use of the seafront
has dropped slightly compared to previous years but still remains extremely high at 96%.
Figure 26: Seafront (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with parks and open spaces than male
respondents.
Figure 27: Satisfaction with seafront by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
88%
92%
89%
91%
88%
88%
5%
5%
6%
5%
7%
7%
7%
3%
5%
4%
5%
5%
Boscombe West 2013 (333)
Boscombe West 2014 (486)
Boscombe West 2015 (451)
Boscombe West 2016 (486)
Boscombe West 2017 (458)
Bournemouth 2017 (2745)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
88%
91%
83%
93%
91%
87%
87%
85%
88%
88%
87%
97%
87%
85%
All respondents (458)
Female (203)
Male (232)
65+ (51)
55-64 (41)
45-54 (55)
16-34 (167)
35-44 (74)
Yes disability - limited a little (48)
No disability (336)
Yes disability - limited a lot (51)
BME (45)
White British (302)
White Other (88)
24 Insight Team
5 Your community
Over half of respondents (55%) say that they feel they belong to their local area. This is a
decrease of 3% when compared to 2016 and is 9% lower than the Bournemouth average.
However, the proportion of respondents who don’t feel at all strongly that they belong to
their local area is currently at its lowest recorded level.
Figure 28: How strongly do you feel you belong to your local area? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There were no significant differences between groups in relation to a sense of belonging.
Figure 29: Sense of belonging to local area by protected characteristics (% belonging)
BASE: Varied as labelled
14%
11%
13%
14%
14%
17%
38%
44%
38%
44%
41%
47%
30%
27%
34%
28%
32%
29%
19%
18%
15%
15%
13%
7%
Boscombe West 2013 (327)
Boscombe West 2014 (487)
Boscombe West 2015 (454)
Boscombe West 2016 (481)
Boscombe West 2017 (445)
Bournemouth 2017 (2709)
Very strongly Fairly strongly Not very strongly Not at all strongly
55%
56%
54%
61%
61%
53%
53%
52%
68%
54%
54%
56%
55%
55%
All respondents (445)
Female (195)
Male (229)
35-44 (71)
65+ (50)
16-34 (168)
45-54 (50)
55-64 (42)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
No disability (330)
BME (43)
White British (294)
White Other (89)
25 Insight Team
5.1 People from different ethnic backgrounds get on well together
Over half of respondents (56%) agreed that people from different ethnic backgrounds get
on well together which is a 3% increase compared to 2016. Levels of agreement have
remained fairly consistent since 2014. The proportion of respondents who disagreed that
people from different ethnic backgrounds get on well together has declined over the last 3
years and is currently at its lowest recorded level.
Figure 30: To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different ethnic backgrounds get on well together? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
White British respondents are significantly less likely to agree that people from different
ethnic backgrounds get on well together compared to those from other white backgrounds.
Figure 31: Different ethnic backgrounds get on well together by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
52%
54%
52%
53%
56%
60%
21%
23%
22%
24%
28%
28%
28%
23%
26%
23%
16%
11%
Boscombe West 2013 (294)
Boscombe West 2014 (434)
Boscombe West 2015 (417)
Boscombe West 2016 (458)
Boscombe West 2017 (421)
Bournemouth 2017 (2341)
Agree Neutral Disagree
56%
56%
54%
64%
55%
50%
50%
42%
57%
56%
56%
68%
58%
50%
All respondents (421)
Female (184)
Male (218)
16-34 (157)
65+ (45)
45-54 (52)
55-64 (38)
35-44 (65)
Yes disability - limited a little (47)
Yes disability - limited a lot (48)
No disability (307)
White Other (90)
BME (40)
White British (272)
26 Insight Team
5.2 People in this local area pull together to improve the local area
Just under three in ten respondents (29%) agreed that people in the local area pull together
to improve the local area. This is consistent with 2015 and 2013 (this question was not
asked in the 2014 and 2016 Boscombe West surveys) and is also consistent with
Bournemouth overall. The proportion of respondents who disagree with this statement has
decreased by 6%, from 44% in 2015 to 38% in 2017.
Figure 32: To what extent do you agree or disagree that people in this local area pull together to improve the local area? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents from BME backgrounds are significantly less likely than white respondents to
agree that people pull together. However, levels of disagreement do not vary greatly but
rather BME respondents are much more likely to give a neutral response.
Figure 33: People in this local area pull together to improve the local area by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
29%
30%
29%
30%
29%
26%
33%
38%
41%
44%
38%
32%
Boscombe West 2013 (292)
Boscombe West 2015 (392)
Boscombe West 2017 (416)
Bournemouth 2017 (2442)
Agree Neutral Disagree
29%
31%26%
32%30%
29%28%
21%
36%32%
28%
32%29%
4%
All respondents (416)
Female (179)Male (219)
65+ (46)16-34 (161)
55-64 (37)45-54 (48)35-44 (64)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)Yes disability - limited a little (46)
No disability (307)
White British (279)White Other (84)
BME (35)
27 Insight Team
5.3 Satisfaction with home
Under three quarters of respondents (72%) of respondents were satisfied with their home
which is 14% less than the Bournemouth average. Respondents in Boscombe West are
twice as likely to be dissatisfied with their home compared to all Bournemouth respondents.
This was a new question introduced in 2017 so no comparative data is available.
Figure 34: How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your home as a place to live? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with their home compared to male
respondents. Respondents with a disability which limits them a little are significantly less
likely to be satisfied with their home compared to those with no disability. Respondents who
rent their homes from a housing association or private landlord are significantly less
satisfied with their home than respondents who own their own home.
Figure 35: Satisfaction with your home as a place to live by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
BASE: Varied as labelled
72%
86%
16%
8%
12%
6%
Boscombe West 2017 (466)
Bournemouth 2017 (2811)
Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied
72%
78%67%
84%75%
73%72%
58%
75%75%
58%
75%71%
62%
All respondents (466)
Female (202)Male (241)
65+ (53)55-64 (42)45-54 (54)
16-34 (174)35-44 (73)
Yes disability - limited a lot (53)No disability (342)
Yes disability - limited a little (48)
White British (304)White Other (94)
BME (45)
28 Insight Team
5.4 Unpaid help
Just over two fifths of respondents (41%) have given some sort of unpaid help (group or
individual) in the last 12 months which is consistent with 2015 (this question was not asked
in 2016). Just under one quarter of respondents (23%) have given unpaid help to a group,
club or organisation. This figure has gradually decreased since 2013 and is now 13% less
than in was in 2013 when it stood at 36%. The proportion of respondents who haven’t given
any unpaid help has increased significantly from 51% in 2013 to 59% in 2017.
