By Dr. Courtney Flint | June 4, 2021

Vernal Wellbeing Survey Findings

May 2021

extension logo
utah wellbeing survey logo

Summary

Vernal 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. 

What is in this report?

This report describes findings from the 2021 Vernal 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?

From January through early March 2021, Vernal City advertised the survey social media and local radio. All city residents age 18+ were encouraged to take the online Qualtrics survey.

How many people responded?

  • 98 viable surveys were recorded in this 2021 this effort with 86% complete responses.  
  • The adult population of Vernal was estimated at 7,377 based on the 2015-2019 American Community Survey. The survey responses represent 1.3% of the adult population and have a conservative margin of error of 9.83%.

Key Findings in Vernal

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Community Wellbeing in Vernal were below average among 29 study cities.

Highest Rated Wellbeing Domains:

  • Connection with Nature
  • Safety and Security

Most Important Wellbeing Domains:

  • Mental Health
  • Safety and Security
  • Living Standards
  • Physical Health

Red Zone Domain: (High Importance, Lower Quality)

  • Mental Health
  • Physical Health 

COVID-19 had greatest impact on Social Connections, Cultural Opportunities, and Mental Health. Overall personal wellbeing declined in the last year for 54% of respondents. Community wellbeing declined in the last year for 67% of respondents. Cultural opportunities and social connections were more likely to decline for Latter-day Saints. Social connections were also more likely to decline for female respondents.

Population Growth was seen by nearly half of respondents as just right, but the Pace of Economic Development in Vernal was seen as too slow according to nearly two-thirds of respondents respondents.

Top concerns for the future of Vernal were:

  • Opportunities for Youth (88% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Employment Opportunities (82% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Social and Emotional Support (74% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Substance Abuse (73% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Recreation Opportunities (72% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Affordable Housing (69% Moderate or Major Concern)
  • Access to Public Land (67% Moderate or Major Concern)

What do people value most about Vernal? 
Small-town feel, access to nature, abundant recreation, and feeling safe

Survey Respondent Characteristics

Full Time Residents of Vernal 96.9%
Part Time Residents of Vernal 3.1%
Length of Residency - Range 1-81 years
Length of Residency - Average 22 years
Length of Residency - Median 20 years
Length of Residence 5 Years or Less 16.3%

Demographic characteristics of the survey respondents are compared below with U.S. Census information from the 2015-2019 American Community Survey. As the table shows, survey respondents were not fully representative of Vernal. People who are female, have at least a 4- year college degree, and have children in their home were particularly overrepresented. People age 18-29, those with household incomes under $25,000, and those who rent their home or are married 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 Vernal

Demographic Characteristics Vernal Online Wellbeing
Survey 2021 (N=98)
American Community Survey
2016-2020 Estimates
Age 18-29 21.4% 26.9%
Age 30-39 27.4% 20.9%
Age 40-49 26.2% 18.9%
Age 50-59 10.7% 14.2%
Age 60-69 8.3% 8.9%
Age 70 or over 6.0% 10.2%
Adult female 67.9% 46.7%
Adult male 32.1% 53.3%
No college degree 63.1% 83.6%
College degree (4-year) 36.9% 16.4%
Median household income NA $47,926
Income under $25,000 13.2% 26.6%
Income $25,000-$49,999 27.7% 26.4%
Income $50,000 to $74,999 21.7% 16.8%
Income $75,000 to $99,999 22.9% 10.0%
Income $100,000 to $149,999 7.2% 16.2%
Income $150,000 or over 7.2% 4.0%
Latter-day Saint 46.3% NA
Other religion 26.8% NA
No religious preference 26.8% NA
Hispanic/Latino 4.9% 10.0%
White 91.3% 91.2%
Nonwhite 72.3% 8.8%
Married 27.7% 44.0%
Children under 18 in household 57.1% 38.8%
Employed (combined) 64.3% 59.6%
Out of work and looking for work 6.0% 4.6%
Other 29.7% 35.8%
Own home/owner occupied 72.6% 54.9%
Rent home/renter occupied/other 27.4% 45.1%

Overall Personal Wellbeing and Overall Wellbeing in Vernal

Survey participants were asked about their overall personal wellbeing and overall community wellbeing in Vernal. These wellbeing indicators both measured on a 5-point scale from very poor (1) to excellent (5). The average personal wellbeing score in Vernal was 3.66, with 54% of respondents indicating their wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale. The average score for community wellbeing in Vernal was 3.27 with 46% of respondents indicating city wellbeing at a 4 or 5 on the 5-point scale.

