Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-08-27 Info PacketI<; is I i I 1 � 7 I r I;- City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: August 15, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager!' v �� RE: FAUS Funding Enclosed is a memorandum which recommends the allocation of FAUS funds to the Benton Street bridge. For the reasons listed, it is recommended that the City Council concur with the proposal. The Board of Directors of JCCOG will consider the matter on August 28th. I i I 1 � 7 I r City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: August 15, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager!' v �� RE: FAUS Funding Enclosed is a memorandum which recommends the allocation of FAUS funds to the Benton Street bridge. For the reasons listed, it is recommended that the City Council concur with the proposal. The Board of Directors of JCCOG will consider the matter on August 28th. /613 I i I f f � j I; I j 1 I i I I � j /613 Johnson County Council of Governments 410E.Vkshrgt0nSt. bAnCity, kriw52240 Date: August B, 1985 To: Neal Berlin, City Manager From:JJohn Lundell, Transportation Planner Re: FAUS Funding On August 7, Chuck, Frank, Denny and I met to discuss the FAUS program and the Benton Street bridge project. The FAUS program is due to expire next year and the Iowa DOT is strongly encouraging urban areas to obligate their funds. However, since the program is expiring, the DOT may no longer allow areas to borrow ahead. Apparently the DOT will evaluate the merits of each individual project to determine whether it is of sufficient priority to permit borrowing ahead. After taking into account the Coralville pedestrian overpass project, the University Heights project, and the Iowa City Dubuque Street project, the area will have an approximate balance of $270,000 available after October 1, 1985. If the Iowa DOT allows the area to borrow ahead one year, this amount would increase by $271,455. Potential upcoming Iowa City projects which could utilize FAUS funds are Melrose Avenue paving, Rohret Road paving, Scott Boulevard/Local Road paving, or the Benton Street bridge replacement project. The consensus of the Public Works Department and the JCCOG Transporttation Planning Division is that the funds ought to be applied to the Benton Street bridge project. The reasons for this recommendation are as follows: 1. Federal Bridge Replacement Program funds will pay only one-third of the Benton Street bridge cost. The total estimated cost of this pro�ect is $1,995,000 of which federal bridge funds will only pay a maximum of $650,000. Therefore, FAUS funds would help to offset the significant local cost of this project. 2. Since the Benton Street bridge project will already be partially federal funded, the use of FAUS funds will not significantly increase the costs or paperwork. Conversely, the application of FAUS funds to one of the other potential projects will cause the cost to increase due to Davis - Bacon wages, increase the paperwork, and add at least one year to the project development time. 3. In other areas of the state, the priority ranking of bridge projects has increased when FAUS funds were also used. In other words, the Benton Street bridge project could receive a higher ranking for bridge replace- ment funds gf we obligate our FAUS balance to the project. 4. Since the Benton Street bridge project is currently in the design stage, FAUS funds could be allocated to this project in the very near future. Hence satisfying the state's desire for us to expeditiously obligate the funds. None of the other potential projects are currently this far I i 1 L' 1 i 1 L' y 2 along. In particular, the Local Road/Scott Boulevard project status is uncertain and it could be some time before FAUS funds would be obli- gated. The obligation of FAUS funds requires JCCOG Board approval. However, I am not aware of any current projects in Coralville or University Heights which may be candidates for FAUS funding. I suspect the JCCOG Board may agree that improvement of the Benton Street bridge would serve the needs of all area residents. Upon a decision by the City of Iowa City, I feel the next step would be to discuss it with the JCCOG Technical Advisory Committee and the Board of Directors. I will wait to hear from you before taking any further action. Thank you. cc: Don Schmeiser, JCCOG Director Chuck Schmadeke, Public Works Director /sp /62.3 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 16, 1985 To: City Council Members From: Terrence L. Timmins, City Attorney . . Re: Iowa -Illinois Electric and Gas Franchises - Recent Attorney General's Opinion Introduction: During the formal City Council meeting on July 30, Mr. Phil Nychay appeared before the City Council to discuss the electric franchise. At that time, he read to the Council portions of a recent Attorney General's opinion regarding franchise fees. That opinion, issued July 24, 1985, is attached for your review. In this memo I will outline and discuss that opinion, and I will also indicate my views on the issues therein discussed. I will also give the Council a report on the status of my review of the proposed franchise ordinances and regulatory ordinance. Discussion: Attorney General's Opinion. 1. Validity of Franchise Fee. In the opinion request, the Attorney General's office was asked to address three basic issues: a. The validity of a franchise fee; b. Whether the franchise fee could be passed on by the utility to all of the customers of the utility, or just the customers residing in the city imposing the fee; and c. Whether the ballot franchise question could be stated and presented in the alternative, giving voters a choice, for instance, between a five year franchise and a 25 year franchise. In addressing the first issue, the Attorney General's office came down squarely in favor of the validity of franchise fees. The discussion therein focuses on the distinction between a fee and a tax, and indicates that while a city's power to levy taxes is very limited, its power to charge fees is very broad. Prior to passage of Home Rule legislation, in the early 70's, cities were specifically prohibited from levying "any tax, assessment, excise, fee, charge or other exaction except as ex- ressly authorized db�bys�stat_t,17." With the passage of Chap er o t e owa Gode in L913, this limitation was considerably narrowed, and Section 364.3(4) now provides that "A city may not levy a tax unless specifically authorized by a state law." The distinction betwe—a tax and a fee is well established in the law, and is aptly outlined in the opinion. Basically, a tax is "a charge to pay the cost of government without regard to special benefits conferred," while a fee is a charge made in consideration of special services rendered or special benefits conferred. /6 ay 2 Cities charged a myriad of fees ranging from fees for permits and inspections, to fees for the rental of community halls and park pavil- ions. As stated in the Attorney General's Opinion, "The essence of a franchise is the conferment of special benefits, not enjoyed by the general public, to the use of public property." To further buttress its opinion that franchise fees may legitimately be charged, the opinion cites a recent amendment of Section 364.2 of the Code, dealing with municipal franchises, to the effect that a franchise fee which is assessed (passed on) to utility customers shall not be assessed to the city as a customer. While acknowledging that this provision is not a "specific authorization" for cities to charge fran- chise fees, the Attorney General argues that its adoption strongly implies a legislative intent that cities have the power to impose them. Furthermore, the legitimacy of a franchise fee must be presumed if any rational effect is to be given this recently enacted provision. In reviewing our departmental file on this matter, I have found consider- able correspondence on this issue of the validity of a franchise fee, some of which questions the validity of such a fee. In an October 1964 opinion by counsel for Iowa -Illinois, the view was expressed that the recently enacted amendment to Chapter 364 mentioned in the Attorney General's Opinion did not constitute "specific authorization" for a franchise fee, and that without such authorization a city could not charge such a fee. In response, and drawing from the discussion in the Attorney General's Opinion,.I would counter that "specific authorization: by statute is only required in instances where cities desire to levy taxes, and that since the authority of cities to charge fees is not TFiTed or denied in the Iowa Code, cities have the authority under Home Rule to charge such fees as they deem reasonable, necessary and proper. To conclude, my views on the issue of the validity of franchise fees are entirely in accord with those of the Attorney General as expressed in this most recent opinion. 2. Assessment (Pass -on) of Franchise Fee to Utility Custcmers In the opinion, the Attorney General declined to opine concerning the propriety of a utility passing on its franchise fee costs to utility customers, deferring to the judgment of the Iowa Commerce Commission which has jurisdiction of such matters under its rate and tariff review authority. The opinion merely points out that the Commission has ruled on the question whether a franchise fee should be assessed to all customers of the utility or. to only those customers residing in the city imposing the fee. In that case (City of Des Moines v. Iowa State Commerce Commission), the Supreme Court affirmed the Commission's approval of a private utility's decision to pass Des Moines franchise fee on to only the utility's customers in Des Moines. The opinion doesn't address the factors which the Commission can consider in making such a determination, nor does it address whether a different outcome could be upheld. 3. Alternative Questions in Franchise Election In the recent opinion, the Attorney General indicates that a city could submit alternate questions to the electors regarding the duration of the franchise. In reviewing this portion of the Attorney General's opinion with attorney Ken Haynie, we came to the conclusion that the submission of such alternative proposals by the City Council is not envisioned by Section 364.2 of the Code, and that the result could prove to be unworkable. Mr. Haynie's principal concern is that both proposals (franchise for five years and franchise for 25 years) might be approved by a majority of the electors, since you could not limit the electors to voting for one or the other proposal. Despite the Attorney General's apparent approval of the concept, Mr. Haynie was not aware of any instance where such alternative questions were presented to the electors, nor was he aware of any established legal principles for resolving which of the two proposals would prevail if both received majority approval. On that basis, it would be my advice that the City Council not attempt to use this method- ology in dealing with either the franchise duration issue or the fran- chise fee issue. Discussion: Review of Proposed Electric and Gas Franchises. During the last two weeks, I have been going over the gas and electric franchise file left by my predecessor, including the reports and correspon- dence sent to you over the past year by the City Manager and various other parties. I have also comprehensively reviewed the various forms of franchise ordinances and accompanying regulatory ordinance developed to date. Finally, I have obtained copies of franchise ordinances and utility regulatory ordinances from two other cities in Iowa which have adopted such ordinances during the last ten years - Sioux City and Davenport. Based on my review of these items, I have undertaken to "touch up" the franchise ordinances and what I refer to as the "utility regulatory ordi- nance." In approaching this matter, I took the position that my task would be neither to "add to" nor "subtract from" the substantive or philosophical content of those ordinances as presently drafted, but rather to pull various provisions together in an orderly and coherent form, and to make those provisions workable - legally and administratively. Although I have some reservations concerning some of the powers that the regulatory ordinance attempts to give to the City, particularly as regards "consumer protection" issues, I will hold those comments for later discussion. Procedurally, if the gas and electric franchises are to be presented to the electorate for approval at the regular City election in November, the franchise ordinances must be adopted by the City Council by September 26th. Consequently, it is my understanding that I am to have those ordinances prepared for submission to the City Council in late August so that the Council can commence formal consideration at the first meeting in September. On that basis, it is my intent to include drafts of those ordinances in either next Friday's Council packet, or in the Council packet of Friday, August 30th. bdw5/9 1 MUNICIPALITIES: Public Utility Franchise Fees and Elections. Iowa Code SS 364.2(4), 364.2(4)(f), 364.3(4), 476.1, 4.4(2), 4.4(3) (1985), and 368.2 (1973). A city may charge a franchise fee to public utilities as a condition of granting a franchise. Alternative proposals concerning the length of time that a franchise is to be granted may be submitted on the ballot at a franchise election. (D1Donato to Osterberg, State Representative, 7/24/85) A85 -7-7(L) July 24, 1985 The Honorable David Osterberg State Representative Mount Vernon, Iowa 52314 Dear Representative Osterberg: You have requested an opinion of the Attorney General regarding municipal franchise agreements with privately owned public utilities. The questions that you have presented are: 1. Can a city charge a franchise fee to utilities pursuant to its Home Rule authority and Iowa Code section 364.2(4)(f) (1985)? 2. If a franchise fee can be charged, could the utility III pass this cost on to customers? If so, would the fee be charged f only to customers within the city or would the cost be charged to all customers of the utility? 3. May the ballot at a franchise election pose alternative i questions, such as whether a franchise should be granted for 25 years or for 5 years? I We would note at the outset that this opinion concerns only whether a city is precluded by law from charging franchise fees to a public utility and whether alternative propoedis may be submitted at a franchise election. The questions you raise concerning the rates charged by a public utility are properly presented in the first instance to the Iowa State Commerce Commission for determination. Iowa Code section 476.1 (1985) provides that the Iowa State Commerce Commission has the authority to regulate the rates of. public utilities. Questions affecting public utility rates are to be submitted to and settled by the Commerce Commission. Iowa -Illinois Gas a Electric Co. v. Iowa City, 255 Iowa 1341, 124 N.W. d 84o, 84 (11,63). Thi Iowa state ommerce Commission has ruled on questions similar to those you pose. The Iowa Supreme Court has affirmed a ruling of the i&aq The Honorable David Osterberg State Representative Page 2 Iowa State Commerce Commission that a privately owned public utility may recover the cost of the franchise fee charged by the city to the utility by collecting a surcharge from city customers• only rather than spreading the cost of the franchise fee over the utility customers generally in City of Des Moines, Iowa v. Iowa State Commerce Commission, 285 N.W.Fd—T (I a A franchise is a grant whereby a city confers the right to a public service company to use the public streets and ways for the water pipes, gas pipes, conduits for wire, poles, etc., necessary to provide public utility service. 12 McQuillin, Municipal Corporations g 34.01 (3rd Ed. 1970). A franchise fee is charged as compensation for the use of streets and public ways by the public service company. C��ity of St. Louis v. Western Telegraph Co., 149 U.S. 465, 470, 37—L. E 1 , 3 S. t. 99 ( 89'x). The authority of a city to grant a franchise to a public utility is delineated in Iowa Code section 364.2(4) (1985). Franchise fees are referred to in subsection (f) as follows: f. If a city franchise fee is assessed to customers of a franchise, the fee shall not be assessed to the city as a customer. While there is no specific authorization for a city to charge a franchise fee in Iowa Code section 364.2(4) (1985), the power of a city to do so may be inferred from Iowa Code section 364.2(4)(f) (1985) and is within the Home Rule powers of a city, as the assessment of a fee is not limited by the Iowa Code. The reference to the assessment of a city franchise fee in Iowa Code section 364.2(4)(f) was added by the Iowa legislature in 1983. 1983 Iowa Acts, ch. 127, g S. It is our opinion that the reference to a city franchise fee strongly implies the legislative intent that a city has the power to impose such a fee. See Willis v. Consolidated Inde endent School District, 210 Iowa 391, 96, 227 N.W. 32, 5 5 (1929). To find of erw se would be to deny effect to 364.2(4)(f) and would therefore be unreasonable. Iowa Code S 4.4(2), (3) (1985). Pursuant to its Home Rule powers, it is our opinion that a city has the authority to assess a franchise fee to a public utility in the absence of an express authorization pursuant to the Iowa Code. Any limitation on a city's home rule powers by state law must be expressly imposed. Bryan v. CitX of Des Moines, 261 N.W.2d 685, 687 (Iowa 1978). We nave tound no statutory restriction on the power of a city to impose a fee in consideration of the grant of a franchise to a utility. A The Honorable David Osterberg State Representative Page 3 franchise fee may be distinguished from a tax. "A tax is a charge to pay the cost of government without regard to special benefits conferred." Newman v. Cit of Indianola, 232 N.W.2d 568, 573 (Iowa 1975), citing In re Trust o S urtz, 242 Iowa 448; 454, 46 N.W.2d 559, 562 (1951). T e essence o a franchise is the conferment of special benefits, not enjoyed by the general Public, to the use of public property. The Iowa legislature appears to have recognized this distinction. Iowa Code section 364.3(4) (1985) restricts the power of a city to levy a tax by Providing that: "A city may not levy a tax unless specifically sauthorized by a state law." This section was previously codified aIowa Code section 368.2 (1973) as: "Cities and towns shall not have the power to levy any tax, assessment, excise, fee, charge or other exaction except as expressly authorizedy� statute." (emphasis added) The section was amended in 1975 to delete the reference to fees and the other exactions. It can be inferred that the legislature, by dropping the reference to fees, has removed the previous limitation on a city's power to impose a fee. It is our opinion that City of Des Moines v. Iowa Tele hone Co., 181 Iowa 1282—,162 �-.W- , s not contro ng on this issue. CitY Of Des Moines v. _lova Co. held that a city cannot Impose rental fees on the use o streets and public ways absent express statutory authority to do no. 162 N.W. at 331, 332. The court based its decision on two factors no lon;:r relevant: the doctrine that a city has only that power delegated to it from the state and the fact that a statute gave public utilities the right to the unlimited use of city streets, the city having no voice in this grant of power. The basis of the court's decision has completely changed due to the adoption of the Home Rule Amendment and Iowa Code section 364.2(Telephone 4) (1985), subsequent to the date of City of Des Moines v. Iowa Co. Because of the deletion of "fees" from Iowa Code section 368.2 in 1975 and the addition of subsection (f) to Iowa Code section 364.2(4) in 1983, it is our opinion that two previous Iowa Attorney General Opinions, 1970 Op.Att'yGen. 421 (a municipal corporation has no authority to exact a franchise fee from a private utility as a condition precedent to the granting of a franchise), and 1972 Op.Att'yGen. 79 (city may not exact rental fee from telephone company for use of public streets for lines and poles) are no longer controlling. III Iowa Code section 364.2(4) (1985) empowers a city to grant a franchise for a term up to 25 years and does not limit the submittal to the voters at a franchise election of a proposal for The Honorable David Osterberg State Representative Page 4 a single term of years for approval. Under the Home Rule authority of a city and Iowa Code section 364.2(4) (1985), a city would have the authority to submit alternative proposals for a term of 25 years or 5 years to a franchisee to voters at a franchise eleetion.1 Two prior Attorney General Opinions, 1978 Op.Att'yGen. 487 and 1978 Op.Att'yGen. 503, held that more than one proposal concerning the granting of a franchiae to a public utility may be submitted on the ballot at an election. In Rule authority eand,Iow& Codeas the sectionu364.2(4)(f)tPursuant (198 ) its Home a fee to a public utility (1985) . charge Alternative granted a franchise by the city. franchise isptopbeagranted emay nbetsubmithe ted on the th of eballot that aat a franchise election. Questions concerning the rates charged by a public utility should be presented in the first instance to the Iowa State Commerce Commission. Sincerely, qft",u "44,06mlax ANN DiDONATO Assistant Attorney General AD/skb 'Alternative proposals concerning the term of years that a franchise shall be granted should be submitted as separate questions on the ballot. See Lahn v. Incor oratedow Tn of Primghar, 225 Iowa 686, tel NN. j, )s Keokuk Water Works Co. v. City of Keokuk, 224 Iowa 718, 277 N.W. 91 (1938); 19 8 Op.Att y en. 8 . ,r6a.� - i l i i The Honorable David Osterberg State Representative Page 4 a single term of years for approval. Under the Home Rule authority of a city and Iowa Code section 364.2(4) (1985), a city would have the authority to submit alternative proposals for a term of 25 years or 5 years to a franchisee to voters at a franchise eleetion.1 Two prior Attorney General Opinions, 1978 Op.Att'yGen. 487 and 1978 Op.Att'yGen. 503, held that more than one proposal concerning the granting of a franchiae to a public utility may be submitted on the ballot at an election. In Rule authority eand,Iow& Codeas the sectionu364.2(4)(f)tPursuant (198 ) its Home a fee to a public utility (1985) . charge Alternative granted a franchise by the city. franchise isptopbeagranted emay nbetsubmithe ted on the th of eballot that aat a franchise election. Questions concerning the rates charged by a public utility should be presented in the first instance to the Iowa State Commerce Commission. Sincerely, qft",u "44,06mlax ANN DiDONATO Assistant Attorney General AD/skb 'Alternative proposals concerning the term of years that a franchise shall be granted should be submitted as separate questions on the ballot. See Lahn v. Incor oratedow Tn of Primghar, 225 Iowa 686, tel NN. j, )s Keokuk Water Works Co. v. City of Keokuk, 224 Iowa 718, 277 N.W. 91 (1938); 19 8 Op.Att y en. 8 . ,r6a.� - l i I 1 I City of Iowa City I MEMORANDUM Date; August 16, 1985 To; City Council o `, From;. Rosemary Vitosh, Director of FinanceM Re; Budget Award I am pleased to inform you that the City of Iowa City has been granted the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) for its FY86 Budget. To date only 121 organizations have received the Award on a national basis. In addition, Iowa City is one of the few organizations in the country to receive this award for two consecutive years. The City's budget was reviewed by a panel of three independent budget experts, governmental officials who have extensive experience in budget preparation. Each reviewer submitted comments and suggestions for improvement which I have attached -for your review. It is infrequent that the City's work undergoes review by its peers and it is particularly gratifying when we receive such high marks. Also attached is the press release on the Award. bc5 k f- r I' CITY OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASi,NGTON ST. IOWA CITY. ICWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 August 16, 1985 PRESS RELEASE Contact: Rosemary Vitosh 356-5052 Girard Miller (GFOA) (312)977-9700 The City of Iowa City has received notification that the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) has granted its Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation to the City of Iowa City for its FY86 Budget. This award is the highest form of recogni- tion in governmental budgeting. Its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by the management and elected officials of Iowa City. To receive the award, governments submit their budget document for a review by a panel of independent budget experts. Using extensive criteria, the reviewers evaluate the effectiveness of the budget as: - A policy document - An operations guide - A financial plan - A communications document To receive the award, the budget document must be rated "Proficient" in each of these four categories. To date only 121 organizations have received the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation on a national basis. Additionally, the City of Iowa City is one of the few organizations in the country to receive this award for two consecutive years. i` I° 1 1 or; i CITY OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASi,NGTON ST. IOWA CITY. ICWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 August 16, 1985 PRESS RELEASE Contact: Rosemary Vitosh 356-5052 Girard Miller (GFOA) (312)977-9700 The City of Iowa City has received notification that the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) has granted its Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation to the City of Iowa City for its FY86 Budget. This award is the highest form of recogni- tion in governmental budgeting. Its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by the management and elected officials of Iowa City. To receive the award, governments submit their budget document for a review by a panel of independent budget experts. Using extensive criteria, the reviewers evaluate the effectiveness of the budget as: - A policy document - An operations guide - A financial plan - A communications document To receive the award, the budget document must be rated "Proficient" in each of these four categories. To date only 121 organizations have received the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation on a national basis. Additionally, the City of Iowa City is one of the few organizations in the country to receive this award for two consecutive years. i` I° i i I` Z L r-: t , F i i� i a I L � CITY OF IOWA CITY CHIC CENTER 410 E. WASi,NGTON ST. IOWA CITY. ICWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 August 16, 1985 PRESS RELEASE Contact: Rosemary Vitosh 356-5052 Girard Miller (GFOA) (312)977-9700 The City of Iowa City has received notification that the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) has granted its Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation to the City of Iowa City for its FY86 Budget. This award is the highest form of recogni- tion in governmental budgeting. Its attainment represents a significant accomplishment by the management and elected officials of Iowa City. To receive the award, governments submit their budget document for a review by a panel of independent budget experts. Using extensive criteria, the reviewers evaluate the effectiveness of the budget as: - A policy document - An operations guide - A financial plan - A communications document To receive the award, the budget document must be rated "Proficient" in each of these four categories. To date only 121 organizations have received the Award for Distinguished Budget Presentation on a national basis. Additionally, the City of Iowa City is one of the few organizations in the country to receive this award for two consecutive years. i i I` Z t F i i� i Page 2 Winning entries represent truly pioneering efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide excellent examples for other governments and nonprofit organizations throughout North America. The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving 9,500 government finance professionals throughout North America. Over 4,000 governments participate actively in the association's activities. The association produces a variety of technical publications in various fields of governmental finance, and represents the public finance community in Washington, O.C. The association provides numerous training opportunities, and conducts an annual conference _ attended by 4,000 public, finance professionals. -0- From: Administrative Offices 1., j: d i I; E 3 a j k j I 1 ' Page 2 Winning entries represent truly pioneering efforts to improve the quality of budgeting and provide excellent examples for other governments and nonprofit organizations throughout North America. The Government Finance Officers Association is a nonprofit professional association serving 9,500 government finance professionals throughout North America. Over 4,000 governments participate actively in the association's activities. The association produces a variety of technical publications in various fields of governmental finance, and represents the public finance community in Washington, O.C. The association provides numerous training opportunities, and conducts an annual conference _ attended by 4,000 public, finance professionals. -0- From: Administrative Offices d i I; E 3 t j k j i COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IOWA CITY, IOWA The Annual Budget submitted by the City of Iowa City is an excellent example of a clear and informative budget document. Budget as a Policy Document: The document presents budgetary policies, and the rationale for these policies, in a coherent manner. .The information given in the Financial Policies section and Budget Summary found in the City Manager's Message were especially helpful. BudRat as an Operations Guide: The document dose an excellent job explaining how capital spending decisions will affect operations and operating expend— itures. It also clearly describes the general direction given to each department. The organizational chart is helpful. The five—year projections related to capital improvement programs, as well as the descriptions of individual projects, are very useful. Budget a_a Financial Plan: The financial structure and operations of the government are explained quite clearly. Conditions that may require changes in operations in order to ensure financial stability are outlined. There are, however, two recommendations that I believe would make this document even better: 1. Comparisons between estimated and acturl budget amounts would enhance the document's ability to 'measure and account for performance. 2. The budget should include projections of current FY activity. Budget as a Communications Device: The budget is organized well, and its complete Table of Contents and cross—classifications help make it readable. The Program Division Statements are helpful, although in some cases there seemed to be too much narrative, which led to repetition. Following are three more suggestions which I believe would make the document a better communication device: - 1. Revenue descriptions are needed. 2. A glossary of key terms wculd be helpful. 3. Property taxes should not be allocated amonF. the various departments as receipts, as this presentation detracts from the illustrative abilities of actual departmental receipts and expenditure&. M —2— 16x5 j i -j, i t 1 ' 1. I; i I City of Iowa City f Policy Doc Ent % b Overall an acceptable package. I would only agree with prior year's comments on emphasizing programmatic changes (either in dollars or output) in department areas as well as in the introductory area. Operations Guide ♦gain, overall a very good package. Weakness maybe in the explanation of relation- ships I)etween CIP projects and operating funds. Relationships in terms of both dollars and pr. -gram activity might be addressed. Financial Plan - Overall another acceptable package. A possible improvement might be a "layman's section on consolidated operations". This could be a plain language, "quick and dirty" explanation of the entire financial organization. Communications Device Sae Financial Plan. Glossary might be considered. Summary For an entity its size this budget is a very good document. Improvements at this point must be considered on a cost/benefit basis. i A CITY OF IOW CITY, IOW I am impressed! Your budget is very informative and easily understood. I like the City Manager's transmittal letter and the section on financial and fiscal policies. The budget in brief section is very good. However, would it be possible to make it a bit shorter; nineteen pages is not very brief. I offer the following suggestions for improvement: he document are I. The difficult tolread �andenot g pleasing to the eye. enerated numbein t somewhat A clearer print would be helpful. 2. The program budgets are well done. I would suggest that the inclusion of a similar treatment of entire departments would increase the reader's understanding of how the City's organizational units relate to each other and their individual responsibilities. 