Boscombe West Residents’ Survey 2017 · 5 Insight Team 1 Introduction Bournemouth Borough Council conducted the Bournemouth Opinion Survey in September and October 2017. The results

| 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)


57%

55%

61%

62%

71%

80%

14%

19%

17%

16%

14%

10%

29%

26%

22%

22%

15%

11%

Boscombe West 2013 (339)





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% - -


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)


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)


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)


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


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)


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)


65%

53%

67%

51%

62%

61%

14%

19%

9%

20%

9%

11%

21%

28%

24%

29%

29%

28%








62%

65%

59%

69%

67%

57%

55%

48%

64%

63%

59%

74%

62%

61%


Male (232)

Female (195)

16-34 (163)

65+ (51)

45-54 (54)

35-44 (73)

55-64 (42)


No disability (330)


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)


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)


81%

71%

79%

71%

64%

60%

8%

13%

10%

17%

10%

11%

11%

15%

11%

13%

25%

30%








64%

68%

61%

81%

64%

61%

57%

56%

68%

64%

63%

65%

65%

64%


Female (197)

Male (221)

65+ (52)

16-34 (148)

45-54 (55)

55-64 (43)

35-44 (73)


No disability (317)


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)


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)


65%

64%

64%

58%

56%

65%

18%

21%

20%

24%

24%

17%

17%

15%

16%

18%

20%

18%








56%

65%

47%

79%

54%

53%

50%

49%

72%

60%

53%

56%

56%

53%


Female (175)

Male (202)

65+ (43)

35-44 (68)

45-54 (42)

55-64 (37)

16-34 (149)



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)


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)


72%

68%

70%

69%

70%

59%

14%

26%

17%

26%

22%

30%

14%

6%

13%

5%

7%

12%








70%

71%

69%

75%

73%

68%

68%

66%

72%

71%

62%

82%

76%

66%


Female (178)

Male (199)

65+ (47)

16-34 (135)

45-54 (49)

35-44 (69)

55-64 (35)


No disability (287)


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)


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)


79%

83%

77%

78%

79%

66%

6%

11%

13%

15%

14%

19%

15%

6%

9%

7%

8%

15%








79%

80%

77%

87%

82%

80%

76%

70%

87%

78%

76%

91%

79%

77%


Male (212)

Female (188)

65+ (49)

55-64 (37)

16-34 (149)

45-54 (52)

35-44 (67)


No disability (304)


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)


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)


55%

44%

58%

46%

67%

72%

27%

31%

27%

35%

22%

21%

18%

25%

15%

19%

12%

7%








67%

67%

66%

73%

73%

68%

66%

50%

70%

70%

53%

72%

66%

65%


Male (188)

Female (173)

65+ (33)

16-34 (137)

35-44 (68)

45-54 (50)

55-64 (34)


No disability (280)


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)


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)


74%

70%

75%

67%

80%

77%

16%

23%

18%

28%

18%

19%

9%

7%

7%

6%

2%

4%








80%

80%

79%

87%

86%

81%

76%

72%

82%

78%

71%

94%

79%

75%


Female (178)

Male (189)

16-34 (131)

65+ (41)

55-64 (33)

45-54 (48)

35-44 (69)

No disability (274)



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)


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)


51%

25%

47%

31%

62%

59%

33%

46%

23%

45%

26%

30%

16%

29%

30%

24%

12%

10%








62%

67%55%

80%62%61%

58%58%

63%62%

55%

65%58%

54%


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)


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)


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)


69%

44%

61%

50%

68%

70%

22%

34%

25%

33%

20%

22%

9%

22%

14%

17%

12%

8%








68%

73%

62%

79%

75%

72%

67%

64%

69%

64%

60%

71%

64%

52%


Female (180)

Male (203)

65+ (42)

55-64 (37)

45-54 (50)

35-44 (69)

16-34 (143)

No disability (297)



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)


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)


78%

76%

78%

77%

82%

83%

12%

12%

11%

15%

8%

10%

11%

12%

11%

9%

10%

8%








82%

87%

76%

85%

85%

83%

81%

78%

83%

83%

72%

86%

84%

80%


Female (200)

Male (230)

55-64 (42)

35-44 (74)

45-54 (55)

65+ (49)

16-34 (165)

No disability (333)



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)


Female respondents are significantly more satisfied with parks and open spaces than male

respondents.