Figure 36: Overall, about how often over the last 12 months have you given unpaid help to any groups, clubs or organisations? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents from BME backgrounds are significantly more likely to give help as an
individual compared to white respondents.
Figure 37: Given unpaid help to any groups, clubs or organisations by protected characteristics (% given help)
BASE: Varied as labelled
13%
9%
9%
9%
12%
8%
7%
7%
7%
10%
15%
12%
11%
7%
10%
13%
17%
14%
18%
15%
51%
55%
60%
59%
52%
Boscombe West 2013 (299)
Boscombe West 2014 (452)
Boscombe West 2015 (407)
Boscombe West 2017 (390)
Bournemouth 2017 (2421)
At least once a week
Less than once a week but at least once a month
Less often
I give unpaid help as an individual only
I have not given any unpaid help at all
23%
24%22%
30%30%
26%19%
17%
23%21%21%
26%18%
11%
All respondents (390)
Female (169)Male (201)
55-64 (35)35-44 (60)45-54 (51)
16-34 (149)65+ (41)
No disability (298)Yes disability - limited a lot (38)
Yes disability - limited a little (43)
White British (268)White Other (78)
BME (30)
29 Insight Team
6 Community safety
6.1 Feeling safe after dark
Just under one third of respondents (32%) feel safe after dark which is an increase of 3%
compared to 2016 but is still well below the Bournemouth average. Half of respondents
(50%) feel unsafe after dark which is a reduction of 4% compared to 2016 and is currently
at its lowest recorded level.
Figure 38: Feelings of safety in local area after dark (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents feel significantly less safe after dark compared to male respondents.
Respondents from BME backgrounds are significantly more likely to feel unsafe after dark
compared to those from white backgrounds.
Figure 39: Feelings of safety in local area after dark by protected characteristics (% feel safe)
BASE: Varied as labelled
33%
22%
25%
29%
32%
51%
13%
17%
14%
18%
18%
19%
54%
60%
60%
54%
50%
30%
Boscombe West 2013 (329)
Boscombe West 2014 (493)
Boscombe West 2015 (449)
Boscombe West 2016 (458)
Boscombe West 2017 (457)
Bournemouth 2017 (2734)
Safe Neutral Unsafe
32%
38%
25%
37%
35%
29%
29%
24%
34%
28%
27%
34%
30%
24%
All respondents (457)
Male (235)
Female (201)
45-54 (54)
16-34 (170)
35-44 (74)
55-64 (42)
65+ (48)
No disability (341)
Yes disability - limited a little (47)
Yes disability - limited a lot (49)
White British (302)
White Other (91)
BME (45)
30 Insight Team
6.2 Feeling safe during the day
Over seven in ten respondents (72%) feel safe during the day which is a 2% decrease
compared to 2016. However, the proportion of respondents who feel unsafe during the day
has remained at its lowest level of 9% (although this is still over double the Bournemouth
average).
Figure 40: Feelings of safety in local area during the day (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents from BME backgrounds feel significantly less safe during the day than those
from white backgrounds.
Figure 41: Feelings of safety in local area during the day by protected characteristics (% feel safe)
BASE: Varied as labelled
72%
65%
70%
74%
72%
87%
14%
21%
13%
17%
19%
9%
14%
14%
17%
9%
9%
4%
Boscombe West 2013 (338)
Boscombe West 2014 (496)
Boscombe West 2015 (460)
Boscombe West 2016 (458)
Boscombe West 2017 (462)
Bournemouth 2017 (2792)
Safe Neutral Unsafe
72%
73%
71%
75%
73%
72%
71%
68%
74%
73%
65%
79%
72%
58%
All respondents (462)
Male (239)
Female (202)
65+ (52)
35-44 (74)
16-34 (170)
55-64 (42)
45-54 (55)
No disability (341)
Yes disability - limited a little (48)
Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
White Other (91)
White British (305)
BME (45)
31 Insight Team
6.3 Safety at home
For the first time in 2017 respondents were asked how safe they feel in their homes. More
than eight in ten respondents (86%) said they felt safe in their homes which is 6% lower
than the Bournemouth average. Respondents in Boscombe West are twice as likely to feel
unsafe in their home compared to all Bournemouth respondents.
Figure 42: Feelings of safety at home (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Male respondents are feel significantly safer in their home compared to females. White
British respondents feel significantly safer in their home compared to respondents from
other white backgrounds and BME backgrounds.
Figure 43: Feelings of safety at home by protected characteristics (% feel safe)
BASE: Varied as labelled
86%
92%
8%
4%
6%
3%
Boscombe West 2017 (462)
Bournemouth 2017 (2808)
Safe Neutral Unsafe
86%
89%
82%
88%
87%
85%
82%
82%
88%
83%
78%
89%
80%
79%
All respondents (462)
Male (239)
Female (201)
16-34 (170)
55-64 (42)
65+ (52)
35-44 (74)
45-54 (55)
No disability (341)
Yes disability - limited a little (49)
Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
White British (304)
White Other (92)
BME (45)
32 Insight Team
7 Anti-social behaviour
The BOS identified eight different types of anti-social behaviour and asked respondents
how much of a problem each of those behaviours are in their local area. Seven of these
indicators (all except ‘untidy gardens and other private land’) are used by the Crime Survey
for England & Wales to measure anti-social behaviour. Scores are allocated according to
how big a problem the respondent perceives for each indicator, and the scores are
combined to give an overall score.
BOS uses a similar methodology. Historically we have used 6 indicators to calculate high
perception of anti-social behaviour. It should be noted that ‘abandoned cars’ is included as
an indicator for the first time in 2017. For comparison purposes, we have included the
results based on 6 and 7 indicators. The 6 indicator allows for comparisons with Boscombe
West’s previous years’ data and the 7 indicator allows for comparison with Bournemouth
overall.
7.1 Overall perceptions of anti-social behaviour
The majority of anti-social behaviour has seen a decrease since 2016. The only significant
increase has been in rubbish or litter lying around which has increased by 8%, from 49% in
2016 to 57% in 2017. Each behaviour is reported in more detail later in this section.
Figure 44: Perception of anti-social behaviour (% a problem)
BASE: All respondents
27%
33%
48%
57%
49%
75%
86%
19%
22%
35%
41%
46%
57%
68%
82%
10%
19%
18%
26%
25%
39%
35%
46%
Abandoned cars
Noisy neighbours or loud parties
Untidy gardens or other privately ownedland
Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberatedamage
Groups hanging around the streets
Rubbish or litter lying around
People being drunk or rowdy in publicplaces
People using or dealing drugs
Bournemouth 2017 Boscombe West 2017 Boscombe West 2016
33 Insight Team
The proportion of respondents who have a high perception of anti-social behaviour based
on 6 indicators (combined score of ten or more) has remained at 54%. This is more than
double the level of the Bournemouth average.