3. The graphs in the appendix are good, but should be moved to the narrative portion of the budget to which they relate. q. A better effort is needed at relating the capital budget to the operating budget. r leas j a j, �- II I I, r ,fit t i r I. A CITY OF IOW CITY, IOW I am impressed! Your budget is very informative and easily understood. I like the City Manager's transmittal letter and the section on financial and fiscal policies. The budget in brief section is very good. However, would it be possible to make it a bit shorter; nineteen pages is not very brief. I offer the following suggestions for improvement: he document are I. The difficult tolread �andenot g pleasing to the eye. enerated numbein t somewhat A clearer print would be helpful. 2. The program budgets are well done. I would suggest that the inclusion of a similar treatment of entire departments would increase the reader's understanding of how the City's organizational units relate to each other and their individual responsibilities. 3. The graphs in the appendix are good, but should be moved to the narrative portion of the budget to which they relate. q. A better effort is needed at relating the capital budget to the operating budget. r leas j a j, �- II I I, r ,fit t i r I. i i 1 i 1 i -- I City of Iowan City = MEMORANDUM Date: August 15, 1985 To: City Council From: Congregate Housing Committek\� Re: Status of the Congregate Housing Development The Congregate Housing Committee will meet with the City Council at its informal discussion on Monday, August 26, 1985, to discuss the findings and make recommendations regarding the Congregate Housing market study conducted by May Zima and Company. The Congregate Housing Committee will meet an Wednesday, August 21, 1985, to formulate recommendations to the City Council concerning the status of the Congregate Housing project and meeting the needs of the City's elderly residents. bdw4/2 I. i i i I t s i ji i r a { 1 r I I 'I I r� CITY OF IOWA CITY CNIC CENTER 410 E. WASITYNGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5COD August 13, 1985 PRESS RELEASE Contact Person: Douglas Boothroy, Director of Housing & Inspection Services, 356-5121 The City of Iowa City has been considering the development of congregate housing in Iowa City. In order to continue the progress towards the goal i of providing congregate housing, it was necessary to determine whether or not the market potential of Johnson County was sufficient to economically justify congregate housing. The consulting firm of May lima & Co. was hired by the City to conduct the marketing feasibility study which has now been completed. The study found that the market potential for congregate housing targeting private -pay residents is not economically feasible. Virtually no market exists for independent or condominium housing. Even if the market area were extended beyond Johnson County, there is an extremely limited market potential for congregate housing in Iowa City. The study concluded that the number of elderly in Johnson County who need, want, and are willing to pay for elderly housing/services is limited. This is due to: 'I I i, 2 i. Community services currently available, and 2. Supply of existing elderly housing facilities, and 3. Number of existing elderly housing facilities currently offering subsidized housing. The Congregate Housing Committee, which was formed to consider the development of a congregate housing project, will be considering the findings of the May Zima report and forwarding a recommendation to the Iowa City Council concerning the status of the congregate housing project and meeting the needs of elderly residents. L City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM 777 Date: August 16, 1985 To: City council j���(� From: Douglas Boothroy,'�..c},'or of Housing 8 Inspection Services Re: Undeclared Income - Robert Gustoff Attached is the response from the Regional Inspector General for Investi- gation (I.G.) concerning Robert Gustoff's misrepresentation of income from April to October, 1982. The I.G. recommends the actual dollar loss be determined and a demand letter for repayment of funds owed to the Public Housing Authority be issued. Failure to repay upon demand appears to be a violation of the lease terms and could result in termination. The Legal staff is investigating possible sanctions. Staff will apprise Council of any other future action taken 1n this case. If you have any questions please contact me. bc4 I I I. 1. , i t l I � U.S. Dapsrtnant of Housing and Urban Dawlopmar Kansas City Regional Office, Region VII Professional Building 1103 Grand Avenue Kansas, City, Missouri 64106.2496 RECEIVED AUG 1 2 1985 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION . August 6, 1985 Lyle G. Seydel Housing Coordinator Local Housing Authority Civic Center 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mr. Seydoi: This rnin Mr, and Mrs. Robert pL.sGustoffuwho ehave occupied July a public 8housing eunitgIn Iowa City and failed to declare Income received from April — October 1982 from the Iowa Department of Social Services. We recognize that the undeclared Income In this case will not have e significant dollar volume Impact on the amount of assistance the Gustoffs were eligible to receive. However, we do not believe the loss should be waived and only a warn.ing letter issued to the Gustoffs. Rather, we recommend you determine the actual dollar loss at Issue In this case and then Issue a demand letter for repayment of funds owed to your agency. In this regard you may wish to seek the advice of counsel available to the LHA. I trust the information herein wlII he of some assistance to you. Sincerely, A44��� Louis J. Raubor Regional Inspector General for Investigation A Ib�7 s U.S. Dapsrtnant of Housing and Urban Dawlopmar Kansas City Regional Office, Region VII Professional Building 1103 Grand Avenue Kansas, City, Missouri 64106.2496 RECEIVED AUG 1 2 1985 OFFICE OF INVESTIGATION . August 6, 1985 Lyle G. Seydel Housing Coordinator Local Housing Authority Civic Center 410 E. Washington Street Iowa City, IA 52240 Dear Mr. Seydoi: This rnin Mr, and Mrs. Robert pL.sGustoffuwho ehave occupied July a public 8housing eunitgIn Iowa City and failed to declare Income received from April — October 1982 from the Iowa Department of Social Services. We recognize that the undeclared Income In this case will not have e significant dollar volume Impact on the amount of assistance the Gustoffs were eligible to receive. However, we do not believe the loss should be waived and only a warn.ing letter issued to the Gustoffs. Rather, we recommend you determine the actual dollar loss at Issue In this case and then Issue a demand letter for repayment of funds owed to your agency. In this regard you may wish to seek the advice of counsel available to the LHA. I trust the information herein wlII he of some assistance to you. Sincerely, A44��� Louis J. Raubor Regional Inspector General for Investigation A Ib�7 . r. 1.: i% I, 11 I i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM OATlj August u, 1985 TO: Douglas Hoothroy, Director FROM: Sherri Patterson, Code Enforcement Assistant Ris Nature of work being conducted at 703 N. Dubuque Street, Sigma Chi I contacted David Braverman, Office of Caws Programs, University of Iaa. (His duties include supervision of activity for all sororities and fraternities.) He informed me that, the Sigma Chi's were hard -surfacing their gravel parking areas. No expansion of the parking.was taking place. No permit is parking areas from this department for the hard surfacing of l /tool 91 1.: /.August 6, 1985 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIGEST Page 7 HUD.announcement, with summaries of all projects, is in release 85-128 from Rm. 32, 450 7th, Wash. 20410. Info: Jack Flynn 202-755-6685. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HUD -SMALL BUSINESS ADM'N TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GOES TO 35 CITIES FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Technical assistance, from combined HUD -Small Business Adm'n (SBA) program, goes to 35 cities to help them solve problems in economic development with special emphasis on aiding local small businesses. Under $470,000, 3 -year contract with Washington -based Match Institute, HUD and SBA help localities to design and carry out specific projects. Cities identify problems to be addressed and make proposals. Match does intensive review and ranks projects with concurrence from the 2 agencies. Contractor then finds expert assistance that it tail- ored to solving the problem, says David Nesbitt of Hatch. HUD staff and funds come from Community Planning and Development office. Program began in April 1984. 15 communities participated in first phase (CDD 2/19p10) Cities selected in second round are: Burlington, Vt. Clarksville, Tenn. Maplewood, Oh. Cranston, R.I. Cocoa, Fla. Waterloo, Ia. Worcester, Mass. Gulfport, Miss. Arvada, Col. Elizabeth, N.J. Largo, Fla. Orem, Ut. Greece, N.Y. Rock Rill, S.C. Alhambra, Cal. Monroe County, N.Y. Volusia County, Fla. Monterey Park, Cal. Peterburg, Va. Evansville, Ind. Porterville, Cal. Pittsburgh Mound, Minn. Union City, Cal. Weirton, W. Va. Muskegon Heights, Mich. Pierce County, Wash. York, Pa. Shawnee, Okla. Vancouver, Wash. Bristol, Tenn. le, Tex. Broward County, Fla.ow t Iowa. Notable troject among the 35 are: • Monterey City, Cal.—Help develop small business programs aimed at firms owned by Asian immigrants. Pro ram's v - m ort trade and franchising. Z:ZZrganizing design conference for proposed hig -tec n v. of Iowa. Roles of city, developer and university viii be pre- e.Vanc.--Help in negotiating agreement with developer for proposed Of- fices Row project, conference center/office complex using 22 old Victorian -style buildings, some of which were part of Northwest Territory headquarters. SBA funds for the program will also go to help Springfield, Ill., and Abilene, Tex., organize small business incubators. Important element in selection criteria is local commitment and demonstrated ability to leverage and use public/private partnerships. Info: Nesbitt, Match, 202-745-4596; Phyllis Amon, HUD, 202-755-5977. RURAL DEVELOPMENT RURAL PRESERVATION GRANT RULE LIMITS DEMO TO HOMEOWNER UNITS The $20 million pilot implementation of new rural housing preservation grants (HPC) ' program would be restricted to rehabilitation of low income, ovaer-occupied housing, under proposed rules issued by Farmers Home Adm'n (FmHA). Congress authorized the grants for both homeowner and rental units, at $200 million a year level, in 1983 housing act. Nonprofit groups, Indian tribes and units of local. government can compete for grants to support a variety of housing rehab activities. lba9 ■ U I ri> t . i_ MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING August 14, 1985 Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetings were distributed to the staff for review and discussion (copy attached). The Assistant City Manager distributed copies of information assembled by the League of Iowa Municipalities summarizing legislation passed during the most recent session which has a direct impact on cities. He also distributed memoranda to certain Department Heads requesting a more detailed summary of the effect of certain pieces of legislation on the City. This information has been requested by Council. The Assistant City Manager distributed copies of a memorandum detailing a chargeback system for Cable TV staff assistance in the use of video equipment and video production for purposes not related to local cable programming. Departments will reimburse the Cable TV fund only for actual hours of staff participation at a rate of $10.50 per hour. This program is on a six month trial basis. The Finance Director distributed copies of a memorandum regarding liability insurance coverage for special events. She explained that due to increased difficulty in acquiring insurance and because of rapidly increasing costs, it will be necessary that the City not be committed as co-sponsors of any events without first gaining assurance from the Finance Director that insurance is in effect or can be purchased. The Human Relations Director gave an update on the status of FLSA compliance efforts. Staff will receive additional direction within the next few weeks. The Human Relations Director also advised staff to check very closely the references given by applicants for City employment. She related several cases where information regarding education or experience had been either greatly exaggerated or totally falsified. Prepared by: . Dale Helling 1630 MINUTES OF STAFF MEETING August 14, 1985 Referrals from the informal and formal Council meetings were distributed to the staff for review and discussion (copy attached). The Assistant City Manager distributed copies of information assembled by the League of Iowa Municipalities summarizing legislation passed during the most recent session which has a direct impact on cities. He also distributed memoranda to certain Department Heads requesting a more detailed summary of the effect of certain pieces of legislation on the City. This information has been requested by Council. The Assistant City Manager distributed copies of a memorandum detailing a chargeback system for Cable TV staff assistance in the use of video equipment and video production for purposes not related to local cable programming. Departments will reimburse the Cable TV fund only for actual hours of staff participation at a rate of $10.50 per hour. This program is on a six month trial basis. The Finance Director distributed copies of a memorandum regarding liability insurance coverage for special events. She explained that due to increased difficulty in acquiring insurance and because of rapidly increasing costs, it will be necessary that the City not be committed as co-sponsors of any events without first gaining assurance from the Finance Director that insurance is in effect or can be purchased. The Human Relations Director gave an update on the status of FLSA compliance efforts. Staff will receive additional direction within the next few weeks. The Human Relations Director also advised staff to check very closely the references given by applicants for City employment. She related several cases where information regarding education or experience had been either greatly exaggerated or totally falsified. Prepared by: . Dale Helling 1630 Informal Council Meeting August 12, 1985 DATE: PENDING COUNCIL ITEMS I-- W iu to uaj tl 1 W } CO SUBJECT 8� REFTORRED DTE � d o COMMENTS/STATUS azw ¢ a Gilbert & Davenport - side yard Abandoned Car -Strait 8/12 H & IS on Gilbert. Did City hire Noel to trim on Tree Trimming -Baker 8/12 Parks & Rec N. Dubuque? City For informal discussion at an Administrative Procedures 8/12 Manager early date. Check on Washington and others in CBD. Notify owners if any are a Vault Doors 8/12 hazard. Does City have maintanence agreements on any of these? City Call Lee VanderVelde re: Code Enforcement B/12 Manager specjfics and City perception of problems. Assistant City Memo to Council re: Legislative Issues 8/12 Manager issues raised by Strait. I Status of reply from Inspector Housing Eligibility 8/12 H & IS General? Parks & Rec. Why no trees in area of parking Weatherby Park 8/12 lot? City Consider possible alternatives to New City Office Building 8/12 1 Manager raised structure during design. 1 y 1 1 I 1 1 I i 1 I Informal Council Meeting August 12, 1985 Page 2 DATE: Wm W w w } 1... 9� SUBJECT �� REFTORRED E �a o COMMENTS/STATUS a z Ir y�-w w � Provide more information to Council re: location, process, etc. Lower Ralston Creek Parcel 8 12 re: recent request from John Vedepo. . I 1 PENDwr rni winu ITCRAO I Regular Council Meeting August 13, 1985 DATE: PENDING COUNCIL ITEMS SUBJECT Fc. �'w REFERRED rO .DATE aic�8 DUE 2�o o COMMENTS/STATUS ¢ w ¢ a 1. Clinton & Iowa - is the phasing Traffic Signals 8/13 Public Works correct? 2. Benton & Riverside- s wa p ase exc us ve7 Does right turn on red interfere? What is the process for notification and meeting with neighbors on Notification Process 8/13 PPD LSRDs, LSNRD's and rezoning for treet in front of K -Mart - ght in entrance to shopping Braverman Center 8/13 PPD r: P&Z meet with Council at ms meeting on Auoust 26th V for Mayor to Lea VanderVelde Letters 8/13 PPD ckie Blank. Public Re: Gilbert & Highway M6: Lane Markings 1 8/13 Works When were these painted? Hard to see on wet pavement. Does lot at Sigma Phi conform to Parking Lot 8/13 code and is permit issued? 1. 1631 � JI TABLE OF CONTENTS MARKETING FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE. CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA TRANSMITTAL LETTER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALTERNATIVES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIXES 1 2-3 Y-5 6-B 9-10 11-19 20-21 -TRANSMITTAL 'L`ETTER 131 1 a J -TRANSMITTAL 'L`ETTER 131 RIMM aCL CncfwdPakAcmmumm Sm 610, Fir Pk& w Cmar Adm Gem&50305 Ph= (404) 266.9180 Mr. Douglas Boothroy Director Housing and Inspection Services City of Iowa City 410 East Washington Street .Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Dear Mr. Boothroy: In accordance with our Agreement, we have completed the Marketing Feasibility Study for The City of Iowa City relative to elderly housing/services in Johnson County. This report should be read in its entirety to understand the conclusions presented. The information contained within this report has been compiled for your evaluation and, as such, is intended for the City's use only. Use of this report for pur- poses other than its original intent must be approved by May Zima & Co. A complete financial feasibility study of elderly housing in Iowa City is, of course, dependent on additional factors which are not included in the objectives of this report. We have no responsibility to update this analysis for events and cir- cumstances occuring after the date of this report. It has been our pleasure to assist you with the research for this Study. If you have questions regarding this report, do not hesitate to contact Mary Ann McElroy, Consultant, or Donald P. Zima, Partner. Atlanta; a gia July 29, 85 Ib31 , 1 J i - EXECUTIVESUMMARY i i , Ib3� EXECUTIVE SUMMARY May ima of Iowa Z City and Johnson Co. has pCounty leted a Marketing elderlyho sing/services. The research objectives for the Study were formulated by the Iowa City Congregate Housing Committee under the direction of the City's Director of Housing oan to Inspection this Study ras cto. what No deci ion housing thehe elderly need, was made the City P want or are willing to pay for. re ed in the Several types of housing alternatives assisted livingorrcongregate research: independent livinging,, housing, and condominiums. Both the research design and methodology for the City of Iowa City Marketing Feasibility Study were developed consistent with the d the research. principles researchdesignnincluded anmailed q estionnairrinciles of e to the elderly in Johnson County. A simple random sample was utilized so that results from the sample survey could be used to describe the entire elderly population in Johnson County. From the sample results, a computerized data base was compiled. Both manual analysis from the actul e completionnaires and computerized analysiadata base wer Demand analysis indicates a limited market in Johnson County for assisted -living elderly housing and condominiums, but virtually An no market for independent-living housingidents is notassisted- eeono economi- callyfacility targeting p and the market for Cally feasible in the first year, condominiums is rovidedn a onomicallyt on the i via availability sharing which with an could only be p assisted -living facility. Based on a review of the geographical origin of residents in existing facilities in the Iowa City area, all of the facilities ofv existingn facilitiesineIowa nCity son C to County.Given ability residents from out of state,he market for a new facility would most probably be extended geographically. With both geographicalulation market t extension and annual growth of the elderly pop , potential ithe fifth break-even; but subsidization o would be required initially. above In conclusion, there is a definite, but extremely limited, market for additional elderly housing in Johnson County; however, market potential is dangerously low for immediate eco- nomic viability. The number of elderly elderJohnson ly g/services need , want, and are willing to pay r is limited due to the community services currently available in Iowa City, the existing supply of elderly housing in Johnson County, and the number of facilities currently in Iowa City offering subsidized housing. 545 9 i 1 _ Assisted living or congregate housing is not economically viable in the first year, and may not be viable in the fifth year, unless subsidized by the City. There is virtually no market for independent living, and the market for condominiums for the elderly is both limited and dependent on assisted living or != congregate housing. The 1983-1988 State Health Plan for Iowa was reviewed in addition to the survey data. The State -recognized unmet healthcare needs of the elderly include residential (assisted or congregate living) care beds. A Certificate of Need and some subsidization '1 of rates would, however, be required. IA q I r i INTRODUCTION i. I. . i. 1 INTRODUCTION I .i i -. INTRODUCTION Formal planning for additional housing for the elderly in the 1982. A report prepared by the Iowa City of Iowa City began in Housing and Inspection Services Department, "Congregate City Housing - A Study of Local Elderly Needs" was submitted to the i the Iowa City Housing City's Congregate Housing Task Force and 2, 1983. Other reports addressing the - Commission February of additional elderly housing in Iowa City have social merits been presented to the City. _ Planning for a Marketing Feasibility Study was initiated by i the DirectorJuly ,ia Congregatesing and Housinglnspection CommitteeServices the in 1984. I selectionntof The Committee assumed the responsibility for clarifying and formulating an economic appraisal of the question of addi- Iowa City. Members of the Committee tional elderly housing in are: Douglas Boothroy - Director of Housing and Inspection Services Jim Hencin - Community Development Block Grant ; i Program Coordinator Kate Dickson - Representative from, City Council Iowa City Housing Commission Member, {,J Fred Krause:. - i Bette Meisel - Senior Center Coordinator. Needs Mary Parden Membermmittee on unity ; I Representative Mary Nugent - Associate Planner ti. The research objectives formulated by the Iowa City Congregate Housing Committee are as follows: I j 1. Analyze demographic, socio-economic and housing charae- in the Iowa teristios of the elderly population City/Coralville area. ; 2. Evaluate the long-term care needs of the elderly. 3. Survey the elderly population in the Iowa City/Coralville analysis and _ area to obtain primary data for customer _ market segmentation. ed s for and dsemrvicesand ,�aandicser hou4. sing alternatives,elderlys healthcare vices for the elderly. i 5. Evaluate the economic feasibility of specific housing, ser- demand vice and healthcare alternatives based on need and analysis. ! es s well 6. Analyzeting Iowa City, services andposed healthcarenofferedninv including: I I _ -q J i 1631 , I INTRODUCTION (continued) a) Information describing programs and services pro- vided by public and private organizations i b) Review of services and amenities offered by other retirement facilities located in the primary ser - vied area. j c) Identification of unmet needs in the service area. 7., Review the competitive environment to determine market penetration, market share, and market risks. B. Complete market analysis to develop strategies, for specific housing and service arrangements. 9. Develop a profile of the survey respondents. May Zima 6 Co. was engaged to complete the Marketing Feasibility Study for the City of Iowa City to accomplish the above objec- tives. The scope of the Study was determined by these objec- tives, and -this report, includes a review of the .research design and methodology,- inferences .and conclusions drawn from ,the j research results,a nd alternative courses of action. 1 —s— r i i i i J . i RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY Both the research design and methodology for the City of Iowa City Marketing Feasibility Study were developed consistent with the principles of marketing and the principles of marketing research. The research design for the Study includes two types of research: (1) exploratory and (2) descriptive. EXPLORATORY RESEARCH Exploratory research was conducted initially to gain insights into the Johnson County elderly housing market and develop spe- cific hypotheses about the needs, preferences, and attitudes of the elderly in Iowa City and Johnson County. Demographic and economic data was gathered and analyzed. A listing of this data is shown in Appendix A-1 to this report. Primarily, U. S. Census data was used in the initial review of demographic, socio-economic, and housing characteristics of the elderly popu- lation in Iowa City and Johnson County. National and state data was also gathered to provide a relative, as well as absolute, review of the needs in Johnson County. Exploratory research for the City of Iowa City also included an "experience survey" to tap the reservoir of knowledge and experience of professionals associated with elderly housing, healthcare, and support services. A listing of the pro- fessionals and facilities surveyed is shown In Appendix B-1 to this report. Since several studies of the needs of the elderly in Johnson County had been completed by local professionals prior to May Zima 6 Co.'s beginning research for this report, the published results of these efforts were reviewed. Published data surveying the needs of the elderly on a state and national level was also reviewed. A listing of this secondary data is shown in the Bibliography of this report. Fieldwork in the City of Iowa City and surrounding area was con- ducted to examine an initial hypothesis concerning market poten- tial based solely on preliminary need analysis and to develop additional hypotheses about unmet needs. A public meeting was arranged by the City, and both the elderly and professionals working with the elderly were invited to attend. The objective of this meeting was to solicit (1) opinions about existing faci- lities and services and (2) preferences for future facilities and services. A copy of the "Opinion/Preferences" survey form used at this meeting is shown in Appendix C-1 to this Report. Also, as part of fieldwork, personal interviews were conducted at existing facilities in Johnson County to validate information gathered by an initial telephone survey relative to: Ownership, degree of subsidization, age of facility, physi- cal plant description, units, square footage, monthly rates, area of patient origin, average age of residents, average length of stay, patient profile, occupancy, rent -up, ameni- ties, marketing efforts and opinions of administrators rela- tive to unmet needs of the elderly and types of services provided. SZ RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY (continued) DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH Given the research objectives set by. the City of Iowa City, the majority of the research plan was devoted to descriptive research. A survey in the form of a mailed questionnaire (Appendix C-3) was utilized to generate summary statistics and examine the interrelationships of these summary statistics. Market dimensions and specific variables were identified during ! the course of exploratory research and were the basis for designing the questionnaire. A listing of the Johnson County elderly housing/services market dimensions is shown in Appendix C-4 to this report. Question numbers associated with each j variable are also shown. The number and type of questions, as well as the dimensions, were determined by the specific market characteristics of Iowa City and the research objectives set by the City. - SAMPLE DESIGN The research design for the City of Iowa City Study also included' designing an appropriate sample which considered the �j following: {� -A.Sampling Frame - Two national mailing list companies and the -Heritage "Area Agency on Aging mailing list for Johnson County - were considered as a source for defining the population from which to sample. It was decided to use the Agency's list since it represented a current list of all Johnson County residents age 55' and over. It was also decided to include only Johnson County in the population and calculate` the extended market potential' using experience ratios of existing and similar facilities.' B. Sample Selection - Since the research design included a cross-sectional analysis of the elderly population of Johnson County, it was necessary to use a sample which was representative of the entire population. A simple random J sample was used. C. Sample Size - The sample size was calculated to accomplish the research objectives with the required precision and con- fidence within the framework of time and cost restrictions. _ In calculating the sample size of 590, the following was considered: - 95% confidence level - 1% estimated proportion - i% precision - greater than 5% sample of population - cross-tabulation of data - no response to individual questions -7- 1631 ■ I ;I RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY (continued) All of these factors were considered to reduce sampling error. Also, the mailing list was edited by the City and May Zima & Co. to remove names of professionals working with the elderly and names of individuals age 55 and younger, living outside Johnson County or currently living in elderly housing. To reduce non- sampling error, May Zima & Co. considered the various types of non -sampling errors and completed the following to remove possible biases: 1. To increase total response, the City implemented a t i public relations effort to increase interest in the sur- vey and encourage response. The City's efforts were very successful with an approximate 40 percent response rate. 2. The questionnaire was designed to increase the response s to individual questions. It was anticipated that response to pricing questions would be low due to the sensitive nature of the question and the elderly's lack � of knowledge about current price levels. To increase r f response to individual questions, the response format i i was adapted to the nature of each question. Also, the i sample size calculation considered different response r rates -to different questions. To offset theeffectof these no responses, the sample size. was increased so that a.uniform confidence level could be applied -to all conclusions. ., _ 3• Approximately,,300•of the 590 questionnaires .were, edited rbefore,all responses were keypunched to finalize the coding 1"I system consistent with actual responses and finalize the structure of the database. 4.: Responses to all 590 questionnaires were :keypunched I ! twice. • Data entry errors were identified and 'corrected to.provide 100 percent accurate data. 5. Compilation of individual data into a computerized data base was tested, and errors were corrected to provide a 100 percent accurate data base. I'. I t i 4 i i s I � j r f i i i i I� -ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION .1 a OF ..