MRPI Home Page UTSA Home Page   
• Home
• Activities
• Bexar Census 2000
• Contact Us
• Current Research
• Faculty
• Geographic Profiles
• News
• Policy Briefs
• Profiles
• Recent Publications
• What is MRPI?

COMMUNITY NEEDS

To determine the kinds of needs individuals living in Kendall County might have, respondents were asked about problems that families living in their neighborhood might experience, and were provided a list of eighteen different problems. The list of problems included : Streets are in poor condition; Fire station too far; Lack of police protection; Lack of emergency health services; Too much commercial development; Drainage/Flooding problems during rain; Neighborhood safety; Traffic Congestion; Lack of parks and recreation areas; Lack of close shopping (groceries, cleaners, etc.); Lack of child care; Lack of transportation; Crime (ie., violence or theft); Drug abuse; Uncontrolled growth; Lack of development planning (zoning); Lack of cultural opportunities; Lack of continuing education; Lack of affordable housing; and Lack of employment opportunities.

* In the order presented in the survey

Individuals could select more than one of these choices. About one fourth of respondents selected only one problem, while a little over 14% mentioned two. Thirteen percent of respondents said they were not aware of any problems that families in their neighborhood experienced. At the opposite end of the spectrum a few individuals mentioned that families in their neighborhood experienced as many as 15 of the problems (see Figure 17).

f

Figure 18 displays those problems which were mentioned by the largest percentage of respondents. Uncontrolled growth was the most frequently cited problem, cited by 36.1% of respondents. Lack of affordable housing and too much commercial development both had about 30% of respondents stating they are a problem. About one fourth of the respondents mentioned that a lack of development planning (zoning) was a problem, and about one fifth mentioned lack of streets in poor condition and employment opportunities. The problems with the next largest percentage of affirmative responses were traffic congestion (17.7%), lack of close shopping such as groceries and cleaners (16.7%), lack of cultural opportunities (16.7%), lack of continuing education (15.6%), and lack of emergency health services (15.3%).

f

Figure 19 arranges those problems that were least cited by respondents in order of response. Fire station too far, drainage or flooding problems when it rains and lack of transportation were mentioned by about 14% of respondents. Lack of parks and recreation areas was mentioned by 10.6% of individuals. About eight percent of the respondents mentioned lack of childcare and drug abuse as problems. Nearly six percent mentioned neighborhood safety and lack of police protection as problems experienced by families in their neighborhoods. Finally 4.5% of respondents said that crime such as theft or violence were problems experienced in their neighborhoods.

f

Table 4 indicates the one problem among those mentioned that the respondent considered the most serious for their neighborhood. Uncontrolled growth received the largest percentage of responses (19.2%) and lack of affordable housing was the next most frequently mentioned (11.1%). The rest of the problems were selected by less than 10% of respondents as the most serious. Lack of continuing education received the smallest percentage of responses (0.9%).

Table 4: The Most Serious Problem Experienced by Families in Your Neighborhood

Uncontrolled growth 19.2%
Lack of Affordable housing 11.1%
Streets in poor condition 7.8%
Lack of developmental planning (zoning) 7.8%
Too much commercial development 7.5%
Traffic congestion 6.0%
Drainage or Flooding when it rains 5.1%
Lack of close shopping (food, cleaners, etc.) 4.8%
Fire Station too far 4.8%
Drug abuse 4.5%
Lack of employment opportunities 4.5%
Lack of emergency health services 4.2%
Crime (i.e. violence or theft) 2.1%
Neighborhood safety 1.8%
Lack of parks and recreation areas 1.8%
Lack of transportation 1.8%
Lack of cultural opportunities 1.8%
Lack of Police protection 1.5%
Lack of child care 1.2%
Lack of continuing education 0.9%

Respondents were also asked the following: The County governments in Texas often provide a variety of services designed to help individuals and families. We are going to name some services and we want you to tell us which ones you believe are important for helping people in your community. Figure 20 displays the responses to this question.