Figure 45: Perception of anti-social behaviour – old measure (% high perception)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There were no significantly differences between groups in relation to the old measure for
perceptions of anti-social behaviour.
Figure 46: High perception of anti-social behaviour – old measure by protected characteristics (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
47%
58%
56%
54%
54%
26%
Boscombe West 2013 (314)
Boscombe West 2014 (474)
Boscombe West 2015 (427)
Boscombe West 2016 (463)
Boscombe West 2017 (449)
Bournemouth 2017 (2700)
54%
50%
58%
44%
52%
53%
56%
62%
53%
55%
63%
51%
57%
64%
All respondents (447)
Male (235)
Female (190)
65+ (45)
45-54 (55)
16-34 (172)
55-64 (39)
35-44 (71)
No disability (334)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
Yes disability - limited a little (45)
White British (293)
White Other (92)
BME (43)
34 Insight Team
Over two fifths of respondents (44%) have a high perception of anti-social behaviour based
on 7 indicators (combined score of eleven or more). As with the old measure, this is more
than double the level of the Bournemouth average.
Figure 47: Perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure (% high perception)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There were no significantly differences between groups in relation to the new measure for
perceptions of anti-social behaviour.
Figure 48: High perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure by protected characteristics (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
44%
21%
Boscombe West 2017 (449)
Bournemouth 2017 (2700)
44%
42%
48%
34%
45%
47%
48%
52%
43%
48%
53%
43%
47%
52%
All respondents (449)
Male (235)
Female (191)
65+ (44)
16-34 (172)
45-54 (55)
35-44 (72)
55-64 (39)
No disability (337)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
White British (292)
White Other (93)
BME (44)
35 Insight Team
7.2 Noisy neighbours and loud parties
Just over one fifth of respondents (22%) perceive noisy neighbours and loud parties as a
problem which is a 5% decrease compared to 2016 and is at its lowest recorded level.
Figure 49: Perception of noisy neighbours & loud parties (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents with a disability which limits them a lot are significantly more likely to perceive
noisy neighbours and loud parties as a problem compared to those without a disability.
Figure 50: Perception of noisy neighbours & loud parties by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
13%
9%
12%
9%
8%
8%
21%
20%
20%
18%
15%
11%
41%
42%
42%
45%
46%
37%
25%
29%
26%
28%
32%
44%
Boscombe West 2013 (319)
Boscombe West 2014 (472)
Boscombe West 2015 (432)
Boscombe West 2016 (470)
Boscombe West 2017 (440)
Bournemouth 2017 (2717)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
22%
23%
21%
29%
26%
25%
24%
18%
42%
25%
20%
28%
21%
13%
All respondents (440)
Female (194)
Male (228)
35-44 (73)
45-54 (53)
65+ (47)
55-64 (40)
16-34 (165)
Yes disability - limited a lot (50)
Yes disability - limited a little (45)
No disability (328)
White Other (85)
White British (295)
BME (43)
36 Insight Team
7.3 Rubbish or litter lying around
Almost three fifths of respondents (57%) perceive rubbish and litter lying around as a
problem which is a significant increase of 8% compared to 2016 and is at its highest
recorded level and well above the Bournemouth average (although the perception of litter
and rubbish being a problem also increased significantly for Bournemouth overall).
Figure 51: Perception of rubbish or litter lying around (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There were no significant differences between groups in relation to perceptions of rubbish
and litter being a problem.
Figure 52: Perception of rubbish and litter lying around by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
15%
20%
16%
16%
19%
13%
36%
35%
34%
33%
38%
25%
37%
36%
37%
45%
31%
41%
13%
9%
12%
6%
11%
20%
Boscombe West 2013 (320)
Boscombe West 2014 (486)
Boscombe West 2015 (447)
Boscombe West 2016 (479)
Boscombe West 2017 (450)
Bournemouth 2017 (2742)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
57%
57%
56%
68%
65%
57%
56%
52%
66%
56%
56%
60%
52%
48%
All respondents (450)
Female (198)
Male (231)
45-54 (53)
55-64 (42)
65+ (48)
16-34 (165)
35-44 (73)
Yes disability - limited a lot (51)
Yes disability - limited a little (47)
No disability (334)
White British (297)
White Other (87)
BME (44)
37 Insight Team
7.4 Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage
Just over two fifths of respondents (41%) perceive vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate
damage as a problem which is a significant decrease of 7% compared to 2016 and is at its
lowest recorded level. However, it is still well above the Bournemouth average.
Figure 53: Perception of vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 55 to 64 are significantly more likely to perceive vandalism and graffiti
as a problem compared to those aged 16 to 44. Respondents with a disability which limits
them a lot are significantly more likely to perceive vandalism and graffiti as a problem
compared to those without a disability.
Figure 54: Perception of vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
14%
15%
14%
12%
13%
8%
29%
32%
27%
35%
27%
18%
44%
40%
45%
41%
44%
44%
14%
12%
13%
11%
16%
30%
Boscombe West 2013 (310)
Boscombe West 2014 (469)
Boscombe West 2015 (421)
Boscombe West 2016 (457)
Boscombe West 2017 (432)
Bournemouth 2017 (2627)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
41%
45%
36%
58%
46%
38%
36%
34%
55%
49%
37%
47%
40%
38%
All respondents (432)
Male (224)
Female (188)
55-64 (36)
45-54 (53)
65+ (42)
16-34 (163)
35-44 (72)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
No disability (326)
BME (44)
White British (284)
White Other (85)
38 Insight Team
7.5 People using or dealing drugs
Just over four fifths of respondents (82%) perceive people using or dealing drugs as a
problem which is a decrease of 4% compared to 2016. However, it is still well above the
Bournemouth average. With the exception of a spike in 2014, perceptions of drug use and
dealing has remained fairly consistent.
Figure 55: Perception of people using or dealing drugs (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There are no significant differences between groups in relation to perceptions of drug use
and dealing.
Figure 56: Perception of people using or dealing drugs by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
49%
61%
51%
53%
48%
20%
32%
29%
32%
33%
33%
26%
12%
7%
12%
10%
11%
25%
7%
3%
5%
4%
7%
30%
Boscombe West 2013 (302)
Boscombe West 2014 (466)
Boscombe West 2015 (419)
Boscombe West 2016 (436)
Boscombe West 2017 (414)
Bournemouth 2017 (2344)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
82%
85%
80%
89%
83%
81%
81%
77%
85%
82%
79%
85%
84%
80%
All respondents (414)
Female (189)
Male (206)
55-64 (37)
35-44 (70)
16-34 (153)
65+ (40)
45-54 (50)
Yes disability - limited a little (43)
No disability (310)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
White Other (86)
BME (35)
White British (277)
39 Insight Team
7.6 People being drunk or rowdy in public places
Just over two thirds of respondents (68%) perceive people being drunk or rowdy in public
places as a problem which is a significant decrease of 7% compared to 2016 and is
currently at its lowest recorded level. However, it is still almost double the Bournemouth
average.