-• ___ _ DATA .,._ y... `i� ... , r ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA - A computer printout of the total responses to all questions in the Johnson County elderly survey is provided in Appendix C-5 to this report. The printout reflects frequencies for each response alternative, percents to total, percents to total adjusted for no responses, and statistics reflecting the mean (average), standard deviation (variation from the average), minimum and maximum. Complete results of the survey are being provided as an integral part of this report since one-way tabu- lation is useful in examining each of the variables - independently. Another useful method of examining the variables is to review the responses to questions by market dimensions (as shown in the "Elderly Housing/Services Market Dimensions" table in Appendix - C-4). For example, to evaluate the level of interest in elderly housing by individual respondent, more than one question is needed. I From the responses to the survey taken at the public meeting in - f Iowa City, it was suggested that the psychological needs which - most influence the decision-making process in selecting elderly housing after retirement are independence, security and social contact. Question Number 28 "(Questionnaire - Appendix C-3) - I I relates these needs to the self -expressed interest in elderly housing relative to meeting these needs via other alternatives. Other questions, however,, are needed to more accurately estimate the level of interest; i.e., Question Numbers 37 (satisfaction with I� current living arrangement), 30 (description of plan for retire- ment housing needs) and 52 (anxiety from changing current living arrangement even if for the better). Also, the rate of adoption "1 (Question Number 51) is important in assessing interest. Will the elderly person truly interested in elderly housing be one of the first residents or will he/she wait until the facility is well- known and accepted or be dependent on the opinions of friends r and/or relatives. The level of interest must be assessed, but it is also important to estimate whether or not the probability of action is consistent with the level of interest. Question - Number 48 asks for the respondents' own estimation of this probabi- lity. 6 The parameters for quantifying market potential based on level of interest are defined to be the following responses to those - questions associated with the variables reflecting level of interest: j - feels elderly housing provides the highest level of independence/security/social contact - elderly housing would increase feelings of independence r - has evaluated the alternatives and concluded that elderly - housing offers the best plan for retirement living - is not satisfied with current living arrangements for one reason or another - anxiety associated with change would not be prohibitive _ - opinions of others would not delay rate of adoption - probability of acting on positive interest is high -9- I - I j - 1631 I I — ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA (continued) This process of reviewing responses to the individual variables, grouped by market dimension, was completed for all eight market dimensions. In addition, the data was analyzed to evaluate: existing community services as a substitute for elderly housing f — - market potential by segment (based on type of housing) I' - product requirements - pricing requirements _ - locations preferences - requirements for the most effective promotion Both computerized analysis of the data base and manual analysis from the actual questionnaires were completed. ` II Based on the analysis described, the number of survey respon- iJ dents includable in market potential, by type of elderly i housing, was determined. Detailed calculations of market poten- tial for Johnson County, based on a confidence interval, are { provided in Appendixes D-19 through D-25. If i Or r 1 J ! 11 _ —10— — r --- ----1 i -. ?.._, ,. ,.. is f` �..—.. F `j .. f. ':; ;, ;� i I. i ; --- ----1 CONCLUSIONS COMMUNITY SERVICES One of the hypotheses underlying the development of the questionnaire was that the number and quality of existing com- munity services would provide a substitute for elderly housing. This hypothesis was specifically addressed via the following questions: Question No. Response 28 21 percent of those responding feel that existing services provide the highest level of independence, security and social contact. 30 6 percent of those responding plan to rely on existing services. 35 2 percent of those responding use a community service for assistance with daily living activities. w Question Number 27 specifically addresses the elderly's feelings aboutthe existing community services. Shown in Appendix D are several tables providing analysis of the data relative to existing community services: 1. Ranking of opinions about community services - _ The- number one -1) (see Appendix D-1) isj that the existing services will allow the elderly to remain in their own home as long as possible. Secondly, there appears to be the appropriate level of services offered and, simi- larly', the. lowest -rated opinion is that there is•a duplica- tion of services offered. However, there also appears to i be a distinction between the benefits from community ser- vices and elderly housing. The opinion that the need, for elderly housing is not eliminated by the services offered ranks number four. The preference to receive similar ser- vices in elderly housing is ranked number seven. A cross - tabulation table is also provided to show these opinions by individual services offered (see Appendix D-2). 2. Use of the various services - Also provided in Appendix D are tables reflecting (1) ranking of the total reliance on others by daily living activity per Appendix D-3 (2) ranking of the services used regularly per Appendix D-4 and (3) cross -tabulation of data relating to services used and reliance on others for various activities per Appendix D-5. As shown, yard work is the activity for which there is the greatest degree of reliance on others totally, but S.E.A.T.S. versus chore i services ranks highest relative to regular use. It appears that use of community services can still be increased. -11- �6sr CONCLUSIONS (continued) I MARKET POTENTIAL Another hypothesis which the questionnaire was designed to test was that market potential in Johnson County was sufficient to economically justify additional elderly housing. As shown in Appendix A-7, retiree markets in Johnson County are extremely small. Counties surrounding Johnson County, such as Washington, Iowa, Benton, Cedar and Jones, have larger total elderly markets both in number and as a percent of total population. It should be noted that the elderly currently in elderly housing are not included in the socio-economic classifications shown in the table (Appendix A-7). Also, since the socio-economic clusters are based on -a mathematical "best fit", zeroes should be interpreted as indicating an extremely small portion of the total population. Market potential is always affected by preferences for, and attitudes about, elderly housing; however, in Iowa City, atti- tudes about subsidization were also assumed to have a definite effect on market potential. Question Number 29 specifically addresses , the elderly's attitudes toward evaluating housing/service alternatives relative to price elasticity: of those responding, 8.5 percent would increase the proportion.of income they spend on housing and related services to have the housing/services they prefer.. Provided inAppendix D are tables which reflect highlights of the analysis of market potential. A recap of the major inferen- ces -from these highlights includes: 1. A change in physical health is the factor which most increases the interest in elderly housing (see Appendix D-6) .. 2. 13 of -, the,; 590 respondents consider themselves "very dependent" based on their evaluation of their overall phy- sical health and consider their health "worse now" compared to five years ago (see Appendix D-7). 3. Of these 13, two 'have a nurse providing care in their home regularly (see Appendix D-8). 4. Of the elderly receiving assistance with daily living acti- vities those, receiving support from family members or close friends are most concerned about the continuity of this support and those hiring someone to provide support are the least concerned (see Appendix D-10). 5. 88 of the 590 respondents have been encouraged to consider a different living arrangement. A profile (based on Questions No. 1-8) of these respondents is shown. This profile can be compared to the profile for all respondents (see Appendix D-11). -12- CONCLUSIONS (continued) 6. Of the 47 respondents who base their plan for retirement on elderly housing, 13 would increase the proportion of their income spent on housing/services to have the housing/services they prefer and 14 were income qualified (see Appendix D-12). 7. Of the 29 respondents who were not satisfied with their current living arrangement, 18 needed independent living, 3 needed assisted living, and 4 wanted a condominium (see Appendix D-13). B. 55 of the 590 respondents selected elderly housing as pro- viding the highest level of independence, security and social contact (see Appendix D-14). 9. Of the 55, 18 can be considered income qualified. 10. Of these 18, 5 would like to move into elderly housing. 11. Of. these 5, 2 would increase the proportion of their income they spend on housing/services to have the housing/services they prefer. 12. Of these 2, only one respondent felt there was a definite likelihood and wanted to be one of the ifirst residents. The other felt the likelihood was probable and preferred to'wait a year (see Appendix -`D-15) 13. There appears to be a definite discrepancy-'between°the !opinions about housing/services alternatives and the selection of which alternative best describes the plan:for retirement years (see Appendix D-16). 14. Of the 55 respondents selecting elderly housing as pro- viding the highest levelof independence, security and social -,'contact, 20 needed independent living, 2 needed assisted living and 2 wanted a condominium (see Appendix _..D-17). 15. Of these 20 needing independent living in elderly housing, 15 were not income qualified, 3 wanted subsidized rent, 1 had problems paying current living expenses, and 1 was not willing to pay. As indicated by all of the above, market potential is not large. When all factors of demand (need, preferences and attitudes) are considered, the number of elderly who need, want, and are willing to pay for elderly housing is extremely low. -13- 1631 CONCLUSIONS (continued) CONFIDENCE INTERVALS Based on all of the analysis for all of the variables relative to need, preferences, attitudes, ability to pay, and willingness to pay, market potential is shown on the following page for independent living, assisted living, and condominiums. The potential for each type of housing is shown in the form of a range with a certain degree of confidence. The middle number in the range estimates the average number of elderly in Johnson County includable in market potential for additional elderly housing. Both limits to the range are calculated based on esti- mated;variability from the average. Using the market potential for assisted -living elderly housing as an example,_ market potential confidence intervals would be interpreted as follows: approximately 6 elderly people in Johnson County are willing to pay for the type assisted -living elderly housing they need and want. This number, though, cannot be used emphatically and conclusively since only -a sample of the elderly[in Johnson County were surveyed. .The approximate number of 6 could be higher or lower,, depending on variability of the data related to the total population. Given this variability, the': number:., of people includable .inmarket potential is more appropriately 'stated in a range. Therefore, it can be stated with 95 percent., confidence that there are, between zero and 22 elderly in -Johnson County. who, need,, want, and, are willing to pay for elderly housing. To translate market potential for all of Johnson, County based on analysis of sample data, the range of i,izero,::to :22; with' 6 as_.an. approximate average:,, is. stated as follows:,.- 0.<.6 < 22 Conclusions about market ;potential, stated in a range as c. described,,: is :presented for three.types of elderly housing. Detailed calculations of market potential are. provided in Appendixes D-19 through D-25. i ■ 71 CONCLUSIONS (continued) JOHNSON COUNTY MARKET POTENTIAL Market Potential Independent Living 7 The market potential for independent -living elderly housing in Johnson County is virtually nil. No sample questionnaires were identified as includable in the market 7 potential. AS such, we are 95% confident that the market potential is virtually zero based on need, preferences, ability to pay, willingness to pay and attitudes regarding subsidization. 2'' Market Potential - Assisted Living (Congregate Housing) Based on sample questionnaires identified, we are 95% con- fident that the first-year market potential (in number of people) in Johnson County is: 0 < 6 j 22 With an agressive promotional strategy, we are 95% con- fident that the market potential is: 0 �<. 13 —< 28. The fifth -year market potential is more optimistic due to �confident that the expeoted.iarket'p6n6tration. .We are�.95% market potential by the end of thefifthyear is: 2 <. 32 <. 63 3. Market Potential - Condominiums Based on sample questionnaires identified, we are 95% con- fident that the first-year market . potential, in Johnson County is: 0 < 6 < 22 With an aggressive promotional stragegy we are 95% con- fident that the market potential is: 0 < 13 < 28 The fifth -year market potential is more optimistic due to expected market penetration and is slightly' higher than that for assisted -living. We are 95% confident that the J marketpot6ntial bythe end of the fifth year,is: U 8 < 39 < 69 to I � I . CONCLUSIONS (continued) EXTENDED MARKET POTENTIAL Since market potential calculations are based on the geographi- cal area of Johnson County only, some estimation of the market potential including the area outside of Johnson County is also needed. Based on discussions during fieldwork, a summary of resident origins by various type facility is shown in Appendix D. Using these ratios as a basis for estimation, the extended market potential for assisted -living elderly housing and con- dominiums is as follows: 1. Extended 'Market Potential -.Assisted-Living — Private Pa First Year _(e) 0 < 22 < 47 (a*�) 0 < 14 < 29 2. Extended Market Potential - Assisted -Living - Private Pay - Fifth -Year . (a) 3 < 53 < 105 .,p (na) 2 < 34 < 66 _.. 31 Extended Market�Potential —Condominiums -�First.Year:. (n) 0 < 16; < 35 (aaa) 0 < 14 < 29 4. Extended Market Potential Condominiums - Fifth Year (aa), 10, <(49.<:86 (��s) 8 < 41 < 73 Note:: , i i i I j (*) Assumes 40% origin outside of Johnson County (based on The Villa - See Appendix i (�*) Assumes 20% origin .outside County (see r.: 'Appendix D-24) I (��+) Assumes 5% origin outside of CONCLUSIONS (continued) EXTENDED MARKET POTENTIAL Since market potential calculations are based on the geographi- cal area of Johnson County only, some estimation of the market potential including the area outside of Johnson County is also needed. Based on discussions during fieldwork, a summary of resident origins by various type facility is shown in Appendix D. Using these ratios as a basis for estimation, the extended market potential for assisted -living elderly housing and con- dominiums is as follows: 1. Extended 'Market Potential -.Assisted-Living — Private Pa First Year _(e) 0 < 22 < 47 (a*�) 0 < 14 < 29 2. Extended Market Potential - Assisted -Living - Private Pay - Fifth -Year . (a) 3 < 53 < 105 .,p (na) 2 < 34 < 66 _.. 31 Extended Market�Potential —Condominiums -�First.Year:. (n) 0 < 16; < 35 (aaa) 0 < 14 < 29 4. Extended Market Potential Condominiums - Fifth Year (aa), 10, <(49.<:86 (��s) 8 < 41 < 73 Note:: , i i i I (*) Assumes 40% origin outside of Johnson County (based on The Villa - See Appendix D-24) (�*) Assumes 20% origin .outside County (see r.: 'Appendix D-24) ,of ,Johnson (��+) Assumes 5% origin outside of Johnson County.(based on a conservative assumption of not being able to attract elderly•from outside Johnson County) -16- I& 31 i i i I i � t r. is s !.J i I, , LL I& 31 CONCLUSIONS (continued) MARKETING STRATEGY Market potential estimations are based on an associated marketing strategy. By definition, a marketing strategy inclu- des a description of the target market and the individual stra- tegies (product, price, promotion and location) developed specifically for this market. Tables, cross -tabulations and computerized sorting of the sample responses are provided in Appendix D. These tables reflect summary information for in Johnson to the product elderly hosing ounty (AppendixesuD-26.through D-31),Cpricing relative through D-37), location (Appendixes D-38 through D-40) and promotion (Appendixes D-41 and 42). From this information, inferences and decisions can be made about the marketing mix. Also, generali- zations about the marketing mix for elderly housing in Johnson County can, be compared to information about the elderly in general as.:shown In Appendixes B-4 through B-7.. Conclusions about market potential were made based.on responses .Iltoall.'..the questions related to all the market dimensions defined:.for developing the questionnaire. A recap, of the target descriptionsand.:marketing mix underlying these conclusions is shown on 'the following pages for assisted -living elderly housing and condominiums. -17- CONCLUSIONS (continued) ASSISTED -LIVING ELDERLY ROUSING MARKET A recap of the target description and marketing mix underlying the conclusions about market potential for assisted -living elderly housing is shown below. Target: Female, living alone, widow, average age of 78, average income of above $26,000 annually, physical health is worse now and created high dependency, home responsibilities have caused an increased interest in elderly housing, there is concern about how to provide self-care and what the future holds, and more anxiety about coping with daily activities, dissatisfied with current living arrangement. Product: Primary factors considered very important in determining whether or not to become a resident are the size of apartments, more than one level of care offered in the same facility, aesthetic qualities of the area surrounding the site, and a one -level building. The essen- tial amenities which would be considered very important by all of the elderly in the market are a call -help system, building security, and special equipment for the elderly. Additional amenities considered very important by most of the elderly in the market include lounges, beauty/barber shop, and a nurse on duty. The essential services which would be considered very important are dinner served daily, transportation, housekeeping and assistance with bathing, dressing, etc, and walking, shopping, etc. The type housing preferred is an efficiency apartment. Pricing: The range of rent would be approximately $1050 - $1200 per month. The monthly amount associated with essential amenities is $50 addi- tional per month and $75 additional per month for services. Attitudes underlying perceptions about rental rates include: (1) there is no problem paying bills for current monthly living expenses, (2) there is a willingness to increase the proportion of income spent for housing/services preferred, (3) there would be less concern about rental rates depending on the ownership and management of the facility and (4) the concern would be less depending on monthly income. Location: Location is not considered a "very important" determining factor, but there does seem to be some preference for downtown. Promotion: The most effective advertising medium is newsletters which means pro- motional cost for the Johnson County segment would be very low. Word -Of -mouth advertising should not be relied on for accomplishing a promotional objective. Newspaper advertising would be effective for Initial information. Since the extended market potential is deter- mined primarily by Johnson County residents, this cost, too, would be less than reaching potential residents outside Johnson County directly. Newspaper advertising would be a medium to address both segments. Using additional advertising mediums would depend on the Proportion of reliance on residents outside of Johnson County. -18- 101 - CONCLUSIONS (continued) CONDOMINIUM MARKET A recap of the target description and marketing mix underlying the conclusion about market potential for condominiums is shown below. Target: Male and female, both married and living alone, average age of 71, average income approximately $35,000 annually and owning a home valued at approximately $75,000, educational level is slightly higher than that for rental housing, physical health and emotional postures are good, but some change in physical health affects interest level, interest also affected by home responsibilities and loss of family members, potential residents are just now beginning to plan for retirement housing. Product: Factors considered very important in determining whether or not to become a resident are varied - the one common consideration is size of the rooms. The amenities which would be considered very important are also varied but primarily include covered parking, a call -help system, building security, and storage space. The one common amenity considered very important is building security. There is definite agreement that services should also be offered but no common agreement as to which services would be very important. gals, however, appear to be the most commonly preferred. Pricing: The average price which would be paid is approximately $65,000. The additional amounts which would be paid for amenities and services desired are not (mown; however, approximately $95 per month is an estimation. Attitudes underlying perceptions about prices include a desire for a "bargain", some propensity not to change the current living arrangement or to wait a year to be sure the decision is right, and fear that monthly rates may increase. Location: Location is considered "somewhat important", and there seems to be a preference for away from downtown. Promotion: Newsletters and newspaper ads are the most effective advertising medium, but comments from friends would have an effect. -19- 9 I 1 I I' 1 I I I L 7 ` 1 tl 1 ALTERNATIVES I ORIGINAL OBJECTIVE Market potential for assisted -living elderly housing targeting - s in the first year (mid -point of range) is private -pay resident not economically feasible. There is but a small market marketing dominiums targeting the elderly, strategy includes services as well as housing. The market — ices would ro- potential for condominiums without shared seryBased bably be too low to justify such a project economically. on sample results, the market potential for independent -living elderly housing targeting private -pay elderly in Johnson County is.considered to be virtually zero. CHANGE MARKETING STRATEGY A recap of market potential for assisted -living shown elderly in using and the associated marketing strategy - Conclusion" section of this markettpotential wouldtalsoing schangei. is ,changed in any way, the For; example, if efficiency apartments were changed to private or of ridents f semi -private rooms and/or if theMefinancial edicaid reimbursementesmarket were changed from private pay potential would also change. Based on the type of data analysis described in the "Analysis and Interpretation of Data" section of this report, the calculation for market potential for resi- dents uprobably br-ed 3 caid assistance in a s mi -private roomom isshown inAppendixD Current residents of subsidized independent -living facilities in Iowa City who actually need assistance with daily living are not included in market potential. Based on discussions during fieldwork, there are several residents currently in elderly housing whose needs would be better met via assisted -living i elderly housing. EXT END MARKET AND RENT -UP PERIOD Considering long-range planning (Appendix B72) for elderly -J housing/services in Johnson County and current unmet needs, the ideal solution would be an assisted -living facilitynumd con- dominiums with shared services. Ideally, the of assisted -living units shou, and matched residents with the receiving (Medicaid extended market potential, assistance should be accepted in the first year to reduce fixed Some subsidization, however, would probably costs per resident. be required for financial viability during the first five years of operation. Also, a Certificate of Need would be required. This alternative to meeting the congregate housing needs of the elderly in calculated byotheon County is cc State of Iowa (see iAppendix withstent the1990 needs i -20- 1631 � I I 1 ALTERNATIVES (continued) EXPAND GRADUALLY Another alternative to meeting the congregate housing needs of the elderly in Johnson County would be a facility which matched the estimated market potential for the first year. Land would _ i have to be acquired initially with a plan to increase the number of units gradually. However, given the effects of economy of scale, subsidization would be required initially. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Other considerations in evaluating alternatives to meet congre- gate housing needs fortheelderly in, Johnson County include: y _ 1. Percentof population age 65 and over -- The State of Iowa ranks third in the nation (see Appendix A-2). — I 2. Growth, rate of the elderly in Johnson County -- The elderly aged 75 and over,, as a percent of total popula- _ (tion, is projected to increase steadily (see Appendix ' { A-6). _ _ 1 I -21- i 163( F 1631 i I I. j I j' I 16 I , I GUIDE TO THE APPENDIXES i — BIBLIOGRAPHY — APPENDIX A A- 1 Demographic/Economic Resource Data ` A- 2 States By Percent of Population 65 and Over A- 3 Percent Distribution of National Population 65 and Over By Age 1950 - 2020 _ A- 4 City of Iowa City Elderly Population 1970 - 1980 A- 5 Johnson County Elderly Population 1970 - 1980 A- 6 Johnson County Past and Projected Population i A- 7 Retiree Markets By Socio -Economic Groups and Location A- 8 Marital Status of National Population 65 and Over By Age _ and Sex A- 9 Living Arrangements of National Population 65 and Over — By Age and Sex i A-10 Components of Population Change 1980 - 1982 A-11 Mobility of National Population 65 and Over f A-12 In -Migration M _ APPENDIX B 1 B- 1 Experience Survey and Selected Cases B- 2 State of Iowa Health Planning B- 3 1990 Bed Need B- 4 Myth versus Reality of Aging B- 5 Self -Reported Health Status of National Noninstitutionalized Elderly By Age and Sex, 1976 B- 6 State of Iowa - Self -Reported Activity Limitations By f: Degree and Age L' B- 7 Potential In -Mover Differential Preference Index of t Services and Features B- 8 Iowa City Competing Facilities — APPENDIX C C- 1 Public Meeting Survey Forms C- 2 Questionnaire Cover Letter C- 3 Confidential Questionnaire for Elderly Housing ` C- 4 Elderly Housing/Services Market Dimensions _ C- 5 Frequencies and Statistics jj { 16 I X631 t APPENDIX D J Community Services D- 1 Evaluation of Community Services D- 2 Cross Tab: Feelings About Community Services/Community JServices Used Regularly D- 3 Reliance on Others Totally for Assistance with Daily Living D- 4 Regular Reliance on Community Services D- 5 Cross Tab: Reliance on Others Totally/Community Services — Used Regularly Market Potential D- 6 Cross Tab: Lifestyle Changes/Increased Interest —. D-.7. Cross Tab: Current Physical Health/Change in Physical Health D- 8 Cross Tab: Current Health/Change in Health/Nurse in Home D- 9 Cross Tab: Emotional Posture/Support Person — D-10 Cross Tab: Support Person or Service/Concerned About Permanence or Affordability — D-11 Data Sort: Encouraged to Consider Different Living Arrangement - Demographics 1 D-12 Data Sort: Elderly Housing as Plan for Retirement - J Factors in Increasing Interest - Attitudes on Subsidization - Income Levels D-13 Data Sort: Not Satisfied with Current Living Arrangement - Type Elderly Housing D-14 Data Sort: Elderly Housing as Highest Level of Independence, Security, Social Contact - Income Levels, Retirement Plan of Income Quantified, Attitudes on Subsidization D-15 Cross Tab: Likelihood of Becoming a Resident/Rate of Adoption i D-16 Opinion vs. Plan D-17 Data Sort: Elderly Housing as Highest Level of Independence, Security, Social Contact - Type Elderly Housing � D-18 Mailing List D-19 Market Potential - Assisted Living - First Year D-20 Market Potential - Assisted Living - Fifth Year D-21 Market Potential - Condominiums - First Year Year D-22 Market Potential - Condominiums - Fifth D-23 Market Potential - Supplemental Security Income Residents - -� First Year D-24 Resident Origins _ D-25 Extended Market Potential Product D-26_ Determining Factors in Becoming a Resident D-27 Cross Tab: Elderly Housing/Determining Factors D-28 Very Important Amenities D-29 Cross Tab: Current Physical Health/Change in Physical Health/Importance of Nurse on Duty D-30 D-31 Very Important Services Data Sort: Income -Qualified Elderly Interested in — Elderly Housing and Want Services Included - I Importance of Services X631 t I I I I, •;.. I is I, { t Pricing D-32 Ability to Pay D-33 Data Sort: Would like Elderly Housing - Attitude About Monthly Living Expenses D-34 Willingness to Pay D-35 Cross Tab: Very Important Amenities/Willing to Pay for Amenities D-36 Cross Tab: Very Important Services/Willing to Pay for Services D-37 Data Sort: Purchase vs. Rent - Willing to Pay Location D -39 --Cross Tab:Importance of Location/Preference of Location D-39 Cross. Tab: Location of Current Residence/Importance of Location ".,-.D-40 Cross Tab: Location of Current Residence/Preference of Location D-411 .Cross Tab:` Discuss Elderly Housing and Try to. Convince Others/Likelihood of Becoming a Resident D=42 Cross Tab:' Best Source of,'Information/Word-of-mouth 'Advertising County Map., - State' of Iowa I 163( I l' i , i i i 'f i 1 Pricing D-32 Ability to Pay D-33 Data Sort: Would like Elderly Housing - Attitude About Monthly Living Expenses D-34 Willingness to Pay D-35 Cross Tab: Very Important Amenities/Willing to Pay for Amenities D-36 Cross Tab: Very Important Services/Willing to Pay for Services D-37 Data Sort: Purchase vs. Rent - Willing to Pay Location D -39 --Cross Tab:Importance of Location/Preference of Location D-39 Cross. Tab: Location of Current Residence/Importance of Location ".,-.D-40 Cross Tab: Location of Current Residence/Preference of Location D-411 .Cross Tab:` Discuss Elderly Housing and Try to. Convince Others/Likelihood of Becoming a Resident D=42 Cross Tab:' Best Source of,'Information/Word-of-mouth 'Advertising County Map., - State' of Iowa I 163( J i J BIBLIOGRAPHY.; . i t I IJ j 163/ I BIBLIOGRAPHY _ 1. Health Care Facilities in Iowa, Iowa State Department of Health, Division of Health Facilities, Des Moines, Iowa, - January, 1985. 2. "Report to the Governor and General Assembly Regarding Public _ Health Nursing Services, January 31, 1985," Prepared by Ronald D. Eckoff, M.D., M.P.H., Darleen Sickert, R.N., M.P.H., Frances Jones, R.N. j. 1985 Statistical Profile of Iowa, i Iowa Development Commission, Des Moines, Iowa. f{ -I 4. America's Elderly in the 1980's, No. 4, - Beth J.Soldo, Population Bulletin, Vol. 35, _ November, 1980. 5, America in Transition: An Aging Society, Series P-23, No. 12 , U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Revised December, 1983• _ 6. Aging America - Trends and Projections, Prepared by the U. S. Senate pecial Committee on Aging in Conjunction with the American Association of Retired - Persons, Second Printing 1984. _ 7. "Preferred Supportive Services for Middle to Higher Income _ Retirement Housing", Victor Regnier, AIA, and Louis E. Gelwicks, AIA, The Gerontologist, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1981, pp _ 54-58. 8. "Delivery of Services to the Elderly of Iowa: Agency Assisted Self Studies", Multidisciplinary Gerontology Center of Iowa, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, November, 1977. 9. "Congregate Housing - A Study of Local Elderly Needs", Prepared by David E. Munson, Housing and Inspection Services Department, City of Iowa City, 1983. J 10. "The Congregate Housing Environment As It Relates To The r Proposed Congregate Housing For Johnson County", an Independent Study, Prepared by Millie Moffett, graduate stu- dent, The University of Iowa, June, 1983• 11. Housing Options for Older Americans, American Association of Retired Persons, 1984, j 12. Housing Choices for Older Homeowners, American Association of Retired Persons, 1983• _ BIBLIOGRAPHY (continued) 13• "A Study of the Patterns of Living of the Elderly in Iowa lion -urban Population Census", Home Economics Research Institute, Project No., 65, College of Home Economics, Department of Family Environment, Iowa State University, Ames; Iowa, 1971. 14. 1983-88 State Health Plan for Iowa, State Department of Ilealth, Des Moines, Iowa. i i� i 1 �1 a 1. j J f LJ �I jj 1 1 'J I I I BIBLIOGRAPHY (continued) 13• "A Study of the Patterns of Living of the Elderly in Iowa lion -urban Population Census", Home Economics Research Institute, Project No., 65, College of Home Economics, Department of Family Environment, Iowa State University, Ames; Iowa, 1971. 14. 1983-88 State Health Plan for Iowa, State Department of Ilealth, Des Moines, Iowa. i s i BIBLIOGRAPHY (continued) 13• "A Study of the Patterns of Living of the Elderly in Iowa lion -urban Population Census", Home Economics Research Institute, Project No., 65, College of Home Economics, Department of Family Environment, Iowa State University, Ames; Iowa, 1971. 14. 1983-88 State Health Plan for Iowa, State Department of Ilealth, Des Moines, Iowa. s i 1 1 a 1. j f �I t 1 i i APPENDIX A i I APPENDIX A-1 —, DEMOGRAPHIC/ECONOMIC RESOURCE DATA — The following is a listing of information obtained from the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, used to review the - demographics/economics of the State of Iowa, Johnson County, and Iowa City: ! 1. I Census of Population by Iowa Counties, 1950-1980 2. Population Density j � 1 3. Population by Age and Sex j _ I 4. Percent of Aged Population by State and Region .- i 5. Projected Percent of Aged Population i 6. Composition of Elderly Population, 1970 and 1980 - City of Iowa City, Johnson County, and Counties Con- j I� tiguous to Johnson County j r' 7.,Composition of Projected Elderly Population - 1985, 1990, 1995, 2000 - Johnson County and Counties Contiguous to I j Johnson County j ±_ 8. 1 Life Expectations at Birth and Age 65 . 