Bar chart. Title: Personal Wellbeing in Vernal. Subtitle: How would you rate your overall personal wellbeing? Data - 1 Very Poor: 2% of respondents; 2: 6% of respondents; 3: 38% of respondents; 4: 32% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 22% of respondents

Bar Chart. Title: Community Wellbeing in Vernal. Subtitle: How would you rate overall wellbeing in Vernal? Data - 1 Very Poor: 9% of respondents; 2: 10% of respondents; 3: 35% of respondents; 4: 37% of respondents; 5 Excellent: 9% of respondents

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 54% of respondents indicated that their personal wellbeing declined in that time and 67% of respondents indicated that wellbeing in Vernal declined as well.

Bar Graph. Title: Personal Wellbeing Change in Vernal. Subtitle: Has your overall personal wellbeing changed in the last year? Data – Declined Substantially: 20%; Declined slightly: 34%; No change: 22%; Improved slightly: 20%; Improved Substantially: 3%.
Bar Graph. Title: Community Wellbeing Change in Vernal. Subtitle: Has overall wellbeing in Vernal changed in the last year? Data – Declined Substantially: 29%; Declined slightly: 38%; No change: 27%; Improved slightly: 5%; Improved Substantially: 2%.

Comparing Wellbeing Across Utah Cities

The Utah League of Cities and Towns classifies Vernal as a Rural Hub/Resort city (which we have combined with Traditional Rural Communities). Within this cluster of cities, Vernal had the lowest score in terms of the average overall personal wellbeing score and was below average on the average community wellbeing score. Vernal was statistically significantly lower than Wellington, Helper, and Richfield in terms of overall personal wellbeing and lower than Helper and Richfield in terms of overall community wellbeing.


Dot Plot. Title: Overall Personal Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2021). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Very Poor to 5=Excellent). Group: Established/Mid-Sized Cities. Draper: Average Score 4.22; Sandy: Average Score 4.13; Bountiful: Average Score 4.06; South Ogden: Average Score 4.05; Layton: Average Score 3.98; Logan: Average Score 3.81; Tooele: Average Score 3.79. Group: Rapid Growth Cities. Hyde Park: Average Score 4.18; Vineyard: Average Score 4.17; Nibley: Average Score 4.16; North Logan: Average Score 4.15; Hurricane: Average Score 4.08; Spanish Fork: Average Score 4.06; Nephi: Average Score 4.05; Saratoga Springs: Average Score 4.03; Santaquin: Average Score 4.00; Lehi: Average Score 3.98; Ephriam: Average Score 3.86; Herriman: Average Score 3.86. Group: Rural, Rural Hub, & Resort and Traditional Communities. Richfield: Average Score 4.12; Helper: Average Score 4.07; Wellington: Average Score 4.02; La Verkin: Average Score 3.98; Blanding: Average Score 3.88; Moab: Average Score 3.82; East Carbon: Average Score 3.82; Price: Average Score 3.79, Delta: Average Score: 3.78; Vernal: Average Score 3.66.