Figure 57: Perception of people being drunk or rowdy in public places (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There are no significant differences between groups in relation to perceptions of drunk or
rowdy behaviour.
Figure 58: Perception of people being drunk or rowdy in public places by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
43%
45%
40%
40%
36%
14%
37%
37%
36%
35%
32%
21%
14%
15%
20%
22%
24%
38%
6%
3%
4%
3%
7%
28%
Boscombe West 2013 (320)
Boscombe West 2014 (482)
Boscombe West 2015 (431)
Boscombe West 2016 (451)
Boscombe West 2017 (429)
Bournemouth 2017 (2531)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
68%
72%
65%
75%
67%
65%
62%
59%
79%
67%
65%
78%
71%
66%
All respondents (429)
Female (192)
Male (217)
35-44 (74)
16-34 (160)
55-64 (38)
45-54 (51)
65+ (42)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
No disability (322)
Yes disability - limited a lot (45)
BME (35)
White Other (86)
White British (290)
40 Insight Team
7.7 Groups hanging around the streets
Under half of respondents (46%) perceive groups hanging around the streets as a problem
which is a significant decrease of 11% compared to 2016 and is currently at its lowest
recorded level. However, it is still well above the Bournemouth average.
Figure 59: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents with a disability which limits them a little are significantly more likely to
perceive groups hanging around the streets as a problem compared to those without a
disability. Respondents from a BME background are significantly more likely to perceive
groups hanging around the streets as a problem compared to white British respondents.
Figure 60: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
25%
28%
24%
26%
19%
9%
29%
31%
32%
31%
27%
16%
38%
34%
35%
34%
40%
41%
8%
7%
9%
9%
14%
34%
Boscombe West 2013 (308)
Boscombe West 2014 (479)
Boscombe West 2015 (427)
Boscombe West 2016 (459)
Boscombe West 2017 (420)
Bournemouth 2017 (2517)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
46%
49%
45%
60%
53%
46%
43%
39%
60%
52%
44%
60%
49%
43%
All respondents (420)
Female (186)
Male (213)
55-64 (37)
45-54 (50)
35-44 (70)
16-34 (157)
65+ (43)
Yes disability - limited a little (42)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
No disability (313)
BME (35)
White Other (84)
White British (281)
41 Insight Team
7.8 Abandoned cars
The survey asked about abandoned cars for the first time in 2017 so no historical
comparisons are available. Just under one fifth of respondents (19%) perceived abandoned
cars to be a problem in their area which is almost double the Bournemouth average.
Figure 61: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents with a disability which limits them a lot are significantly more likely to perceive
abandoned cars as a problem compared to those without a disability. Respondents from a
BME background are significantly more likely to perceive abandoned cars as a problem
compared to white British respondents.
Figure 62: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
5%
3%
13%
6%
47%
35%
34%
55%
Boscombe West 2017 (378)
Bournemouth 2017 (2452)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
19%
22%
16%
29%
21%
21%
18%
16%
30%
17%
14%
30%
22%
16%
All respondents (378)
Female (168)
Male (192)
45-54 (47)
55-64 (36)
65+ (35)
35-44 (63)
16-34 (142)
Yes disability - limited a lot (41)
No disability (283)
Yes disability - limited a little (40)
BME (30)
White Other (81)
White British (249)
42 Insight Team
7.9 Untidy gardens and other private land
Just over one third of respondents (35%) perceive untidy gardens and other private land as
a problem which is a slight increase of 2% compared to 2016 and is almost double the
Bournemouth average. The perception of untidy gardens and other private land has
remained fairly consistent since 2014.
Figure 63: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There are no significant differences between groups in relation to perceptions of untidy
gardens and other private land.
Figure 64: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land by protected characteristics (% problem)
BASE: Varied as labelled
10%
15%
16%
10%
9%
5%
19%
22%
20%
24%
26%
13%
49%
41%
38%
48%
38%
42%
22%
22%
27%
18%
28%
40%
Boscombe West 2013 (312)
Boscombe West 2014 (467)
Boscombe West 2015 (417)
Boscombe West 2016 (456)
Boscombe West 2017 (407)
Bournemouth 2017 (2564)
A very big problem A fairly big problem
Not a very big problem Not a problem at all
35%
37%
32%
43%
38%
37%
35%
28%
35%
34%
33%
40%
40%
32%
All respondents (407)
Male (203)
Female (184)
35-44 (67)
65+ (44)
16-34 (145)
45-54 (49)
55-64 (38)
No disability (301)
Yes disability - limited a little (43)
Yes disability - limited a lot (46)
White Other (79)
BME (32)
White British (277)
43 Insight Team
7.10 Police and public services
Three new questions were included in the 2017 survey, asking respondents to what extent
they agreed or disagreed with three statements about the police and other public services.
Just over two fifths of respondents (41%) agreed that the police and other local public
services sought their views about anti-social behaviour and crime in their local area. This is
significantly higher than Bournemouth overall where 31% of respondents agreed.
Figure 65: The police and other local public services seek people’s views about anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more likely than male respondents to disagree that
the police and other local public services seek their views about anti-social behaviour and
crime in their local area. White British respondents are significantly less likely to agree
compared to other white respondents.
Figure 66: The police and other local public services seek people’s views about anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
41%
31%
29%
26%
31%
42%
Boscombe West 2017 (354)
Bournemouth 2017 (2086)
Agree Neutral Disagree
41%
44%37%
48%39%39%
37%30%
42%40%
36%
57%50%
34%
All respondents (354)
Male (199)Female (139)
16-34 (128)35-44 (52)
65+ (38)45-54 (46)55-64 (35)
Yes disability - limited a little (38)No disability (260)
Yes disability - limited a lot (43)
White Other (69)BME (33)
White British (238)
44 Insight Team
Over two fifths of respondents (43%) agreed that the police and other local public services
are successfully dealing with anti-social behaviour and crime issues in their local area. This
is marginally higher than Bournemouth overall where 41% of respondents agreed.