9. I U.S. Census'= Persons by Age for Areas and'Places - 1970 and 1980 10. U.S. Census - Age by Race, Spanish Origin`, and Sex for 1 t Areas and Places - 1980. i 11. Marital Status of Aged Population by Age and Sex' 12. Living Arrangements of Aged Population by Age and Sex - �� 1965 - 1981 j 13. Living Arrangements of Aged Population - 1980 - Johnson County and Iowa City _ 14. Characteristics of Elderly Persons - Johnson County and Iowa City By Age Group 15. Number of Households by County and City - Past and — Projected I 16. Households by Age and Number of Persons - 1980 - I Johnson County and Iowa City 17. Household Relationship for Selected Age Groups — 18. General Characteristics for Counties - 1980 - By Age Groups i i I I I 1631 I APPENDIX A-1 — DEMOGRAPHIC/ECONOMIC RESOURCE DATA (continued) 19. Family Composition for Counties - 1980 — 20. General Characteristics for Rural Portions of Counties - 1980 i 21. Age and Educational Characteristics for Counties and Places - 1980 22. Estimated Net Migration by Region - 1960 - 1970 and 1970 1980 23. Net Migration - 1980 - 1982 - Johnson County and I I Contiguous Counties — 24. Geographic Distribution and Residential Mobility 25. Mobility of Aged Population - 1975 - 1979 26. Distribution of Aged Population by Mobility Status and Sex j 27. 1980,'Mobil ity Status for Johnson County and Iowa City — 28. Summary of 1980 Social Characteristics for Johnson County and Iowa City 29. Geographic, Mobility and Commuting for Johnson County and Iowa City 30. Labor Force„Participation of Elderly 31. Mean Assets of Elderly by Type of Asset, Marital Status and Sex n 32. Federal Dollars Spent on the Elderly I � :3. Income of the Elderly Compared to Younger Families i 34. Health Care Expenditures - Iowa and U.S. 35. Medicare Cost Reimbursement by Iowa Counties - 1980 _ 36. Social Welfare Programs - By County 37. Computation of 1985 Iowa City Elderly Budgets Based on _ Various Levels of Living 38. Income Characteristics of the Elderly for Johnson County and Iowa City 39. Labor Force Characteristics for Johnson County and Iowa City i f i 1631 i I J APPENDIX A-1 DEMOGRAPHIC/ECONOMIC RESOURCE DATA (continued) 40. Income Characteristics By Region of U.S. 41, Poverty Status - Johnson County and Iowa City 42. Economic Characteristics of Rural Portions of Johnson County 43. Industries of Johnson County Employed Persons 44. Occupations of Johnson County Employed Persons 45. Labor Force Characteristics by Race for Johnson County 46. Labor Force and Income Characteristics for Johnson County 47. Housing Units by State and Region for U.S. 48. Summary of General Housing Characteristics of Iowa City and Johnson County 49. Summary of Detailed Housing Characteristics for Iowa City and Johnson County 50. Costs of Owner -Occupied and Renter -Occupied Housing in -Iowa City and Johnson; County 51. Major Components of the Iowa Economy 52. Retail Sales and Buying Power Indexes for Iowa City and Johnson County - 1980and1988 53. Effective Buying Income:for Iowa City and Johnson County - 1980 and 1988 54. Households in Johnson County by Effective Buying Income 55. Age/Income Data (Summary Tape File 4) for Johnson County, Counties Contiguous to Johnson County, Iowa City and Other Major Cities in Iowa li I APPENDIX A-2 STATES BY PERCENT OF POPULATION 65 AND OVER PERCENT OF POPULATION 65 AND OVER STATES 18,1 Florida 13.7 Arkansas 13,1 Iowa; South Dakota 13.0 Missouri, Nebraska 12,7 Pennsylvania, Kansas 12,5 Oklahoma 12.3 Maine, Massachusetts 12.1 North Dakota 12.0 New York, West Virginia,. _11,8 Wisconsin, Arizona 11.6 Minnesota, Oregon, " 11.5 New Jersey" : 11.4 Connecticut, Mississippi 11.3' _ Vermont 11,2 Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama 11.1 New Hampshire, District of Columbia :.:10.9' Illinois 10.6 Ohio,Indiana', Montana, Washington 10.2 North Carolina, California 10.0 ;r _ c :c Idaho 9,7 Delaware, Texas 9:6 :: Michigan :'. 9.5 `' Geobgial 9.4_ Louisiana 9:3 Virginia 9,2 Maryland, South Carolina, 8.8 New Mexico 86 Colorado,:Nevada 8.1 Wyoming 7.7 Utah, Hawaii...; 2.6 Alaska Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No. 875, "Estamates of the Population of States by Age: July 1, 1971 to 1979•" j I i i. 1950 1970 1976 1980 2000 i.y 65-69 40.7 35.0 36.1 34.9 28.9 - 35.4 70-74 27.8 27.2 25.8 27.3 25.9 26.9 75-79 17.4 19.2 ,i 17:3 20.1 16.8 80-84 9.3 11.5 11.9 11.3 13.3 10.2 85 and Over L, 7.1 F .. APPENDIX A-3 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF NATIONAL POPULATION 65 AND OVER BY AGE 1950 THROUGH 2020 AGE 1950 1970 1976 1980 2000 2020 65-69 40.7 35.0 36.1 34.9 28.9 - 35.4 70-74 27.8 27.2 25.8 27.3 25.9 26.9 75-79 17.4 19.2 17.7 17:3 20.1 16.8 80-84 9.3 11.5 11.9 11.3 13.3 10.2 85 and Over 4.8 7.1 8.6 9.2 11.8 10.6 Total 65 and Over 100.0 100.0 100.0 '100.0 100.0 100.0 Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-25, Nos. 311, 519, 614; 643, and -704: 163/ :i i 163/ F n i i i AGE 1970 i 55-59 1,244 2.5 60-64" 1,183 .2.3 65-74..1.. 1,797 3.6 75 + 1,278 2.5 TOTAL 5,774 ,12.3 APPENDIX A-4 CITY OF IOWA CITY ELDERLY POPULATION 1970 - 1980 i i i AGE 1970 i 55-59 1,244 2.5 60-64" 1,183 .2.3 65-74..1.. 1,797 3.6 75 + 1,278 2.5 TOTAL 5,774 ,12.3 4.9 5,502 . 10.9 65 + 3,075 6.1 TOTAL POPULATION 46,850 1 j L I APPENDIX A-4 CITY OF IOWA CITY ELDERLY POPULATION 1970 - 1980 50,508 Source: r, Table 26, U.S." Census, 1980 7.8 —I i z z AGE 1970 TOTAL 55-59 1,244 2.5 60-64" 1,183 .2.3 65-74..1.. 1,797 3.6 75 + 1,278 2.5 TOTAL 5,774 ,12.3 4.9 5,502 . 10.9 65 + 3,075 6.1 TOTAL POPULATION 46,850 50,508 Source: r, Table 26, U.S." Census, 1980 7.8 —I i z 1970-1980 1980 TOTAL PERCENT CHANGE 1,337 2.9 7.5 1,124 2.4 (5.0) 1,8261 3.9 1.6 1,487 3.2 16.4 5,774 ,12.3 4.9 3,313 7.1 7.7 50,508 Source: r, Table 26, U.S." Census, 1980 7.8 —I i APPENDIX A-5 JOHNSON COUNTY ELDERLY POPULATION. 1970 - 1980 AGE 1970 55-59 2,224 60-64 1,996 65-74 2,990 75 +:. 2,023 TOTAL 3.1 55 +, 9,?33 65 + 5,013 x TOTAL 3.1 2.8 4.1 2.8 1980 2,496 2,206 3,281 2,530 x 1970-1980 TOTAL PERCENT CHANGE 3.1 12.2% 2.7 10.5' 4.o 9.7 3.1 25.1, 12.8 10,513 12.9 7.0 5,811 7.1 TOTAL' POPULATION % 729127 ! 81,717'- i Source: Table 26, U.S. Census, 1980. i U i , G 1 t. 1 i I j Source: Table 26, U.S. Census, 1980. i i � G 1 t. 1 i I j I , APPENDIX A-6 JOHNSON COUNTY PAST AND PROJECTED POPULATION 1980-85 1985-90 1990-g5 ` 1995-2000 ELDERLY AGE GROUP PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT BY SEX 1980 1985 INCREASE 1990 INCREASE 1995 INCREASE 2000 INCREASE 55-59 - Male 1,236 1,230 1,300 1,500 1,900 - Female Total 1 260 22. I!-9� 1,300 2,530 1.4 1,400 2,700 6.7 1,500 3,000 11.1 1 900 -3 00 26.7 60-64 - Male 1,021 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,300 { I Female 1.185 1,200 1,200 1,300 _. 1,400 I, Total 2,20 2,300 4.3 2,320 9 2,500 7.8 2,700 8.0 65-69 - Male 789 goo 1,000 1,000 1,100 Female 1,008 1,100 1,100 1,200 1,200 Total 1,797 2,000 11.3 2,100 5.0 2,200 4.8 2,200 -- I 70-74 - Male 597 700 700 800 800 ' Female 887 900 1,000 1 000 fl� 6- 1,100 i Total1 4b4 1, 00 7.8 1,700 6.3 �H 5.9 1,900 5.6 75 + - Male - 820 900 1,000 1,100 1,300 I. Female Total 1,710 2,530 1 900 2 0�O 10.7 2,100 3,100 10.7 2 300 3 0 9.7 2 500 :EAR 00 11.8 Total 55 and Older 10,513 11,230 6.8 11,920 6.1 12,900 8.2 14,400 11.6 Total 65 and Older 5,811 6,400 10.1 6,900 7.8 7,400 7.2 7,900 6.8 Total Population 81,717 85,300 4.4 87,900 3.0 90,500 3.0, 93,700 3.5 Percent of Total i - 65 and Older 7.1 7.5 7.8 8.2 8.4 - 75 and Older 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.8 4.1 �W Source: Office of the State Demographer, Iowa Office for Planning and Programming, Des Moines. i APPENDIX A-7 RETIREE MARKETS Shown on the following page is a table reflecting •elderly markets by socio-economic classification and geographical area. This information is based on Donnelley Marketing Information Services' data base. Donnelley Marketing Information Service is a Division of Dun 6 Bradstreet Corporation. Donnelley Marketing has provided direct mail information to consumer product companies for the past 60 years, and the Information Services Division has provided demographic consumer information for the past five years to large companies for the determination of site location. Donnelley's data base consists of 73,000,000 households. Population groups, based on socio-economic characteristics, represent segments of the total elderly market in Johnson County. These population clusters are compiled through specific demographic analysis by Donnelley Marketing Information Service. Based on statistical analysis of approximately 1,500 related demographic variables from U.S. Census data, Donnelley is able to "cluster" on a mathematical "best fit" basis the population of a particular area into 47 groups which indicate relative socio-economic status. Since the' population is clustered on a mathematical "best fit" basis, zeroes should be interpreted as indicating an extremely small proportion of the total population. The socio-economic clusters which relate to the elderly have been selected from, the 47 total groups and presented by county. Also shown is the total retiree market for each county as a per- cent of the total 1984 population._ 163 1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CLASSIFICATION Retirees, Apts. 6 Condos. High Home Value 6 Rents Older, Non Moblle, Urban White Collar Old Housing Below Avg. Income, Retirees Mobile Hanes, Few Children Older, Non Mobile, Low Income Retirees, Old Housing Old, Low Income, Singles, Retirees, Few Children Old, Low Income, Retirees Urban Apt. areas Older, Singles, Retirees Old Hames 6 Apt. — 1,156 2,820 Total Retirees -- 9,111 7.157 4,322 82,086 168,599 23,450 15,032 RETIREE MARKETS JOHNSON LINN BENTON IOWA WASHINGTON LOUISA MUSNTM. rFnan nuce Total Population - 1984 Retiree Markets - Percent of Total Population 5.4% 30.5% 28.8% FAL 6,320 851 4,694 _3.579 20,240 12,091 42,478 18,506 20,219 31.2% — 2.0% 25.4% 17.7% �I Source: Donnelley Marketing Information Service, Division of Dun 6 Bradstreet Corp. ;I L MARITAL.STATUS 5-7 75 -OVER 5-7 75 -OVER J Total Un 1,000s) i 3,090 APPENDIX A-8 MARITAL STATUS OF NATIONAL POPULATION 65 AND OVER BY AGE AND SEX MEN WOMEN — MARITAL.STATUS 5-7 75 -OVER 5-7 75 -OVER J Total Un 1,000s) 6,080 3,090 8,189 5,109 Percent. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 J Never Married 5.7 4.8 6.6 5.7 Married, Spouse Present 78.1 68,2 46.2 21.6 I Married, Spouse J Absent 3.0 2.1 .2.2 1.3 Separated 2.0 1.2 1:5 0.5 Widowed 9.7 23.0 41.2 69.3 Divorced_ 3.5 1.8 - 3.9 2.1 J Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 338, "Marital Status and Living :Arrangements: March, 1978," p, 8. APPENDIX A-9 LIVING ARRANGEMENTS OF NATIONAL POPULATION 65 AND OVER BY AGE AND SEX TYPE OF LIVING MEN WOMEN ARRANGEMENT 5-7 75 -OVER 5-7 T- 5 -OVER - � Total (in 1,000s) 6,038 3,186 8,898 5,541 Percent 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ` IN HOUSEHOLDS L, Head of Household 95.9 85.5 44.4 51.8 Head of Family Household 85.1 66.4 8.6 8.0 1 Head of Nonfamily I' Household 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 Living Alone 12.4 18.4 35.0 42.8 j Spouse of Household Head -- -- 45.7 19.2 Other Relative of Head 0.7 6.7 7.5 17.7 r'I Nonrelative of Head 1.8 1.0 0.9 1.3 n IN INSTITUTIONS y Patient or Resident 1.6 6.8 1.5 10.3 r Sources: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 306, "Marital Status and Living Arrangements: March, 1978," pp. 15, 31, and 33; and = j tabulations from the 1976 Survey of Institutionalized Persons prepared by the Center for Population Research, Georgetown University, for the Administration on Aging, Grant No. 90-17-1681. _ 1631 i - j I I i. APPENDIX A-10 i. I I i. APPENDIX A-10 i. COMPONENTS OF POPULATION CHANGE _ i 1980-1982 I .1 _ TOTAL POPULATION NET CHANGE COUNTY BIRTHS DEATHS MIGRATION NO.0) PERCENT Johnson 3,000 900 200 2,300 2.8% iLinn 6,000 2,800 (3,700) (500) (.3) - Benton 800 500 (600) (200) (1.0) Iowa 500 400 (300) (100) (,7) J Washington 700 400 (200) -- (,j) Louisa 400 300 -- 100 1.1 Muscatine :. 1,600: 800 500 1,300 3.2 J Cedar_,- 600 400 (300) (100) (.5) Jones, 700:..:.. 400 (300) -- ... (.2) i I i. i. i I .1 APPENDIX A-11 MOBILITY OF NATIONAL POPULATION 65 AND OVER MOBILITY STATUS AGE AND TYPE OF MOVE64-74.75 AND OVER Total (in 1,OOOs) 14,767 8,408 Percent 100.0 100.0 Movers 18.1 15.9 Nonmovers 81.9 84.1 Total Movers;(in 1,OOOs) Percent— Percent distribution by type of move*! 2,614 1,315-- 100.0 100.0,:.?. Same County 55.7 58.2 Different County in Same State 21.5 21.5 Different State, Total 22.8 20.3 Contiguous State 16.4 ;.6.1(; Noncontiguous State 15.0 14.2 e Excludes moves from abroad. Source: 'U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Series P-20, No. 353, "Geographic Mobility: March 1975 to March 1979," p•15• _ i f j ,w i t F i, i 1631 APPENDIX 1-12 IN -MIGRATION An indicator of market potential is information relative to net residential migratory patterns. Population poulation gdue es reflect hs, as in pop to changes in an area, i.e., chang deaths, out -migration and in -migration. The table below reveals a static rlflection f in -migration ation within Iowa City and Johnson County, (5 years and older) of Iowa City and Johnson County (excluding Armed Forces and College Students) is proportioned based on place of residence in 1975. Residence in 1975 Same House Different House/Same County Different County/Same State Different State: Northeast Northcentral South West Abroad Percent of 1980 Population Iowa City Johnson n C 32% 38% P1 23 26 22 2 2 10 8 3 2 3 3 3 2 100% 100% Source: U S Census oDfCPooulation, Department of Commerce, Washington, i i f i J J I Ver �IY. i I J i a I- I APPENDIX 1-12 IN -MIGRATION An indicator of market potential is information relative to net residential migratory patterns. Population poulation gdue es reflect hs, as in pop to changes in an area, i.e., chang deaths, out -migration and in -migration. The table below reveals a static rlflection f in -migration ation within Iowa City and Johnson County, (5 years and older) of Iowa City and Johnson County (excluding Armed Forces and College Students) is proportioned based on place of residence in 1975. Residence in 1975 Same House Different House/Same County Different County/Same State Different State: Northeast Northcentral South West Abroad Percent of 1980 Population Iowa City Johnson n C 32% 38% P1 23 26 22 2 2 10 8 3 2 3 3 3 2 100% 100% Source: U S Census oDfCPooulation, Department of Commerce, Washington, i i f i F r APPENDIX B-1 EXPERIENCE SURVEY AND SELECTED CASES 1. Telephone interviews were conducted with State Departments and Agencies in Des Moines: State Department of Health - Home Health Aid/Chore Service - Public Health Nursing - Commission on Aging - Nutrition Section of:Public Health Office of Licensure and Certification 2.. Telephone and personal interviews were conducted with pro- fessionals and agencies working with, or knowledgeable about, the elderly in Johnson County: Dr. W. W. Morris Mr. Jim Clark Ms. Thea Sando Mr. Kevin Hanick Mr. Lou Betts Rev. Robert Welsh Dr. G. 0. Williams Heritage Area Agency on Aging Agencies at Senior Center - Elderly Services Agency - Congregate Meals Home Delivered Meals S.E.A.T.S. Johnson County Health Department Community and Home Health Services Agency Beverly Home Health Services 3• Telephone and personal interviews were conducted with pro- fessionals associated with hospitals, nursing homes and elderly housing in Johnson County: University of Iowa Hospital Mercy Hospital V.A. Hospital Lantern Park Care Center Iowa City Care Center Beverly Manor Solon Nursing Care Center Capitol House Apartments Autumn Park Apartments Coral Village East Side Village Ecumenical Towers Liberty Square Apartments Ib3/ t. APPENDIX B-1 EXPERIENCE SURVEY AND SELECTED CASES 1. Telephone interviews were conducted with State Departments and Agencies in Des Moines: State Department of Health - Home Health Aid/Chore Service - Public Health Nursing - Commission on Aging - Nutrition Section of:Public Health Office of Licensure and Certification 2.. Telephone and personal interviews were conducted with pro- fessionals and agencies working with, or knowledgeable about, the elderly in Johnson County: Dr. W. W. Morris Mr. Jim Clark Ms. Thea Sando Mr. Kevin Hanick Mr. Lou Betts Rev. Robert Welsh Dr. G. 0. Williams Heritage Area Agency on Aging Agencies at Senior Center - Elderly Services Agency - Congregate Meals Home Delivered Meals S.E.A.T.S. Johnson County Health Department Community and Home Health Services Agency Beverly Home Health Services 3• Telephone and personal interviews were conducted with pro- fessionals associated with hospitals, nursing homes and elderly housing in Johnson County: University of Iowa Hospital Mercy Hospital V.A. Hospital Lantern Park Care Center Iowa City Care Center Beverly Manor Solon Nursing Care Center Capitol House Apartments Autumn Park Apartments Coral Village East Side Village Ecumenical Towers Liberty Square Apartments Ib3/ i I I H APPENDIX B-1 — EXPERIENCE SURVEY AND SELECTED CASES (continued) Mary 0. Coldren Home Atrium Village The Villa Oaknoll Retirement Residence personaland interviews 4. Telephonea and condominiumsineeconducted various Iowa City to determine if there apartmewere any targeting the elderly and to determine price levels. 5. Telephone interviews -were conducted,with.several residential care facilities in Johnson County and other counties in Iowa: Johnson County Care Center Systems Unlimited Pine View Residential Care (Cedar Rapids, Linn County) United Presbyterian Home (Washington County) Parkview Manor (Washington County). Cooksen Memorial Home (Cedar County -Personal Interview) (Grinnell, Iowa) The Mayflower Home . i I 1&31 l { I I ■ _1 APPENDIX B-2 STATE OF IOWA HEALTH PLANNING Presented below are excerpts from the1983-1988 State Health Plan for Iowa. These statements reflect state -recognized problems and challenges relative to long-term care for the elderly. Current trends have resulted in four challenges for public policy and public representatives. These are: - increased use of long-term health care; - increasing demand for long-term health care; - changing patterns of demand; and - increased pressures on existing quality assurance and accountability mechanisms. As with other services, reimbursement policies have a strong effect on total costs. As the programs now stand, public reim- bursement (Medicaid and Medicare) in Iowa is considered to have resulted in the following problems: 1. Too few residential and skilled care beds 2. Limited services and populations served in specialized ICF and RCF facilities 3. Insufficient home health care 4. Limited involvement of pharmacists 5. Limited dental care rl Reimbursement of home health care through Medicare has been wj made less restrictive in recent years. This is important because most Home Health Agencies depend heavily on Medicare for funds. I Medicaid regulations and the Iowa State Medicaid Plan have remained fairly constant since 1976. Only in 1978 did Medicaid li reimbursement for home health care increase substantially, �f however, when it went up 158% over 1977, the largest increase of any service covered by Medicaid. The State Department of Health has adopted the following policy assumptions which will guide the development of cost contain- ment efforts.and all planning for long-term health care. _ A complete range of long-term health care services and settings will be available, such that individuals can select the ser- vices and setting which allows them a maximum range of Indepen- dent action. At a minimum, each person should have available to them: comprehensive assessment and coordination services in-home/home centered health care - residential personal care i intermediate inpatient nursing care Skilled inpatient nursing care. 1&31 l { I I ■ APPENDIX B-3 1990 BED NEED The table below shows the 1990 total bed need for intermedia and skilled nursing homes and residential care facilities f Johnson, Benton, Cedar, Iowa, Jones, Linn and Washingt Counties as of February 1985. INTERMEDIATE AND RESIDENTIAL SKILLED NURSING HOMES CARE FACILITIES NET NET COUNTY I I I . I i i APPENDIX B-3 1990 BED NEED The table below shows the 1990 total bed need for intermedia and skilled nursing homes and residential care facilities f Johnson, Benton, Cedar, Iowa, Jones, Linn and Washingt Counties as of February 1985. INTERMEDIATE AND RESIDENTIAL SKILLED NURSING HOMES CARE FACILITIES NET NET COUNTY NEED EXISTING NEED NEED EXISTING NEED Johnson 453 457 (4) 227 132 95 Benton 265 234 31 133 50 83 Cedar 215 235 (20) 107 74 33 Iowa 205 225 (20) 102 64 38 Jones 223 223 -- 112 49 63 Linn 1,092 1,176 (84) 596 .361 235 Washington 243 377 (134) 121 180 (59) Secondary Counties 2.243 2.470 (227) 575 417 158 Total Area 2.696 2.927 (231) 802 549 25 to or on _ i FI i r' I NOTE: (1) The Office for Health Planning and Development, Iowa State Department of Health, combines 'intermediate and skilled beds for need calculations. . (2) Negative bed need is indicated by parentheses. Source: Iowa State Department of Health, Des Moines, Iowa. _ 1631 I I APPENDIX B-4 MYTH VERSUS REALITY OF AGING The table below reflects the percent of elderly respondents reporting problems to be very serious versus the public's (ages 18764 and 65+) expectations of the seriousness of the problems. Personal Experience: Public Expectation: Real it of Public Myth of Public 5 and Over 18-64 5+ Not Enough Money To Live On 17% 68% 50% Poor Health 21 47 40 Loneliness 13 65 45 Poor Housing 5 43 30 Fear of Crime 25 74 58 Not Enough Education 6 21 17 Not Enough Opportunities 6 51 24 Not Enough Medical Care 9 45 34 High Cost of Energy 42 81 72 Transportation 14 58 43 Source: The National Council on Aging - Lou Harris, Aging in the 801s: Americans in Transition, November, 1981. I t i f j APPENDIX B-5 SELF-REPORTED HEALTH STATUS OF NATIONAL NONINSTITUTIONALIZED AGE 65 and Over 65-74 75 and Over 65 and Over 65-74 75 and Over BY AGE AND SEX: '1976 !il TOTAL MEN WOMEN Percent unable to carry on major activity — 17.6 29.9 8.0 i. 14.7 26.6 5.5 22.7 36.4 14.5 — I: Source: Mary Grace Kovar, "Statement, May 24, 1978," in I, Consequences of Changing U.S. Population: Demographics of Aging, Joint Hearings before the Select Committees on Population and Aging, U.S. House of Representatives (Washington, D.C.: *U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978) p. 140. r I � 1431 ! i APPENDIX B-5 SELF-REPORTED HEALTH STATUS OF NATIONAL NONINSTITUTIONALIZED AGE 65 and Over 65-74 75 and Over 65 and Over 65-74 75 and Over BY AGE AND SEX: '1976 !il TOTAL MEN WOMEN Percent unable to carry on major activity — 17.6 29.9 8.0 i. 14.7 26.6 5.5 22.7 36.4 14.5 — I: Source: Mary Grace Kovar, "Statement, May 24, 1978," in I, Consequences of Changing U.S. Population: Demographics of Aging, Joint Hearings before the Select Committees on Population and Aging, U.S. House of Representatives (Washington, D.C.: *U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978) p. 140. r I � 1431 1 I i. i STATE OF IOWA r. SELF-REPORTED ACTIVITY LIMITATIONS BY DEGREE AND AGE NO LIMITED IN AMOUNT OR UNABLE TO CARRY I i. i STATE OF IOWA r. SELF-REPORTED ACTIVITY LIMITATIONS BY DEGREE AND AGE NO LIMITED IN AMOUNT OR UNABLE TO CARRY LIMITATIONS r - i Source: 1983-88 State Health.Plan for Iowa, State Department of Health, Des Moines, Iowa. APPENDIX B-6 STATE OF IOWA SELF-REPORTED ACTIVITY LIMITATIONS BY DEGREE AND AGE NO LIMITED IN AMOUNT OR UNABLE TO CARRY LIMITATIONS KIND OF MAJOR ACTIVITY ON MAJOR ACTIVITY Iowa 86% 8% 3x By 'Age Under 45 94% 3%OS 45-65 78% 135. 4% 65 + 57% 22% 14% , Source: 1983-88 State Health.Plan for Iowa, State Department of Health, Des Moines, Iowa. APPENDIX B-7 POTENTIAL IN -MOVER DIFFERENTIAL PREFERENCE INDEX OF SERVICES AND FEATURES The table below shows the service preferences of middle and upper income elderly based on a random sample of 221 in a large Southern city. I NOTE: It is important to caution the reader not to make fine distinctions between rank ordered categories for two reasons. (1) The lack of empirical validation linking preference responses to action is weak. (2)- Sampling procedures . warrant a standard error of estimate of,+ or - 8% (Gelwicks, Regnier, Newcomer, 1974). Therefore each preference response item could conceivably vary by a range of sixteen percentage points. Source: "Preferred Supportive Services for Middle to Higher Income Retirement Housing", Victor Regnier, AIA, and Louis E. Gelwicks, AIA, The Gerontologist, Vol. 21, No.1, 1981, page 57. i Ito31 - % MOST % LEAST DIFFERENTIAL SERVICE. APPROVED APPROVED INDEX Security 73.0 5.4 67.6 Pharmacy 70.3 2.7 67.6 Beauty/Barber Shop 67.6 1.2 66.4 Small Convenience Grocery 64.9 2.7 62.2 Infirmary 63.5 1.4 62.1 Nurse -0n -Call 66.2 8.1 58.1. Public Transportation 62.2 5.4 56.8 Doctor's Office for Visits 58.1 8.1 50.0 Restaurants 50.0 2.7 47.3 Physical Therapy 50.0 8.1 41.9 Dry Cleaner 54.1 13.5 40.6 Private Limousine 45.9 13.5 32.4 Nursing Home 41.9 10.8 31.1. Gift Shop 37.8 8.1 29.7 Card Room 44.6 16.2 28.4 Library 41.9 13.5 28.4 Craft Room 36.5 14.9 21.6 Two or More Meals 33.8 17.6 16.2 Large Meeting Room 25.7 9.5 16.2 Maid Service (Optional) 35.1 20.3 14.8 Homemaker Service 29.7 14.9 14.8 Whirlpool/Sauna 33.8 24.3 9.5 Meals Delivered 28.4 28.4 -- Exercise Room 24.3 29.7 (5.4) Private Entertainment Room 23.0 28.4 (5.4) Linen (Optional) 27.0 39.2 (12.2) Greenhouse 16.2 35.1 (18.9) Catering Service 16.2 45.9 (29.7) Adult Education 12.2 43.2 (31.0) Maid Service (Included) 14.9 50.0 (35.1) Shuffleboard 12.2 47.3 (35.1) Billiard Room 14.9 54.1 (39.2) Cocktail Lounge 8.1 54.1 (46.0) Swimming Pool 8.1 55.4 (47.3) Linen (Included) 17.6 66.2 (48.6) Tennis Court -0- 81.1 (81.1) NOTE: It is important to caution the reader not to make fine distinctions between rank ordered categories for two reasons. (1) The lack of empirical validation linking preference responses to action is weak. (2)- Sampling procedures . warrant a standard error of estimate of,+ or - 8% (Gelwicks, Regnier, Newcomer, 1974). Therefore each preference response item could conceivably vary by a range of sixteen percentage points. Source: "Preferred Supportive Services for Middle to Higher Income Retirement Housing", Victor Regnier, AIA, and Louis E. Gelwicks, AIA, The Gerontologist, Vol. 21, No.1, 1981, page 57. i Ito31 - i t - I APPENDIX B-8 IOWA CITY COMPETING FACILITIES The table below lists those facilities in Iowa City which are similar to the types of additional elderly housing under study for Iowa City. The Villa is an assisted-living facility; Autumn Park Apartments, Capitol House, and Ecumenical Towers are independent-living facilities; Oaknoll Retirement Residence offers independent living, assisted living and nursing home care. AGE OF ENDOWMENT/ AVERAGE AGE FACILITY UNITS OCCUPANCY MONTHLY RATE OF RESIDENT The Villa 1 year 16 100% $950/month 79 Autumn Park Apartments 8 years 64 100% Sliding Scale 72 based on ability to pay I Oaknoll Retirement Residence 19 years 131 Apartments 92% $32,340-$99,500 78 48 health' care $392-$818/month i beds I; Capitol House 41 years 81 100% Sliding Scale 77 f`'•' based on ability i to pay { { Ecumenical Towers 31 years 81 100% Sliding Scale 74 I based on ability to pay ! � I N -Y 1 Iv _. '! _ .. .. . :. � I � i {moi _ I I . f i' i;: !. I , .. .0 � f . j ,. -- lj �- � -� �" ,,, ,:e -.� � � t �� i .. _ �. i �. �- i i � � 3: ., - i �.. ';, l J� ' _ , Ii _- � _ - r � � � -..[i i ..I ,- '. t. �. ._ i. C ,.r. ., .. .. .__ .. .I � .. ,.. - _.: �+ �. .. � ,. 16 31 ' � � .. I -- 1&31 _l APPENDIX C-1 a i-7 1.1 t, PUBLIC MEETING_ SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER i MARCH 11, 1985 t — i ' n PRESENTED BY: q MAY ZIMA & CO. ., CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS ON BEHALF OF L 1� CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA + t i • I � I t I 1 4 1 1&31 APPENDIX C-1 MARKETING FEASIBILITY STUDY PUBLIC MEETING_ SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER i MARCH 11, 1985 ' n PRESENTED BY: ' MAY ZIMA & CO. ., CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS ON BEHALF OF L CITY OF IOWA CITY, IOWA j,. iq i 1&31 uncontrollable CURRENT SITUATION 1 Age: 2. Sex: 3., Have you moved in the last five years? Yes No If yes: Different house in same county Different county in same state Different state (which one) 4. Do you live in the urbanized area of Iowa City? Do you live outside the urbanized area of Iowa City? Do you live in Johnson County outside Iowa City? Do you live outside Johnson County (which county)? 5. 'Occupation before retirement 6.Approximate annual income before retirement (check one): i $ ' 0 - $ 999 1,000 - 91999 10,000 - 14,999 �- 15,000 - 24,999 - 25,000 - 39,999 40,000 - 59,999 60,000 and over 7. Approximate current annual income (check one): $ 100 - $ 2,999 3,000 - 9,999 10,000 - 14,999 15,000 - 19,999 20,000 - 39,999 40,000 and over B. Within the last three years, have you been in a hospital? Yes No If yes, how long did you stay? 131 I i M 9. Within the last three years, have you been in a nursing home? Yes No If yes, how long did you stay? 10. Do you own a car and drive? Yes No If no, transportation provided by: 11. Do you receive assistance with daily living functions? Yes No If yes, from whom? 12. What "services for elderly" do you presently use? SERVICE PROVIDED BY 13. Current living arrangements: Homeowner Live alone - male Live alone - female Someone else living in your home - male Someone else living in your home - female Non -Homeowner Spouse of homeowner Live with a relative Live with a non -relative Check Number of if Persons in Applicable. Household i 13. Current living arrangements (continued): Check Number of — I if Persons in Applicable Household Group Quarters: Apartment Building Boarding House Condominium i j — Retirement Center Housing for Elderly III — f If you own a home, estimate current value: If you rent, what are your monthly payments $ ... /mo. — .i is .. _. ( 14. Current budget: III MONTH YEAR Housing (includes utilities) $ $ n '. Food I Transportation Clothing Personal Care Medical Care Other Spending...(recreation 6 all others)' i. TOTAL CONSUMPTION $ $ — OTHER ITEMS (include savings) _ — TOTAL BUDGET AND TOTAL INCOME— i I!I I _ I i • 1b31 - � , F OPMONS/PREBERENCFS STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 1. There are adequate nursing home beds in Johnson County. 2. The hospitals and nursing homes in Johnson County pro- vide adequate long-term care for the very ill and no other type facility is needed. 3. I have had no problems receiving "skilled" nursing care in Johnson County in the past when needed. 4. I would be willing to leave Johnson County to receive nursing home care. 5. If.more nursing home beds were available in Johnson County, I believe people would move from surrounding counties..-__ 6. If I needed nursing home care, I would be willing to pay "extra" for a higher level of care. 7. I -think Johnson County pro- vides enough services to enable me to live in my own home until I need to move to a nursing home due to ill health. B. I would prefer to live in my own home but I now, or will soon, require the following in order to live alone: Assistance with daily living (bathing, dressing, cooking, housekeeping, etc.) Chore service Transportation Nursing care Other (discuss) 1631 I I STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 9. If I am unable to live in my own home, I feel that living with a relative or close friend is preferable to living in a retirement center or subsidized housing. 10. I feel that $900/month is an appropriate rate for per- sonal care to cover the cost of an efficiency apartment, utilities, meals, house- keeping, and assistance with daily living functions. 11. I would prefer "Home Health" nursing care instead of a nursing home since this would allow me to stay in my own home. 12. I think the Home Health ser- vices provided in Johnson County are adequate. 13. Home Health services are beneficial but I feel iso- lated and would prefer social contact in addition to -receiving the services I need. - 14. I have experienced problems in obtaining home chore/ repair services and I would be willing to pay for ser- vices, other than nursing care, provided by a Hama Health Agency. 15. I am familiar with the terms "adult congregate living facility", "retirement center", "continuing care" and "life rare center". 16. I have recently requested information about housing alternatives or additional services for the elderly. _ 1'- 17. I think there may be more housing alternatives and services for the elderly available in Johnson County than I am aware of, but I do not know how to get informa- tion. 18. I think retirement centers are an excellent housing alternative for the elderly and are worth the cost. 19. Only the elderly with high incomes can live in retire- ment centers. 20. An older person who lives in a retirement center is more secure than one living at home alone, and this security is worth the cost. 21. I would prefer to live in a retirement center while I am still -independent. - - 22. I would choose a life care center over a retirement center so that -I could -- receive progressive care even if the initial costs were higher. 23. I have friends who live in a retirement center, and they recommend this way of life. 24. I am familiar with retire- ment centers in Iowa Counties other than Johnson County and feel they are superior to the ones in Johnson County. 25. Private enterprise versus government subsidization can best promote the social welfare of the elderly. 