East Carbon Wellbeing Survey Findings
May 2021
Summary
East Carbon City is one of 30 cities currently participating in the Utah Wellbeing Survey Project in 2021. This project is designed to assess the wellbeing and local perspectives of city residents and to provide information to city leaders to inform their general planning process. It is important to note that the 2021 survey was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was intentional as the last round of wellbeing surveys were conducted in 2020 prior to the pandemic. This allows us to assess changes at this unique period of time. Future surveys are anticipated to gauge recovery. More details can be found on the Utah Wellbeing Project website.
What is in this report?
This report describes findings from the 2021 East Carbon survey as well as some comparative information with other project cities. Feedback from city leaders and planners is welcome. We will continue with analysis and reporting.
How was the survey conducted?
In February 2021, East Carbon City advertised the survey via social media and local news media. All city residents age 18+ were encouraged to take the online Qualtrics survey.
How many people responded?
- 104 viable surveys were recorded in this 2021 effort with 85% complete responses.
- The adult population of East Carbon was estimated at 1,110 based on the 2015-2019 American Community Survey. The survey responses represent 9.4% of the adult population and have a conservative margin of error of 9.15%.
Key Findings in East Carbon
Overall Personal Wellbeing and Community Wellbeing in East Carbon were below average among 29 study cities. Personal wellbeing was more likely to decline for male respondents.
Highest Rated Wellbeing Domains:
- Connection with Nature
- Mental Health
- Leisure Time
Most Important Wellbeing Domains:
- Safety and Security
- Physical Health
- Mental Health
- Living Standards
Red Zone Domain: (High Importance, Lower Quality)
- Safety and Security
- Local Environmental Quality
COVID-19 had greatest impact on Social Connections and Cultural Opportunities. Overall personal wellbeing declined in last year for 34% of respondents. Wellbeing in East Carbon declined in the last year for 49% of respondents.
Perceptions that residents take action in East Carbon were lower than in any other study area.
The majority of respondents felt the Pace of Economic Development was too slow in East Carbon.
Top concerns for the future of East Carbon were:
- Opportunities for Youth (92% Moderate or Major Concern)
- Substance Abuse (91% Moderate or Major Concern)
- Water Supply (85% Moderate or Major Concern)
- Employment Opportunities (84% Moderate or Major Concern)
- Recreation Opportunities (81% Moderate or Major Concern)
- Public Safety (73% Moderate or Major Concern)
What do people value most about East Carbon?
Sense of community, small-town feel, access to nature, and the quiet and peacefulness.
Survey Respondent Characteristics
Full Time Residents of East Carbon | 91.3% |
Part Time Residents of East Carbon | 8.7% |
Length of Residency - Range | 0-71 years |
Length of Residency - Average | 24 years |
Length of Residency - Median | 18 years |
Length of Residence 5 Years or Less | 25.2% |
Demographic characteristics of the survey respondents are compared below with U.S. Census information from the 2016-2020 American Community Survey. As the table shows, survey respondents were quite representative of East Carbon. People who are married and who are employed were particularly overrepresented and people age 18-29 were particularly underrepresented. Not all respondents provided demographic information. Weighting was not used in any of the analysis for the findings presented below. Updates will be provided later in 2021 to account for weighting by demographic characteristics.