Figure 27: Satisfaction with seafront by protected characteristics (% satisfied)


88%

92%

89%

91%

88%

88%

5%

5%

6%

5%

7%

7%

7%

3%

5%

4%

5%

5%








88%

91%

83%

93%

91%

87%

87%

85%

88%

88%

87%

97%

87%

85%


Female (203)

Male (232)

65+ (51)

55-64 (41)

45-54 (55)

16-34 (167)

35-44 (74)


No disability (336)


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)


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)


14%

11%

13%

14%

14%

17%

38%

44%

38%

44%

41%

47%

30%

27%

34%

28%

32%

29%

19%

18%

15%

15%

13%

7%







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%


Female (195)

Male (229)

35-44 (71)

65+ (50)

16-34 (168)

45-54 (50)

55-64 (42)



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)


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)


52%

54%

52%

53%

56%

60%

21%

23%

22%

24%

28%

28%

28%

23%

26%

23%

16%

11%







Agree Neutral Disagree

56%

56%

54%

64%

55%

50%

50%

42%

57%

56%

56%

68%

58%

50%


Female (184)

Male (218)

16-34 (157)

65+ (45)

45-54 (52)

55-64 (38)

35-44 (65)



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)


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)


29%

30%

29%

30%

29%

26%

33%

38%

41%

44%

38%

32%






29%

31%26%

32%30%

29%28%

21%

36%32%

28%

32%29%

4%



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)


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)


72%

86%

16%

8%

12%

6%




72%

78%67%

84%75%

73%72%

58%

75%75%

58%

75%71%

62%



65+ (53)55-64 (42)45-54 (54)

16-34 (174)35-44 (73)

Yes disability - limited a lot (53)No disability (342)



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)


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)


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%






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%



55-64 (35)35-44 (60)45-54 (51)

16-34 (149)65+ (41)

No disability (298)Yes disability - limited a lot (38)



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)


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)


33%

22%

25%

29%

32%

51%

13%

17%

14%

18%

18%

19%

54%

60%

60%

54%

50%

30%







Safe Neutral Unsafe

32%

38%

25%

37%

35%

29%

29%

24%

34%

28%

27%

34%

30%

24%


Male (235)

Female (201)

45-54 (54)

16-34 (170)

35-44 (74)

55-64 (42)

65+ (48)

No disability (341)



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)


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)


72%

65%

70%

74%

72%

87%

14%

21%

13%

17%

19%

9%

14%

14%

17%

9%

9%

4%







Safe Neutral Unsafe

72%

73%

71%

75%

73%

72%

71%

68%

74%

73%

65%

79%

72%

58%


Male (239)

Female (202)

65+ (52)

35-44 (74)

16-34 (170)

55-64 (42)

45-54 (55)

No disability (341)



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)


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)


86%

92%

8%

4%

6%

3%



Safe Neutral Unsafe

86%

89%

82%

88%

87%

85%

82%

82%

88%

83%

78%

89%

80%

79%


Male (239)

Female (201)

16-34 (170)

55-64 (42)

65+ (52)

35-44 (74)

45-54 (55)

No disability (341)



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)


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


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)


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)


47%

58%

56%

54%

54%

26%







54%

50%

58%

44%

52%

53%

56%

62%

53%

55%

63%

51%

57%

64%


Male (235)

Female (190)

65+ (45)

45-54 (55)

16-34 (172)

55-64 (39)

35-44 (71)

No disability (334)



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)


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)