26. Retirement centers would be more readily accepted in Florida or California than in Iowa. STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 27. I would be willing to move to any county in eastern Iowa to find the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 28. I would be willing to move to any county surrounding Johnson County to find the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 29. I have friends in counties surrounding Johnson County who, I think, might be willing to move to Johnson County to find the type of "retirement housing" they prefer. 30. I feel that the cultural benefits of living in a uni- versity town outweigh the disadvantages. 31. I don't like living in a town with so many college students. 32. The cost of living in Iowa .City.is too high, and I would prefer a more rural area with a lower cost of living. 33. I have close family members in Iowa City/Johnson County and would not be willing to move to another county even if it offered the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 34. I have close friends in Iowa City/Johnson County and would not be willing to move to another county even if it offered the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE t t.' i I: i 27. I would be willing to move to any county in eastern Iowa to find the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 28. I would be willing to move to any county surrounding Johnson County to find the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 29. I have friends in counties surrounding Johnson County who, I think, might be willing to move to Johnson County to find the type of "retirement housing" they prefer. 30. I feel that the cultural benefits of living in a uni- versity town outweigh the disadvantages. 31. I don't like living in a town with so many college students. 32. The cost of living in Iowa .City.is too high, and I would prefer a more rural area with a lower cost of living. 33. I have close family members in Iowa City/Johnson County and would not be willing to move to another county even if it offered the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. 34. I have close friends in Iowa City/Johnson County and would not be willing to move to another county even if it offered the type of "retirement housing" I prefer. STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 1631 t i i I: �II r N � j i j i I - — l i 1631 i — --- �Or— STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 35. If I lived in a retirement center, I would consider the following services extremely important and would be willing to pay higher monthly rates to receive them: Transportation Pool/Health Spa Full Kitchen Large Living Room/Bedroom - Call-Help/Security System _ Personal Care — 36. I think that elderly housing is only appropriate for the elderly who are at least 75 years of age and older. 37. I -think retirement centers are appropriate for all i senior citizens even those j who are 55 or 65 Years old. If 38. I would be willing to sell my house if i found a prefer- able "retirement housing" alternative. 39. 1 would prefer to pay $10,000 - $25,000 entrance fee and have lower monthly rates if I chose a retire - went center to live in. 40. 1 would prefer to buy a con- dominium for approximately $60,000 than to pay rent at a retirement center. i 41. If I decided to sell my home, I would prefer to live in an existing apartment than to live in a retirement center. — - 42. If I lived in a retirement center, I would prefer to pay higher monthly rates than live in subsidized housing. 1631 F I I I t t i 61 STRONGLY NEITHER AGREE STRONGLY AGREE AGREE NOR DISAGREE DISAGREE DISAGREE 43. I feel that $900/mo. is an appropriate rate for retire- ment center living to cover the cost of an apartment, utilities, meals, house- keeping activities, transportation. 44. I would be willing to.. transfer all my assets to a family -member -in order_to qualify for.government- reimbursed healthoare.ser- vices. 45. I don't feel comfortable expressing a need for health- care-services.because I.fear being placed in a nursing home. i I 61 L � i I. i _ t I - t i t - DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. What is the greatest unmet need in Johnson County relative to housing and services for the elderly? 2. What needs are distinct to the elderly in Iowa City and Johnson County as opposed to other cities, counties, or states? 3. Which psychological need most influences the decision making process in selecting. housing after retirement;. i.e., Security Social Contact _..._ Status/Prestige- Belonging to,:a group. Companionship Independence Other 4. What is your greatest anxiety about your current lifestyle? 5. How do you receive information about housing alternatives i and healthcare services for the elderly; i.e., I Word of Mouth Senior Citizens Center 6. Do you feel elderly services should be grouped or separated as much as possible. For example, hospital adding long-term nursing care and home health. 7. What do you think is the current market rate for: a) Assistance with daily living provided in private room b) Efficiency Apartment - Assistance with daily living provided 163/ M is j' M APPENDIX C-2 CITY. OF IOWA CITY CNIC CENTER 410 E. WASHINGTON ST. IOWA C11Y. IOWA 52240 (319) 356-5000 Decisions about elderly housing in Iowa City are now being made by citizens just like yourself, and you have the opportunity to be a part of the decision-making process. The City of Iowa City is conducting a survey in Johnson County to determine the housing and support service needs of older persons. You have been chosen to participate in this survey by a scien- tific sampling method. Because you were chosen, you now repre- sent many other older residents. For this reason it is particularly important to receive your response. The City of Iowa City is assuming responsibility for collecting the necessary information to help provide senior citizens with a choice in the areas of housing and support services. It is hoped that, by providing such choices, elderly persons will be less likely to be forced into formal institutional living arrangements such as nursing homes unless and until their health needs make it necessary. The City of Iowa City is not, however, assuming responsibility for construction, management, or subsidization. No decision has been made as to what type of housing the elderly need, want or are willing to pay for. Your answers to this sur- vey will determine this decision. Please answer the enclosed CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE completely and with responses which truly reflect your attitudes. It is not necessary for you to provide your name ... just your opinion. Your attention to every question and timely response will also be appreciated. Please return the questionnaire by April 29 in the stamped, self-addressed envelope enclosed. If you have any questions about the purpose of the survey, questionnaire, or need assistance in interpreting or completing the questionnaire, please do not hesitate to call ,356-5248. Someone will be pleased to assist you in completing this questionnaire. Your Opinion/CCoountsl ohn McDonald Mayor APPENDIX C-3 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING IOWA CITY, IOUA 1) AGE: 2) SEX: MALE FEMALE 3) MARITAL STATUS: SINGLE, NEVER MARRIED MARRIED. WIDOWED. _ DIVORCED, SEPARATED 4) CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT: I LIVE.ALONE SOMEONE ELSE LIVES IN MY HOME WITH ME., I LIVE.WITH MY'CHILDREN OR OTHER RELATIVE m I:LIVE 'WITH :A NON -RELATIVE 1 LIVE IN GROUP QUARTERS (APARTMENT, HOUSING FOR THE ;:,..ELDERLY, -ETC.).., 5)JYPE OF RESIDENCE: HOUSE _ FARM CONDOMINIUM APARTMENT BOARDING HOUSE _ HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY G) DO YOU OWN YOUR HOME? _ YES _ N0 IF YES, WHAT IS THE TAX -ASSESSED VALUE? $ J) IF YQU ARE RENTING AN APARTMENT, WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY RENT 8 INCLUDING UTILITIES $ ____ EXCLUDING UTILITIES 1431 i 1, i` LQNF[DENTIAL (IIIFSTIOEIP_ RE (CONTINUED) 8) APPROXIMATE C t�NCFOMEANNNUAL INNCCOOME. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, HOWM $ 0 - 91999 10,000 - 16,499 16,500 - 24,999 25,000 - 34,999 350000 - 49,999 - 50,000 AND OVER 9) APPROXIMATE ANNUAL INCOME S R TIE RfJFUT (CHECK m). g 0'`- 9,999. 10,000 - 14,999 15.400 - 24,999 25,000 ;.39,999 _ 401000- 59,999 _ 60,000 AND OVER - 10);Do.You LIVE•'. IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, CORALVILLE OR -UNIVERSITY -.HEIGHTS IN ANOTHER CITY'IN JOHNSON COUNTY' - IN THE RURAL PORTIONS OF'JOHNSON COUNTY OUTSIDE JOHNSON COUNTY 11) HIGHEST;LEVEL OF FORMAL EDUCATION COMPLETED: LESS THAN 9TH GRADE 12TH GRADE SOME COLLEGE OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL COLLEGE OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL POST GRADUATE COLLEGE -2- i LQNF[DENTIAL (IIIFSTIOEIP_ RE (CONTINUED) 8) APPROXIMATE C t�NCFOMEANNNUAL INNCCOOME. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, HOWM $ 0 - 91999 10,000 - 16,499 16,500 - 24,999 25,000 - 34,999 350000 - 49,999 - 50,000 AND OVER 9) APPROXIMATE ANNUAL INCOME S R TIE RfJFUT (CHECK m). g 0'`- 9,999. 10,000 - 14,999 15.400 - 24,999 25,000 ;.39,999 _ 401000- 59,999 _ 60,000 AND OVER - 10);Do.You LIVE•'. IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY, CORALVILLE OR -UNIVERSITY -.HEIGHTS IN ANOTHER CITY'IN JOHNSON COUNTY' - IN THE RURAL PORTIONS OF'JOHNSON COUNTY OUTSIDE JOHNSON COUNTY 11) HIGHEST;LEVEL OF FORMAL EDUCATION COMPLETED: LESS THAN 9TH GRADE 12TH GRADE SOME COLLEGE OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL COLLEGE OR VOCATIONAL SCHOOL POST GRADUATE COLLEGE -2- I I _ I I 'j CONFIDENTIAL 01"ESTIONTAIRF (CONTINUED) 12) SOURCE OF CURRENT INCOME (CHECK ALL THAT Appfy), __ SOCIAL SECURITY — SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS EMPLOYMENT __ RETIREMENT BENEFITS FROM PREVIOUS EMPLOYER (PENSION) RENTAL REVENUE _— OTHER. SOURCES 13) WITHIN THE LAST THREE YEARS, HAVE YOU BEEN A PATIENT IN A HOSPITAL OR NURSING HOME? YES No --.. 14) DO YOU OWN A CAR AND DRIVE? YES No ' 15) Do YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO CHECKS ON YOU RE1. GULARLY (DA;�LY OR-_ SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK) JUST TO SEE HOW YOU: ARE DOING.. YES No 16) THINKING BACK OVER THE LAST YEAR, HAVE YOU EXPERIENCED dQ� ANXIETY IN FEELING ALONE, COPING.WITH DAI�Y CHORES OR ACTIVI=-' TIES;"OR;COPING WITH PHYSICAL INFIRMITIES, YES No, NO ANXIETY EXPERIENCED 17) DURING THE PAST YEAR; HAS SOMEONE ENCOURAGED YOU TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT? YES NO 18) IN GENERAL, DO YOU iTALK 1TO YOUR 'FRIENDS ABOUT HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE ELDERLY? YES No 19) IF YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS WERE TO DISCUSS HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES F?R THE ELDERLY, WHAT PART WOULD YOU BE MOST.. LIKELY TO PLAY, I WOULD MAINLY LISTEN TO MY FRIENDS IDEAS I WOULD TRY TO CONVINCE THEM OF MY IDEAS f7 I III Ili 1631 J -3- _ I I ' I I � I. I � t CORE I DENT IAL .011EST I OITAIR (CONTINUED) 20) PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING LIFESTYLE CHANGES WHICH YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED IN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS AND VHICN HAVE CAUSED YOU GREAT DISCOMFORT tCHECK ALL THAT APPLY): DEATH OF SPOUSE CHANGE IN YOUR HEALTH Loss OF A CLOSE FAMILY MEMBER OR FRIEND RETIREMENT MARITAL PROBLEM OR CHANGE IN MARITAL STATUS SON OR DAUGHTER LEAVING HOME OTHER NONE OF -THE -ABOVE 21) HOW is YOUR EYESIGHT -AND/OR HEARING? -EXCELLENT FAIR - . . . . . . . . POOR - DEPENDENT-ON.SOMEONE OTHER THAN MYSELF! 22) 1 HAVE A NURSE WHO PROVIDES CARE IN My HOME: REGULARLY OCCASIONALLY NOT NEEDED - 23) HOW DO YOU RATE YOUR'OVERALL PH�SICAL HEALTH RELATIVE TO. DOING THE THINGS YOU WANT TO DO, EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR POOR VERY DEPENDENT ON, OTHERS TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON OTHERS -4- i "FiD�iTln� AlIFSTIOn3 a RE (CONTINUED) - 24) WHO DO YOU RELY ON FOR THE FOLLOWING: IOTHERS RN I ELY ON OCCASIONALLY O[ OaHEYS IU HOUSEWORK . . . — PREPARING MEALS PERSONAL CARE (BATHING. DRESSING, ETC.) ' I PERSONAL APPEARANCE (SHAVING, - SHAMPOOING HAIR, ETC.). _ SHOPPING . . . i a I TRANSPORTATION- PAYING BILLS . . . . . . . f YARD WORK . . . ' LAUNDRY ' MEDICATION - GETTING IT I MEDICATION - TAKING IT I 25) PLEASE CHECK,THE FOLLOWING WHICH APPLY TO YOU: 'SOMETIMES I HAVE TROUBLE REMEMBERING THINGS. I FEEL VERY MUCH ALONE. WORRY A LOT ABOUT HOW TO TAKE CARE OF MYSELF,'' -- -- [ WORRY A LOT ABOUT LIVING EXPENSES. __ WORRY A LOT ABOUT WHAT WILL BECOME OF ME IN THE i. FUTURE, _ .�. NONE OF THE ABOVE APPLIES TO ME. -5- I I 1(631 1 CONFIDENTIALAIIEST[OMMAIRE (CONTIIIUED) p 26) MUNITYUSERVICESY(PLEASETANCE CHECKAS ARE FROM MANY OF THE FOLLOWING ANY AS ARE APPROPRIATE)? E ER OC( RSNY A L(OhP E SERVICE COMMUNITY AND HO%% HEALTH SERVINURSECES AGENCASSOCIATIISITING O - HOME HEALTHCARE . - ELDERLY CLINIC . . - RESPITE CARE (SOM�ONE TO STAY WITH YOU . S.E.A.T.S. . .. . DAY CARE AT SENIOR CENTER. . CONGREGATE' MEALS AT SENIOR' --- ----- CENTER. , . HOME DELIVERED MEALS , JOHNSOryry COUNTYy HOM MAKER/ HOME' HEAL-TH'AIDE ERVICE,' , BEVERLY .;HOME HEALTH ELDERLY SERVICES AGENCY - CHORE'SERVICES . .. . ROSSTAY SERVICESWITH (SOMEONE VISITATION SERVICE , REFERRAL AND INFORMATION SERVICE . . . . . . . VARIOUS PRIVATE, FOR PROFIT COMPANIES . . . . . . . • OTHER. . . . . . . . . . . . -5- 1 CONFIDENTIAL 01JESTIONNAIRE (CONTINUED) 27) F'YOU HAVE USED ANY OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES (LISTED IN QUESTION N26) PROVIDED IN IOWA CITY, PLEASE INDI- CATE YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT THESE SERVICES (CHECK &L THAT APPLY): THE COMMUNITY SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED WILL ALLOW ME TO STAY IN MY OWN HOME APARTMENT AS LONG AS POSSIBLE, THE SERVICES PROVIDED IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF MY LIFE, BUT WILL NOT ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY THERE IS A DUPLICATION OF SERVICES. IOWA CITY/JOHNSON COUNTY HAS ALL THE SERVICES I NEED. I CANNOT IMAGINE NEEDING ANY MORE SERVICES'THAN ARE CURRENTLY PROVIDED, THE EXISTING SERVICES MEET MY NEEDS BUT I STILL FEEL EXTREMELY. ALONE AND.LONELY, I NEED THE SERVICES OFFERED BUT WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE_THEM IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, RECEIVING.COMMUNITY SERVICES IS THE SAME THING AS RECEIVING CHARITY. EXISTING SERVICES SHOULD B EXPANDED'TO'REACH' MORE PEOPLE IN ALL OF -JOHNSON LOUNTY. I ALSO NEED SERVICES ON THE WEEKEND AND/OR 24 HOURS A DAY. IF I RELY ON TOO MANY OF THE SERVICES, I WONT BE ABLE TO AFFORD THE COST, _ NONE...OF..THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE OF MY FEELINGS. 28) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES DO YOU FEEL WOULD PROVIDE YOU WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SECURITY AU INDEPENDENCE AND SOCIAL CONTACT WITH OTHERS? MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT WITH EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES, HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, - CURRENTLY LIVE IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, ` I DONT KNOW, i Ib31 f_ �I f i. HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, - CURRENTLY LIVE IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, ` I DONT KNOW, i Ib31 rn►::IDEMTIAI (IIFSTIOP+kJ4IRE (CONTINUED) 29) IOWA CITY HAS SEVERAL SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FACILITIES AND SERVICES; YOURATIONs ATTTITUDEICH OF T HE TOWARDEVALUATIN G STATE— NG MENTSBESTHOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHC ALL THAT APPLY)? j WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE OFFERING SUBSIDIZED RENT, DUE TO MY INCOME, I CAN ONLY CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED — HOUSING/SERVICES. __ I WOULD NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE, I WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT pFGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. RECEIVING WHAT I CONSIDER TO. BE A It BARGAIN" IS THE -- ONLY WAY I WOULD CONSIDER CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEMENT. I WOULD INCREASE. THE PROPORTION OF THE INCOME 1 SPEND ON HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES TO HAVE THE HOUSING/SERVICES 1 PREFER, I'AM`CONTENT WITH My CURRENT LIVING;ARRANGEMENT, _ NONE OF THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE OF MY ATTITUDE.. 30) WHICH OF THE-FOLLq�ING.BEST DESCRIBES YOUR PLAN FOR YOUR RETIRE14ENT YEARS I- PLAN,.TO;CONTINUE LIVING WHERE I AM., j WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY, I PLAN TO LIVE WITH RELATIVES OR FRIENDS. _ I PLAN TO RELY ON EXISTING C014MUNITY SERVICES, I AM NOT SURE WHAT I WILL DO - GENERALLY DON'T PLAN 0,GENERALNAN VERY FAR IN ADVANCE OR I INTEND jTO PLANSLATER, AM TRYING TO DEVELOP A PLAN NOW. j0 i i 1 I i I i I I I_ COgFIpEjjTIAL 1111ESTIONNAI t (CONTINUED) K) WHICH, THE DO YOU FEEL LIVING ULD ARRANGEMENT INCREASE ARRANGEMENTTO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ADMISSION INTO HOSPITAL OR TEMPORARY STAY IN NURSING HOME, _ CHANGE IN PHYSICAL HEALTH, REACHING 75 YEARS OF AGE. FEELINGS.OF ANXIETY DUE TO LONELINESS, DEATH OF SPOUSE, LOSS OF CLOSE FRIEND OR RELATIVE, FEELINGS OF ANXIETY DUE TO HOME RESPONSIBILITIES. NONE OF'THE ABOVE WOULD AFFECT MY INTEREST,IN'HOUSING_ FOR THE ELDERLY. 54) IF,,.I•F,OUND;THE-TYPE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY 11 ( NEEDS �Qjl. , ,WOULD PREFER TO _CHECK. _ PAY RENT TO COVER THE COSTS. — W IN ENTRANCE FEE �I MONTHLY, RENT TO COVER,THE COSTS, 7tt,)Ti'1'- PURCHASE INSTEAD OF RENT WOULD CURRENTLY CONSIDER NO'ALTERNATIVE`OTHER THAN 'HAVING MY OWN HOME, 33) IF I DECIDED TO PURCHASE INSTEAD OF REV. -THE MAXIMUM I WOULD BE WILLING TO,PAY FOR ELDERLY HOUSING TO MEET MY NEEDS IS: _ UP TO $35,000. _ _ UP TO $50,000 _ UP TO $75,000 _ UP TO $100,000 OVER $100,000 I AM NOT INTERESTED IN PURCHASING HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY ml I I coopFMTiAi (.1uFSTION(CONTINOED) 34) HOW IS YOUR PHYSICAL HEALTHN(�yj COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO? BETTER NOW ABOUT THE SAME j I WORSE,NOW E HO HELPS YOU WITH SUHAS 35) IS THERE SOMEONHOUSEWORK, MEALS,WBATHING, DRESSING ORCGETTINGSAROUND?PPING, e I. N0, I DO NOT.REOUIRE AS N0, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE -TO ALWAYS FIND THE ASSISTANCE I j NEED, I I _ YES, A FAMILY MEMBER OR CLOSE FRIEND. YES, I HIRE SOMEONE AS NEEDED OR USE A PRIVATE COMPANY. YES,•,I USE,A COMMUNITY,AGENCY SERVICE, i �j IF YES, HAVE YOU BECOME MORE CONCERNED ABOUT''THE PERMANENCE !i AND/OR AFFORDABILITY OF,YOUR SUPPORT'PERSON/SERVICE. i i No 36)'WHI6'-DF THE FOLLOWING BEST'DESCRIBES;YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT I' YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES? I CANNOT ALWAYS PAY MY BILLS _.. , CAN BARELY PAY MY BILLS J , I WORRY A LOT ABOUT PAYING MY BILLS _ MY MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES ARE SOMEWHAT OF A PROBLEM i BILLS ARE NO PROBLEM FOR ME j 37-40) THE FOLLOWING.OUESj1ONS RELApTE TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF I ELDERLY HOUSING,I ASSSTED LIVING IS HOUSING UM SER- j VICES SUCH AS MEALS, 4 -HOUR STAFFING, HOUSEKEEPING, ETC, , I -lo i I ' - 1631 I coopFMTiAi (.1uFSTION(CONTINOED) 34) HOW IS YOUR PHYSICAL HEALTHN(�yj COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO? BETTER NOW ABOUT THE SAME j I WORSE,NOW E HO HELPS YOU WITH SUHAS 35) IS THERE SOMEONHOUSEWORK, MEALS,WBATHING, DRESSING ORCGETTINGSAROUND?PPING, e I. N0, I DO NOT.REOUIRE AS N0, I HAVE BEEN UNABLE -TO ALWAYS FIND THE ASSISTANCE I j NEED, I I _ YES, A FAMILY MEMBER OR CLOSE FRIEND. YES, I HIRE SOMEONE AS NEEDED OR USE A PRIVATE COMPANY. YES,•,I USE,A COMMUNITY,AGENCY SERVICE, i �j IF YES, HAVE YOU BECOME MORE CONCERNED ABOUT''THE PERMANENCE !i AND/OR AFFORDABILITY OF,YOUR SUPPORT'PERSON/SERVICE. i i No 36)'WHI6'-DF THE FOLLOWING BEST'DESCRIBES;YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT I' YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES? I CANNOT ALWAYS PAY MY BILLS _.. , CAN BARELY PAY MY BILLS J , I WORRY A LOT ABOUT PAYING MY BILLS _ MY MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES ARE SOMEWHAT OF A PROBLEM i BILLS ARE NO PROBLEM FOR ME j 37-40) THE FOLLOWING.OUESj1ONS RELApTE TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF I ELDERLY HOUSING,I ASSSTED LIVING IS HOUSING UM SER- j VICES SUCH AS MEALS, 4 -HOUR STAFFING, HOUSEKEEPING, ETC, , I -lo i I ' - 1631 I CONFIDENTIAL AlIESTIONNAIRE (CONTINUED) 371 ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH YOUR CURRENT L{Y[N6 ARRANGEMENT? — YES — No 38) /F NO, WHICH OF THE FOLLO�� DESCRIBES WHAT WOULD BEST MEET YOUR CURRENT NEEDS CHECK 2Ma \: HOME HEALTH AND/OR EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES �� |NDEPENOENTLIVING - OmE~AEDRDOMAPARTMENT � INDEPENDENT LIVING ~ Two-AEDR00M APARTMENT INDEPENDENT LIVING ~ EFFICIENCY APARTMENT ^~~-- ASSISTED LIVING ~ PRIVATE QOUM -- .~--~�� 8��{SJEQ LIVING ~ SEMIPRIVATE QDOM ' ' ASSISTED LIVING ~ EFFICIENCY APARTMENT ASSISTED LIVING ~ GROUP HOME ~~~�.�� CONDOMINIUM ( lD.E~AEURnoM;—TwU~QEDR |DM: � TuREE~QEDRUOM) NURSING HOME- LIFE UME- |. . �FE [u�E / ARANTEEn'A[ALTHCAR[ FOR LIFE) - 39\ / FEEL THE RANGE OF RENT FOR INDEPENDENT LIYING IN HOUSING FUR -THE ELDERLY WITH NO SERVICES SHOULD BE tENTER THE LEAST YOUWOULD EXPECT TuPAY FOR WHAT YOU WANTAWDTHE MAXIMUM YOU COULD AFFORD): ' ` � TO PER MONTH FOR AN EFF[CiEWCY APARTMENT /uTlL[Tl[S INCLUDED 1 ' T0 MONTH FOR & UNE~BEDROOMAPARTMENT M� 1 TlL[T[ES [NCLU0EU, � TO PER MONTH FOR A TWO~BE0R00M APARTMENT �UTlLlT[ES INCLUDED � 80) 1 FEEL THE RANG[ OF RENT FOR ASSISTED LIVING IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY SHOULD BE (ENTER - YOU WOULD E%PECT TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU N8mT ND THE YOU COULD AFFORD �� � TO P|R MONTH FOR A SE[PRlYAT[ RUUn 7UT[LIT[ES lNCLUDEDl TO � PER MONTH FOR A PRIVATE ROOM (UTILITIES INCLUDED) � T0 � PER MONTH FOR AN FFFl[lEN[Y APARTMENT --~�~~~ (UT[LlTlES |N[LUDED\ ! | ����� ^- ,n'~," CONFIDENTIAL (HIESTIOPdVAIR (CONTINUED) 41) IF ADDITIONAL HOUSING WERE AVAILABLE IN IOWA CITY, WHAT WOULD BE THE IMPORTANCE OF THE FOLL WING FACTORS IN DETERMINING IF YOU LWOULD EVEL OFCOIMPORTANCEDTOTYOUTFORCEACHEFACTOR):COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE IMPORTANT MPORTANT IMPORTANCE IMPLITTLE ORTANCE LOCATION . . . . . . . SERVICES PROVIDED IN ADDITION TO HOUSING AMENITIES . SIZE OF APARTMENTS OR ROOMS MORE THAN ONE LEVEL OF ---CAKE OFFERED IN -THE SAME FACILITY .......... AMOUNT OF RENT OPINION OF FAMILY FRIENDS LIVING THERE AESTHETIC QUALITIES OF THE AREA SURROUNDING THE SITE . BUILDING ON ONE LEVEL . 42) IF -I FELT THAT HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS, I WOULD PREFER THAT THIS TYPE FACILITY BE LOCATED: IN'A DOWNTOWN AREA AWAY FROM A DOWNTOWN AREA NO PARTICULAR PREFERENCE. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ANY HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY IN ANY LOCATIONi i ' i i I I i I i' I i i � i =I .I, 1 QNE DEfiTIAL DIIESTIDNNAIRE (CONTINUED) 43) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING AMENITIES DO YOU FEEL WOULD BE IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO YOU TO PAY A HIGHER MONTHLY RATE TO RECEIVE 1N HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY (CHECK THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH FACTOR)? VERY SOMEWHAT LITTLE NO IMPORTANT P NIMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE NURSE ON DUTY BEAUTY/BARBER SHOP COVERED PARKING CHAPEL WITH RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES POOL/HEALTH AND RECREA— TION AREA GROUP LOUNGES _.CALL—HELP SYSTEM __.BUILDING SECURITY _,.CLOSED. CIRCUIT TELEVISION EXTRA STORAGE SPACE —-.SPECIAL E?UIPMENT FOR ELDERLY (SIT -1N SHOWERS, ETC.) ROOM AND ACCOMMODATIONS FOR: GUESTS OF RESIDENTS AND/OR NON-RESIDENTS 44) THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR THE AMENITIES SELECTED IS $� PER MONTH §O)LETE.BASED ON THE TYPE AMENITIES YOU CONSIDER VERY IMPORTANT . 45) IN AN INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITY, I FEEL THAT SERVICES SHOULD BE OFFERED AND THE COSTS FOR THESE SERVICES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RENTAL RATE IN ADDITION TO HOUSING COSTS. AGREE DISAGREE -13- 1631 i I is i I t I I. v i a i i roMEUIU TIAL0110 011MAIRE (CONTINUED) 46) IF YOU AgU WITH QUESTION #45, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: WHAT SERVICES DO YOU FEEL SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN AN INDEPENDENT !]V1NG FACILITY (IN ADDITION TO HOUSING) AND YOU WOULD BE (CHECKG TO PAY PROPORTIONATELY HIGHER RENTAL RATES TO RECEIVE ... THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH FACTOR VERY SOMEWHAT LITTLE NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE BREAKFAST SERVED DAILY . LUNCH SERVED DAILY DINNER SERVED DAILY HOUSEKEEPING . , . LAUNDRY (LINENS, TOWELS, ETC.) . . . . . . . . . PERSONAL -LAUNDRY:, ASSISTANCE WITH BATHING, DRESSING, ETC, MONITORING MEDICATION ASSISTANCE WITH WALKING, SHOPPING, GETTING TO DOCTOR, ETC, TRANSPORTATION RUNNING ERRANDS ASSISTANCE WITH OBTAIN-' ING AND COORDINATING EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES , • . , , • • EDUCATIONAL SEMINARS AND SPEAKERS COUNSELING GROUP TRIPS ELDERLY PLANNEDSEVERALTI MES A YEAR . . . . ACTIVITIES AND RECREA- TION . . . . , , , • 24-HOUR STAFFING , -14- i i 631 i { L i i i I ' _i I 1 I 'y ,i i. •I J �7 L.N i roMEUIU TIAL0110 011MAIRE (CONTINUED) 46) IF YOU AgU WITH QUESTION #45, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: WHAT SERVICES DO YOU FEEL SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN AN INDEPENDENT !]V1NG FACILITY (IN ADDITION TO HOUSING) AND YOU WOULD BE (CHECKG TO PAY PROPORTIONATELY HIGHER RENTAL RATES TO RECEIVE ... THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH FACTOR VERY SOMEWHAT LITTLE NO IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE BREAKFAST SERVED DAILY . LUNCH SERVED DAILY DINNER SERVED DAILY HOUSEKEEPING . , . LAUNDRY (LINENS, TOWELS, ETC.) . . . . . . . . . PERSONAL -LAUNDRY:, ASSISTANCE WITH BATHING, DRESSING, ETC, MONITORING MEDICATION ASSISTANCE WITH WALKING, SHOPPING, GETTING TO DOCTOR, ETC, TRANSPORTATION RUNNING ERRANDS ASSISTANCE WITH OBTAIN-' ING AND COORDINATING EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES , • . , , • • EDUCATIONAL SEMINARS AND SPEAKERS COUNSELING GROUP TRIPS ELDERLY PLANNEDSEVERALTI MES A YEAR . . . . ACTIVITIES AND RECREA- TION . . . . , , , • 24-HOUR STAFFING , -14- i i 631 i { L i i i I I: 'y ,i i. •I CONFIDENTIAL 011ESTIONVAIRE (CONTINUED) 47) THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT I WOULD BE WILLING TQ PAY FOR THE SER- VICES SELECTED 1S $ PER MONTH (COMPETE BASED ON THE TYPE SERVICES YOU CONSIDER 'VERY IMPORTANT" 48) WHAT IS THE LIKE HOOD YOU WOULD BECOME A RESIDENT OF HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY NO�.IF A FACILITY WERE AVAILABLE IN JOHNSON COUNTY WHICH MATCHED YOUR NEEDS, PREFERENCES AND ABILITY TO PAY? DEFINITELY PROBABLY 14AYBE PROBABLY NOT DEFINITELY NOT IF -YOU ARE- NOT- INTERESTED NOW, WOULD YOU PROBABLY:.BE.INTERESTED: WITHIN THE NEXT 5 YEARS WITHIN THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS I AM NOT SURE 1 WOULD NEVER BE INTERESTED: I PLAN TO MOVE TO A WARMER CLIMATE, _ I PLAN TO LIVE WITH RELATIVES _ I WOULD PREFER A LIFE CARE OR CONDOMINIUM PROJECT I PLAN TO WAIT UNTIL I REQUIRE NURSING HOME CARE ---49)..OVERALL� I..THINK_HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY WOULD _ INCREASE MY FEELINGS OF INDEPENDENCE _ DECREASE.MY FEELINGS. -OF INDEPENDENCE _ HAVE NO DEFINITE EFFECT ON CHANGING MY FEELINGS OF --- -INDEPENDENCE -15- 'J I1 1631 u. i i CONFIDENTIAL 011ESTIONVAIRE (CONTINUED) 47) THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT I WOULD BE WILLING TQ PAY FOR THE SER- VICES SELECTED 1S $ PER MONTH (COMPETE BASED ON THE TYPE SERVICES YOU CONSIDER 'VERY IMPORTANT" 48) WHAT IS THE LIKE HOOD YOU WOULD BECOME A RESIDENT OF HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY NO�.IF A FACILITY WERE AVAILABLE IN JOHNSON COUNTY WHICH MATCHED YOUR NEEDS, PREFERENCES AND ABILITY TO PAY? DEFINITELY PROBABLY 14AYBE PROBABLY NOT DEFINITELY NOT IF -YOU ARE- NOT- INTERESTED NOW, WOULD YOU PROBABLY:.BE.INTERESTED: WITHIN THE NEXT 5 YEARS WITHIN THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS I AM NOT SURE 1 WOULD NEVER BE INTERESTED: I PLAN TO MOVE TO A WARMER CLIMATE, _ I PLAN TO LIVE WITH RELATIVES _ I WOULD PREFER A LIFE CARE OR CONDOMINIUM PROJECT I PLAN TO WAIT UNTIL I REQUIRE NURSING HOME CARE ---49)..OVERALL� I..THINK_HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY WOULD _ INCREASE MY FEELINGS OF INDEPENDENCE _ DECREASE.MY FEELINGS. -OF INDEPENDENCE _ HAVE NO DEFINITE EFFECT ON CHANGING MY FEELINGS OF --- -INDEPENDENCE -15- 'J I1 1631 u. I i I i I I, i -ll) t CONFIDENTIAL (IIIF_STIOPMAIRE (COUTIMUED) 50) IN GENERAL, THE BEST SOURCE OF INFORMATION ABOUT COMMUNITY OR ELDERLY AFFAIRS FOR ME IS: RADIO _ TELEVISION NEWSPAPER _ NEWSLETTERS (SENIOR CENTER POST OR 'OTHER NEWSLETTERS FOR THE ELDERLY, CHURCH NEWSLETTERS, ETC.) COMMENTS OF FRIENDS, RELATIVES, PROFESSIONALS, NEIGHBORS, ETC, INFORMATION I RECEIVE THROUGH THE MAIL _ PERSONAL RESEARCH ABOUT MY INTERESTS 51) IFA FOUND THE TYPE,OF HOUSING A TERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY' NEEDS.9X# ; I ?WOULD (ru�;Q9): LIKE TO BE ONE OF THE FIRST RESIDENTS BE INTERESTED ONLY IF MY CLOSE FRIENDS OR RELATIVES APPROVED OF THE IDEA _ PREFER_TO.WAIT ABOUT. A YEAR TO ENSURE THAT I MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION PREFER TO WAIT UNTIL MY FRIENDS HAVE BECOME RESIDENTS AND SEE IF THEY EXPERIENCE ANY PROBLEMS PREFER NOT TO CHANGE JUST TO FOLLOW MY FRIENDS I DO NOT PLAN TO CHANGE MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT I AM NOT SURE 52) IN GENERAL, I THINK CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEMENT, EVEN IF FOR THE BETTER, WOULD CAUSE ME: _ ANXIETY AND DISCOMFORT _ SOME INCONVENIENCE IN ADAPTING TO A NEW ENVIRONMENT NO GREAT ANXIETY IF I THOUGHT THE CHANGE WERE 1N MY BEST INTEREST I AM NOT SURE -I6- rb3r r i LONEIDENTI I 011 STIOhUTAIRG (CONTINUED) 53) IF I WERE CONSIDERING HOUSING FOR THE NATIVE LIVING ARRANGEMENT, ELDERLY AS AN ALTER - WOULD WOULD EVALUATE THE RENTAL RATES RELATJVE TO MY INCOME AND PROBABLY FEEL.,, (CHECK &L Iy� APPLY) - VERY LITTLE ANXIETY IF MY INCOME WERE APPROPRIATE VERY FEARFUL THAT RATES MAY INCREASE AND I WOULD SOON NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PAY RENT f LESS CONCERNED DEPENDING ON THE OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PROJECT _ I ALREADY LIVE IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY 'I''WOULD NOT CONSIDER CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEMENT DO NOT KNOW 54) ARE'YOU'INTERESTED 1N'KNOMING;THE RESULTSS0, PLEASE COMPLETE THE SURVEY?`.:IF: : FOLLOWING AND THE'''.QQF.THIS NFORN'' YOU OF THE PROGRESS AND SURVEY RESULTS, i NAME ADDRESS L i .>. TELEPHONE NUMBER Ll { 1ij i i. i 1631 I � 1 I APPENDIX C-4 ELDERLY HOUSING/SERVICES MARKET DIMENSIONS. -' _ I QUESTION DIMENSION VARIABLE NUMBER — 1. DEMOGRAPHIC/ Age 1 ! 2 SOCIO-ECONOMIC Sex Marital Status 3 J Current Living Arrangement 4 Type Residence Home Ownership and Value of Home -I Apartment Rent I CurrentAnnual Income 8 Income Be fore.Retirement 9 Location, of Current Residence 10 j Education Source of Current Income 12 j 2. NEED/INTEREST Factors: Affecting Interest Zo Lifestyle Changes Overall Physical Health 23 Change in Physical Health 34 Eyesight/Hearing 21 Emotional Posture 25 Nurse in Home 22 I Patient in Hospital or Nursing I � Home 13 I� Own a Car and Drive 14 j I, Support Person 15 16 Anxiety in Coping Encouragement to Change Living 4 Arrangement 17 3• LEVEL OF INTEREST Independence/Security/Social Contact 49 j Independence -1 Retirement Plan 30 u Satisfaction With Current Living Arrangement 37 Anxiety in Changing Current Living Arrangement 5? Rate of Adoption Current and Future Likelihood 48 4. LEVEL OF NEED Requirements for Assistance With Daily Living 24 Assistance From Community Services 26 . _ Feelings About Community Services 27 I _I Support Person/Service 35 , �t J ELDERLY HOUSING/SERVICES MARKET DEMINSIONS (continued) DIMENSION VARIABLE 5. PRODUCT Type Service/Housing Determining Factors Amenities Services; PRICING Rent vs. Purchase Purchase Price Rangeof Rent Additional Rent for Amenities Additional Rent for Services Current Monthly Living Expenses Attitudes About Subsidization Attitudes" About`Rental'Rates LOCATION Preference PROMOTION Hord -Of -Mouth Medium --' ;tc QUESTION NUMBER 38 41 43 45/46 32 33 39/40 44 47 36 29 53 42 18/19 50 J i I I j.. t ELDERLY HOUSING/SERVICES MARKET DEMINSIONS (continued) DIMENSION VARIABLE 5. PRODUCT Type Service/Housing Determining Factors Amenities Services; PRICING Rent vs. Purchase Purchase Price Rangeof Rent Additional Rent for Amenities Additional Rent for Services Current Monthly Living Expenses Attitudes About Subsidization Attitudes" About`Rental'Rates LOCATION Preference PROMOTION Hord -Of -Mouth Medium --' ;tc QUESTION NUMBER 38 41 43 45/46 32 33 39/40 44 47 36 29 53 42 18/19 50 'i , FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ^I J ---------"----------------------------------------------------------------- 1) 0 S VALUE LABEL FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT i I APPENDIX C-5 CONFIDENTIAL_ 1-)UESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA J j I !J 100A 1 C J i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ^I J ---------"----------------------------------------------------------------- 1) 0 S VALUE LABEL FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT UNDER 55 8 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 55 - 64 88 14.9% 15.17 16.5% 65 - 74 270 45.8% 46.4% 62.9%' 75 - 84 173 29.3% 29.7% 92.6% ":,.. 