Figure 67: The police and other local public services are successfully dealing with anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents in the oldest and youngest age groups are significantly more likely than any
other age group to agree that the police and other public services are successfully dealing
with anti-social behaviour and crime issues in their local area. Respondents who have a
disability which limits them a lot are significantly more likely to disagree than those with no
disability. White British respondents are significantly less likely to agree compared to those
from other white backgrounds.
Figure 68: The police and other local public services are successfully dealing with anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
43%
41%
22%
27%
36%
32%
Boscombe West 2017 (373)
Bournemouth 2017 (2032)
Agree Neutral Disagree
43%
46%
39%
54%
48%
36%
31%
28%
42%
42%
42%
59%
44%
37%
All respondents (373)
Male (200)
Female (157)
65+ (40)
16-34 (139)
55-64 (35)
45-54 (48)
35-44 (54)
Yes disability - limited a little (40)
Yes disability - limited a lot (45)
No disability (272)
White Other (77)
BME (36)
White British (243)
45 Insight Team
One quarter of respondents (25%) agreed that the police and other local public services
inform residents how to get involved in tackling crime and disorder in their local area. This is
broadly in line with the Bournemouth average.
Figure 69: The police and other local public services inform residents how to get involved in tackling crime and disorder in your local area (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more likely than male respondents to disagree that
the police and other public services inform residents how to get involved in tackling crime
and disorder in their local area. Respondents aged 16 to 44 are significantly more likely to
disagree compared to those aged 65 and over. Respondents from other white backgrounds
are significantly more likely to agree than white British and BME respondents.
Figure 70: The police and other local public services inform residents how to get involved in tackling crime and disorder in your local area by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
25%
26%
30%
24%
46%
50%
Boscombe West 2017 (357)
Bournemouth 2017 (2159)
Agree Neutral Disagree
25%
27%
22%
33%
31%
24%
24%
21%
30%
27%
22%
37%
23%
10%
All respondents (357)
Male (194)
Female (150)
65+ (34)
55-64 (34)
45-54 (43)
16-34 (142)
35-44 (54)
Yes disability - limited a lot (40)
Yes disability - limited a little (36)
No disability (268)
White Other (72)
White British (240)
BME (33)
46 Insight Team
8 Communication
The proportion of respondents who think that the Council acts on concerns of local
residents has increased significantly by 8%, from 54% in 2016 to 62% in 2017 and is
currently at its highest recorded level and well above the Bournemouth average.
Figure 71: To what extent do you think Bournemouth Borough Council acts on the concerns of local residents? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more likely to feel that the Council acts on concerns of
local residents compared to male respondents. Respondents in the oldest and youngest
age groups are significantly more likely than any other age group to feel that the Council
acts on concerns of local residents.
Figure 72: Bournemouth Borough Council acts on the concerns of local residents (% a great deal / a fair amount)
BASE: Varied as labelled
9%
4%
8%
6%
10%
6%
48%
43%
48%
48%
52%
49%
36%
46%
37%
36%
33%
36%
7%
7%
6%
9%
6%
9%
Boscombe West 2013 (286)
Boscombe West 2014 (408)
Boscombe West 2015 (399)
Boscombe West 2016 (385)
Boscombe West 2017 (378)
Bournemouth 2017 (2301)
A great deal A fair amount Not very much Not at all
62%
67%56%
67%66%
53%49%
46%
67%61%
59%
76%69%
56%
All respondents (378)
Female (163)Male (195)
16-34 (124)65+ (48)
35-44 (58)55-64 (37)45-54 (49)
Yes disability - limited a lot (49)No disability (263)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
BME (33)White Other (74)
White British (250)
47 Insight Team
8.1 Improvements to Boscombe
A question was introduced in 2013 asking respondents whether they have heard of any of
the work being done by the Boscombe Regeneration Partnership to improve Boscombe.
The wording of this question was changed in 2016 to exclude reference to the Boscombe
Regeneration Partnership. Just over half of respondents (51%) have heard of the work
being done to improve Boscombe. This is a significant decrease of 7% compared to 2016.
Figure 73: Have you heard of any of the work being done to improve Boscombe? (% yes)
BASE: Varied as labelled
There were no significant differences between groups in relation to having heard about the
work being done to improve Boscombe.
Figure 74: Work being done to improve Boscombe by protected characteristics (% heard)
BASE: Varied as labelled
44%
67%
66%
58%
51%
44%
Boscombe West 2013 (320)
Boscombe West 2014 (452)
Boscombe West 2015 (428)
Boscombe West 2016 (457)
Boscombe West 2017 (432)
Bournemouth 2017 (2582)
51%
54%
48%
59%
54%
50%
50%
49%
52%
52%
50%
52%
52%
38%
All respondents (432)
Female (188)
Male (224)
45-54 (50)
35-44 (69)
65+ (47)
16-34 (165)
55-64 (40)
No disability (317)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
Yes disability - limited a lot (51)
White Other (86)
White British (283)
BME (41)
48 Insight Team
Just under half of respondents (47%) felt Boscombe is improving which is significantly
higher than the Bournemouth average of 32%. Although this question was introduced in
2016, it was asked as a straight yes or no question so data from 2016 isn’t comparable.
Figure 75: To what extent do you think Boscombe is improving? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 16 to 34 are significantly more likely than any other age group to feel
that Boscombe is improving.
Figure 76: Boscombe is improving (% a great deal/a fair amount)
BASE: Varied as labelled
9%
4%
38%
28%
41%
50%
13%
18%
Boscombe West 2017 (434)
Bournemouth 2017 (2251)
A great deal A fair amount Not very much Not at all
46%
47%
44%
59%
40%
39%
33%
30%
49%
39%
34%
51%
45%
34%
All respondents (434)
Female (192)
Male (219)
16-34 (157)
35-44 (71)
65+ (51)
45-54 (49)
55-64 (40)
No disability (322)
Yes disability - limited a lot (48)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
White Other (85)
White British (291)
BME (35)
49 Insight Team
9 Local decision making
Half of respondents (50%) feel that Bournemouth Borough Council seeks out people’s
views on issues and services which is a decrease of 4% compared to 2015 but is
significantly higher than the Bournemouth average. This question was not asked in the
2016 and 2014 Boscombe West surveys.
Figure 77: To what extent do you think Bournemouth Borough Council seeks out people’s views on issues and services? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
White British respondents are significantly less likely to agree that the Council seeks out
people’s views compared to those from other white backgrounds.