Dot Plot. Title: Overall Community Wellbeing Scores from Participating Utah Cities (2021). Subtitle: (On a scale from 1=Very Poor to 5=Excellent). Group: Established/Mid-Sized Cities. Bountiful: Average Score 3.96; Draper: Average Score 3.89; Sandy: Average Score 3.80; Layton: Average Score 3.72; South Ogden: Average Score 3.68; Logan: Average Score 3.46; Tooele: Average Score 3.28. Group: Rapid Growth Cities. Hyde Park: Average Score 4.06; Vineyard: Average Score 3.95; North Logan: Average Score 3.91; Spanish Fork: Average Score 3.87; Nibley: Average Score 3.80; Hurricane: Average Score 3.75; Saratoga Springs: Average Score 3.66; Lehi: Average Score 3.60; Santaquin: Average Score 3.59; Nephi: Average Score 3.58; Ephriam: Average Score 3.57; Herriman: Average Score 3.47. Group: Rural, Rural Hub, & Resort and Traditional Communities. Richfield: Average Score 3.88; Helper: Average Score 3.73; La Verkin: Average Score 3.62; Wellington: Average Score 3.61; Delta: Average Score 3.51; Blanding: Average Score 3.48; Vernal: Average Score 3.27; Price: Average Score 3.17, Moab: Average Score: 3.13; East Carbon: Average Score 2.98.

Wellbeing Domains in Vernal

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 Vernal were Connection to Nature, Safety and Security, and Living Standards. The four most important wellbeing domains were Mental Health, Safety and Security, Living Standards and Physical Health.

Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Ratings in Vernal. Subtitle: How would you rate your level of personal wellbeing in each of the following categories? Category: Connection with Nature - 25% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 75% rated as good or excellent; Category: Safety and Security - 32% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 68% rated as good or excellent; Category: Living Standards - 41% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 59% rated as good or excellent; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 44% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 56% rated as good or excellent; Category: Leisure Time - 45% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 55% rated as good or excellent; Category: Education - 47% of respondents rated as poor, fair or moderate while 53% rated as good or excellent; Category: Physical Health - 58% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 42% rated as good or excellent; Category: Mental Health - 60% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 40% rated as good or excellent; Category: Social Connections - 63% of respondents rated as poor, fair or moderate while 37% rated as good or excellent. Category: Cultural Opportunities - 76% of respondents rated as poor, fair, or moderate while 24% rated as good or excellent


Likert Graph. Title: Wellbeing Domain Importance in Vernal. Subtitle: How important are the following categories to your overall personal wellbeing? Category: Mental Health - 6% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 94% rated as important or very important; Category: Safety and Security- 9% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 91% rated as important or very important; Category: Living Standards - 11% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 89% rated as important or very important; Category: Physical Health - 13% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 87% rated as important or very important; Category: Connection with Nature - 22% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 78% of respondents rated as important or very important; Category: Leisure Time - 22% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 78% rated as important or very important; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 28% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 72% rated as important or very important; Category: Education - 36% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 64% rated as important or very important; Category: Social Connections - 38% of respondents rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 62% rated as important or very important; Category: Cultural Opportunities - 59% rated as not at all important, slightly important, or moderately important while 41% rated as important or very important.

Wellbeing Matrix for Vernal

The graph below illustrates the relationship between the average rating and the average importance of wellbeing domains for survey respondents from Vernal. Connection to Nature, Safety and Security, and Living Standards were highly important and highly rated. Physical Health and Mental Health fell into the red quadrant or “Red Zone,” indicating that they were of higher-than-average importance, but rated lower than average. Leisure Time approaches this quadrant as its importance was close to the overall average domain importance, but rating fell near the overall average rating. Please note that all domains had an average rating above 3.0 (moderate) and the importance score for all domains was higher than 3.0 (moderately important).

Scatterplot. Title: Vernal Wellbeing Matrix. Domains are classified into four quadrants depending on their average rating and average importance as compared to the average of all the average domain ratings and the average of all the average domain importance ratings. High rating, high importance (green quadrant) domains include: Safety and Security, Living Standards, Connection with Nature, Leisure Time. High rating, lower Importance (blue quadrant) domains include: Education, Local Environmental Quality. Lower rating, lower importance (yellow quadrant) domains include: Social Connections and Cultural Opportunities. Lower rating, high importance (red quadrant) domains include: Physical Health, Mental Health.

How did the COVID-19 Pandemic Impact Wellbeing Domains?