85.AND OVER 43 7.3% 7.4% 100.0% .,"..:. NO RESPONSE 8 1.4% J � c 590 1UU. 17% IUO. U% I MFF1N 71.119 STD DEV 8.1722 MINIMUM '`36.000 MAXIMUM -- - 96.000 -- - -- ------ ------- 2) ---- -------------------------- SEX --- J ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VAL11F LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT. MALE S' 1 193 32.7% 33.5% 33.5% FEMRLF. 2 383 64.9% ' 66.5% 100.0% '. NO RESPONSE •..:: 0 14 2.4% :. -------- 590 -------- 100.0% ------ ----590 100.0% --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) MARITAL_.STATUS ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE =+ VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT '8 NGLE'NEVER MARRIED MARRIED' - 1 2 4B 276 8.1% 46.8%' 8.1% "46.9% 8.1% 55.0% WIDOWED 3 235 39.8% 39.9% 94.9% DIVORCED,.. SEPARATED 4 30 5.1/. 5.1% 100.0% .,.. NO'RESPONSE' 0 1 0.2% ------- -" --------- -------- 59() 100.0% 100.0% -=------------------ -4) ---------.-----'---------------------------------------- CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE .I VAL 1.1E. LABEL. - - - VAL.LIE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT Lf VF. ALONE 1 220 37.3:: 38.5% 38.5% LIVE SOMEIINE ELSE P, 4:88 48.8% 5U.4% 89.0% -� LIVE W/RELATIVE. 3 34_ 5. S7. 6.0'/. 94.9% _. _.. ... LIVE. W/NON-REI_A7IVF.. 4 10 1:7% 1.8% - "96.7% LIVE /GROUP DUARTERS 6 19 3.21% 3.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE II 19Z.-------- ------�- --------- U7U. (-)." 100.0% I !J 100A 1 C J i XOIJAIC 7 CONFJl)ENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING IOWA CITY, IOWA FRrOl.)ENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- TYPE OF RESIDENCE 1 ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE f VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT HOUSE 1 434 73.6% 73.9% 73.9% FARM 2 44 7.5% 7.5% 81.4% CONDOMINIUM- 3 10 1.7% 1.7% 83.1% APARTMENT 4 87 14.7% 14.8% 98.0% BOARDING HOUSE 5 0 0.0% 0.0% 98.0% HOUSING THE ELDERLY 6 12 2.0% 2.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 3 -------- 0.5% --- ---- --------- 590 7 100.0% 100.0% ------------------------------------------------------------- 6) DO YOU OWN YOUR HOME? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE :.VALUE LAREL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT, PERCENT YES- 467 79.2% 80.7% 80.7% - NO I 1, . 1 , 2 112 19.0% 19.3% 100.0% �,:; 1-: ---.-NO. RESPONSE 0 11 1.9% ---- -------- 590 -------- 100.07 100.0% IF YES, WHAT IS THE TAX-ASSESSED VALUE? ADJUSTED,CUMULATIVE QQLUE LABEL FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT,, PERCENT -UNDER $10.000 10 77 1.7% 13.1% 2.8% 21.8% 2.8% 24.6% n' i. $1()10()() - 39-999 -6?.999 168 28.5% 47.6% 72:2%* --40,000 70,000 7 99-999 69 11.7% 19.5% 91.8% 100.000 - 124.999 18 3.1% 5.1% 96.9% 125,000 AND OVER ti 1.9% 3.1% 100.0% NO;RESPONSE 237 4.2 -----0---% ------- 590 100.0% io6.o% MEAN 58521 STD DEV 29540 MINIMUM Boo -------------------------------------------- ---------------- 7-7Ij MAXIMUM 216000 XOIJAIC I S I l I i I I: � i j -� CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------------- 7) IF YOCI ARE RENTING AN APARTMENT, WHAT --------------- 1S YOUR CURRENT _____ -- M014THL'Y RENT^ INCLUDING UTILITIES: j VALUE I_APFI. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I -- FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT _ UIJDER $200 9:204 - 399 16 2.7% 27.6% 27.6% - 400 - 599 25 4.2% 43.1% 70.7% - . :600 - 799 11 1.9% 19.0% 89.7% -BU0 - 999 5 0.8% 8.6% 98.3% 1000 AND OVER 1 0.27 1.7% 100.0% E RESPONSENO RE 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% _.. 532 90.2% _.. -------- 590 100.0% 100.0% ' MEAN .334.017 STD DEV 183.952 ....-. I _---pIINIMUM - - - _. 76. - - MAXIMUM BUU EXCLUDING UTILITIES: -•. �'�' `-VALUE LABELADJUSTED FREQUENCY CUMULATIVE PERCENT ..UNDER PERCENT PERCENT �'• $200 _ $200 - 399,:14 2.4% 23.0% 23.0% -- '400 599 31 5.3% ..50.8% 73.8% t - ••r" .'600'- 799'. - 9 1.5% ...14.8% 88.5% ' 800 - 999 7 1.2% 11.5% 100.0% ' - 1000 HND OVER O 0.O% . :;-.0.07 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% - .. , ,.. ,.... - ,. 529 89.7% ... -------- 1590 ---89.7% --------- 100.0% 100.07. MEAN 32.5.1$1 S'TD DEV 176.052 _.. MINIMUM ------------------- ------------ MAXIMUM 750 APPROXIMATE CURRENT ANNUAL INCOME. IF ________ YOU ARE MARFIED, SHOW COMBINED INCOME (CHE.CK ONE): I I - VALUE L.ABEt_ VAl_Uf_' FRF.GIIENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCEN7 PERCENT PERCENT O - 9.999 1 11i.ssrl0 - IC,,499 127 21.51: 24.77. 24.7% j . ... 16.500 - 24,999 3 1. `ib 26.4'% 30, i% 55.0% '25.040 - 34,999 4 93 15.8% 18.1% 73.0% 35.000 - 49,999' h ] 11.4% 1::.0% 86.4% 5 54.000 AMO nVFR 6 44 2R 7.5% 8.5% 94.6% Nll RESPONSE 4.7% 8.4% 100.0% fl - 590 r nu. ()%1 ilo. uz MEAN 2. 47h 91 r) I)FV f I ---------------------- ------------------ I S I l I i I I: � i j: � I i 1 Ir. I+ I 1 j 'utWAIC I ' CUNF'lUENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTTCS -'� 9) i APPROXIMATE ANNUAL INCOME BEFORE RETIREMENT (CHECK. ONE): +..,. - -- - • •- ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE '' -i- - VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ••- U - 9,999 1 100 16.9% 20.2% 20.2% - .10,000 - 14,999 2 99 16.8% 20.0% 40.2% - 15,000 - 24,999 3 1227 21.5% 25.7% 65.9% -- -25,000 - 39.999 4 103 17.5% 20.8% B6.7% • - .40.000 - 59,999 5 45 7.6% 9.1% 95.8% 60,000 AND OVER 6 21 3.6% 4.2% 100.0% - - NO RESPONSE U • 95 16.1% -------- 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11EAN- '2:636 STD DEV 1.581 1 10) DO YOU LIVE: .. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I - IN -IOWA CITY:-- 1 460 78.0% 79.7% 79.7% CITY IN JOHNSON CO 2 45 7.6% 7.8% 87.5% RURAL JOHNSON CO 3 70 11.9% 12.1% 99.7% OUTSIDE JOHNSON CO 4 2 0.37"- 0.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 13 2.2% _ -------- 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% .. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) HIGHEST LEVEL OF FORMAL EDUCATION COMPLETED: - ' - - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE I-ADEL. VALUE FREQUENCY. PERCENT PERCE14T PERCENT - LESS THAN 9TH GRADE 1 70 It.(?% 12.2% 12.22% 121H GRADE 2 176 29.87. 30.7% 42.9% -�-. SOME COLL/VOCATION 3 141 23.97. 24.6% 67.5% COLLEGE/VOCATIONAL 4 92 15.6% 16.1% 83.6% ! - OST GRADUATE COLL 5 S'4- 15.5% 16 4% 100.0% ! I - N NO FESPONSE � 0 7.'7 2.9'!. . I ---- 590 --- 110.0'4 ---- 1 VO. U% --------------------------------------------------------------------------- MEAN :.857 STI) DEV 1..5119 IOWAIC i J: } ! r. . CON.'-;DCN"f Ii9L QIIES'TIONWAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 12) SOURCE OF CURRENT INCOME (CHECK, ALL THAT APPLY): - VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT SOCIAL SECURITY 1 516 B7.5% ,;NOT.APPLICABLE- 0 74 -------- 12.5% -_ - 590., --------- 100.0% -. _ SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME 1 32 5.4% NOT APPLICABLE - 0 558 -------- 94.6% . .... 590 --------- 100.0% ._ ,.;,.,INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS 1 387 65.6% NOT`APPLIC ABLE 0 203 -------- 34.4% --------- . 590 100.0% EMPLOYMENT= - 1 109- 18.5% _ NOT APPLICABLE` 0 481 B1.5% =--- ._...__._......_ . ---- i... .'..._.._. -------- 590 100.0% ..RETIREMENT BENEFITS/PREV EMF - PENSION 1 250 42.4% NOT,,AFPLICABLE - - 0. - 340. 57.6% . ----590 . 100.0% RENTAL. REVENUE 1 94 15.9% Nor APPLICABLE - 0 496 -------- 84.1% .. .-. 590 --------- 100.0% OTHER SQIIRCER 1 76 12.9% NOT.APPLICABLE 0 514 -------- 87.1% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 590 --------- 100.0% 1a) WITHIN THE LAST THREE YEARS. HAVE YOU BEEN,A PATIENT IN A HOSPITAL OR NURSING HOME? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALIJE. LAPEL VALUE F'REPLIFNCY PFRCENT PERCENT PERCENT YES 1 209 35.4%. 36.0% 36.0% NO 2 .':71 62.9% 64.0% 100.0'% NO RESP014SE i1 10 1.7% -------------------------- 1 OWA 1 C i CONFivF.NIIAI_ C!UESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 14) DO YOU OWN A CAR AND DRIVE? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT __i6). THINKING BACK OVER THE LAST YEAR, HAVE YOU EXPERIENCED MORE _ . ANXIETY IN FEELING ALONE, COPING WITH DAILY CHORES OR -ACTIVITIES, OR COPING WITH PHYSICAL INFIRMITIES? VALUE. LABEL YES NO NO ANX. EXPERIENCED NO RESPONSE` 1 453 76.8% 77.8% 77.8% YES 2 129 21.9% 22.2% 100.0% NO 0 81.4% 21.9% 22.7% 51.0% NO RESP014SE -------- 47.3% -------- --------- 0 213.6% 590 100.0% 100.0% -------- 590 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) DO YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO CHECKS ON YOU REGULARLY (DAILY OR SEVERAL TIMES A WEEK) JUST TO SEE HOW YOU ARE DOING? .. _ ADJUSTED. CUMULATIVE . VALUE I_A8F_L VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 270 45.8% 47.2% 47.2% YES .. 2 302 51.2% 52.8% 100.0% NO __. NO RESP014SE 0 -------- 18 3.1% -------- --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% __i6). THINKING BACK OVER THE LAST YEAR, HAVE YOU EXPERIENCED MORE _ . ANXIETY IN FEELING ALONE, COPING WITH DAILY CHORES OR -ACTIVITIES, OR COPING WITH PHYSICAL INFIRMITIES? VALUE. LABEL YES NO NO ANX. EXPERIENCED NO RESPONSE` 17) DURING 7HE FAST YEAR, HAS SOMEONE ENCOURAGED YOU TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VAI_I1E FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT. PERCENT 1 161 27.3% 28.3% 2B.3% 2 129 21.9% 22.7% 51.0% 3 279 47.3% 49.0% 100.0% 0 213.6% --------- -------- 590 -------- 1('.10.0% 100.0% 17) DURING 7HE FAST YEAR, HAS SOMEONE ENCOURAGED YOU TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VAI_I1E FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 88 14.9% 15.:% 15.3% YES 2 4R9 82.9% 134.7% 100.0% NO NO RESPONSE 0 1`t`. -------- 2% -------- --------- 590 100.0% SOO.0% ------------------ I F)WAIC /631 i i i I i j I: 1' I FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IDWA FREOUENCIES AND STATISTICS I t f � 7. ---------------- i I I i I f I i i I i j I: 1' LONF[DENT IAL L1UFsTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IDWA FREOUENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- I i I f I 18) IN GF.NF_RAI_. DO YOU TALK, TO YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT HOUSING A ND :J SERVICE RLTEFtNATIVES FOR THE ELDERLY? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE .l ._. VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 239 40.5% 42.2% 42.2% YES 2 327 55.4% 57.8% 100.0% • NO NO RESPONSE 0 24 -------- 4.1% -------- --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% J ----------------------------------------------- 19) ----------------------------- IF YOU AND YOUR FRIENDS WERE TO DISCUSS HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE ELDERLY. WHAT PART WOULD YOU BE MOST _LIKELY. TO PLAY? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE " VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT MAINLY LISTEN 1 373 63.2% 68.4% 68.4% TO CONVINCE THEM 2 117 1.9.8% 21.5% 89.9% .-.TRY. _... 3 32 5.4% 5.9% 95.8% �_. j .BOTH : .NEITHER. 4 23 3.9% 4.2% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 045 --__ -- 7.6% -------- --- -_---- ----- 590 ', 100.0% 100-0% --------------------- .. -20) -_ PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING LIFESTYLE CHANGES WHICH YOU HAVE EXPERIENCEMN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS AND WHICH HAVE CAUSED YOU GREAT DISCOMFORT (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): VALUE I_ABEI_." - VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT .�i _ —I DEATH OF SPOUSE 1 152' 25.8% ! NOT APPLILAPLE i) 438 74.2% -------- 590 --------- 100.0% -j CHANCE. IN YOUR HEAL. TH 1 174 29.5% J NOTAPPLICABLE0 _---416- ---70.5%- 590 100.0% =1 LOSS OF A CLOSE FAMILY MFMBFR/FRIEND 1 114 -_. NOT.APF'LICABL.E U 476 ---BU --- S90 100.0% 1 114 19.3% RE'r IREMENI ii NOT APPLICABLE ----476- --- - 7 I)WA 7 L; -� 1631 i i I i j I: 1' { i i I i I f I i LONFIDENTIALQUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 20 CONT VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY 1 MARITAL PROBLEM/CHANGE F' it 1.9% ,. NOT APPLICABLE 0 579 -------- 98.1% -------- ,. PERCENT 590 100.0% SON OR DAUGHTER LEAVING HOME 1 24 id NOT APPLICABLE 0 566' -------- 95.9% -------- NOT APPLICABLE, 3 500 i I 100.0'% 392 -------- f LONFIDENTIALQUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 20 CONT VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT MARITAL PROBLEM/CHANGE 1 it 1.9% ,. NOT APPLICABLE 0 579 -------- 98.1% -------- ,. PERCENT 590 100.0% SON OR DAUGHTER LEAVING HOME 1 24 4.1% NOT APPLICABLE 0 566' -------- 95.9% -------- NOT APPLICABLE, 3 500 990 100.0'% OTHER WHO PROVIDES CARE IN MY HOME: 1 28 4.7% NOT APPLICABLE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE 0 562 -------- 95.3% ------ --- ,. PERCENT REGULARLY 1 6 590 100.0% NONE OF THE ABOVE OCCASIONALLY 2 10 1 198 33.6% NOT APPLICABLE, 3 500 84.7% 0 392 -------- 66.4% --------- . ---------------------------------------------------- 12.5% -------- --------- 590 ------.------------ 100.0% 21) HOW IS:YOUR-EYESIGHT"AND/OR 100.0% HEARING? " - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FRFQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT EXCELLENT 1 78" -13.2% 13.8% -13.8% ,;,,, GOOD - 2 284 "48.1% 50.4% 64.2% FAIR 3 162 27.5% 228.7% 92.9% .,POOR. 4 35 5.9% 6.2% 99.1% - - DEPENDENT 5 5 0.8%- 0.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 26 4.4% -------- --------- ... -. .. -------- 590 100.0%- 100.0%, 22) I HAVE A NURSE WHO PROVIDES CARE IN MY HOME: " ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT REGULARLY 1 6 1.0% 1.2% 1.2% OCCASIONALLY 2 10 1.7% 1.9% 3.1% NOT NEEDED 3 500 84.7% "96.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 74 12.5% -------- --------- ------------------------------------- -------- ____J90 ---------------------------- 100.0% 100.0% AS/ F CONFIDENTIAL OUEsTIUNNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREOIJENCIES AND STATISTICS ]OWAIr 1631 23) HOW DO YOU RATE YOUR OVERALL PHYSICAL HEALTH RELATIVE TO A DOING THE THINGS YOU WANT TO DO? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABELVALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT EXCELLENT 1 99 16.8% 17.5% 17.5% GOOD* 2 288 88% 510%68.5% 4.. 92.4% FAIR' 3 135 22.9% 23.9% POOR 4 27 4.6%, 4.8%,. 97.2% VMY'DEPENDENT 5 14 2.4% 2.5% 99.6% TOTALLY DEPENDENT 6 2 0.3% 0.4% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 25 4.2% --------- -------------------------------------------------------- -------- 590 -------- 100.0% 100.6% -- ----- ----- -- ]OWAIr 1631 A ]OWAIr 1631 I1fFF I I� I 1 I . CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA - '.. FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------- 24) WHO DO YOU RELY ON FOR THE FOLLOWING: _______________ HOUSEWORK: i I VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED CUMULATIVEPERCENT PERCENT I RELY ON MYSELF 1 361 - OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2 61.2% 64.0% 64.0% ' OTHERS TOTALLY - 140 3 23.7% 24.8% 88.8% NO RESPONSE 63 0 10.7% 11.2% 100.0% ,. ... .. .. 26 4.4% 590 --100 0% 100.0% PREPARING MEALS - VALUE LABEL- -VALUE--FREQUENCY PERCENT APERCENT DJUSTED CPERCENTVE. I RELY ON MYSELF 1 OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 432 2 73.2%76.9% 76.9% OTHERS TOTALLY 70 3 11.9% 12.5% 89.3% -s NO RESPONSE 60 0 10.2% 10.7% 100.0% 28 ------- 4.7% - - 59U -------- 100.0% 100.0% �., PERSONAL CARE (BATHING, DRESSING, ETC.) VALUE LABELVALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT APERCENT CUMULATIVE ,I I RELY ON MYSELF OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 1 - 547 92.7% 97.3% 97.3% !�- OTHERS TOTALLY 12 2 3 3 2'0% 2.1% 99.5% NO RESPONSE 0 0'S% 0.5% 100.0% 28 4.7% 590 100.0% 100.0% PERSONAL APPEARANCE (SHAVING, SHAMPOOING HAIR, ETC.) VALUE LABEL, VALUF. FREQJUSTEUMULATI UENCY PERCENT APERCENT CPERCENTVE I RELY ON MYSELF 1 - OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 512 Z Bb.B% 90.9% 90,9% - OTHERS TOTALLY 37 3 6.3% 6.6% 97.5% - NO RESPONSE 14 0 2.4% 2.5% IU0.0% .. {...- 27 ________ 4.6% -------- 590 --------- _____590 100.0% 100.0% IOWA21' n FOR THE FOL.L.OWING: la i SHOPPING L:IJiJFI UEiJI I:iL I:ULST10NNA1RE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA I'RF_QUENCIES AND STATISTICS 34 CONT WHO DO 'YOU RFLY ON FOR THE FOL.L.OWING: SHOPPING I ` i i !. t ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I RELY ON MYSELF 1 437 74.1% 77.1% 77.1% OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2 91 15.4% 16.0% 93.1% ---- OTHERS TOTALLY 3 39 6.6% 6.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 2.3% 3.9% - _ - - - --- 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% TRANSPORTATION ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE - VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT .PERCENT PERCENT I RELY ON MYSELF 1 433 73.4% 76.2% 76.2% - OTHERS OOCASIONALLY 2 75 12 7%' 13.27. 89.4% - OTHERS TOTALLY 3 60 10.2% 10.6% 100.0% NO RESPONSE - 0 22 3.7% ........_ _ �. - ----5- 90 -- 100.0% 100.0% PAYING BILLS CUMULATIVE '''%'•�'- VALUE LAPEL VALUE _ FRFQUFNCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I RELY ON MYSELF 1 501 84.9% 88.0% 88.0% OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2' 46 7.8%' 8.1% 96.1% OTHERS TOTALLY 3 22 3.7% 3.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 217.6% - .... .... .. .. -------- 590 -------- 100. 0% --------- 100.0% YARD WORK ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LAPEL. VALUE FF'EQUF.NCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I RELY ON MYSELF 1 259 43.9% 48.4% 48.4% OTHERS OCCASTONAI_I_Y 2 134 27.7% 25.0% 73.5% OTHERS TOTALLY 3 111 19.0% 2U. 9'; 94.4% NOT APPLICABLE 4 -1. 5.1:: 5.6% 100.07. - NO RESPONSE 0. 55 9.3% J OWA2C i I I ` i i !. t 1 CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 24 CONT WHO DO YOU RELY ON FOR THE FOLLOWING: -- ---------------- LAUNDRY VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTEPERCENT CPERCENTVE I RELY ON MYSELF 1 431 73.1% 76.3% 76.3% OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2 58 9.8% 10.3% 86.5% OTHERS TOTALLY 3 76 12.9% 13.5% 100.0% NO,RESPONSE 0 25 ----5- 4.2% 90 -- 100.0% 100.0% _ MEDICATION - GETTING IT VALUF LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTEDPERCENTCPERCENTVE I RELY ON MYSELF 1 456' 77.3% .86.0% 860% OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2 35 5.9% 6.6% 92..67 OTHERS TOTALLY 3 39 6.6% 7.4% 100.0% NO RESPONSE _ 0 60 10.2% . 590 100.0% 100.0% ,;� ,,.MEDICATION - TAKING IT - VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTEPERCENT CPERCENTVE I,RELY ON MYSELF 1 505 85.6% ' 95.6% 95.6% OTHERS OCCASIONALLY 2 13 2.2% 2.57. 981% OTHERS TOTALLY 3 10 1.7% 1.9% 100.. p% NO RESPONSE 0 62 -------- 10.5% ------------------------------------------------------------ 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% 25) PLEASE CHECK THE FOLLOWING WHICH APPLY TO YOU: - VAL.UF LABEL VALUE_ .FREQUENCY PERCENT SOMETIMES I HAVE TROUBLE RE11EMBERINO 1 246 41.7% NOT APPLICABLE 0 ----5- 344 58.3% -- 90 100.0% I FEEL VER`/ MUCH ALONE_ 1 57 9.77 NOT APPLICABLE 0 533 -- 90.37 590 100.0% JOWA2C r _I CONI-ADEWIIAL OUESTIDNNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. 10WA FREQUENCIES. AND STATISTICS 1631 25 CON"I)PLEASE CHECK: THE FOLLOWING WHICH APPLY TO YOIJ: _I CONI-ADEWIIAL OUESTIDNNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. 10WA FREQUENCIES. AND STATISTICS 1631 25 CON"I)PLEASE CHECK: THE FOLLOWING WHICH APPLY TO YOIJ: � VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I . I Wf1RRY ABOUT HOW TO TAKE_ CARE OF MYSELF 1 NOT APPLICABLE 34 5.8% - � 556 94.2% -------- --------- 590 100.0% I W11RRY ABC111'f LIVING EXPENSES NOT APPLICABLE 1. 84 14.2% . 0 506 85.8% ------ _ --------- 590 100. U% - - •J I WORRY ABOUT WHAT WILL BECOME OF ME 1 NOT APPLICABLE. 111 18.8% • r, •479 -.. 81.2% ---- - _ ... - - --100.0% 590 NONE OF THE ABOVE APPLIES TO ME NO RESPONSE.. 1 - 258 43.7% ` ' .�...-.' .,:. 0 332 56.3%. -------- '. - ____ _________ --------- 100.0% ------------- 26) ARE YOU RECEIVING ASSISTANCE FROM ANY OF THE FOLLOWING -�Z COMMUNITY SERVICES (PLEASE CHECK AS MANY AS ARE APPROPRIATE)> COMMUNITY AND HOME HEALTH - .. _ SERVICES AGENCY/VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION - HOME HEALTHCARE VALUE LABEL VAI..UE FREQUF'NCY PERCENT ADJUSTEDPERCENTCF'ERCENTVE - - NE'V'ER USED1 USE OCCASIONALLY 46 9 %90% 94.9% 94.9% USE REGULARLY . 3.9% 98.8% _I 3 NO RESPONSE 6 1.0% 1.2% 300.0% I- 0 --------- 99 16 8% � FL fIERLY CLINIC :,90 -------- --------- IIA.. O% 100.0% VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQIJEIJC'f ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE �'ERCF.NT PFRI'FNT I 'j- PERCENT - NEVER USED 1 LISE OCCAS111NAL1 Y 45? T.5% 96.2): 96.2% ' USE REGULARLY 1..V% ';. ,5% 99.8% _-_ NO RF'SPONSE 1 1 0 U.<'"/. �7, ' 'tr/ 101,1.0% f) --------- I 15 -------- ---------- -' --.. 1631 ■ 1 I t 1, :l 1 ' a i �1 CONFIDENTIAL OUES7ICNNAIRE FOR ELUFRLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA li FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ------------------------------------------------- - � - 26 CON T - RESPITE CARE (SOMEONE TO STAY WITH YOU) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT .: NEVER USED 1 464 78.6% 98.1% 98.1% - USE OCCASIONALLY 2 6 1.0% 1.3% 99.4% _ USE REGULARLY 3 3 0.5% 0.6% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 117 19.8% -------- --------- -------- 590 100.0% -100.0%. i .. ._.S.. E. A. T. S. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE ^i VALUE LABEL_ VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT USED 1 403 68.3% 81.3%. 81.3% .NEVER USE OCCASIONALLY 2 80 13.6% 36.1% 97.4% .. - USE REGULARLY 3 13 2.2% 2.6% 100.0% r NO RESPONSE 094 15.9% --------- ---- 590 100.0% 100.0% DAY. CARE AT SENIOR CENTER ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ;r NEVER USED 1 466 79.0% 97.7% 97.7% USE OCCASIONALLY 2 ..9.. 1.5% 1.9% 99.6% i USE REGULARLY 3 2 0.3% 0.4% 100.0% - NO RESPONSE 0 113 19.2% _ 590 100.0% 100.0% _ CONGREGATE MEALS AT SENIOR CENTER< . ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT NEVER USED 1 330 55.9% 65.0%.. 65.0% . USE OCCASIONALLY 2 169 28.6% 33.3% 98.2% _ USE REGULARLY 3 9 1.5% 1.8% 100.0% NO RESPONSE_ 0 82 1a.9/. - 590 100.0'% 100.0% HOME DELIVERED MEALS ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE = i- VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT. PERCENT ^-.1 I NEVER USED 1 449 76.1% 94.3% 94.3% _ I' USE OCCASIONALLY 2 20 3.4% 4.2% 98.5% ^II I. USE REGULARLY 3 7 1.27. 1.5% 100.0% 71 ! NO RESPONSE. 0 114 19.3% -------- --------- r _I -------- 1 OWA= t 1, :l 1 ' a i �1 163 i JCONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIkE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREIQUENCIF_S AND STATISTICS - -------------------------------------------------------------------------- SERVICE 26 CON T JOHNSON COlJN7'V HOMEMAKER/HOME HEALTH AIDE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE i - VALUELABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT l NEVER USED 1 457 77.5% 95.4% 95.4% USE "OCCASIONALLY - 2 15 2.57. 3.1% . 98.5% USE REGULARLY 3 7 1.2% 1.57. 100.0% '-------- - NO RESPONSE- 0 111 ----590 18.8% ---------- 100.0% 100.0% 1 ,J BEVER1..Y HOME HEALTH . ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT NEVER. USED 1 469 79.5% 100.0% 100.0% _ j USE OCCASIONALLY 2 0 0.0% �� 0.0%, �.� 100.0% J IISE`kEGULFRLY' 3 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% . '� .. NO RESPONSE O 121 20.5% 590 100.0% 100.0%". •,; '.. ELDERLY SERVICES AGENCY CHORE'SERVICES ..,. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE LABEL, VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - ,-�VALUE -+ NEVER USED 1 427 72.4% 86.8%- 86.8% - I15E 'OCI.ASIONALL.Y 2 60 10.2% 12.2% 99.0% USF_. REGULARLY 3 5 0.8% 1.0% 100.0% • ] NI'J RESPONSE 0 98 -------- 16.6% -------- --------- - . 590 100.07. 100.0% -J I - - RESPITESERVICES (SOMEONE TO STAY WITH YOU) - ... I ADJUSTED. CUMULATIVE ^-� VALUE LABEI. VALUE FREPIENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ' - NEVER USED 1 474 80.3% °9.0% 99.0% USE OCCASIONALLY 7 4 0.7% Ci. 13% 99.8% USE REGULARLY 3 1 0.2% 0.2% 100.0% NO RESPONSE Ci 111 -------- ]fl.H% -------- --------- i I :�90 10(1.0% 100.0% 163 i GONFIDFNTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA - FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS �_. 26 CON' T - -------------- i - - - VISITATION SERVICE i - �'� _ ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE. LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT NEVER USED 1 469 79.5% 9S.5% 98.5% " USE OCCASIONALLY 2 7 1.2% 1.5% 1000% j USE REGULARLY 3 0 0.0% 0.0% 100..0% i ,I t NO RESPONSE E O 114 -------- - 590 ---19_3% 100.0% - - --------- 100.0% -- REFERRAL AND INFORMATION SERVICE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT • - '' NEVER USED 1 444 75.3% 95.1% .,. 95.1% ' USE OCCASIONALLY 2 21 3.6% 4.5%., 99.6% USE REGULARLY. 3 2 0.3% 0.4%�. 100.0% _ -., NO RESPONSE - . ... .. O 123 20.8% .._„. - 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% VARIOUS PRIVATE, FOR PROFIT COMPANIES ' j ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - NEVER USED 1 442 74.9% 97.4% 97.4% USE.00CASIONALLY - 2 12 2.0% 2.6% . 100.0% - USE REGULARLY. 3 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% i NO RESPONSE' ,. O 136 23 1% ._. .. --- 5 300.0% 100.0% i OTHER - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT NEVER USED 1 215 36.4% 95.1% 95.1% I+� USE OCCASIONALLY 2 7 1.2% 3.1% 98.2% USE REGULARLY 3 4 0.7% 1.8% 100.0% NO RESPONSE ti 364 61.7% - -------- 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% i • IOWA2C iii I CDpR'1DFNTIAL. OUFSTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - I014A CITY, IOWA _I FREOLIF_NCIES AND STATISTICS -------------------------------------------------------------------------- i 27) IF YOU HAVE LISED. ANY OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES - (LISTED IN QUESTION 826) PROVIDED IN IOWA CITY,'PLEASE INDICATE YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT THESE SERVICES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED WILL ALLOW ME TO STAY IN MY OWN HOME/APARTMENT AS LONG AS .J POSSIBLE. NOT, APPI_ICAbL.E THE..SFRVICF_S PROVIDED IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF MY LIFE, BUT WILL NOT ELIMINATE 1 95 16.1% J 0 495 83.9% 590 100.0% THE NEED FOR HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY. 1 69 6 6, NOT APPLICABLE _.. .. •O _��� 521_: n i •! _. ._ ,590'' i THFRE IS A DUPLTCAI'il]N OF SERVICES. 1 4 n f .. CDpR'1DFNTIAL. OUFSTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - I014A CITY, IOWA _I FREOLIF_NCIES AND STATISTICS -------------------------------------------------------------------------- i 27) IF YOU HAVE LISED. ANY OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES - (LISTED IN QUESTION 826) PROVIDED IN IOWA CITY,'PLEASE INDICATE YOUR FEELINGS ABOUT THESE SERVICES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT THE COMMUNITY SERVICES CURRENTLY PROVIDED WILL ALLOW ME TO STAY IN MY OWN HOME/APARTMENT AS LONG AS .J POSSIBLE. NOT, APPI_ICAbL.E THE..SFRVICF_S PROVIDED IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF MY LIFE, BUT WILL NOT ELIMINATE 1 95 16.1% J 0 495 83.9% 590 100.0% 0.7% 99.3% `� r. '•(r - ' n THE NEED FOR HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY. 1 69 6 6, NOT APPLICABLE _.. .. •O _��� 521_: n .._. ._.._ ... ._._.. .. ......_.__. _. ._ ,590'' r� THFRE IS A DUPLTCAI'il]N OF SERVICES. 1 4 n f .. 590 100.0% NOT APPLICABLE.. .. .. .., ..... 0.... ,'586` 4 ,.. 0.7% 99.3% `� r. '•(r - ' n .. .,_ -------- .. .. ..590 -------- 100.0% _., IOWA CTl'V!.IUHNSI')N COUNTY MAS ALL. n • THE SERVICES I NEED. 1 78 13.2% I I NOT APPLICAHI_E 0 512 86.8% �r I f .. 590 100.0% .., i' 4 I CANNOT IMAGINE NEEDING ANY MORE i SERVICES -IHAN ARE CURRENTLY PROVIDED. 1 71 12.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 519 88.0% ----5- -------- 90 100.0% THE EXISTING SERVICES MEET MY NEEDS BUT I S'IILI_ FEEL EXTREMELY ALONE/LONELY. 1 18 3.1% NOT APF'I_1CABL E 0 572 96.9% - 11990 100.0% I I S - �r I i i i i' CONFIDENTIAL_ QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA 27 CON.'T VALUE LABEL FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ,�-- I NEED THE SERVICES OFFERED BUT WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE THEM IN HOUSING FOR..THE ELDERLY. NOT APPLICABLE - ,• RECEIVING COMMUNITY SERVICES IS THE SAME -THING AS RECEIVING CHARITY. NOTAPPLICABLE ' EXISTING SERVICES SHOULD BE EXPANDED TO -- REACH MORE PEOPLE IN ALL OF JOHNSON CO �•� .;.L NOT APPLICABLE r I VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT _ iI. I, ALSO NEED SERVICES ON THE WEEKEND AND/OR -. 24 HOURS A DAY. NOT APPLICABLE 1OWA2C 1 22 0 568 ----590 1 12 0 --- 578- 590 1 47 0 543 1 O 1 0 1 0 590. ^963%- 100.0% '- 2.0% i t, 98.0% L 100.0% ^ 8.0%. 92.0% L 100.0% 7 GONVIDF_N1IAL LiUES'IIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA 7 I=REOUFNCIES AND STATISTICS I J- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ .281. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES DO YOU FEEL WOULD FROVIDE YOU WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SECURITY AND INDEPENDENCE AND SOCIAL. CONTACT WITH OTHERS? 19.27 " 20.6% VALUE LADEI j CURRENT ARRANGET•IENT 4 10 rr 1.8% COMMUNITY r. Ij ..,.. ;EXISTING _.. _ _SERVICES i HOUSING FOR ELDERLY CURRENTLY LIVE IN 1 HOUSI14B ELDERLY t� T U•t)N'T KNOW NO RESP014SE rj 7 GONVIDF_N1IAL LiUES'IIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA 7 I=REOUFNCIES AND STATISTICS I J- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ .281. WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES DO YOU FEEL WOULD FROVIDE YOU WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SECURITY AND INDEPENDENCE AND SOCIAL. CONTACT WITH OTHERS? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 268 45.4%. 48.8% 48.8% 19.27 " 20.6% VALUE LADEI 9.3% CURRENT ARRANGET•IENT 4 10 CURRENT ARRANI?F_T•IF_NI/ 1.8% COMMUNITY r. Ij ..,.. ;EXISTING _.. _ _SERVICES 0 .. ... 41 HOUSING FOR ELDERLY CURRENTLY LIVE IN r� HOUSI14B ELDERLY T U•t)N'T KNOW NO RESP014SE rj ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 268 45.4%. 48.8% 48.8% ^ 113 19.27 " 20.6% r� 9.3% 10.0% 4 10 1.7% 1.8% 5 103 17.5% 18.8% 0 .. ... 41 _. 6.9% -------- 590 ---- ----0. 10 0% --------- 100: 0% ^ 113 19.27 " 20.6% 3 55 9.3% 10.0% 4 10 1.7% 1.8% 5 103 17.5% 18.8% 0 .. ... 41 _. 6.9% -------- 590 ---- ----0. 10 0% --------- 100: 0% 69.4% 79.4% 81.2% I 100.0% . ,- i I � t � r i i I S I,. 81.2% I 100.0% . ,- CUNFIUENTIAL D.DFSTIUNNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 29) IOWA CITY HAS SEVERAL. SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FACILITIES AND SERVICES; GIVEN THIS SITUATION, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS BEST'DESCRIBF.S YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD EVALUATING HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE OFFERING SUBSIDIZED RENT. 1 32 5.4% NOT APPLICABLE 0 558 94.6% --------- 590 100.0% DUE TO MY INCOME. I CAN ONLY CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 I WOUL.D NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/ - - SERVICES AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 IOWAX I.WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT REGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. NOT APPLICABLE RECEIVING WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A "BARGAIN" IS THE ONLY WAY I WOULD CONSIDER CHANGING MY LIVINIG ARRANGF_MEN NOT APPLICABLE I WOUL.D INCREASE THE PROPORTION nF THE INCOME I SPEND OIJ HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES TO HAVE THE HOUSING/SERVICES I PREFER. NOT AP'P'LICABLE 1 0 1 0 I 0 68 11.5% 522 88.5% 590 100.0% 23 3.9% 567 96.1% 590 100.0% 37 6.3% 553 93.7% 590 100.0% 64 10.8% 526 89.2% 590 100.0% SO 8.5% 540 91.5% 590 100.0% n CONFIDENTLAL 171.IESTIONNAIRF. FOR ELDERLY HOUSING — IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS i 29 CONT VALUE LABEL I AM CONTENT WITH MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT. .. .... t .., NOT APPLICABLE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT 1 430 - 72.9% 0 ----160— ---27_1% 590 100.0% \ NONF. OF THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE , .J .- OF MY ATTITUDE. i� 44`. 7.5% NOT APPL.,ICANLE 0 ---- 46 92.5% ' _—___ 1 100.0% 30. WHICH OFITHE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR PLAN FOR YOUR �yW RFTIFPMENT YEARS"? 1 i- VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT 1 430 - 72.9% 0 ----160— ---27_1% 590 100.0% \ NONF. OF THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE , I .- OF MY ATTITUDE. 1 44`. 7.5% NOT APPL.,ICANLE 0 ---- 46 92.5% _—___ 590 100.0% 30. WHICH OFITHE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR PLAN FOR YOUR i; RFTIFPMENT YEARS"? i; . ..... _. VALUE LABEL VALUE .._ FREQUENCY PERCENT. I PLAN' "TO:CONTINUE LIVING WHERE., X, AM. I 382 64.7% NOT APPLICABLE 0 1208 -------- -- -,,35.3% --------- �. 