Figure 78: Bournemouth Borough Council seeks out people’s views on issues and services by protected characteristics (% a great deal/a fair amount)
BASE: Varied as labelled
7%
6%
4%
3%
44%
48%
46%
33%
42%
38%
43%
50%
7%
8%
7%
14%
Boscombe West 2013 (272)
Boscombe West 2015 (379)
Boscombe West 2017 (391)
Bournemouth 2017 (2253)
A great deal A fair amount Not very much Not at all
50%
51%
48%
55%
45%
44%
43%
37%
61%
55%
47%
66%
52%
44%
All respondents (391)
Female (171)
Male (203)
16-34 (154)
55-64 (33)
45-54 (43)
65+ (42)
35-44 (62)
Yes disability - limited a little (45)
Yes disability - limited a lot (42)
No disability (290)
White Other (71)
BME (33)
White British (269)
50 Insight Team
Over one third of respondents (37%) agree that they can influence decisions which is
significantly higher than the Bournemouth average of 29%. This is a new question for 2017
so no comparative data is available.
Figure 79: Do you agree or disagree that you can influence decisions affecting your local area? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
White British respondents are around half as likely as respondents from other white and
BME backgrounds to agree that they can influence decisions in their local area.
Figure 80: Influencing decisions affecting your local area by protected characteristics (% agree)
BASE: Varied as labelled
3%
4%
35%
25%
46%
45%
17%
26%
Boscombe West 2017 (375)
Bournemouth 2017 (2253)
Definitely agree Tend to agree Tend to disagree Definitely disagree
37%
40%
34%
38%
34%
33%
33%
25%
44%
37%
23%
57%
55%
28%
All respondents (375)
Female (163)
Male (196)
16-34 (147)
35-44 (60)
45-54 (36)
65+ (41)
55-64 (37)
Yes disability - limited a lot (45)
No disability (277)
Yes disability - limited a little (42)
White Other (68)
BME (34)
White British (256)
51 Insight Team
Just over two fifths of respondents (41%) said that they would like to be more involved in
the decisions that affect their local area which is significantly higher than the Bournemouth
average of 34%. This is a new question for 2017 so no comparative data is available.
Figure 81: Generally speaking, would you like to be more involved in the decisions that affect your local area? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents aged 65 and over are significantly less likely to want to be involved in
decisions. Respondents without a disability are significantly more likely to want to be
involved in decisions compared to those with a disability which limits them a lot.
Figure 82: Would like to be more involved in the decisions that affect your local area by protected characteristics (% yes)
BASE: Varied as labelled
41%
34%
9%
10%
50%
56%
Boscombe West 2017 (443)
Bournemouth 2017 (2668)
Yes No Depends on the issue
41%
45%
39%
54%
46%
38%
36%
20%
45%
34%
27%
49%
48%
37%
All respondents (443)
Female (191)
Male (233)
35-44 (72)
16-34 (168)
55-64 (41)
45-54 (53)
65+ (47)
No disability (333)
Yes disability - limited a little (46)
Yes disability - limited a lot (47)
BME (40)
White Other (88)
White British (295)
52 Insight Team
10 Health and wellbeing
Just under three quarters of respondents (73%) describe their health as ‘very good’ or
‘good’ which is a decrease of 4% compared to 2016. The 2017 results are in line with
Bournemouth overall. The proportion of respondents describing their health as ‘bad’ or ‘very
bad’ has increased significantly and more than doubled; from 4% in 2016 to 10% in 2017.
Figure 83: How is your health and wellbeing in general? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Male respondents are significantly less likely to describe their health and wellbeing as
‘good’ or ‘very good’ compared to females. Respondents aged 16 to 44 are significantly
more likely than those aged 45 and over to describe their health as good. Respondents with
a disability are significantly less likely to have good health compared to those without a
disability. Respondents from other white backgrounds are significantly less likely to
describe their health as ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’ compared to white British and BME respondents.
Figure 84: Health and wellbeing by protected characteristics (% good/very good)
BASE: Varied as labelled
64%
79%
72%
77%
73%
73%
21%
17%
20%
19%
17%
20%
15%
4%
8%
4%
10%
7%
Boscombe West 2013 (339)
Boscombe West 2014 (499)
Boscombe West 2015 (455)
Boscombe West 2016 (494)
Boscombe West 2017 (465)
Bournemouth 2017 (2787)
Good Fair Bad
73%
78%69%
89%83%
63%55%
45%
89%37%
9%
80%71%71%
All respondents (465)
Female (200)Male (242)
16-34 (172)35-44 (74)55-64 (42)45-54 (55)
65+ (52)
No disability (345)Yes disability - limited a little (47)Yes disability - limited a lot (52)
White Other (94)BME (45)
White British (303)
53 Insight Team
10.1 Social contact
Just under three quarters of respondents (74%) have sufficient social contact which is a
significant decrease of 9% when compared to 2016 and is significantly lower than the
Bournemouth average.
Figure 85: Which of the following statements best describes your social situation? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Respondents with a disability which limits them a lot are significantly less likely to have
sufficient social contact compared to those without a disability or those with a disability
which limits them a little. Respondents from a BME background are significantly less likely
to have sufficient social contact compared to white respondents.
Figure 86: Social contact by protected characteristics (% at least adequate social contact)
BASE: Varied as labelled
46%
58%
51%
56%
50%
58%
25%
25%
26%
27%
24%
26%
16%
14%
12%
13%
20%
12%
13%
3%
10%
4%
6%
4%
Boscombe West 2013 (335)
Boscombe West 2014 (498)
Boscombe West 2015 (449)
Boscombe West 2016 (491)
Boscombe West 2017 (453)
Bournemouth 2017 (2744)
I have as much social contact as I want with people I like
I have adequate social contact with people
I have some social contact with people but not enough
I have little social contact and feel socially isolated
74%
74%
74%
81%
77%
76%
69%
68%
77%
73%
52%
78%
76%
54%
All respondents (453)
Female (200)
Male (238)
65+ (52)
55-64 (41)
16-34 (172)
45-54 (52)
35-44 (74)
No disability (338)
Yes disability - limited a little (44)
Yes disability - limited a lot (51)
White British (300)
White Other (93)
BME (44)
54 Insight Team
10.2 Satisfaction with life
Just under two thirds of respondents (64%) rate their life as 7 or more which is a significant
decrease of 6% compared to 2016 and is significantly lower than the Bournemouth
average. The proportion of respondents rating their life as 4 or less has increased from 8%
in 2016 to 12% in 2017.
Figure 87: On a scale of 1 to 10, how satisfied are you overall with your life nowadays? (% respondents)
BASE: Varied as labelled
Female respondents are significantly more likely to be satisfied with their life compared to
male respondents. Respondents with a disability which limits them a lot are significantly
less likely to rate their lives as seven or more compared to those without a disability or
those with a disability which limits them a little.