The COVID-19 pandemic’s impact was most strongly felt regarding:

  • Social Connections
  • Cultural Opportunities
  • Mental Health

No change was reported by most Vernal respondents for these areas:

  • Safety and Security
  • Local Environmental Quality

Improvements were reported in Connection to Nature (16%) and Leisure Time (13%).

Likert Graph. Title: The COVID-19 Pandemic's effect on wellbeing domains in Vernal. Subtitle: Have any of these categories of your personal wellbeing been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic? Data – Category: Social Connections- 70% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 29% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 1% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Mental Health- 70% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 28% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 2% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Cultural Opportunities- 67% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 32% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 1% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Leisure Time - 51% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 36% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 13% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Physical Health- 48% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 48% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 4% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19. Category: Education - 46% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 53% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 1% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Living Standards- 42% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 54% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 3% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Connection with Nature - 37% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 46% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 16% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Local Environmental Quality - 33% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 64% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 3% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19; Category: Safety and Security- 28% of respondents rated wellbeing declined with COVID-19, 69% of respondents rated no change to wellbeing with COVID-19, 3% of respondents rated wellbeing improved with COVID-19;

The following relationships were found in Vernal between demographic variables and declines due to COVID-19 pandemic:

  • Cultural opportunities were more likely to decline for Latter-day Saints.

  • Social connections were more likely to decline for female respondents and Latter-day Saints.

How are Demographic Characteristics Related to Wellbeing?

The demographic variables age, gender, college degree, religion, income, and length of residence were found to have varying relationships with wellbeing perspectives among Vernal respondents as shown in the table below based on a multivariate generalized linear model with unweighted data (significance based on p < 0.1). The +/- sign indicates whether the demographic group was statistically significantly higher or lower than others in that category. Colors indicate strongest relationships (p < .05).

Relationship Between Demographic Characteristics and Wellbeing Domains in Vernal

  Domains Rated Demographic Variables
Age 60+ Female College Degree Latter-day Saint Higher Income Resident 5 Years or Less
Wellbeing Ratings
Overall Personal Wellbeing            
Wellbeing in Vernal            
Connection to Nature            
Cultural Opportunities            
Education     +      
Leisure Time +
         
Living Standards            
Local Environmental Quality            
Mental Health +
         
Physical Health +
           
Safety & Security +
vs 40-59
–    + vs Other  +
Over $100,000 >
Under $50,000 
 
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 +
vs 40-59
+ +   +  
Education – 
vs 18-39
         
Leisure Time            
Living Standards – 
vs 18-39
    vs Other +
Over $100,000 >
$50,000-$74,999
 
Local Environmental Quality       vs A/A/NP    
Mental Health – 
 +        
Physical Health    +   vs A/A/NP    
Safety & Security    +      
Social Connections    + +  
Over $150,000 <
$50,000-$99,999
  

A/A/NRP = Agnostic/Atheist/No Religious Preference, Other= Other Religions

Community Action & Connections in Vernal

Survey participants were asked about community actions and community connection in Vernal. 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 Vernal, the average score was 3.54. When asked about the degree they feel connected to their community, the average score was 3.11.

Bar chart. Title: Community Action in Vernal. Subtitle: In Vernal, to what degree do people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities? Data - 1 Not at All: 6% of respondents; 2: 11% of respondents; 3: 27% of respondents; 4: 36% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 20% of respondents

Bar chart. Title: Community Connection in Vernal. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to Vernal as a community? Data - 1 Not at All: 9% of respondents; 2: 22% of respondents; 3: 31% of respondents; 4: 22% of respondents; 5 A Great Deal: 15% of respondents

No demographic variables were significantly related to perceived local action or community connection for Vernal respondents.

A significant, positive relationship was found between individuals’ community connection and overall personal wellbeing.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Overall Wellbeing and Community Connection in Vernal. Of the 8 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 1 or 2, 100% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 0% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 31 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 3, 77% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 23% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 31 respondents that rate their overall personal wellbeing as a 4, 48% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 52% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5. Of the 19 participants that rate their overall wellbeing as a 5, 47% indicate a community connection score of 1, 2, or 3 while 53% indicate a community connection score of 4 or 5.