590 100.0% 1 WOULD I_IR'F TO MOVE INIT, HOt.ISING - 47 8.07. FOR THE ELDERLY. 1 0. 543— 92.0 NOAPFCICABLE _T -- -- 590 100.0% I PLAN TO L.IVF' WITH RE.L.ATIVF..S/FRIFNDS. 1 9 1.5% 0__— 98_5%— .. NOT APPLICABLE _81_ -- .- 590 100.0% I;naA:;C I PIAN 11) RELY 014 F.%ISTINfi COMMUNI I'Y SERVICES. 'NOT APPLICABLE. 34 5.8% 556 94.2%— 590— --100.0% 16-51 i , I I i; i; i j i:ONFIOENTIAL. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 30 CONT VALUE LABEL I AM NOT SURE WHAT I WILL DO. j NOT APPLICABLE L 22.7% 0 456 77.3% 590 100.0% .16.3% NOTAPPLICABLE { I' i I i 83.7% I 590 j I -AM TRYING TO DEVELOP A PLAN NOW. 1. I I � VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT 1 134 22.7% 0 456 77.3% 590 100.0% I GENERALLY DON'T. PLAN VERY FAR IN ADV- ANCE OR. I INTEND. TO MAKE PLANS LATER. 1 ,96 .16.3% NOTAPPLICABLE 0 -------- 494 --------- 83.7% 590 100.0% I -AM TRYING TO DEVELOP A PLAN NOW. 1 73 12.4% NOT APPLICABLE 0 -------- 517 --------- 87.6% ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 590 100.0% 31) WHICH, IF ANY, OF THE FOLLOWING DO YOU FEEL WOULD INCREASE, • -'YOUR INTEREST IN CHANGING YOUR CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT TO-HOUSINGFOR THE ELDERLY (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY):: VALUE LAREI. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT. •-'= ADMISSION INTO HOSPITAL OR TEMPORARY - STAY IN NURSING HOME. 1 109 18.5% '-- NOT APPLICABLE 0 481 81.5% J::, r- -------- --------- 590 100.0% CHANGE IN PHYSICAL HEALTH. 1 373 63.2% IJOT APPLICABLE 0 .217 36.8% 590 100.0% REACHING A PARTICULAR AGE. .1 1;6 9.5% NOT APPLICABLE 0 ---- _34- 90.5% ...., -. B90 --100.07. FEELINGS OF ANXIETY OUE TO LONELINESS. >. 42 7.1% NOT APPLICABLE 0 ---- S48 92.97 .`NO 100. l 0% 1 I TWA .'lG .---------------- --------- 0. -- X90-_.--1,)0_ 0% _---------- lOWA3C /63/r .J CilhiF lVEI'1'I IAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING — 1.OWA C11Y. IOWA � y Fr,Ern.tEw:1ES AND srAl'1sT1cs -------------•------------------------------------------------------------- 31. f..LIN "i VALUE LABELVALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT -� DEATH OF SPOUSE. 1 172 29.2% NOT APPLICABLE 0 -------- 418 70.8% --------- .. .. - .. 590 100.0% '- LOSS IIF CLOSE FRIEND OR RELATIVE. 1 32 5.4% ., NOT APPLICABLE 0 -------- 558 94. b% --------- 590 100.0% FEELINGS OF ANXIETY DUE TO HOME RESPONSIBILITIES. 1 95. 16.1% r� .. .. _. NOT.APPLICABLE U 495 ----- 590 100.0% ' r L,] ABOVE_ WOULD AFFECT MY - NONE: OF THE INTEREST. -IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY. 1 103 17.5% NOT APPLICABLE --- 4137----- 82.5%_ -- 590 100.0% ---------------- - 32) IF I FOUND',THE TYPE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY ,. NEEDS NOW.IWOU1_D PREFER TO (CHECK ONE): ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE J VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT _ PAY RENT TO COVER 1 162 27.5% 32.3% 32,3% THE COSTS. -� PAY A14 ENTRANCE FEE. .. AND MONTHLY RENT TO 2 31 - 5.3% 6.2% 38.4% COVER THE COSTS. 'j PURCHASE INSTEAD OF RENT. 39 ` 6.6% 7.8% 46.2% 1 WOULD CURRENTLY CONSIDER NO AL'f6RNHTIVE OTHER THAN RAVING 4 '270 45.8% 53.8% 100.0% I' MY OWN HOME. 'I NO RESFUNFf?. t> 8R 14.9% .---------------- --------- 0. -- X90-_.--1,)0_ 0% _---------- lOWA3C /63/r I CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA I L' I i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------- L 33) 1F I DECIDED TO PURCHASE INSTEAD OF RENT, THE MAXIMUM I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR ELDERLY HOUSING TO MEET MY NEEDS IS: j. V"ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I LJP TO $ 35,000 1 ' 57 9.7% 10.8% ' 10.8% UP 1'Q $ 50,000 2 UP 'IO 3 3 22 s. 7% 75,000 47 8.7% 8.9% 19.7% . 23.8% - LIP TO $100,000 42% 4 6 1.O% OVER $100,000 1.1% 25.0% 5 3 0.5% 0.6% I Atli NOT INTERESTED IN 25.5% — PURCHASING HOUSINS — I - FOR THE ELDERLY. 6 394 66.8% 74.5% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 61 10.3% :. .. -------- -------- --------- 590 100.07 100.07 - --- ------------------------ I— I I is 34) HOW IS YOUR PHYSICAL HEALTH NOW COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO? _I r 'ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I { VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT r BETTER NOW ABOUT 1 29 4.9% 5.1% 5.1% r THE SAME 2 387 65.6% 68.0% 73.1% WORSE NOW. 3 '153 25.9% 26.9%100.0%r . NO RESPONSE 0 21 - i -------- -------- --------- r I --- 1 .. 590 100.0% 100.0% --, I I I )WA:_.0 i. r I I t� I r i I " 1 i I CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA I L' I i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------- L 33) 1F I DECIDED TO PURCHASE INSTEAD OF RENT, THE MAXIMUM I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR ELDERLY HOUSING TO MEET MY NEEDS IS: j. V"ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I LJP TO $ 35,000 1 ' 57 9.7% 10.8% ' 10.8% UP 1'Q $ 50,000 2 UP 'IO 3 3 22 s. 7% 75,000 47 8.7% 8.9% 19.7% . 23.8% - LIP TO $100,000 42% 4 6 1.O% OVER $100,000 1.1% 25.0% 5 3 0.5% 0.6% I Atli NOT INTERESTED IN 25.5% — PURCHASING HOUSINS — I - FOR THE ELDERLY. 6 394 66.8% 74.5% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 61 10.3% :. .. -------- -------- --------- 590 100.07 100.07 - --- ------------------------ I— I I is 34) HOW IS YOUR PHYSICAL HEALTH NOW COMPARED TO FIVE YEARS AGO? _I r 'ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I { VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT r BETTER NOW ABOUT 1 29 4.9% 5.1% 5.1% r THE SAME 2 387 65.6% 68.0% 73.1% WORSE NOW. 3 '153 25.9% 26.9%100.0%r . NO RESPONSE 0 21 - i -------- -------- --------- r I --- 1 .. 590 100.0% 100.0% --, I I I )WA:_.0 I -+� CONFIDEbITiAL DUGSTIONNAIRE FDR ELDERLY HOUSING — IOWA CITY, IOWA 1 FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35) IS iHFRE SUMF_ONE WI -10 HELPS YOU WITH SUCH THINGS AS SHOPPING, HOUSEWORK, MEALS, BATHING, DRESSING OR GETTING AROUND? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT NO.- I DO NOT - 1 REQUIRE ASSISTANCE. 1 433 73.4% 76.6% 76.6% j- NO. I HAVE BEEN LINABLE TO AL14AYS FIND THE ASSISTANCE I 1 NEED. 2 10 1.7% 1.8% 78.4% J YES. A FAMILY MEMBER OR CLOSE FRIEND. 3 98 16.6% 17.3% 95.8% ! YES, —1 HIRE 90MFDNE. AS NEEDED OR USE A PRIVATE COMPANY. 4 15 2.5% 2:7% 98.4% -.. ...... YES. T USE A COMMUNITY AGENCY SERVICE:" '- - - 5 9 1.5% 1.6% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 2F 4.2% -------- -------- --------- 59 0 -------- 590 100.0% 100.0% IF YES. HAVE YOU BECOME MORF CONCERNED ABOUT THE PERMANENCE_ AND/OR AFFORDABILITY OF YOUR SUPPORT PERSON/SERVICE? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT YES 1 35 5.9% 29.2% 29.2% NO 2 85 14.4% 70.8% 100.0% NONRESPONSE 0 470 79.7% -------- -------- --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- n CONFIUENT1AL RUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS .56) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE I_ABFL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I CANNOT ALWAYS PAY MY BILLS 1 15 2.5% 2.8% 2.8% 1 CAN BARELY PAY MY BfLLS 2 31 5.3% 5.7% 8.5% I WORRY A LOT ABOUT PAYING MY BIL_S 3 43 7.3% 7.9% 16.4% MY MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES ARE SOMEWHAT OF A PROBLEM 4 62 10.5%. 11.4% 27.9% BILLS ARE NO - PROBLEM FOR ME 5 391 66.3% 72.1% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 48 ------------------------- 590 100.0% 100.0% ----------------- - 3T-,40 THE .FOLLOWING OUESTIONS RELATE TO DIFFERENT TYPES OF ELDERLY HOUSING. ASSISTED LIVING IS HOUSING WITH SERVICES ,.SUCH AS MEALS, -24-HOUR STAFFING, HOUSEKEEPING. ETC. 37) ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH YOUR CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT YES.- 1 514 87.1% 94.7% 94.7% NO - 2 29 4.9% 5.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 47 8.0% ------ --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% I C4Jf, -"IG - i I t j , - irl t � I i . i � I ~ I f I CONFj DENI.f RL (:UEB'CI(JW1,1AIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FrEOUENCJFS AND STATISTICS 38) IF NO. WHICH OF THE. FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES WHAT WOULD BEST MEET YOUR CURRENT NEEDS (CHECK. ONLY ONE): ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT �- " "HOME -HEALTH -AND/OR i , F_XISTING COMMUNITY' 3 U.5% 3.4% i - 3.4% SERVICES 1 1NOFPFNDENT LIVING 2 1B 3.1% 20.5% 23.9% OWE -BEDROOM APART. ' INDEPENDENT LIVING - 3 40 6.B% '" 69.3% TWO-BEDROOM APART. :45.5% INDEPENDENT LIVINH•-"- 5 0.8% 5.7% 75.0% EFFICIENCY APART. 4 _. .. i ,ASSISTED LIVING -. 5 0 ...is 0:0% Q.0%' .75.0% .. •.'-"PRIVATE' ROOM i . ASSISTED LIVING 6 0 0.0% 0.0% 75.0% , SEMIPRIVATE 80011 ASSISTED'LIVING - 7 5 U. B% 5.7% 60.7% j EFFICIENCY APART. . 'ASSISTED LIVING 1 0.2% 11% SI -S% GROUP HOME O ,. CONDCIMI1'JAJM - 9 10 1.7% 11.4% 93.2% ONE -BEDROOM - CONDOMINIUM - 10 -1 3 0.5% 3.4%.' 96.6% , TWO-BFDRO01'1 CONDOMTNIUM - li 2 0.3% 2.3% - 96.9% THREE-BEURUOM NUt:SIMG HOME 1g 1� 0 .07. 0.0% 98.9% I . ' - LIFE CARE 13 1 0.2% 1.1% 100.0% .. NO RESPONSi 0 501 BFr. 1% --7----- --------- ... -------- 'i40 100.0% 100.0% 'i. .. _.._____--------'---------------------'--- ------------------------------------- i T ONA.iC MEN CONFIDE14TIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 39) I FEEL THE RANGE OF RENT FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY WITH NO SERVICES SHOULD BE (ENTER THE LEAST YOU WOULD EXPECT TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT AND THE MAXIMUM .YOU COULD AFFORD): MINIMUM IPER MONTH FOR AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT NIT1l_ITIES INCLUDED) RANGE; LESS THAN $101 $101 - 200 201 - 300 301 - 400 401 AND OVER. NO RESPONSE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 11 r 1' I _ i_ 14.7% 14.7% 39 6.6% -52.0% 66.7% 22 3.7% 29.3% 96.0% 3 0.5% 4.0% 100.0% 0 i•,:i 0.0% 100.0% , r 87.3% � � 2 0.3%. i .. 2.5% $101 - 200 24 4.1% 30.4% I i . 201.-,300 34 5.8% i 75.9% 301 - 400 i r 1.9% ,13.9% • 89.9% I 5 O.B% CONFIDE14TIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 39) I FEEL THE RANGE OF RENT FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY WITH NO SERVICES SHOULD BE (ENTER THE LEAST YOU WOULD EXPECT TO PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT AND THE MAXIMUM .YOU COULD AFFORD): MINIMUM IPER MONTH FOR AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT NIT1l_ITIES INCLUDED) RANGE; LESS THAN $101 $101 - 200 201 - 300 301 - 400 401 AND OVER. NO RESPONSE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 11 1.9% 14.7% 14.7% 39 6.6% -52.0% 66.7% 22 3.7% 29.3% 96.0% 3 0.5% 4.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 515 87.3% � � 2 0.3%. UTIu A.'.•C ,III! 43/ 590 100.0% .100.0%, ' MAXIMUM PER MONTH FOR AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT -... (UTILITIES INCLUDED) - '- ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE - RANGE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - -�"'•` T H LESS x101''" � � 2 0.3%. 2.5% .. 2.5% $101 - 200 24 4.1% 30.4% 32.9% _ . 201.-,300 34 5.8% , 43.0% 75.9% 301 - 400 11 1.9% ,13.9% • 89.9% 401 - 500 5 O.B% 6.3% 96.2% 501.,-,600 3 0.5% 3.8% -,:, 100.0% 601 AND OVER 0 0.0% ; 0.0% _100.0% NO RESPONSE 511 -------- 86.6% -------- --------,.. ..... .. ... 590 100.0% 100._0% , .: MINIMUM PER MONTH FOR A ONE -BEDROOM APARTMENT _ (UTILITIES INCLUDED) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE RANr,E... FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT LESS THAN $101 15 2.5% 12.1% 12.1% $101 = 200 48 S.1% 38.7% 50.8% 201 - 300 415 7.6% 36.3% 87.1% 301 - 400 13 2.2% 10.5% 97.6% 401 - 500 0 0.0% 0.0% 97.6% 501 - 600 1 0.27. O.B% 98.4% 601. - 700 - 0 0.0% 0.0% 98.4% 701 - 800 U 0.0% 0.0% 9B.47. 601 - 900 - 0.3% 1.6% 100.0% 9111 AND OVER 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 466 79.0 -'------- -------- -------- $911 100. i. Q% 101.1.0% UTIu A.'.•C ,III! 43/ • I I I I 1 CON, IDENI IFI. !'! JEEO LOHNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA PRFI)UENCIES ANO STATISTICS 1'9 C(IN'T MAXIMUM PER MONTH FOR A ONE -BEDROOM APARTMENT (UTILITIES INCLUDED) I ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE RANSE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT LESS $101 B 1.4% 6.2% 6.2% .THAN . 5101.- 300 63 10.7% 48.5% 54.6% 301.- 500 49 8.3% 37.7% 92.3% - 501 -. 60(.) 5 0.8% 3.8% 96.2% ..-- 601..- 700 2 0.3% 1.5% 97.7% 701.- 800. 1 0.2% 0.8% 98.5% .•- ...- 801.- 900 0 0.0% 0.0% 98.5% Noll.- 1(i0o , 0 0.0% 0.0% 98.5% .�._ 1001 - 1100 2 0.3% 1.5% 100.0% 1101 AND OVER 0 0.0%': 0.0% 100.0% ,..,,.. _ NO; RESPONSE.- ----460- 78.0% ---------------- .. ...._. .... ... - .. 990 100.0% 100.0% MINIMUM PER MONTH FOR A_TWO-BEDROOM APARTMENT (UTILITIES INCLUDED) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE RANBE .. - FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT -PERCENT. LESS THAN $101 5 0.8% 4.0% 4.0% $101 - 200 32 5.4% 7.5.6% 29.6% 201 - 300 43 7.3% 34.4% 64.0% -_ ...... _ ...301 -- - 400.... . - .. .... SO .-.. 5.1% _24.0% 88.0% -..:. 401 .-.:..500 :: ..42 .2.0% ;. ...9.6% .97.6% .. 501.._ . ; 600 , .. .. _ 2 :. 0.3% 1.67. 99.2% .601 -. ..700 : O 0.0%. 0.0% 99.2% 701 - 800 1 0.2% O.B% 100.0 801 AND OVER 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE. 46!3 78.8% . ., . , _ - • .. .. , .. -------- 590 -------- ). fj0. 0% -------- 100.0% IN /63/ I �1 luwl>>r. IN /63/ CUNFIDENTI:AL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY• IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ----------------------------- a9 COP7'T MAXIMUM PER MONTH FOR A TWO-BEDROOM APARTMENT (UTILITIES INCLUDED) RANCF. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE, FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT LESS THAN $101 - $101 - 200 2 0.3% 1.5% 1.5% - - 15 2.5% 10.9% 12.4% 40 - - -U � 301 - 0 � 32 36 5.4% 23.4% 35.8% 401 - 6.1%26.3% 62.0% .500 - 600 28 4.7% 20.4% 82.5% 601 - 700 11 1.9% 8.0% 90.5% - .701, - Soo- 4 0.7% 2.9% 93.4% . -- - 801 - 900 5 0.8% . 36% 97.1% 901 - 1000 3 0.5% 2.2% 99.3% 1001 AND OVER 1 0.2% 0.7% 100.0% NONRESPONSE - 0 0.0% -- 0.0%.., 100.0% 453 76.8% 590 100.0% 100.0% EFF. APT. MEAN 214.835 STD DEV 121.472 ;- MINIMUM `0.000 ONE -BED -. MEAN 271.092 -- MAXIMUM 600.000 -- ., MINIMUI.1-0.000 STD DEV '158.050 MAXIMUM 1100.000 TWO-BEDl <`MEAN 352.090 STD DEV 163.800 MINIMUM 0.000 MAXIMUM 1000.000 .. ---- --------------------------=- I �•�-•'':'l'40) I•;FEEL THE'RANGE OF RENT FOR ASSISTED LIVING IN ___ HOUSING ___ FOR ---- THE ELllERLYSHOULD BE(EN1'E.R THE LEAST YOU WOULD EXPECT TO - PAY FOR WHAT YOU WANT AIVD THE MAXIMUM YOU COULD AFFORD): --''' MINIMUM PER MONTH FOR A SEMIPRIVATE ROOM ,. (UTILI'TIES INCLUDED) - )YANGE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ' ! LES2 THAN $101 $101 - 300 3 0.5% 5.9% 5.9% - 301 - 5G0 30 5.1% 58.8% 64.7% 501 - boo 12 2.0% 23.5% 88.2% 601 - 700 2 0.3% 3.9% 92.2% I.. 701 - 80o 0 0.0% 0.0% 92.2% ;i BG1 - 900 4 0.7% 7.8% I00.0%0 -� 901 AND OVER 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% - i - NO RESPONSE 0 0.0% Q. ox 100.0% ". 539 -------- 91.4% ...: I -------- 591) -------- 100.0% 100.0% i I , 1 Cllcu,f: /63/ i i:11i 1f-l�`EI•CC i. r•.l, iaUE51'IOIdNA1F:E FOR FI_7lFF:LY NGIJSINC, - IOWA CITY, IONA NC; 1_:3 AMll Sl'Ail%i'f ICS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 CON' T Nol i rh llq PER I11ON f li FOR A 5011 PR I VATS ROOM (UHLIT1ES INCLUDED) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I?HMIiE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT . PERCENT LESS FHHN $10t .. a101 - - '007 30l - Srxl . ... 501 - 700_. 701 - 800 801 - 9UIi 901 - 1000 _ 11 t)1. HND i)VFR 1110. RESPONSE, 3 0. 5% 6.0% 6.0% 24 1 47.1% 53.1% 12 2.0% 23.5% 76.6% 2 11.3% 3.9% 1 4 0.7% , 88.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% 88.4% 4 0.77. 7.8% 96.2% 1 0.27. 2.0% 98.2% 540 91.5% E.61 9UG 0 ----- -- 590 -------- --------, 100. U;: 98...7 _ 101, AND OVFIi r• u.0% 0.0%; 100.0% i i:11i 1f-l�`EI•CC i. r•.l, iaUE51'IOIdNA1F:E FOR FI_7lFF:LY NGIJSINC, - IOWA CITY, IONA NC; 1_:3 AMll Sl'Ail%i'f ICS ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 40 CON' T Nol i rh llq PER I11ON f li FOR A 5011 PR I VATS ROOM (UHLIT1ES INCLUDED) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I?HMIiE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT . PERCENT LESS FHHN $10t .. a101 - - '007 30l - Srxl . ... 501 - 700_. 701 - 800 801 - 9UIi 901 - 1000 _ 11 t)1. HND i)VFR 1110. RESPONSE, 3 0. 5% 6.0% 6.0% 24 4.1% 47.1% 53.1% 12 2.0% 23.5% 76.6% 2 11.3% 3.9% 80.5% 4 0.7% 7.87. 88.4% 0 0.0% 0.0% 88.4% 4 0.77. 7.8% 96.2% 1 0.27. 2.0% 98.2% 540 91.5% E.61 9UG 0 ----- -- 590 -------- --------, 100. U;: 98...7 _ 101, AND OVFIi MINIMUM PER MONTH FOR H PRIVATE ROOM (UTILITIES INCLUDED) I . HI)JUSTED.CUMULATIVE ., •- RAN6F .., FFEOLIENCY PPRCENT PERCENT PERCENT -. .., - LESS THAN $'101 3 0.5% 5.2% 5.2% rr $t0l 30V' : 37 6.'%: �, 63.8% 69.0% c r. 301 4i10 6 1.0%. - 10.3%;, 79.3% .-;: 501 -. 600 10 1.7%. 17.2% 96.6% .. ... 601 - 71 0 .. 1 U. 27.. 1.7% 98.3% 7Q1,- 800 1 0.2% 1.7%.. 100.0% E.61 9UG 0 U.0% 0.0% 100.0% _ 101, AND OVFIi r• u.0% 0.0%; 100.0% - ...... ...--•":140 -- 100.0% 100.0%. . hlfiX lMlJfi F'F=.1"+ rVIN'IH 1:00 A I'li 1'Jli fl{ Pi ifiPl (OTCL1TIES 1NCL.I.I)1FL1! ADJUSTED CUMULHTIVE H1-1NIiF 1=I+PIi1 IFNI';Y I'ERi :If t1Y PERCE14T PERCENT LFl3!3 THAN 8301 .. 0.3% 3.3% 3.3% Ttol - '-,0o .. .1. %;: 36.7% 40.0% 7Xit - 5d,0 .:'H a, 111: 40.07. 80.0% C7(It 704 1'•13%. 8.37. 88.3% 701 _. _13i10 5.0% 93.3% 96.7% tint - 11 uiq Ii. 3% 3.3% 100.0% 1 n''l 07. O. Iii 100.0% _-100.0% 11.1!1, iii: /63/ j i 4 - i I f i -j ea)NFIGkNTIAL. QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTIC'S ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 40 CONT MINIMUM FOR AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT ' (UTILITIES INCLUDED) ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE RANGE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - LESS THAN $101 8 1.4% 7.8% 7.8% _ `f . $101 300 51 8.6% 50.0%. 57.8% 301 - 500 31 5.3% 30.4% 88.2% - - 501 - 700 5 0.8% 4.9% 93.1% 701 - B00 3 0.5% 2.9% 96.1% �. ' 801. - 900 1 0.2% 1.0% 97.1% ' 901 - 1000 O 0.0% O.O% 97.1% ..... 1001 - 1100 2 0.3% `2.0% 99.0% _ �., �. 12201 AND OVER 1 0.2% 1.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 488 82.7% -------- -------- 590 100.0% -------- 100.0% . MAXIMUM FOR AN EFFICIENCY APARTMENT WILITIES'INCLUDED) -" - + ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE ! RANGE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT II _ • -' LESS•THAN $101 3 0.5% 2.B% 2.8% $101 300 - 38 6.4% 35.5% 383% -' .361 600' - 45 7.6% 42.1% 80:4%' �. ' 601 900 11 1.9% 10.3% 90.7% 901 1000 5 0.87. 4.7%- 95.3% i 1001 - 1100 0 0.0% 0.0% 95.3% L - 1101 - 1200' 2 0.3% 1.9% 97.2% 1201 - 1300 0 0.0% 0.07. 97.2% 1301 = 1400 0 0.0% 0.07 97.2% 1401 AND OVER 3 0.5% 2.8% 100.0% ! j NO RES'P014SE 483 81.9% -------- -------- -------= _. 590 100.0% 100.0% EFF. APT. MEAN 347.45B STD DEV 251.110 MINIMUM 0.000 MAXIMUM 1253.000 ONE -BED MEAN 335.500 SI'D DEV 211.853 `. MINIMUM 0.000 MAXIMUM 1000.000 ... TWO -BED MEAN 414.660 STD DEV 282.728 . ' MINIMUM 0.000 MAXIMUM 2000.000 L' n iWa:.jr. i m 1 L)WA 41; i /6 9/ ■ I II , L,i11'JF lJEI7I I, ,;i, i' UF.SI I LIIJNAJ RE Fl% ELDERLIHOUSIHli - 10Wil CITY. IOWA I 1: RF 01.1-14C [F. '-lflli_STATf.ST 1. i I f II I 1 L)WA 41; i /6 9/ ■ I L,i11'JF lJEI7I I, ,;i, i' UF.SI I LIIJNAJ RE Fl% ELDERLIHOUSIHli - 10Wil CITY. IOWA I 1: RF 01.1-14C [F. '-lflli_STATf.ST LC::i- --_-------_- 41: '1F ADDITLONFII. HOUSING WERE AVAILABLE IN IOWA CITY, WHAT WOULD BE !HE IMPORTANCE OF THE FOLLOWING FACTORS IN DETERMINING IF YOU WOULD BECOME A RESIDENT? (CHECK' THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE JLEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH FACTOR): LOCATION ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VAI.I IE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT. PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 '125 55.1% 68.4% 68.4% SOMEWHAT JMPORTANL 2 125 21.22% 26.3% 94.7'% - LITTL.E IMPORTANCE 3 12 2.0% 2.5% 97.3% NO 1MP1'IF'TANCE 4 13 2.2% 2.7% 100.0% - NO RESPU14SF 0 115 19.5% J -------- -------- --------- 590 100.0:! 100.0% '`- SERVICES PROVIDED IN ADDITION TO HOUSING ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE ` - VALUE LABEL' - VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT' 1 231 39.2%, 53.8% 53.8% -' SOMEWHATIMPORTANT- 2 155 26.3% 36.1% 90.0% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 30 5.1% 7.0% 97.0% NO IMPORTANCE 4 13 2.2% 3.0% 100.0% J NO RESPONSE 0 161 27.3% • ''- 590 100.0% _______ 100.0% ' `-- AMENII'IF_S - ADJUS'T'ED CUMULATIVE I VALUE LABEL VALDE.: FREPLIENCY PFRCF.NT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 132 22.4% 38.8% 38.8% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT LITTLE IMPORTANCE 2 .> 147 43 23.9% 7.3% 43,2% 12.6% 82.1% 94.7% NO IMPCIRTANCE 4 1H ?. 17: 5.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 250 42.4: - .,,.. -------- -------- 11Li I.0% --------- r 100.0% SIZE OF hPART'MF_NTS OR ROON.fi AIIJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALOE LABEI. VAIAN- Fi:FRI1rIVCY PF.RC:ENT' PERCENT PERCENT I� VERT' IMPORTANT 1 217 ::6. 8'% 49.4% 49.4% SOMEWHAT lil,'P'1RTANT I8 -c ;lI.02. 41.7% 91.1% LJ77LE IMPORTANCE :> 'Ir] 4./% 6.4% 97.5% NO JESPONSEC:E NO RESPONSE T 0 11.- 15L .7. 6:! 100.0% -`- ---- ----Z--,%- --------- 1 1 L)WA 41; i /6 9/ ■ UONFIDENFIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 41 CONT MORE THAN ONE LEVEL OF CARE OFFERED IN THE SAMEFACILITADJUSTED Y VALUE LABEL_ VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 169 28.6% 44.1% 44.1% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 155 26.3% 40.5% 84.6% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 36 6.1% 3.9% 9.4% 6.0% 94.0% 100.0% NO IMPORTANCE 4 23 NO RESPONSE 0 207 -------- 35.1% -------- --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% AMOUNT OF RENT ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE _ VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 294 49.8% 66.5% - 66.5% IMPORTANT 2 124 21.0% 28.1% 94.6% .,.SOMEWHAT 'LITTLE IMPORTANCE 19 .. NO IMPORTANCE_' 4 1.5% 2.0% 100.0% NO.,RESPONSE.-_ 0 148 '---590 25.1% --100.0% .100.0% OPINION OF.FAMILY A• ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE, LABEL: '. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 100 16.9% .26.1% 26.1% SOMEWHAI' IMPORTANT 2 126 21.4% 32.9% 59.0% . ...-7I.ITTLE IMPORTANCE 4 79 78 13. 4%% 20.4% 100.6% NO IMPORTANCE NO RESPONSE 0 207 -------- 35.1% -------- --------- 590 100.0% 100.0% FRIENDS LIVING THERE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABLI_ VALUE FREQI.IEMCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 81 13.7% 20.2% 20.2% 63.6% '.SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 'T 174 29.5% 15.3% 43.4% 22.4% 86.0% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 90 5h 9.5% 74.0% 100.0% NO IMPORTANCE 4 NO -RESPONSE 0 189 32.0% --------- • -------- SRO 1110.0% 100.0% IDWA4C i I L i I t II i is I j m i:UNFfUEN'IIAI_ G46=.sT I ONNA IRE FOR ELDERLY HDIJSI14G - 10WA CITY, IOWA FRE(4JFI11.(rS AND STAI'IST11:S J I I I 41 CONT AFSTHE1•IC QUALI'LIES OF THE AREA SURROUNDING THE SITE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE_ FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT JVERY 46.5% IMPORTANT 1 184 31.2% 46.5% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 164 27.8% 41.4% 87.9% - - LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 31 5.3% 7.6% 95.7% NO IMPORTANCI? 4 17 2.9% 4.3% 100.0% _1 NO RESPONSE 0 194 32.9% --------- j .. ,.. -•------- 590 -------- 100.0% 100.0% BUILDING ON ONE LEVET. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQLIFNCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 230 39.0% 50.9% 50.9% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 115 19.5% 25.4% 15.0% 76.3% 91.4% :LITTLE IMPORTA14CE 3 68 11.5% ---'NO IMPORTANCE. .. 4 39 6.6% B.6% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 138 23.4/. ... 590 100.0% .-100.0%, ---------------------------------------- -----77 ----- ----------- 42) IF I FELT THAT HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS, I WOULD PREFER THAT THIS TYPE FACILITY DE LOCATED--' ' ji ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VFN_IIF LABEL VALUE FRRQIJENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT IN A DOWNTOWN AREA 1 185 31.4% 34.1% 34.1% :-SWAY FROM A DOWNTOWN AREA 2 124 21.0% 22.9% 57.0% NO PARTICULAR PREFERE14CE 3 101 17.1% 18.6% 75.6% J � •• I AllNOTINTF.RES1•F_U _... -. IIJ ANY HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY IN AIVY - LOCATION 4 1?/2 22.4% 24.4% 100.0% Nfl RESKIKiSf: ii 48 8.1% -� -------- -------- --------- 591! 100.0% f 00. 0% J _ "1 I� l 0;•If 1 d C i I I I CONF wLNTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA - FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 430 WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING AMENITIES DO YOU FEEL WOULD BE IMPORTANT - ENOUGH TO YOU TO PAY A HIGHER MONTHLY RATE TO RECEIVE IN HOUSING l - FOR THE ELDERLY (CHECK THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL OF _ IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH FACTOR)? I � - NURSE ON DUTY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE i VALIIE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I I' I- •. VERY IMPORTANT 1 151 25.6% 36.6% 36.6% _ - SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 158 26.8% 38.3% 74.8% ' LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 59 10.0% 14.3% B9.1% NO IMPORTANCE 4 45 7.6% 10.9% 100.0% 1 NO RESPONSE 0 177 30.0% 7- I ----590 100.0% 100.0% .. . BEAUTY/BARBER SHOP '. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREDUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 58 9.8% 14.5% 14.5% ,. IMPORTANT 2 117 19.8% 29.3% 43.9% ..____,SOMEWHAT LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 119 20.2% 29.8% 73.7% - NO IMPORTANCE4 105 17.8% 26.3% 100.0% t NO RESPONSE.. .. 0 32.4% -------- --------- •- , ' ... _-_-191_ 590 100.0% 100.0% '.. • ! I: .... ' COVERED PARKING .. . ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE. FREPHENCY PERCENT .PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 119 20.2% 2B.8% 28.8% ' SOME=WHAT IMPORTANT 2 145 24.6% 35.1% 63.9% - - LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 66 11.2% 16.0% 79.9% NO IMPORTANCE 4 8314.1% 20.1% 100.0% - I NO RESPONSE 0 177 30.0% ------- --------- _ ---- 590 -- 100.0% 100.0% I CHAPEL WITH RELIGTOUS ACTIVITIF_'S I' ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE ' VALUE LABEL VALUE FREPHENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT _ VERY IMPORTANT 1. 80 13.6% 19.7% 19.7% I 1 SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 145 .^.4.6% 35.6% 55.3% -. ' LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 87 14.7% 21.4'% 76.7% NO IMPORTANCE 4 95 16.1% 23.3% 100.0% - IJO RESPONSE 0 183 31.0% 1110.0% 100.0'% 1611 - • 1111.1A41; /63/ l 1701•i--IDEWIJAL- QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, I014A , I.. FREnIIEIvr7.IE9 AND ST'ATIST'ICS 1111.1A41; /63/ l 1701•i--IDEWIJAL- QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, I014A , ------------------------------------------------------------------------- FREnIIEIvr7.IE9 AND ST'ATIST'ICS - 43 CUNT POOL/HEALTH AND RECREATION AREA. ! i .. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I VERY IMPORTANT 1 68 11.5% 16.9% 16.9% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 158 26.8% 39.2% 56.1% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 88 14.9% 21.8% 77.9% NO fMPORTANC,F. 4 89 15.1% 22.1% 100.0% NO RESPONSE I) 187 31.7% 590 100.07. 100.0% I GROUP LOUNGES -. { .. -• ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I VALUE LASEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT • : , VERY IIJFORTAIJT 1 95 16.1% 23.3% 23.3% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 207 35.1% 50:9% 74.2% LITTLE 1MPORTANCE 3 72 12.2% 17.7% 91.9% NO IMPORTANCE 4 33 5.6% 8.1%, 100.0% � IJO RESPONSE. 0 183 31.0% .... ________ ________ ---------- ______590 590 100.0% 100.0% CALL -HELP SYSTEM ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE I; VALUE LABEL .. VALUE. FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT .PERCENT I I, VERY..JMPORTANT 1 262 44.4%-. .60.1% 60.1% I' SDMEWHAT IMPORTANT - 1.35 22.9% 31.0% 91.1% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 24 4.1% 5.5% 96.6% . NO IMPORTANCE 4 1.5 2.5% 3.4% 100.0% IJO RESPONSE 0 ----154_ 26.1% ' 590 -------- 100.11% --------- 100.0% i ' BIJIL.DING SECURITY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LASFL VALUE. FRE"nIlEN1":Y PERCENT PEW.;ENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 297 50. 3i: 66.7% 66.7% ... SOMEWHAT IMPORTANI' ?. 1.17 J9.8 2.6.3% 93.0% LITTLE 1MPORTANCE 3 20 3.4% 4.5% 97.5% NO RESPONSE 4 1. 9/ 100.0% IJ0 RESPONSE 0 i4,r, ---------5 24.6% 090 ---24 100.0% ____2 -i%- 100.0% I. 1 1111.1A41; /63/ CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 43 CON T CLUSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION J i VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT - CONFIDENTIAL QUESTIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 43 CON T CLUSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT - VERY IMPORTANT 1 52 8.8% 13.6% 13.6% - SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 116 19.7% 30.4% 44.1% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 112 19.0% 29.4% 73.5% IVO IMPORTANCE 4 101 17.1% 26.5% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 209 ------ 35.4% 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% �. EXTRA STORAGE SPACE y VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTEDPERCENTCPERCENTVE - ;- VERY IMPORTANT 1 158 26.8% 37.2% 37.2% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANI 2 182 30.8% 42.8% 80.0% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 53 9:0% 12.5% 92.5% NO IMPORTANCE 4 32 5.4% - 7.5% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 165 -------- 28.0% - 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% .. ,�... SPECIAL EQUIPMENT FOR ELDERLY (SIT-IN SHOWERS, ETC.) �I VALUE LABEL -VALUE FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENTPERCENT PERCENT '^ VERY''IMPORTANT 1 169 28.6% 40.9% 40.9% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 169 28.6% 40.9% 81.8% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 47 8.0% 11.4% 93.2% NO IMPORTANCE NO 4 28 4.7% 6.8% 100.0% RESPONSE_ 0 177 -------- 30.0% " .'� 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% RODM.AND.ACCOMMODATIONS FOR GUESTS OF RESIDENTS I _ AND/OR NON-RESIDENTS _ VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - VERY IMPORTANT 1 112 19.0% 26.5% 26.5% 17 SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 160 27.1% 37.9% 64.57 LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 84 14.2% 19.9% 84.4% NO IMPORTANCE - 4 66 11.7.% 15.6% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 168 28.5% 590- -------- --------- 100.0% 100.07. - I OWA,IC CON?IUFNT(AI- HUES1I7I4I4AIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 44) THF A0011'1OVAL AMOUNT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR THE AMENITIES SELECTED IS I; PER MONTH (COMPLETE BASED ON THE TYPE AMENITIES YOU CONSIDER "VERY IMPORTANT") ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE RANGE FREDUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT LESS THAN 26 40 6.8% 20.6% 20.6% .. $,.'26-- 50. 56 9.5% 28.9% 49.5% ,51 - 100- 62 10.5% 32.0% 81.4% 101 - 800 27 4.6% 13.9% 95.4% 301 - 500 - 6 1.0% 3.1% 98.5% 101, - 600 3 0.57. 1.5% 100.0% 601 AND OVER 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE. 396 67.1% .. ----590 --100.0% 100.0% MFAN 81.777 STD DEV 104.481 - MINIMUM 0 MAXIMUM 600 --------------------------------------------------------------------- ,.45) IN AN; INDEPENDENT- LIVING FACILITY. I FEEL THAT SERVICES SHOULD BE OFFERED AND 'THE COSTS FOR THESE SERVTCES WOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE RENTALRATE INADDITION TOHOUSINGCOSTS. .: '.. .: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT AGREE:. 1 376 63.7% 81.9% 81.9% -n: DISAGREE 2: 83 14.1% ,18.1%., 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 131 22.2% -------- 590 100.0% 100.0% 46) 1F YOU AGREE WITH QUESTION #45, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: - WHAT SERVICES DO YOU FEEL SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN AN INDEPENDENT LIVING, FACILf I'1'.(IN ADDITDN '10 HOUSING) AND YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY PROPORTIONATEI.Y HIGHER RENTAL. RATES TO RECEIVE . . . (CHECK THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE TO YOU FOR EACH ...'.� FACTOR)?: BREAItFAST SERVED DAILY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL 'VALUE FREnUENCY PERL:ENT, PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTA14T 1 62 10.5% 19.0% 19.0% SOMEWHAT fMPURIANl' 2 45 7.6% ,I3.8%. 