f

Respondents clearly thought that providing each of these services was important to the community. Between 41% and 78% of respondents said that each of these services is important. Fire protection (78.3%), police protection (76.4%) and emergency medical services (74.5%) were selected most frequently. Services for the disabled and juvenile probation were selected by over 50% of those answering the survey. Over 47% of respondents said that providing counseling services was important, 42% mentioned adult literacy programs, and 41% mentioned fair housing services

In addition individuals were asked about the importance of services provided by private or public agencies other than the County. Figure 21 those services mentioned as important for their community. With the exception of fire and police protection and emergency medical services, all of these other services had a larger percentage of individuals stating the service was important for their community. Elder care and emergency services (food, money, shelter) had the largest percentage of individuals saying they were important. Parenting education had the smallest percentage claiming it, however, a majority of respondents thought it was important for the community.

f

Affordable housing is an important issue for County officials to consider. Respondents who said that a lack of affordable housing was a problem in Kendall County were most frequently in the 40 year old age group, to have family income between $21,000 and $50,000 and to say they live in Boerne. Overall, sex or race/ethnicity of the individual made no difference in mentioning affordable housing as a problem, and age and income differences were quite small. Those living in Welfare/Waring and in unincorporated areas of the county also had a high percentage saying there was a lack of affordable housing (33%). Individuals within all employment categories except those currently in school were somewhat likely to state that there was a lack of affordable housing. Not surprisingly individuals who said they were currently unemployed were most likely to say that affordable housing was a problem, although about one third of those employed full time, employed part time or who said they were stay home parents also mentioned lack of affordable housing (see, Figures 22 - 25).

f

f

f

f

Another interesting issue for rural counties ties to employment opportunities. Those respondents most likely to say that lack of employment opportunities in Kendall County was a problem said they lived in Comfort or Kendalia, reported their age between 40 and 49 and reported family incomes between $51,000 and $69,000 (see Figures 26-29).

f

f

f

There were no statistically significant differences across categories of sex or race/ethnicity in selecting lack of employment opportunities as a serious problem. (see Figures 30,31).

f

Another interesting issue relates to those individuals who say they are dissatisfied with the quality of their housing. Keeping in mind that only twelve respondents reported being dissatisfied, Figures 32 - 36 illustrate the groups who were most likely to report dissatisfaction. Those most likely to express dissatisfaction with the quality of their housing they lived in "other" unidentified parts of Kendall County, reported being in school, said their family income was between $1,000 and $20,000 and were between the ages of 40 and 49.

f

f

f

Overall, respondents reported being in either excellent or good health (see Figure 37), although 11% reported their health as fair and 4% reported their health as poor. Mexican Americans were those with the highest percentage claiming only fair health, and whites were the group with the highest percentage claiming poor health (see Figure 38).

f

Increasing age and lower family incomes are both risk factors related to reporting health status as fair or poor (see Figures 39 and 40).

f

Related to the issue of health is the type of health insurance individuals are able to purchase. As seen in Figure 41, close to 50% of the respondents had employer based health insurance, about 19% had private insurance, 15% had medicare coverage, about 6% said they had military health benefits, another 6% said they had some other type of health insurance, and about 1% were covered under medicaid. Importantly with respect to the needs of residents, about 7% said they had no health insurance coverage at all. Since a single question focuses on the respondent only, this figure may underestimate the proportion of households in which at least one member is without health insurance benefits. As seen in Figure 42, among those with no health insurance, the largest percentage say their health is poor, and the next largest group say their health is poor.

f

f

Figures 43-46 present a profile of those most at risk for being without health insurance. Respondents who were women, Mexican Americans, those between 40 and 49 years old, and those with family earnings between $1,000 and $20,000 are most likely to say they had no insurance.

f

f

As shown in Figure 47, Kendall County residents are clearly concerned with the future water supply. This concern was reflected by both sexes, across race and ethnic, age and income groups and regardless of where in the County individuals lived.

f

Copyright © 2002, UTSA Metropolitan Research & Policy Institute.