Figure 88: Current life satisfaction by protected characteristics (% 7 or more out of 10)
BASE: Varied as labelled
7%
3%
4%
11%
8%
9%
6%
8%
6%
24%
21%
20%
22%
24%
17%
44%
50%
47%
47%
40%
47%
13%
19%
22%
23%
25%
29%
Boscombe West 2013 (333)
Boscombe West 2014 (499)
Boscombe West 2015 (451)
Boscombe West 2016 (491)
Boscombe West 2017 (455)
Bournemouth 2017 (2740)
1 - 2 3 - 4 5 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 10
64%
57%73%
49%63%62%
66%69%
22%61%
72%
55%65%
72%
All respondents (455)
Male (239)Female (200)
45-54 (55)65+ (52)
55-64 (43)35-44 (71)
16-34 (174)
Yes disability - limited a lot (50)Yes disability - limited a little (47)
No disability (338)
BME (45)White British (302)
White Other (94)
55 Insight Team
11 Conclusion
Overall, findings in 2017 are generally positive in comparison to 2016. Below is a summary
of the differences which have been statistically significant.
Local Area and Communication
There have been significant increases in performance of the following:
• Satisfaction with the local area
• The Council acts on concerns of local residents
There has been a significant decline in relation to:
• Residents who have heard of the work being done to improve Boscombe
Services
There has been an increase in satisfaction with the vast majority of council services. The
services which have seen a significant increase in performance are:
• Satisfaction with keeping land clear of litter and refuse
• Satisfaction with refuse collection
• Satisfaction with sport and leisure facilities
• Satisfaction with libraries
• Satisfaction with museums / galleries
• Satisfaction with theatres / concert halls
Anti-social behaviour
In relation to anti-social behaviour, perceptions of these behaviours being a problem has
decreased for the majority of behaviours. Significant decreases have been in:
• Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage being a problem
• People being drunk or rowdy in public places being a problem
• Groups hanging around the streets being a problem
However, there was one significant increase:
• Rubbish or litter lying around being a problem
Health and Wellbeing
Health and wellbeing measure have decreased. There were significant decreases in
relation to:
• Social contact
• Life satisfaction
56 Insight Team
Comparisons to Bournemouth
Table 3 shows the indicators where Boscombe West fell behind Bournemouth in 2015 but
there has since been a positive change of more than 5%. The largest positive shift has
been in the proportion of respondents in Boscombe West who feel the Council acts on
concerns of local residents which was 8% lower than Bournemouth in 2015 but is now 7%
higher.
Although Boscombe West still falls behind Bournemouth in terms of anti-social behaviour,
the gap is decreasing for many of the indicators. The proportion of respondents in
Boscombe West who consider noisy neighbours or loud parties a problem is now just 3%
higher than the Bournemouth average compared to 12% higher in 2015. There has
therefore been a positive shift of 9%.
Table 3: Closing the gap between Boscombe West and Bournemouth
% difference between Boscombe West and
Bournemouth %
change
2015 2017
Bournemouth Council acts on the concerns of local residents -8% +7% +15%
Satisfaction with local area as a place to live -21% -9% +12%
Satisfaction with refuse collection -7% +4% +11%
Satisfaction with sport / leisure facilities -15% -5% +10%
Feeling safe outside in local area after dark -29% -19% +10%
Satisfaction with libraries -6% +3% +9%
Satisfaction with museums / galleries -6% +3% +9%
Noisy neighbours or loud parties -12% -3% +9%
Groups hanging around the streets -30% -21% +9%
Sense of belonging to local area -16% -9% +7%
People being drunk or rowdy in public places -40% -33% +7%
Satisfaction with theatres / concert halls -8% -2% +6%
Satisfaction with parks and open spaces -7% -1% +6%
People using or dealing drugs -42% -36% +6%
Overall perception of anti-social behaviour -34% -28% +6%
57 Insight Team
Appendix 1: Respondent profile
Weighted Unweighted
Gender Male 243 210
Female 204 237
Age
16 - 34 years 174 65
35 - 44 years 74 61
45 - 54 years 55 60
55 - 64 years 43 84
65+ years 54 128
Disability
Yes – limited a lot 53 48
Yes – limited a little 49 92
No 346 308
Ethnicity
White British 307 356
White Other 95 72
BME 45 19
Religion
No religion 204 165
Christian 223 266
Other religion 38 30
Sexual Orientation Heterosexual 394 400
All other sexual orientations 27 26
Accommodation
Owner / Occupier 187 225
Renting - Social 46 51
Renting - Private 189 157
Employment
In employment 288 235
Unemployed 17 11
Retired 64 128
Economically inactive 61 58
Children 17 and under in
the household
None 198 197
One 60 57
Two or more 36 35
Adults 18 and over in the
household
One 145 159
Two 195 163
Three or more 28 30
58 Insight Team
Appendix 2: Table of figures
Figure 1: Overall satisfaction with local area (% respondents) ......................... 6
Figure 2: Satisfaction with local area by protected characteristics (% satisfied) ..... 6
Figure 3: Importance vs. Improvement (% respondents) ................................ 9
Figure 4: Satisfaction with Council services (% satisfied) .............................. 11
Figure 5: Usage of Council services (% used in the last twelve months) ............ 12
Figure 6: Keeping public land clear of litter and refuse (% respondents) ............ 13
Figure 7: Satisfaction with keeping public land clear of litter and refuse by protected
characteristics (% satisfied) ................................................................ 13
Figure 8: Refuse collection (% respondents) ............................................ 14
Figure 9: Satisfaction with refuse collection by protected characteristics (% satisfied)
................................................................................................. 14
Figure 10: Doorstep recycling (% respondents) ......................................... 15
Figure 11: Satisfaction with doorstep recycling by protected characteristics (%
satisfied) ...................................................................................... 15
Figure 12: Local transport information (% respondents) ............................... 16
Figure 13: Satisfaction with local transport information by protected characteristics
(% satisfied) .................................................................................. 16
Figure 14: Local bus services (% respondents) ......................................... 17
Figure 15: Satisfaction with local bus services by protected characteristics (%
satisfied) ...................................................................................... 17
Figure 16: Sport and leisure facilities (% respondents) ................................. 18
Figure 17: Satisfaction with sport and leisure facilities by protected characteristics
(% satisfied) .................................................................................. 18
Figure 18: Libraries (% respondents) ..................................................... 19
Figure 19: Satisfaction with libraries by protected characteristics (% satisfied) ..... 19
Figure 20: Museums and galleries (% respondents) .................................... 20
Figure 21: Satisfaction with museums and galleries by protected characteristics (%
satisfied) ...................................................................................... 20
Figure 22: Theatres and concert halls (% respondents) ................................ 21
Figure 23: Satisfaction with theatres and concert halls by protected characteristics
(% satisfied) .................................................................................. 21
Figure 24: Parks and open spaces (% respondents) ................................... 22
Figure 25: Satisfaction with parks & open spaces by protected characteristics (%
satisfied) ...................................................................................... 22
Figure 26: Seafront (% respondents) ..................................................... 23
Figure 27: Satisfaction with seafront by protected characteristics (% satisfied) ..... 23
Figure 28: How strongly do you feel you belong to your local area? (% respondents)
................................................................................................. 24
Figure 29: Sense of belonging to local area by protected characteristics (%
belonging) .................................................................................... 24
Figure 30: To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place
where people from different ethnic backgrounds get on well together? (%
respondents) ................................................................................. 25
59 Insight Team
Figure 31: Different ethnic backgrounds get on well together by protected
characteristics (% agree) ................................................................... 25
Figure 32: To what extent do you agree or disagree that people in this local area
pull together to improve the local area? (% respondents) .............................. 26
Figure 33: People in this local area pull together to improve the local area by
protected characteristics (% agree) ....................................................... 26
Figure 34: How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your home as a place to live?