44%

21%



44%

42%

48%

34%

45%

47%

48%

52%

43%

48%

53%

43%

47%

52%


Male (235)

Female (191)

65+ (44)

16-34 (172)

45-54 (55)

35-44 (72)

55-64 (39)

No disability (337)



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)


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)


13%

9%

12%

9%

8%

8%

21%

20%

20%

18%

15%

11%

41%

42%

42%

45%

46%

37%

25%

29%

26%

28%

32%

44%







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%


Female (194)

Male (228)

35-44 (73)

45-54 (53)

65+ (47)

55-64 (40)

16-34 (165)



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)


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)


15%

20%

16%

16%

19%

13%

36%

35%

34%

33%

38%

25%

37%

36%

37%

45%

31%

41%

13%

9%

12%

6%

11%

20%









57%

57%

56%

68%

65%

57%

56%

52%

66%

56%

56%

60%

52%

48%


Female (198)

Male (231)

45-54 (53)

55-64 (42)

65+ (48)

16-34 (165)

35-44 (73)



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)


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)


14%

15%

14%

12%

13%

8%

29%

32%

27%

35%

27%

18%

44%

40%

45%

41%

44%

44%

14%

12%

13%

11%

16%

30%









41%

45%

36%

58%

46%

38%

36%

34%

55%

49%

37%

47%

40%

38%


Male (224)

Female (188)

55-64 (36)

45-54 (53)

65+ (42)

16-34 (163)

35-44 (72)



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)


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)


49%

61%

51%

53%

48%

20%

32%

29%

32%

33%

33%

26%

12%

7%

12%

10%

11%

25%

7%

3%

5%

4%

7%

30%









82%

85%

80%

89%

83%

81%

81%

77%

85%

82%

79%

85%

84%

80%


Female (189)

Male (206)

55-64 (37)

35-44 (70)

16-34 (153)

65+ (40)

45-54 (50)


No disability (310)


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)


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)


43%

45%

40%

40%

36%

14%

37%

37%

36%

35%

32%

21%

14%

15%

20%

22%

24%

38%

6%

3%

4%

3%

7%

28%









68%

72%

65%

75%

67%

65%

62%

59%

79%

67%

65%

78%

71%

66%


Female (192)

Male (217)

35-44 (74)

16-34 (160)

55-64 (38)

45-54 (51)

65+ (42)


No disability (322)


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)


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)


25%

28%

24%

26%

19%

9%

29%

31%

32%

31%

27%

16%

38%

34%

35%

34%

40%

41%

8%

7%

9%

9%

14%

34%









46%

49%

45%

60%

53%

46%

43%

39%

60%

52%

44%

60%

49%

43%


Female (186)

Male (213)

55-64 (37)

45-54 (50)

35-44 (70)

16-34 (157)

65+ (43)



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)


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)


5%

3%

13%

6%

47%

35%

34%

55%





19%

22%

16%

29%

21%

21%

18%

16%

30%

17%

14%

30%

22%

16%


Female (168)

Male (192)

45-54 (47)

55-64 (36)

65+ (35)

35-44 (63)

16-34 (142)


No disability (283)


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)


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)


10%

15%

16%

10%

9%

5%

19%

22%

20%

24%

26%

13%

49%

41%

38%

48%

38%

42%

22%

22%

27%

18%

28%

40%









35%

37%

32%

43%

38%

37%

35%

28%

35%

34%

33%

40%

40%

32%


Male (203)

Female (184)

35-44 (67)

65+ (44)

16-34 (145)

45-54 (49)

55-64 (38)

No disability (301)



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)


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)


41%

31%

29%

26%

31%

42%




41%

44%37%

48%39%39%

37%30%

42%40%

36%

57%50%

34%


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)


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)


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)


43%

41%

22%

27%

36%

32%




43%

46%

39%

54%

48%

36%

31%

28%

42%

42%

42%

59%

44%

37%


Male (200)

Female (157)

65+ (40)

16-34 (139)