Table 1
Demographic Characteristics of Survey Respondents and U.S. Census Data for East Carbon
Demographic Characteristics | East Carbon Online Wellbeing Survey 2021 (N=104) |
American Community Survey 2016-2020 Estimates |
---|---|---|
Age 18-29 | 6.8% | 17.6% |
Age 30-39 | 15.9% | 13.2% |
Age 40-49 | 26.1% | 10.2% |
Age 50-59 | 15.9% | 19.2% |
Age 60-69 | 22.7% | 18.5% |
Age 70 or over | 12.5% | 21.3% |
Adult female | 75.0% | 47.5% |
Adult male | 25.0% | 52.5% |
No college degree | 79.5% | 90.6% |
College degree (4-year) | 20.4% | 9.4% |
Median household income | NA | $29,867 |
Income under $25,000 | 20.7% | 34.4% |
Income $25,000-$49,999 | 34.5% | 33.2% |
Income $50,000 to $74,999 | 21.8% | 13.9% |
Income $75,000 to $99,999 | 12.6% | 10.7% |
Income $100,000 to $149,999 | 6.9% | 7.3% |
Income $150,000 or over | 3.4% | 0.5% |
Latter-day Saint | 23.5% | NA |
Other religion | 50.6% | NA |
No religious preference | 25.9% | NA |
Hispanic/Latino | 13.8% | 18.8% |
White | 89.0% | 94.3% |
Nonwhite | 11.0% | 5.7% |
Married | 73.9% | 49.9% |
Children under 18 in household | 40.9% | 33.7% |
Employed (combined) | 50.0% | 43.1% |
Out of work and looking for work | 3.4% | 3.7% |
Other | 46.6% | 52.3% |
Own home/owner occupied | 85.2% | 68.7% |
Rent home/renter occupied/other | 14.8% | 31.3% |
Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in East Carbon
Survey participants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in East Carbon. These wellbeing indicators both measured on a 5-point scale from very poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score in East Carbon was 3.82, with 70% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in East Carbon was 2.98 with 35% of respondents indicating city wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale.
The COVID-19 pandemic dominated much of 2020. Survey respondents were asked if their overall personal wellbeing or wellbeing had changed in the last year. Survey findings show that 34% of respondents indicated that their personal wellbeing declined in that time and 49% of respondents indicated that wellbeing in East Carbon declined as well.
Comparing Wellbeing Across Utah Cities
The Utah League of Cities and Towns classifies East Carbon as a Traditional Rural Community (we have combined these with Rural Hub/Resource Communities). Within this cluster of cities, East Carbon was below average in terms of the average overall personal wellbeing score and average community wellbeing score. East Carbon was not statistically significantly different from any other cities in this cluster in terms of overall personal wellbeing, but it was statistically significantly lower than all other cities in the cluster except for Moab, Price, and Vernal on overall community wellbeing.
Wellbeing Domains in East Carbon
According to national and international entities that track wellbeing, there are a number of common dimensions or domains of wellbeing. In this survey, respondents rated ten domains on a 5-point scale from poor to excellent, suggesting how their wellbeing was doing well in each area. They were also asked to indicate the importance of each domain to their overall personal wellbeing on a 5-point scale from not at all important to very important. The top three highest rated wellbeing domains for respondents in East Carbon were Connection with Nature, Mental Health, and Leisure Time. The four most important wellbeing domains were Safety and Security, Physical Health, Mental Health, and Living Standards.
Wellbeing Matrix for East Carbon
The graph below illustrates the relationship between the average rating and the average importance of wellbeing domains for survey respondents from East Carbon. Mental Health and Living Standards were highly important and highly rated. Safety and Security and Local Environmental Quality fell into the red quadrant, indicating that they were of higher-than-average importance, but rated lower than average. Physical Health approaches this quadrant as its importance was close to the overall average domain importance, but rating fell near the overall average rating.
How did the COVID-19 Pandemic Impact Wellbeing Domains?
The COVID-19 pandemic’s impact was most strongly felt regarding:
- Social Connections
- Cultural Opportunities
No change was reported by the majority of East Carbon respondents for all other domains.
The following relationships were found in East Carbon between demographic variables and declines due to COVID-19 pandemic:
-
Personal Wellbeing was more likely to decline for male respondents.
-
Living standards were more likely to decline for those age 18-39 and those living in East Carbon 5 years or less.
How are Demographic Characteristics Related to Wellbeing?
The demographic variables age, gender, college degree, religion, and income were found to have varying relationships with wellbeing perspectives among East Carbon respondents as shown in the table below based on a multivariate generalized linear model using unweighted data (significance based on p < 0.1). Please note that the number of responses is not fully representative of East Carbon. The +/- sign indicates whether the demographic group was statistically significantly higher or lower than others in that category. Color indicates the strongest relationships (p< .05).
Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and Wellbeing Domains in East Carbon
Domains Rated | Demographic Variables | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age 60+ | Female | College Degree | Latter-day Saint | Higher Income | Resident 5 Years or Less | |
Wellbeing Ratings | ||||||
Overall Personal Wellbeing | + vs A/A/NRP |
|||||
Wellbeing in East Carbon | – vs 18-39 | + vs A/A/NRP | ||||
Connection to Nature | ||||||
Cultural Opportunities | ||||||
Education | + | + |
||||
Leisure Time | + | |||||
Living Standards | + vs 40-59 | + vs Other | + |
|||
Local Environmental Quality | + | |||||
Mental Health | ||||||
Physical Health | + vs A/A/NRP | |||||
Safety & Security | ||||||
Social Connections | ||||||
Age 60+ | Female | College Degree | Latter-day Saint | Higher Income | Resident 5 Years or Less | |
Domains | Domain Importance | |||||
Connection to Nature | + | |||||
Cultural Opportunities | ||||||
Education | – |
|||||
Leisure Time | – | + |
||||
Living Standards | ||||||
Local Environmental Quality | ||||||
Mental Health | + | |||||
Physical Health | ||||||
Safety and Security | ||||||
Social Connections | – vs 18-39 | + | – vs Other & + vs A/A/NRP |
Community Action & Connections in East Carbon
Survey participants were asked about community actions and community connection in East Carbon. Both questions were scored on a 5-point scale from not at all (1) to a great deal (5). When asked about the degree to which people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities in East Carbon, the average score was 2.60. When asked about the degree they feel connected to their community, the average score was 2.91.
Participation in Community Activities
Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they participated in seven different activities and a community activeness score was calculated by adding activities. The average community activeness score for East Carbon was 2.54. Contacting a public official about an issue was the most common activity reported by 51% of respondents.
Comparing Community Action and Connection Across Cities
The graphs below show how Wellbeing Project cities compare on the degree to which people take action in response to local problems and opportunities and how connected people feel to their city as a community. East Carbon is low on perceived community action, but in the mid- range on community connection based on the number of people indicating a 4 or 5 on a 5- point scale.
Influence of Landscape on Wellbeing
Survey participants were asked about the influence of landscape features on their wellbeing. Natural landscape including mountains, trails, rivers and streams, and city parks were found to generally have a positive influence on wellbeing. In terms of development and industry in the landscape, East Carbon respondents were somewhat more divided.
Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development
Respondents from East Carbon were divided on population growth with 35% indicating they felt population growth is just right and 35% indicating it is too slow. On the pace of economic development, the majority said it was too slow (79%).
The graphs below show how East Carbon compares to other participating cities in the Wellbeing Project on these perceptions of population growth and economic development.
Concerns in East Carbon
Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a concern as they look to the future of East Carbon. Opportunities for Youth, Substance Abuse, Water Supply and Employment Opportunities were the top four concerns with at least 84% of respondents indicating these were moderate or major concerns
Other concerns were raised by 23 respondents who filled in the “other” category. Drugs and Dissatisfaction with City Personnel and Leaders were the two most common additional concerns.
Other Concerns Mentioned |
|||
---|---|---|---|
Drug abuse problem, drug dealers (7) |
Dissatisfaction with city personnel and leaders (4) |
||
No trust in law enforcement (3) |
Crime (2) |
||
Deterioration of homes, city appearance (2) |
Lack of unity, need more involvement by residents (2) |
||
Open access for fishing and camping to draw visitors, reservoir access (2) |
Religious intolerance (2) |
||
Access to land (1) |
Animal control (1) |
||
City has gone down hill (1) |
Dirty parks (1) |
||
Division between haves and have nots (1) |
Lack of interest in the city in growth (1) |
||
Local business (1) |
Need to increase water supply (1) |
||
People moving into East Carbon (1) |
Protecting community from COVID (1) |
||
Taxes (1) |
Summary of Open Comments
The survey included opportunities in the survey were provided for respondents to share their ideas about East Carbon with one question on what they value most about their city and another for any additional comments on wellbeing. A summary of values is below. Analysis is ongoing regarding all additional comments and will be added to the report later in 2021.
Key Themes for “Please tell us what you value most about living in East Carbon”
Contact Information
Dr. Courtney Flint
courtney.flint@usu.edu
435-797-8635
On This Page
The Utah League of Cities and Towns is a collaborator on this project and the following people have contributed to this effort in many ways: Casey Trout, Rachel Sagers, , Madison Fjeldsted, Jordan Hammon, and Sarah Wilson.
Utah State University is an affirmative action/equal opportunity institution and is committed to a learning and working environment free from discrimination, including harassment. For USU’s non-discrimination notice, see equity.usu.edu/non-discrimination.