(% respondents) ............................................................................. 27
Figure 35: Satisfaction with your home as a place to live by protected characteristics
(% satisfied) .................................................................................. 27
Figure 36: Overall, about how often over the last 12 months have you given unpaid
help to any groups, clubs or organisations? (% respondents) ......................... 28
Figure 37: Given unpaid help to any groups, clubs or organisations by protected
characteristics (% respondents) ........................................................... 28
Figure 38: Feelings of safety in local area after dark (% respondents) ............... 29
Figure 39: Feelings of safety in local area after dark by protected characteristics (%
feel safe) ...................................................................................... 29
Figure 40: Feelings of safety in local area during the day (% respondents) ......... 30
Figure 41: Feelings of safety in local area during the day by protected
characteristics (% feel safe) ................................................................ 30
Figure 42: Feelings of safety at home (% respondents) ................................ 31
Figure 43: Feelings of safety at home by protected characteristics (% feel safe) ... 31
Figure 44: Perception of anti-social behaviour (% a problem) ......................... 32
Figure 45: Perception of anti-social behaviour – old measure (% high perception) 33
Figure 46: High perception of anti-social behaviour – old measure by protected
characteristics (% respondents) ........................................................... 33
Figure 47: Perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure (% high perception)
................................................................................................. 34
Figure 48: High perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure by protected
characteristics (% respondents) ........................................................... 34
Figure 49: Perception of noisy neighbours & loud parties (% respondents) ......... 35
Figure 50: Perception of noisy neighbours & loud parties by protected
characteristics (% problem) ................................................................ 35
Figure 51: Perception of rubbish or litter lying around (% respondents) ............. 36
Figure 52: Perception of rubbish and litter lying around by protected characteristics
(% problem) .................................................................................. 36
Figure 53: Perception of vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage (%
respondents) ................................................................................. 37
Figure 54: Perception of vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage by
protected characteristics (% problem) .................................................... 37
Figure 55: Perception of people using or dealing drugs (% respondents) ........... 38
Figure 56: Perception of people using or dealing drugs by protected characteristics
(% problem) .................................................................................. 38
Figure 57: Perception of people being drunk or rowdy in public places (%
respondents) ................................................................................. 39
60 Insight Team
Figure 58: Perception of people being drunk or rowdy in public places by protected
characteristics (% problem) ................................................................ 39
Figure 59: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents) ...... 40
Figure 60: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected
characteristics (% problem) ................................................................ 40
Figure 61: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents) ...... 41
Figure 62: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected
characteristics (% problem) ................................................................ 41
Figure 63: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land (% respondents) .. 42
Figure 64: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land by protected
characteristics (% problem) ................................................................ 42
Figure 65: The police and other local public services seek people’s views about
anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area (% respondents) ......... 43
Figure 66: The police and other local public services seek people’s views about
anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area by protected
characteristics (% agree) ................................................................... 43
Figure 67: The police and other local public services are successfully dealing with
anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area (% respondents) ......... 44
Figure 68: The police and other local public services are successfully dealing with
anti-social behaviour and crime issues in your local area by protected
characteristics (% agree) ................................................................... 44
Figure 69: The police and other local public services inform residents how to get
involved in tackling crime and disorder in your local area (% respondents) ......... 45
Figure 70: The police and other local public services inform residents how to get
involved in tackling crime and disorder in your local area by protected
characteristics (% agree) ................................................................... 45
Figure 71: To what extent do you think Bournemouth Borough Council acts on the
concerns of local residents? (% respondents) ........................................... 46
Figure 72: Bournemouth Borough Council acts on the concerns of local residents
(% a great deal/a fair amount) ............................................................. 46
Figure 73: Have you heard of any of the work being done to improve Boscombe?
(% yes) ........................................................................................ 47
Figure 74: Work being done to improve Boscombe by protected characteristics (%
heard) ......................................................................................... 47
Figure 75: To what extent do you think Boscombe is improving? (% respondents) 48
Figure 76: Boscombe is improving (% a great deal/a fair amount) .................... 48
Figure 77: To what extent do you think Bournemouth Borough Council seeks out
people’s views on issues and services? (% respondents) ............................. 49
Figure 78: Bournemouth Borough Council seeks out people’s views on issues and
services by protected characteristics (% a great deal/a fair amount) ................. 49
Figure 79: Do you agree or disagree that you can influence decisions affecting your
local area? (% respondents) ............................................................... 50
Figure 80: Influencing decisions affecting your local area by protected
characteristics (% agree) ................................................................... 50
Figure 81: Generally speaking, would you like to be more involved in the decisions
that affect your local area? (% respondents)............................................. 51
61 Insight Team
Figure 82: Would like to be more involved in the decisions that affect your local area
by protected characteristics (% yes) ...................................................... 51
Figure 83: How is your health and wellbeing in general? (% respondents) .......... 52
Figure 84: Health and wellbeing by protected characteristics (% good/very good) . 52
Figure 85: Which of the following statements best describes your social situation?
(% respondents) ............................................................................. 53
Figure 86: Social contact by protected characteristics (% at least adequate social
contact) ....................................................................................... 53
Figure 87: On a scale of 1 to 10, how satisfied are you overall with your life
nowadays? (% respondents) ............................................................... 54
Figure 88: Current life satisfaction by protected characteristics (% 7 or more out of
10) ............................................................................................. 54
Table 1: Things making somewhere a good place to live (% selected as one of top
5) ................................................................................................ 7
Table 2: Things that most need improving (% selected as one of top 5) .............. 8
Table 3: Things that most need improving (% selected as one of top 5) ............. 56
Recommended