55-64 (35)

45-54 (48)

35-44 (54)



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)


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)


25%

26%

30%

24%

46%

50%




25%

27%

22%

33%

31%

24%

24%

21%

30%

27%

22%

37%

23%

10%


Male (194)

Female (150)

65+ (34)

55-64 (34)

45-54 (43)

16-34 (142)

35-44 (54)



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)


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)


9%

4%

8%

6%

10%

6%

48%

43%

48%

48%

52%

49%

36%

46%

37%

36%

33%

36%

7%

7%

6%

9%

6%

9%







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%



16-34 (124)65+ (48)

35-44 (58)55-64 (37)45-54 (49)

Yes disability - limited a lot (49)No disability (263)


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)


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)


44%

67%

66%

58%

51%

44%







51%

54%

48%

59%

54%

50%

50%

49%

52%

52%

50%

52%

52%

38%


Female (188)

Male (224)

45-54 (50)

35-44 (69)

65+ (47)

16-34 (165)

55-64 (40)

No disability (317)



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)


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)


9%

4%

38%

28%

41%

50%

13%

18%




46%

47%

44%

59%

40%

39%

33%

30%

49%

39%

34%

51%

45%

34%


Female (192)

Male (219)

16-34 (157)

35-44 (71)

65+ (51)

45-54 (49)

55-64 (40)

No disability (322)



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)


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)


7%

6%

4%

3%

44%

48%

46%

33%

42%

38%

43%

50%

7%

8%

7%

14%






50%

51%

48%

55%

45%

44%

43%

37%

61%

55%

47%

66%

52%

44%


Female (171)

Male (203)

16-34 (154)

55-64 (33)

45-54 (43)

65+ (42)

35-44 (62)



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)


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)


3%

4%

35%

25%

46%

45%

17%

26%



Definitely agree Tend to agree Tend to disagree Definitely disagree

37%

40%

34%

38%

34%

33%

33%

25%

44%

37%

23%

57%

55%

28%


Female (163)

Male (196)

16-34 (147)

35-44 (60)

45-54 (36)

65+ (41)

55-64 (37)


No disability (277)


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)


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)


41%

34%

9%

10%

50%

56%



Yes No Depends on the issue

41%

45%

39%

54%

46%

38%

36%

20%

45%

34%

27%

49%

48%

37%


Female (191)

Male (233)

35-44 (72)

16-34 (168)

55-64 (41)

45-54 (53)

65+ (47)

No disability (333)



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)


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)


64%

79%

72%

77%

73%

73%

21%

17%

20%

19%

17%

20%

15%

4%

8%

4%

10%

7%







Good Fair Bad

73%

78%69%

89%83%

63%55%

45%

89%37%

9%

80%71%71%



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)


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)


46%

58%

51%

56%

50%

58%

25%

25%

26%

27%

24%

26%

16%

14%

12%

13%

20%

12%

13%

3%

10%

4%

6%

4%







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%


Female (200)

Male (238)

65+ (52)

55-64 (41)

16-34 (172)

45-54 (52)

35-44 (74)

No disability (338)



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)


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)


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%







1 - 2 3 - 4 5 - 6 7 - 8 9 - 10

64%

57%73%

49%63%62%

66%69%

22%61%

72%

55%65%

72%


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


Figure 47: Perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure (% high perception)

................................................................................................. 34

Figure 48: High perception of anti-social behaviour – new measure by protected


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


Figure 59: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents) ...... 40

Figure 60: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected


Figure 61: Perception of groups hanging around the streets (% respondents) ...... 41

Figure 62: Perception of groups hanging around the streets by protected


Figure 63: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land (% respondents) .. 42

Figure 64: Perception of untidy gardens and other private land by protected


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


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


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


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


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

Documents

Boscombe West Residents’ Survey 2017 · 5 Insight Team 1 Introduction Bournemouth Borough Council conducted the Bournemouth Opinion Survey in September and October 2017. The results