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. Vernal is in the top 5 on perceived community action and in the top half on community connection based on the number of people indicating a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale.

Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Community Action Across Cities. Subtitle: In your city to what degree do people take action together in response to local problems or opportunities? 1 being not at all. 5 being a great deal. Data – City: Delta- 27% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 73% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vernal- 44% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 56% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Moab- 44% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 56% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bountiful 46% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 54% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Blanding- 47% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 53% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Helper- 48% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 52% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nibley- 50% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 50% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Wellington- 52% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 48% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hyde Park- 53% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Spanish Fork- 54% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 46% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Logan- 56% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 44% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nephi- 57% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 43% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Richfield- 59% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Ephriam- 59% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 41% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Draper- 60% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 40% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hurricane- 63% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 37% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: La Verkin- 64% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 36% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tooele- 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Santaquin- 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Herriman- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: South Ogden- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Logan- 68% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 32% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Price- 69% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 31% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Lehi- 69% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 31% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Saratoga Springs- 71% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 29% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Layton- 72% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 28% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Sandy- 72% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 28% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vineyard- 73% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: East Carbon- 75% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 25% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5.
Likert Graph. Title: Comparing Community Connection Across Cities. Subtitle: How connected do you feel to your city as a community? 1 being not at all. 5 being a great deal. Data – City: Helper- 52% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 48% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Blanding- 53% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Delta- 53% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nephi 53% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 47% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Moab- 56% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 44% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Spanish Fork- 57% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 43% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Wellington- 60% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 40% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Richfield- 60% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 40% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hurricane- 63% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 37% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vernal- 63% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 37% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: La Verkin- 63% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 37% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: North Logan- 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Ephriam- 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Hyde Park- 65% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 35% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: East Carbon- 66% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 34% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Price- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Bountiful- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Nibley- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Logan- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Draper- 67% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 33% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Tooele- 68% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 32% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Layton- 71% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 29% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Vineyard- 73% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Santaquin- 73% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 27% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Sandy- 75% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 25% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Herriman- 75% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 25% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Lehi- 76% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 24% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: South Ogden- 76% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 24% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5; City: Saratoga Springs- 80% of respondents indicate a community action score of 1, 2, or 3 while 20% indicate a community action score of 4 or 5.

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 Vernal was 2.38. Church group activities were the most common activity for respondents (47%) followed by civic or charity group activities (44%).

Type: Bar Graph Title: Community Participation in Vernal. Subtitle: Have you participated in any of the following activities (in person or virtually) during the past 12 months? Data - 47% of respondents indicated yes to church group activities. 44% of respondents indicated yes to civic or charity group activities. 33% of respondents indicated yes to contacting a public official about an issue. 35% of respondents indicated yes to working with others on an issue in your community. 34% of respondents indicated yes to attending a public meeting. 28% of respondents indicated yes to school group activities. 17% of respondents indicated yes to serving on a government board or committee.

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 have an overwhelmingly positive influence on wellbeing. In terms of development and industry in the landscape, Vernal respondents were more divided.

Likert Graph. Title: The Role of Landscape Features in Vernal Residents' Wellbeing. Subtitle: How does the presence of the following landscape features influence your wellbeing? Feature: Rivers and Streams - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 1% indicated neither, 98% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Mountains - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 2% indicated neither, 97% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Lakes - 1% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 5% indicated neither, 94% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Trails - 2% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 13% indicated neither, 85% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Red Rock - 2% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 19% indicated neither, 79% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: City Parks - 3% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 19% indicated neither, 78% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Farmland - 3% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 22% indicated neither, 75% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Commercial Development - 13% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 40% indicated neither, 47% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Extractive Industry - 16% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 41% indicated neither, 43% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Residential Development - 22% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 41% indicated neither, 37% indicated positively or very positively; Feature: Manufacturing Industry - 13% of respondents indicated very negatively or negatively, 54% indicated neither, 33% indicated positively or very positively.

Perspectives on Population Growth and Economic Development

Nearly half of Vernal survey respondents (48%) indicated they felt population growth was just right, followed by 29% who said it was too fast and 14% said it was too slow. On the pace of economic development, 64% indicated it was too slow, 27% just right, and 4% too fast.

Type: Bar Graph. Title: Population Growth in Vernal. Subtitle: How would you describe the current rate of population growth in Vernal? Data – 14% of respondents rated too slow; 48% of respondents rated just right; 29% of respondents rated too fast; 9% of respondents rated no opinion.
Type: Bar graph. Title: Economic Development in Vernal. Subtitle: How would you describe the current pace of economic development in Vernal? Data – 64% of respondents rated too slow; 27% of respondents rated just right; 4% of respondents rated too fast; 5% of respondents rated no opinion.

The graphs below show how Vernal compares to other participating cities in the Wellbeing Project on these perceptions of population growth and economic development.

Type: Likert Graph. Title: Respondent’s Opinions Regarding Population Growth and Economic Development in Participating Utah Cities. Subtitle: Population Growth, How would you describe the current rate of population growth in your city/town?  Subtitle: Established/Mid-Sized Cities and cities of the first and second class. Data – City: Draper – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 72% of respondents rated too fast; City: Layton – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 71% of respondents rated too fast; City: Tooele – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 67% of respondents rated too fast; City: Logan – 3% of respondents rated too slow, 61% of respondents rated too fast; City: Sandy – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 58% of respondents rated too fast;  City: South Ogden – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 52% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bountiful – 3% of respondents rated too slow, 48% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rapid Growth Cities. Data – City: Herriman – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 90% of respondents rated too fast; City: Lehi – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 84% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hurricane – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 80% of respondents rated too fast; City: Saratoga Springs – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 79% of respondents rated too fast; City: Santaquin – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 76% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nibley – 1% of respondents rated too slow, 74% of respondents rated too fast; City: Spanish Fork – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 70% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vineyard – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 68% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nephi – 5% of respondents rated too slow, 58% of respondents rated too fast;City: North Logan – 0% of respondents rated too slow, 57% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hyde Park – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 55% of respondents rated too fast; City: Ephraim – 6% of respondents rated too slow, 35% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rural Hub/Resort and Traditional Rural Communities. Data – City: Moab – 6% of respondents rated too slow, 62% of respondents rated too fast;City: La Verkin – 9% of respondents rated too slow, 46% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vernal – 14% of respondents rated too slow, 29% of respondents rated too fast; City: Delta – 18% of respondents rated too slow, 17% of respondents rated too fast; City: Richfield – 7% of respondents rated too slow, 14% of respondents rated too fast; City: Helper – 15% of respondents rated too slow, 11% of respondents rated too fast; City: Blanding – 19% of respondents rated too slow, 10% of respondents rated too fast; City: Price – 32% of respondents rated too slow, 9% of respondents rated too fast; City: East Carbon – 35% of respondents rated too slow, 9% of respondents rated too fast; City: Wellington – 33% of respondents rated too slow, 4% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Economic Growth, How would you describe the current pace of economic growth in your city/town?  Subtitle: Established/Mid-Sized Cities and cities of the first and second class. Data – City: Draper – 3% of respondents rated too slow, 59% of respondents rated too fast; City: Layton – 8% of respondents rated too slow, 42% of respondents rated too fast; City: Tooele – 37% of respondents rated too slow, 28% of respondents rated too fast; City: Logan – 24% of respondents rated too slow, 30% of respondents rated too fast; City: Sandy – 6% of respondents rated too slow, 37% of respondents rated too fast; City: South Ogden – 17% of respondents rated too slow, 25% of respondents rated too fast; City: Bountiful – 20% of respondents rated too slow, 19% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rapid Growth Cities. Data – City: Herriman – 28% of respondents rated too slow, 39% of respondents rated too fast; City: Lehi – 5% of respondents rated too slow, 61% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hurricane – 22% of respondents rated too slow, 47% of respondents rated too fast; City: Saratoga Springs – 33% of respondents rated too slow, 30% of respondents rated too fast; City: Santaquin – 23% of respondents rated too slow, 38% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nibley – 10% of respondents rated too slow, 47% of respondents rated too fast; City: Spanish Fork – 2% of respondents rated too slow, 47% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vineyard – 41% of respondents rated too slow, 20% of respondents rated too fast; City: Nephi – 37% of respondents rated too slow, 20% of respondents rated too fast; City: North Logan – 17% of respondents rated too slow, 20% of respondents rated too fast; City: Hyde Park – 11% of respondents rated too slow, 25% of respondents rated too fast; City: Ephraim – 39% of respondents rated too slow, 13% of respondents rated too fast. Subtitle: Rural Hub/Resort and Traditional Rural Communities. Data – City: Moab – 12% of respondents rated too slow, 73% of respondents rated too fast; City: La Verkin – 27% of respondents rated too slow, 27% of respondents rated too fast; City: Vernal – 64% of respondents rated too slow, 4% of respondents rated too fast; City: Delta – 57% of respondents rated too slow, 1% of respondents rated too fast; City: Richfield – 34% of respondents rated too slow, 9% of respondents rated too fast; City: Helper – 33% of respondents rated too slow, 1% of respondents rated too fast; City: Blanding – 51% of respondents rated too slow, 4% of respondents rated too fast; City: Price – 75% of respondents rated too slow, 1% of respondents rated too fast; City: East Carbon – 79% of respondents rated too slow, 1% of respondents rated too fast; City: Wellington – 66% of respondents rated too slow, 0% of respondents rated too fast.

Concerns in Vernal

Survey respondents indicated the degree to which a number of possible local issues were a concern as they look to the future of Vernal. Opportunities for Youth, Employment Opportunities, Social and Emotional Support, Substance Abuse, and Recreation Opportunities were top concerns with around 72-88% of respondents indicating these were moderate or major concerns.

Title: Concerns in Vernal. Subtitle: As you look to the future of Vernal, how much of a concern are the following issues? Data – Category: Opportunities For Youth- 12% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 88% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Employment Opportunities - 18% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 82% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Social and Emotional Support- 26% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 74% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Substance Abuse- 27% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 73% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Recreation Opportunities- 28% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 72% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Affordable Housing- 31% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 69% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Public Land - 33% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 67% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Mental Health Care - 35% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 65% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Quality Food - 39% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 61% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Roads and Transportation - 40% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 60% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Water Supply - 40% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 60% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Public Safety- 44% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 56% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Shopping Opportunities - 44% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 56% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern; Category: Access to Health Care- 44% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 56% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern. Category: Air Quality - 54% of respondents indicated not a concern at all or slight concern while 46% of respondents indicated a moderate or major concern;

Other concerns were raised by 18 respondents who filled in the “other” category.

Other Concerns Mentioned

Diversity for revenue generation, too much emphasis on oil/gas, jobs outside oilfield (2)

Climate change (1)

Crime (1) Democrats (1)

Extreme right political ideology (1)

Fire Services (1)

Government spending (1)

Joe Biden (1)

Lack of representation (1)

Mental Health (1)

Neighborhood parks (1)

Oil and mining leases on federal land being “paused” (1)

Physical health (1)

Prices of health care (1)

Public Safety (1)

Religious discrimination (1)

Summary of Open Comments

The survey provided opportunities for respondents to share their ideas about Vernal 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 Vernal”

Type: Treemap Chart. Title: Open Comments: Community Values in Vernal. Subtitle: The size of the box is proportional to the number of times the theme was mentioned. Data – Category: Social Climate - 59 mentions, boxes largest to smallest include small town feel, connected, friendly, family-friendly, other; Category: Natural Resources- 42 mentions, boxes largest to smallest include Nature, Abundant Recreation, Other; Category: Other Themes Mentioned - 27 mentions, boxes largest to smallest include feels safe, good economy, freedom and privacy, quiet and peaceful, not much traffic, well-kept, historical city, good police, low crime rate, other.

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.