32.7% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 105 17.8% 32.1% 64.8% NO IMPORl'ANCE 4 115 .19.5% 33.2% 100.0% NO RESPONSE_ CI 263 44.6% S90 100. /63/ i:fiWF IIicW III11. QI.I=SIIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWO CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STA"IISTICS 46 CONT LUNC11 SERVED DAILY VALUE_ LABELADJUSTED VALUE FREQUENCY i CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT i 1 I r i i:fiWF IIicW III11. QI.I=SIIONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWO CITY. IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STA"IISTICS 46 CONT LUNC11 SERVED DAILY VALUE_ LABELADJUSTED VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTA14T • SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 1 73 12.4% 22.1% 22.1% -• LITTLE IMPORTANCE 2 88 14.9% 26.6% 48.6% ' NO 'IMPORTANCE 3 4 94 15.9% 28.4% 77,0% WO RESPONSE 0 76 12.9% 23.11% 100.0% 259 43.9% _, •_, 5- 90 -- 100.0% 100.0% DINNER SERVED DAILY VALIIF_' LABEL VALUE VALUE FREQUENCY CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT --'--- SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 1 -- 118 20.0% 33.6% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 2 3 106 71 18.0% 30.2% 63.8% - NO IMPORTANCE. 4 12.0% 20.2% 84.0% ' '-- NO RESPONSE 0 56 9.5% 16.0% 100.0% 239 40.57 ' .. -------- 590 590 ------- ------------------ 100.0% --------- 100.0% HOUSEKEEPING • VALUE=LABEL ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT SOMEWHAT' IMPORTANT -1 96 16.3% 27.7% 27.7% """-- LITTLE IMPORTANCE' 2 •' 139 68 23.6% 40.2% 67.9% NO IMPORTANCE.. 4 11.5% 19.7% 87.6% NO RESPONSE 0 43 7.3% 12.4% 100.0% 244 41.4% - 590 100.0% 100.0% - LAUNDRY '(LINENS, TOWELS, ETC.) VALUE LABEL. VAI ..I.IE FREWUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTEPERCENT CUMULPERCENTVE VE'R'Y IMPORTANT' .... SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 1 108 18. i% 31.1% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 2 3 112 19.o % 32.3% 63.4% Nil IMPORTANCE 4 60 10.2% 17.3% 60.7% NO RESPONSE 0 67 11.4% 19.3% 100.0% 243 -------- 41.2% -------- 590 --------- 100.0'/. 100.0% I(U114 C :.1 ^1 J f f i i 1 J 1:01J; U�ieNflAL I:'!1FS110i41NAI'RR FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - 1011A CITY. IOWA 1'I0FF4Il'N!:IES AND STATISTICS 46 CONT PERSONAL LAUNDRY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 63 10.7% 19.3% 19.3% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT - 77 13.1% 23.5% 42.8% .LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 99 16.8% 30.3% 73.1% ,NO IMPORTANCE 4 88 14.9% 26.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 44.6% ----263 - 590 --- 100.0% 100.0% ASSISTANCE WITH BATHING, DRESSING, ETC. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE . VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT .. VERY -IMPORTANT- 1 33 5.6% 10.4% 10.4% ..SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 57 9.7% - 17.9% 28.3% LITTLE -IMPORTANCE 3 82 13.9% 25.B% 54.1% NO IMPORTANCE 4 146 24.7% 45.9% 100.0% - NO RESPONSE - 0 272 46.1% - - ..... _. -------- 590 ------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% MONITORING MEDICATION ' - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE, -LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ....., VERY,IMPORTANT .. 1 53 9.0% 16.3% 16.3% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 78 13.2% 24.07. 40.3% .•`. LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 70 11.9% 21.5%" 61.8% .. NO IMPORTANCE 4 124 21.0% 38.2% .100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 265 44.9% -------- 590 -------- 100.0'!. --------- 100.0% ASSISTANCE WITH WALKING, SHOPPING, GETTING TO DOCTOR, ETC. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VAL.IIF_ FREQUENCY PFRCFNT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IIIPORTA14T 1 78 13.2% 23.2% 23.2% SOMFWHAT IMPORTANT 2 90 15.3% 26.8% 50.0% LITTLF- IMPORTANCE 3 65 11.0% 19.3% 69.3% NO, IMPORTANCE 4 10.' 1'7.:i% 30.7%. 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 Y,4 43.1% - a90 -------- 100.0% 100.0% /63/ I I I �:GMFJf.IS lJfIRI. RU'SIIONIIJAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA _ FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS j ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 46 CONT 1RANSPORTATION i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i t - - - VERY IMPORTANT 1 120 20.3% 34.4% 34.4% f ! ' ' SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 114 19.3% 32.7% 67.0% - -- LITTLE. IMPORTANCE. 3 51 8.6% 14.6% 81.7% ..; NO IMPORTANCE 4 64 10.8% 18.3% 100.0% ' NO RESPONSE 0 241 40.8% -------- 590 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% i �I . - - RUNNING ERRANDS - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE J VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 'VERY21MPORTANT 1 41 6.9% 12.9% 12.9% - -- SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 83 14.1% 26.2% -39.1% � ' -- .' LITTLE -IMPORTANCE 3 96 16.3% 30.3% 69.4% L- . .. -.... NO IMPORTANCE - 4 97 16.4% 30.6% 100.0% _ NO RESPONSE - 0 273 46.3% L. 590 100.0% 100.0% ASSISTANCE WITH OBTAINING AND COORDINATING EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVIC : !' .... ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE -- VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT I _ VERY IMPORTANT 1 55 9.3`/. 17.7% 17.7% ' SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 94 15.9% 30.2% 47.9% _- ' LITTLE IMFORTHNCE 3 61 13.7% 26.07. 74.0% NO IMPORTANCE. 4 81 13.7% 26.0% 100.0% . NO RESPONSE 0 279 47.3% L " . 590 100.0% 100.0% r .- I EDUCATIONAL. SEMINARS AND SPEAKERS/COUNSELING _ �• i. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE ' VAI UP. LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PI.RCENT PERCENT PERCENT j - VERY- IMPURlAW"! 1 32 ti. 4% 10.0% 10.0% SIIMEWHAT J MN11R'I ANl' 2 94 15.9% 29.3% 39.3% I: LITTLE II1POR'fHNCE 3 99 16.0% 30.8% 70.1% _ I NO IMPORTANCE 4 96 16.3% 29.9% 100.0% NO RESPONSE . - 0 269 45.6%-- 111 590 10U.0% 100.0% ! CIwA4C. ' CONr1IDENIIAI_ l-+UcSTJONNAIRE FOR ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FRFQUENCf.FS AND STATISTICS J ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 46 CON'T GiR1TIiP (RIPS FOR ELDERLY PLANNED SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE - VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT �. !� VERT IMPORTANT 1 83 14.1% 23.1% 23.1% - I I SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 147 24.9% 40.9% 64.1% _ LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 78 13.2% 21.7% 85.87. i NO IMPORTANCE 4 51 8.6% 14.2%- 100.0% NO RESPONSE f<ESPONBE 0 231 39.2% . - 590 100.0% 100.0% I �. ACTIVI,TIES AND RECREATION ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE 1 VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENTPERCENT VERY:.IMPORTANT, 1 96 16.3% 26.9% 26.9% I, SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 163 27.6% 45.7% 72.5% t LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 64 10.8% 17.9% 90.5% f - - - NO-IMPORTANCE 4 34 - 5.8% 9.5% 100.0% '. '. NO RESPONSE . ,,. 0 233 '39.5% I i.: 590 100.0%' 100.0% _ .. . 247HOUR._ STAFFING IJ ,jb - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALLIE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i � VERY; IMPORTANT 1 144 24.4% 41.3% -41.3% SfJMEWHAT IMPORTANT' 2 125 21.2% 35.6% 77.1% ... •LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 44 7.5% 12.6% 89.77 , + NO 1MPORTANt.E. 4 36 6.1% 10.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0--- 241 _ 40.8% --- I ,, .. .,, I� 590 100.0% i0o.0% A -' J j IUWAac �. j CONI II Pill IAL DUES I"IONNAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS _.._----------'--------------------------------------- - ---------------- 47) THE A001TI.ONAL AMOUNT I WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR THE SERVICES - SELECTED IS #, PER MONTH (COMPLETE BASED ON THE TYPE SERVICES YOU CONSIDER "VERY IMPORTANT") - "RANGE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT .... ' LESS THAN 26 41 6.9% 27.3% 27.3% !- 26 - 50 36 6.1% 24.0% 51.3% 51 - 75 . 6 1.0% 4.0% 85.3% 76 - 100. 2 7 4.6% 18.0% 73.3% 101 - 200 24 4.1% 16.0% 89.3% � j 201 - 400 14 2.4% 9 .3% 98.7%... 401 - 500 501 AND OVER 2 0.3% '1.3% 100.0% .`. i NO RESPONSE 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% ". 440 74.6% 1 `.MEAN 82.481 -------- 590 STD DEV 100.837 -------- --------- - - -590 100.0% 100.0% - -; ! - MINIMUM.. '- •. 0 MAXIMUM 500 ---------------- ------------------------- 1 48) WHAT IS THE_LIKELIHOOD YOU WOULD BECOME - A RESIDENT OF HOUSING - ,.I FOR THE ELDERLY:;NDW IF A FACILITY WERE AVAILABLE IN JOHNSON } COUNTY WHICH MATCHED YOUR NEEDS. PREFERENCES AND ABILITY TO PAY? •�.VHLIIE LABEL --..VALUE. FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT - .DEFINITELY 1 22 3.7% 4.4% 4.47 r^ I _..i. 1 PROflABLY I46 7.13% 9.1% 13.5% ..MAYBE .:.. • _ PROBABLYNOr .. ., 3 99 16.8% 19:6% 33.1% ./ DEFINITELY NOT a 146 5 24.7% 29.0%" 62.1% .. ''..i NO RESPONSE 191 32.4%' 37.9%"" 100.0% 0 86 14.6% 5Q0 t00.ti% 11:10.07. IF VOLI ARE NIJf fNTERESTFI) NOW, WOIJI D YOU PROBABLY BE 1NTEhF.:STED: VALUE LAHFL V AI.IIE F'Rl'f111F.:NI;V ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE F'EFiC,FNI' PERCENT PERCENT -. i' ' WITHIN THE NEXT 5 YRS 1 93' 15 .8% 19.1% 19.1% I_ j WITHIN THE tJE.XI 1 5-10 YEARS 2 104 17.6;: 21.4i: 40.5% t'" 1 AM Nfll SURE 5 )3`.lCl 4V.4% F.t,X 91.8% NEVER EE 114iE-'RESTED 4 40 h. H7. 8.2% 100.0% ! NO RESPONSE U 1,Q't -------- 17-51% -------- --------- • _!.uip iDF14'11Pd. I?UESTICIIdMAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA I I I-k'FG!UI'F1C 11;S AIV!1 S'1 A'fISI'I(:6i _ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 4$CGIJ' i ! Wou 0 NEVER BE INTERESTED: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE �!•^i VAI LIF.. LABF..1_ VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 FLAN TO MOVE_ TO 1 ' 26 4.4% 17.1% 17.1% A WARMER CLIMATE 1 I PIAN TO L.IVF -- WITH RELATIVES 2 10 1.7% b.b% 23.7% - - 1- WOULD PREFER A I� LIFE CARE OR CONDOMINIUM PROJ. 3 31 5.3% 20.4% 44.1% I PLAN TO WAIT UNTI1_ 1!1 _ I REQUIRE NURSIIJG 4 85 14.4% 55.9% 100.0% 0 HOI•tE CARE ---"- -" NO RESPONSE.. iI 438 74.2% n ...• 590 100.0% 100.0% ,49)'0VERALL. I THINK HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY WOULD .... ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE n - .'VALIJE LABFL VAI.LII: - FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT- PERCENT INCREASE MY FEELINGS 1 160 27.1% 32.3% 32.3% y OF INDEPENDENCE IV.iI DECREASE MY FF.EL.INGS 2 75 12.7% 15:2% 47.5% ••- OF INDEPENDENCE •• - 'HAVF NO DFFIIJIT'F - f EFFr_CT ON CHHNGINii h.i .- .. 'MY FEELINGS OF - 3 260 44.1% 52.5% 100.0% • - - INDEPENDE14CE NO RESPONSE 0 95 16.1% i rl ----5- -- 90 100.0:: 100.0% -------•---' 50) IN GENERAL. THE BES1' SOIJ13CE OF INFORMATION ABOUT COMMUNITY OR EL-01-RI..Y Al -FAIRS FOR MF IS: VAI -LIE LABEL VAI.I.IF FREQUENCY PERCENT RAp)(I l 182 30.8% NO RFSPONSE 0 _- 408- -- 69.2%_ 590 100.0% I:UNF IiIEN'YiliL ulORSI'IUNNAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA Fl"'RillUENCIES AND STATISTICS `10 CONT TELEVISION I NO RESPONSE 0 NEWSPAPER 1 NO RESPONSE 0 . MFWSL.EITERS (SENIOR CENTER POST OR OTHER NEWSLETTERS FOR THE ELDERLY, CHURrH NEWSLETTERS, ETC.) I .. .. NO RESPONSE 0 --— —. —"_ COMMENTS OF FRIENDS, RELATIVES. PROFESSIONALS, NEIGHBORS, ETC. NO RESPONSE i OIJi 1:SC .; INFORMATIONiI. RF_CFIVE.THROIIGH THE.MAIL NO RESPONSE PERSONAL RESEARCH ABOUT MY INTERESTS NO RESPONSE 218 36.9% 372 63.1% .. i l j i --------- 100.0% _" ... is 79.0% I:UNF IiIEN'YiliL ulORSI'IUNNAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY. IOWA Fl"'RillUENCIES AND STATISTICS `10 CONT TELEVISION I NO RESPONSE 0 NEWSPAPER 1 NO RESPONSE 0 . MFWSL.EITERS (SENIOR CENTER POST OR OTHER NEWSLETTERS FOR THE ELDERLY, CHURrH NEWSLETTERS, ETC.) I .. .. NO RESPONSE 0 --— —. —"_ COMMENTS OF FRIENDS, RELATIVES. PROFESSIONALS, NEIGHBORS, ETC. NO RESPONSE i OIJi 1:SC .; INFORMATIONiI. RF_CFIVE.THROIIGH THE.MAIL NO RESPONSE PERSONAL RESEARCH ABOUT MY INTERESTS NO RESPONSE 218 36.9% 372 63.1% .. -------- 590 --------- 100.0% _" ... is 79.0% 363 61.5% 227 38.5% -- 100.0% -------- 590 --------- 100.0% 1 300 7 50.8% t i 49.2% 495 .290 L --------- 590 --------- 100.0% ` r •) --------- l - 0 .466 - 79.0% � ; 590 -- 100.0% r--. 1 .95 16.1% I , 0 495 83.9% _ . ... 7--7-7 ------ X --------- l - 590 100.0% r. L I; �..� 1 72 12.2% 0 518 87.8% ----590 I_ 100.0% L CLA�u IDENI IAt. QUF..ST)ONN(4IRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA PKEPUENCIES AND STATISTICS 51) IF I FOUND THE TYPE OF HOUSING ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS NOW, I WOULD (CHECK ONE): VALUE LABEL VALUE LIKE TO BE ONE _.I OF THE FIRST RESIDENTS 1 BE INLERESTED ONLY -IFMY CLOSE i FRIENDS OR 1 I i OF THE IDEA 2 PREFF..R TO WAIT ABOUT A YEAR TO I .. ENSURE THAT I MAKE THE RIGHT :! DECISION- 3 ' PREFER"'TOWAIT' i i f CLA�u IDENI IAt. QUF..ST)ONN(4IRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA PKEPUENCIES AND STATISTICS 51) IF I FOUND THE TYPE OF HOUSING ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS NOW, I WOULD (CHECK ONE): ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 31 11 48 6 5 -� LIVING ARRANGEME 6 317 -- - I- A11 NOT SURE 7 125 140 RESPONSE O 47 i ----590 5.3% 5.7%' 5.7% 1.9% 2.0% 7.7% 8.8% 16.6% 1.07 1.1%_. 17.7% 0.8% 0.9% 18.6% 53.7% '58.4% 77.0% 21.2% 23.0% 100.0% 8.0% ------ -- 100.0% 100.0% VALUE LABEL VALUE LIKE TO BE ONE _.I OF THE FIRST RESIDENTS 1 BE INLERESTED ONLY -IFMY CLOSE i FRIENDS OR RELATIVES APPROVED I. OF THE IDEA 2 PREFF..R TO WAIT ABOUT A YEAR TO nI.� ENSURE THAT I MAKE THE RIGHT :! DECISION- 3 ' PREFER"'TOWAIT' MY FRIEWDS f _UWTIL -,HAVE BECOME RESIDENTS AND SEE IF- THEY EXPERIENCE' ANY PROBLEMS 4 PREFER NOT TO CHANGE JUST TO -L FOLLOW MY FRIEND 5 I DO NOT PLAN; TO - CHANGE 11Y CURRENT ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 31 11 48 6 5 -� LIVING ARRANGEME 6 317 -- - I- A11 NOT SURE 7 125 140 RESPONSE O 47 i ----590 5.3% 5.7%' 5.7% 1.9% 2.0% 7.7% 8.8% 16.6% 1.07 1.1%_. 17.7% 0.8% 0.9% 18.6% 53.7% '58.4% 77.0% 21.2% 23.0% 100.0% 8.0% ------ -- 100.0% 100.0% i � I. CONFf DEN1 IAL. QUESTIONNAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING -.IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 52) IN GENERAL., I THINE: CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEMENT, EVEN IF FOR THE BETTER. WOULD CAUSE ME: - ADJUSTED —L . : VALUE LABEL VALUE FREDUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ANXIETY AND i DISCOMFORT 1 45 7.6% 8.5% 8.5% .... SOME INCONVENIENCE IN ADAPTING TO A r NEW ENVIRONMENT 2 89 15.1% -16.8% 25.3% NO GREAT ANXIETY i i I CONFf DEN1 IAL. QUESTIONNAIRE OF ELDERLY HOUSING -.IOWA CITY, IOWA FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 52) IN GENERAL., I THINE: CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEMENT, EVEN IF FOR THE BETTER. WOULD CAUSE ME: - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE . : VALUE LABEL VALUE FREDUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ANXIETY AND DISCOMFORT 1 45 7.6% 8.5% 8.5% .... SOME INCONVENIENCE IN ADAPTING TO A NEW ENVIRONMENT 2 89 15.1% -16.8% 25.3% NO GREAT ANXIETY IF I THOUGHT THE - CHANGE WERE IN MY - - BEST INTEREST zs 248 42.0% 46.8% 46.8% I AM NOT SURE 4 148 25.1% 27.9% 74.7% NO RESPONSE O ----5- 60 10.2% -- - - 90 100.0% 100.0% 53) IF I WERE CONSIDERING HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY AS AN ALTER- NATIVE LIVING ARRANGEMENT, I WOULD EVALUATE THE RENTAL�RATES RELATIVE TO MY INCOME AND PROBABLY FEEL-... (CHECK:ALL THAT APPLY). - VALUE LABEL VALUE FRE4UENCYPERCENT VERY LITTL.E ANXIETY IF MY INCOME WERE APPROPRIATE 1 237 40.2% - NOT',APPLICABLC- O 353 -------- 59.8% - 590 ---------- 100.0% VERY FEARFOL THAT NATES MAY INCREASE -----AND I WOULD SOON NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO PAY RENT 1 136 23.1% NOI APPLICABLE 0 454 -------- 76.9% 590 --------- 100.0% LESS CONCF..RNFD DEPENDING ON THE OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT OF THE PROJECT 1 104 17.6% NOT APPLICABLE 0 486 -------- 82.4% 590 --------- 100.0% L GtINF TDEWIli41_ DUERfitlhlNAIRF_ OF ELDERLY HOUSING - IOWA CITY, IOWA FIiEnIJENCIGS AND S'TAl'ISTICS 53 C'ON' 1' VAI_ IF LABEL VALUE I ALREADY LIVE,IN HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY OR I WOULD NOT CONSIDER CHANGING NY LIVING ARRANGEMENT 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 I Dn NOT KNOW NOT APPLICABLE I 0 FREQUENCY PERCENT 34 5.8% 556 94.2% 590 100.0% 151 25.6% 439 74.4% 590 100.0% 541 ARE YOU INTERESTED IN KNOWINU THE RESULTS OF THIS SURVEY? IF SO, PLEASE COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING AND THE CITY WILT_ INFORM YOU OF THE PROGRESS AND SURVEY. RESULTS. NUMBER OF RESPONDENTS INTERESTED = 197 i I j I. i i i I r :I i APPENDIX D i.. i_ APPENDIX D-1 EVALUATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES 0 27 - If you have used any of the existing community services provided in Iowa City, please indicate your feelings about these services. Responses to Question No. 27 are shown below ranked based on frequency of response. RANK 1. Will allow me to stay in my own home as long as possible'.. 2.: Iowa City has all the services I need... 3• I cannot imagine needing any more.services.,- 4. Services improve the quality of life but will not eliminate need for elderly housing - Existing services should be expanded; to reach more people in all of Johnson County. 6. If I rely 'on"too many services,:I woo t-be''able to afford the cost. 7: I need the services but would prefer,to receive them in elderly housing.. 8: Services meet my needs but I still feel alone and lonely. 9. Receiving services is the same thing as receiving charity. 10. I also need services on the weekend/24 hrs. 11. There is a duplication of service. i APPENDIX 0-2 CRn51A10AllaR NINE 10.51101 171 - IIEIIION 126 - CMMIIY SERVICES VSFI AN1IRLY FEEL IAS AM Eon I CMXIIV SER- ADD 1 I DOS ELDERLY ASPHE SA.I.I.I 401 COME- ON AD. aMY BEVERLY CASE ISSOIIE VISIT- 017ERM VARIOUS DTMEI 101 VIOL MCI ILICAME CLINIC UAE cut UNREST IIFIII 01SAT1 SERVICES 11101 SIX nIVATE IOTA. RILL ALLON 0E 1 6 1 1 S 0 5 C .. { .0 7 1 0 1 4 2 u 10 STAY IN NY 1 ILII 7.01 6{1 U.II 0.01 ME 16.11 1671 0.01 L31 0.01 0.01 2.01 0.01 5.61 27.71 0A 141 1 55.71 20.01 22.21 1671 0.01 15.91 31.11 31.61 0.91 11.51 I.Of . 4.01 21.91 4.61 . 11.21 101DVE 400111 1 7 1 1 - 6 1 7 2 - 1 ' 0 7' 1 0 `, 2 1" 1 26 ' Or n LIFE I Tim 1.91 1.91 25.11 7.n 16.51 1.31 1651 I.II 2.91 0.4i 0191.-. 1.71 0.01 .. 7.91 u.6 I Fix 20.11 1611 16.71 25.01 13.12 10.01 15.12 1.41 23.01 1.01 6.11 40.01 0.11 11.21 0911229141 I o o a o 0 o e o 1 1 e. a �` 1 1 0 Or SERVICES 1 0.11 4.01 1.11 0.01 0.01 0.01. 0.11 0.01 0.01 0.01 1.91 1.01 1.11. 1.01 0.01 1.91 - 1 0.01 1.01 0.11 Y' 0.01 0.01 0.01 - 0.61 . 0.91 1.91 1.01 1.91 .1.01.- 691 1.91 :-:- 1.01 ALL INE SERVICES 1 7 0 I . 5 02 ..: 5 2 1 1 1: 1 _. 1. 4 ;. 1 I6 I SEI 1 12.51 0.01 6.31 11.11 0.01 12.51 11.01 .12.51 1.11 1.31 {.31 1.01 - 6S. 1.91 ' 6.31 11.11 I Il.n 0.01 11.11 1.51 1.11 10.51 15.01 16.51 0,01 12.51 51.91 MI, 1.91 601 1.11 LAMI IIIASIE 1 0 0 I - 7 0 3 2 - 2 1 1 1 1 /. 0 0 15 RIEIIR ANY roRL 1 0.01 0.01 2.71 23.11 0.01 27.11 . 15.41 11.41 0.01 7.71 7.71 6.01 1.01 0.01 0.01 1.41 IEn1C16 1 1.91 0.01 161 1.31 6.01 15.11 IN." TOM 1.n 11.55• 51.22 4.II-. 691 1.11 • - 601 All NY KISS I I 1 1 5 7 1 3 7 I 't�' 1 .. 0 1 0" 1 11 M9 STILL FEEL 1 5.11 5.61 $At 21.11 ILIO 3.61, 16.91 1671 611 0.01 1.01 - 1.41. 5.91' 6.01 '. 0.01 I1.61 ROME AMI LOELY I 5.11 20.01 11.11 13.92 50.01 3.51 15.01 15.11 0.01 0.01 6.01 O.Vi 70.0E 0.01 0.01 .4 •-•-0 ^^ --. ....0 _---1 »• SED WI 910.1 I 1 4 0 7 : 2 0 1, 0'- 1 1 1 11 InTER 10 010E11 I 10.41 0.01 0.01 40.01 0.01 20.01 70.01 - 1.01 0.03 0.01 4.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 10.01 6.5E IN 40U51161E11ERLY I 5.91 0.01 0.01 II.It 0.01 10.51 CLOS 0.01 0.01 0.01 1.91 1.61 1.91 1.01 1.11 ' UK AS RETURNS 1 1 -------- 0 -------- 0 ------- -------- 0 1 ------- 0 -------- .1_111 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 C@AITY 1 1.01 0.01 0.01 50.01 0.01 30.02 0.01 0.01 0.11 Ln 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 OAS 1.31 1 0.01 1.01 0.01 7.11 0.01 5.11 0.01 0.01 0.01 #.ot 0.01 6.91 0.01 0.03 0.01 FIFAMtoSIER I 7 I 1 4 6 1' 1 .. 1 ._ _1 1 0 0 1' a - 1016071E I 15.41 1.71 7.71 50.6 0.01 7.71: 1.71 2.71 0.01 /.al 1.91 0.01 0.0E 0.01 15.41 1.41 1 I------- 1.91 24.01 ------- 1.1 -------------- Hat 0.01 ------ 5.31 ------ 5.01 5.51 0.01 0.01 6.01 0141 0.91 0.01 1.21 - 116 TRADERS ASI 1 2 1 ' I 2 1 0 _1111_ 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 I 12 OR 74-H UAS A ELY 1 14.71 1.31 1.31 16.71 1.31 0.01 1.31 11.71 0.01 1.01 0.01 0.01 1.31 0.01 ME 1.11 1 I----------- 1.11 20.01 1.1 5.61 25.01 0.01 5.01 10.51 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 20.01 0.01 641 011.91E in Arr0Y1 I 0 e 0 7 0 I 0 0 1 e e 0 0 0 1 4 to PAT SIMUF 1 0.01 0.01 0.01 50.01 0.01 25.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 25.01 2.61 I 1.01 0.01 0.01 5.1 1.41 5.51 0.01 601 0.91 1.01 1.91 0.01 0.01 1.01 t.1 1011 0. 1S NASA 1 0 O 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 1 0.01 0.01 70.01 1.01 0.01 40.05 0.01 0.02 0.01 20.01 1.01 0.01 0.01 1.01 20.01 1.22 • I 0.01 0.0E 11.11 0.01 0.01 10.51 0.01 0.01 0.01 17.51 0.01 0.01 0.02 1.01 1.11 E0.L11II »...... ....... 17 5 ...... ...... 1 ....... IS ._.._:11_1_. 4 11 20 II 0 1 _._. 7 -_ _•_-_. 0 11_11. 1 1111_.. 0 II 19 IOIAL 11.01 5.71 5.11 75.71 ME 17.31 17.71 17.71 0.01 5.71 1.71 0.01 5.71 1.01 7.11 100.01 fr. i I I APPENDIX D-3 RELIANCE ON OTHERS TOTALLY FOR ASSISTANCE WITH DAILY LIVING ACTIVITIES '. G 24 - Who do you rely on for the following? j Responses to Question No. 24 ("Others Totally") are i — shown below in order of frequency of response. 1 Adjusted I Percent - Yard Work 20.9 Laundry 13.5 A,. J Housework 11.2 ' Preparing Meals 10.7 Transportation 10.6 Medication - Getting 7.4 + Shopping 6.9 Paying Bills 3.9 , Personal Appearance 25 Medication - Taking 1:9 • Personal Care" q j i , i I� i I i • I APPENDIX D-4 REGULAR RELIANCE ON COMMUNITY SERVICES P 26 - Are you receiving any assistance from any of the following community services? Responses to Question No. 26 ("Use Regularly") are shown below in order of frequency of response. Adjusted Percent S.E.A.T.S. 2.6 Congregate Meals at Senior Center 1.8 Other 1.8 Home Delivered Meals 1.5 Johnson County Homemaker/• Home Health 1.5 CAHHSA/VNA 2 ESA - Chore 1.0 .CAHHSA - Respite ._. .6 Day Care at Senior Center ,4 ESA - Referral and Information .4 ESA - Respite .2 CAHHSA - Elderly Clinic ,2 Beverly Home Health -0- ESA - Visitation Various Private, For Profit -0- 63 "STION A24 . "STION 126 (Sit RERMYULY 0 Mike CAN I WALLY Yet i UN 'I " Y1IYIO11111M-A- UA 1EWJI1-6 COW-NORE DEL COMIF IEVMY CkW USP31E VISII- WEIM Val as iff al g IIN( m FOLLCM146 COL Z I ALICK CLI cm ciu 6AIl KAL MEALS ODEAva swims ATIOM go . ummu 1 a 1 20.01 1.71 11.31 13.31 4.01 6.71 11.31 13.31 1.01 0.02 9.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 13.31 8.21 6.51 0.01 11.71 6.71 $.QZ 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 11.21 mfula KALS 1 1 1 2 1 21.41 7.11 14.31 1.11 : 6.41 7.11 ILA ILA 0.01 0.01 1.01 0 0.61 a 0.01 0.01 14.31 7.71 1 1.91 611 11.17 3.21 1.01 61.71 4.11 4.11 4.01 601 OA 0.41 col 0.01 11.21 KINK am0 I 21A1 14.31 14.31 6.64 0." 0.41 21.11 14.31 0.01 1'01 0.01 0.01 Cot 0.01 6.01 3.11 5.11 1.11 5." 4.01, 1.61 0.61 ca 3.31 6.01 6,47 611 0.41 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 a 12 APHAUNCE I 1" 1.31 8.31 . 33.11 ca ox Ism sai o.0 @A Cu 1.81 8.01 6.01 6.61 6,11 1 5.91 1.11 slit 12.9Z 6.01 U.71 I'll 3.31 4.41 0.01 1.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 2 2 11.61 5.11 11.11 23.51 5.11 S.?l 11.11 11.11 0.01 4.41 6.01 4.01 I.Oz 0.41 5.91 ut fol 1.11 Ml O.Oz 0.01 0.01 0.03 1.41 6.01 1.11 101 4.211.21 21.21 1.11 0.01 1.31 1j.11 0.03 4.01 4.01 0.31 0.01 4.21 13.11 11.12 CH 5.11 2241 25.01 0.01 1.31 11.31 4.01 0.01 1.01 0.01 10.31 1.11 FAIIJO NILIS 1 0 2 2 • • 30.61 7.71 7.31 7.31 mi 4.01 15-41 15-11 om cot 7.31 o.02 cot om 1.11 7.11 11.91 9.61 5.61 1.21 4.01 0.01, 1.31 1'11 8.01 6.41 INA 0.11 0.01 0.01 1.12 I POU 0 2 n 11.11 3.11 10.71 14.11 33t 3.61 lut 11.31 0.01 10.71 0.01 0.01 3.61 4.01 7.11 15.31 ji-el 9-11 am t2m msi wn 1631 I7.31 1.91 75.07 1,01 0.01 20.01 0.01 11.21 JIMMY I 3 5 0 t 0 0 17.51 4.71 12.31 11.11 4.11 4.21 12.51 20.61 0.01 4.21 1.01 0.01 4.22 1.01 4.21 13.11 1.11 9.11 16.11 12.91 '12.51 16.71 12.11 16.71 6.01 25.11 0.11 0.01 "A 0.01 9.11 0151EI6ION I I 1 1 3 6EIII06 It 1 21.11 5.31 5.31 13.10 Is.52 0.41 14.51 21.11 0.01 1.61 1.01 1.41 5.11 0.01 5.31 10,11 I mat I -it s-st 1.11 moi ca in 11.31 0.01 0.01 cot 0.01 20.01 6.01 I'll OFAICAUDI 1 3 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 10171711 1 20.01 10.01 10.01 10.01 10.01 0.01 10-01 30.01 4.61 6.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 1.01 10 5.51 3-11 1-11 5.613.21 12.5t0,01 4.11 10.01 6.01 #.11 1.61 0.01 4.01 $.OZ 8.01 I mwj it 11 le it A 21 so 1 4 I -_ a - __. I .-- IeII 11,61 6.01 1.11 U.92 4.41 3.11 11.11 16.41 1.01 2.21 1.51 0.01 2.71 a 0.01 it 6.41 Its 10.01 63 APPENDIX D-6 CROSSTABULATIGN TABLE CROSS2 /G3/ QUESTION 131 - INCREASE INTEREST IHOUSEI OUESTION COUNT 120 ROB 1 1 I HOSPITAL PHYSICAL REACHING LONELI- DEATH OF LOSS OF ANXIETY NONE ROB ' ICHANGESI COL 1 I HEALTH AGE NESS SPOUSE FRD/REL RESPONS TOTALS DEATH OF SPOUSE 29 100 12 17 7.1I 12 5.01 9 3.7% 35 14.5% 27 11.21 241 16.51 12.0% 41.5% . 5.0I 17.61 18.41 14.1% 21.31 5.4% 15.01 21.11 I9.3% CHANGE IN HEALTH - _----40- 119 ---20 21 6.41 -- 41- -. 14.21 14 4.2% 39 11.81 30 9.11 330 22.61 12.1% 36.1% 6.1% I 24.21 21.9% 23.5% 26.3% 21.31 23.3% 23.51 21.41 LOSS OF FAMILY OR - 1 25. 76 11 12 5.51 30 13.01 14 6.5% 30 13.81 19 9.111 217 14.91 FRIEND 11.51 I 15.21 35.01 14.01 5.1% 12.91 15.01 13.61 23.31 18.1% 13.6% �16 RETIREMENT ,. 1 --21. 9.4% 87 38.8% . 12 Y--13 - 5.41 5.83 45 20.11 6 2.71 24 10.7% 7.11 224 15.3% 12.71 16.01 14.11 16.3% 20.41 -� 10.01 14.51 11.4% MARITAL PROBLEM ---4 16.71. 6 33.31. 3 12.51 2 -- 0.3% 4 16.71 1 4.21 2 8.31 0 0.01 24 - 1.6% '. 2.4% " . 1.51- 3.51 2.51 .1.8% - 1.71 1.2X M-7 0.01 CHILD LEAVING NONE 1 -� 4'� ' 8.21 .11 34.71 �- 6 � 12.21 3 - 6.1% 6 12.2% - 4 8.21 14.31 2 4.11 49 3.41 - 3.11.' 7.1% 3.111' 2.7% 6.71 4.21. 1.412.41 - 9 19 __._. 4 '. _.._ ; OTHER iS.3% 32.21 b.B% 6.81 11.91 6.81 .13.61 6.81 4.01 ' 5.5% 3.51 4.7% 5.01 3.2% 6.7% 4.8% 2.91 -- 33 118 _.._ 17 - B- - :7p ~.g 21---'.-42 317 NONE - - 10.4% 37.21 - 5.4% 2.51 . 22.1%, 2.5% 6.6% 13.2% ,21.7% ' 20.0% 21.71 20.01 10.0% 31.71 13.3% 12.7% --166' 30.01 ---140 COLUMN 165 ' 544 `^� 85 BO 221' 60 1461' - TOTALS 11.3% 37.2% 5.81 5.5% 15.1% 4.1% 11.4% 9.6% 100.01 CROSS2 /G3/ QUESTION 123 - PHISICAL HEALTH EXCELLENT GOOD FAIR - I � CF.JSSILI3.N APPENDIX D-7 CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION 134 - HEALTH NOW COMPARED TO 5 -YEARS AGO COUNT 1 ROW I ; BETTER ABOUT NORSE NO ROW COL I 1 THE SANE RESPONSE TOTAL j i 8 90 1 0 99 I 8.IZ 90.9% 1.01 0.0% 17.51 1 26.7% 23.9% 0.71 -----1 0.0% -10 ---231 ---'-Si -288 5.6% 00.2% 11.82 2.41 51.01 i 53.3% 61.3% 23.41 53.81 I 1 _-_-- 5 --- 53 - 71 - 6 135 1 3.7% 39.31 52.6% A.4% 23.91 16.71 14.11 49.0% 46.21 -- 3 -- 24 - 0 27 1 0.01 11.11 88.91 O.OZ 4.81 0.01 0.8% 16.6% 0.01 1 --I D. 13 -- 0 14 1 7.1% 0.0% 92.91 0.01 2.51 3.31 0.0% 9.01 0.0% 1 1 0 0 2 0 2 1 0.01 0.01 100.01 0.0% 0.41 1 0.01 0.0% 1.41 0.01 1 -------- 30 ----- ...---- 377 ------- 145 13 565 5.3% 66.72 25.71 2.3Z 100.0% j i r i I � i, f �. i � L• j 1. I ■ I � y:7 APPENDIX D -B CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION 134 AND 23 - QUESTION 122 - A NURSE WHO PROVIDES CARE IN HOME HEALTH IS COUNT 1 NORSE NOW RON X 1 REGULARLY OCCAS- NOT NO RON COL Z 1 IONALLY NEEDED RESPONSE TOTAL NORSE NOW AND 2 1 5 5 13 VERY DEPENDENT 15.41 7.7Z 30.51 38.5% S6.7Z 1 IOD.OZ 100.0% 100.0% 11.42 MORSE NON AND 1 0 0 0 2 2 - TOTALLY DEPENDENT 1 O.OI 0.01 0.01 IOD.OZ 13.32 1 0.01 0.01 0.01 28.6% COLUMN 2 1 5 7 IS TOTAL 13.3I 6.71 33.3% 46.71 100.OZ i 1 i 1 1 I r i � y:7 APPENDIX D -B CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION 134 AND 23 - QUESTION 122 - A NURSE WHO PROVIDES CARE IN HOME HEALTH IS COUNT 1 NORSE NOW RON X 1 REGULARLY OCCAS- NOT NO RON COL Z 1 IONALLY NEEDED RESPONSE TOTAL NORSE NOW AND 2 1 5 5 13 VERY DEPENDENT 15.41 7.7Z 30.51 38.5% S6.7Z 1 IOD.OZ 100.0% 100.0% 11.42 MORSE NON AND 1 0 0 0 2 2 - TOTALLY DEPENDENT 1 O.OI 0.01 0.01 IOD.OZ 13.32 1 0.01 0.01 0.01 28.6% COLUMN 2 1 5 7 IS TOTAL 13.3I 6.71 33.3% 46.71 100.OZ i 1 i I' � y:7 APPENDIX D -B CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION 134 AND 23 - QUESTION 122 - A NURSE WHO PROVIDES CARE IN HOME HEALTH IS COUNT 1 NORSE NOW RON X 1 REGULARLY OCCAS- NOT NO RON COL Z 1 IONALLY NEEDED RESPONSE TOTAL NORSE NOW AND 2 1 5 5 13 VERY DEPENDENT 15.41 7.7Z 30.51 38.5% S6.7Z 1 IOD.OZ 100.0% 100.0% 11.42 MORSE NON AND 1 0 0 0 2 2 - TOTALLY DEPENDENT 1 O.OI 0.01 0.01 IOD.OZ 13.32 1 0.01 0.01 0.01 28.6% COLUMN 2 1 5 7 IS TOTAL 13.3I 6.71 33.3% 46.71 100.OZ 4,51 i I r' 1, I� 4,51 QUESTION #25 APPENDIX D-9 CROSSTAHUL.ATION TABLE QUESTION #15 - SOMEONE CHECKS ON YOU REGULARLY COUNT 1 ROW % 1 NO ROW CDL % 1 YES NO RESPONSE TOTAL 121 118 CHECK THE ,.. 49.2% FOLLOWING WHICH APPLY - 31.1% - - TROUBLE 31.0% 33.3% REMEMBERING . .. -------- 23 O THINGS 59.6% 40.4% I FEFL VERY ' -.I I MUCH ALONE 0.07. .. I J -------- - 21 -------- 12 1 34 I WORRY A LOT 61.8% 35.3% I ABOUT HOW TO TAKE ....... :.. 5.4% 3.1% CARE OF MYSELF I -------- - ,. 1WORRY A LOT 3 84 1 ABOUT LIVING - 40.5% 3.6% 10.6% EXPENSES' 12.1% 8.9% 14.3% i -------- 1 -------- 63 �. I WORRY A LOT --------ABOUT 56.87. WHAT WILL 7% 14.1% 1 BECOME OF ME 11.8% 14.3% ----102 ----- ------7 149 NONE OF THE 39.5% 57.8% ABOVE APPLIES ' �.;'.'. f 26 3% TO ME 33.3% J - 388 381 21 790 COLUMN 49.1% 48.2% 2.7% TOTAL 1 �n . J i it I J i APPENDIX D-9 CROSSTAHUL.ATION TABLE QUESTION #15 - SOMEONE CHECKS ON YOU REGULARLY COUNT 1 ROW % 1 NO ROW CDL % 1 YES NO RESPONSE TOTAL 121 118 7 246 49.2% 48.0% 2.8% 31.1% - - 31.2% 31.0% 33.3% 1 -------- -------- 34 -------- 23 O 57 59.6% 40.4% 0.07. 7.2% 18.8% 6.0% 0.07. .. 1 -------- -------- - 21 -------- 12 1 34 _ 61.8% 35.3% 2.9% 4.37 ....... :.. 5.4% 3.1% 4.8% I -------- - -------- 47 -------- - 34 3 84 1 56.0% - 40.5% 3.6% 10.6% ' 1 12.1% 8.9% 14.3% i -------- 1 -------- 63 ------- 45 3 111 56.87. 40.5% 7% 14.1% 1 16.2% 11.8% 14.3% ----102 ----- ------7 149 258 39.5% 57.8% 2.7% 32.7% f 26 3% 39.1% 33.3% -- - 388 381 21 790 49.1% 48.2% 2.7% 100.0% h � i 7 1 ' l i j, I Q IUEST1014 #35 HEL F WITH SHOPPING, HOUSEWoRt', ETC. YES, A FAMILY MEMBER OR CLOSE FRIEND. VFS, I HIRE SOMEONE. YES, I USE A COI-114UNITY AGENCY SERVICE. ,:COLUMN TOTAL QUESTION #35a - CONCERNED ABOUT PERMANENCE AND/OR AFFORDABILITY OF SUPPORT PERSON COUNT ROW COL % -- NO ROW YES--- NO RESPONSE TOTAL -------- --- 25 -----4-3- -------30- - I 98 I 25.5% 43.9% 3U.6% 80.3% 83.3% 78.27. 81.1% -------- -------- -------- 3 7 5 15 20.0% - 46.7% 33.37 12.3% -------- -----1 12.7% 13.5% --- -------- 2 5 2 9 22.2% 55.6% 22.27 7.4% I. 6.7% 9.1% 5.4% 30 55 37 .45.1% 30.3% APPENDIX D-11 f;O. 11 SOOFUNE HAS EWCOL;H,,GED TO CONSIDER A 1%1FFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT=88 FRFOUENCIES AND STATISTICS 41 AfiP. VALUE LABEL UNDER 55 S5 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 85 AND OVER NO RESPONSE MEAN -71.:7752 MINIMUM ------4_000 --------_-- ----- ------ ., 2) SEX' VALUE LABEL. VAI..UE MALE'' FEMALE NO RESPONSE 3) 11ARITAL STATUS VALAIE LABEL. VALUE. - SINSLE NEVER MARRIED MARRIED, .. - WIDOWED DIVORCED, BE.PARATE.D NO RESPONSE ------------------------------------ 4) CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT VALUE' I.ABEL. VAIA IF LIVE: AL014E I f VE SOME.OMF ELSE LIVE W/REL-AT I VE LTVE WhADN-RELATIVE 1.1 VE tGR0UP QUARTERS NO RESPONSE_ f ADJUSTED i J FREQUE14CY PERCENT 1 I PERCENT I J 1.1% 1.1% I I 225.0% 25.0% 26.1% :s1 35.2% J 61.4% • f 30.7% 92.0% 7 8.0`7. 8.0% 'J ------U- i 88 ----0.0%---- 100.0% 100.0% i.l STD DEV 8.694 -- MAXIMUM ----90.000 ly ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREMLIENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 24 27.3% 27.6% 27.6% 2 67, 71.6% 72.4% 100.0% 0 1 -------- i� 88 -------------------------------------- i - -------- 100.0% i.i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE r� I.: PERCENT PERCENT I i 1 11 12.5% 12.5% I APPENDIX D-11 f;O. 11 SOOFUNE HAS EWCOL;H,,GED TO CONSIDER A 1%1FFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT=88 FRFOUENCIES AND STATISTICS 41 AfiP. VALUE LABEL UNDER 55 S5 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 85 AND OVER NO RESPONSE MEAN -71.:7752 MINIMUM ------4_000 --------_-- ----- ------ ., 2) SEX' VALUE LABEL. VAI..UE MALE'' FEMALE NO RESPONSE 3) 11ARITAL STATUS VALAIE LABEL. VALUE. - SINSLE NEVER MARRIED MARRIED, .. - WIDOWED DIVORCED, BE.PARATE.D NO RESPONSE ------------------------------------ 4) CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT VALUE' I.ABEL. VAIA IF LIVE: AL014E I f VE SOME.OMF ELSE LIVE W/REL-AT I VE LTVE WhADN-RELATIVE 1.1 VE tGR0UP QUARTERS NO RESPONSE_ f ADJUSTED i J f ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUE14CY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 22 225.0% 25.0% 26.1% :s1 35.2% 35.2% 61.4% 27 30.7% 30.7% 92.0% 7 8.0`7. 8.0% 100.0% ------U- 88 ----0.0%---- 100.0% 100.0% STD DEV 8.694 -- MAXIMUM ----90.000 I ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREMLIENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 24 27.3% 27.6% 27.6% 2 67, 71.6% 72.4% 100.0% 0 1 -------- 88 -------------------------------------- ----1_1% 100.0% - -------- 100.0% ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREf.,10FMCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 11 12.5% 12.5% 12.57. '? 30 34.1% 34.1% 46.6% 3 42 47.7% 47.7% 94.3% a 5 5.7% 5.7% 100.0% :I C. 0.0% --------- 88 -___.__.._- -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE �fiFDIIF NF:J PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 1 41 46.6% 47.1% 47.1% ' :56 4o.9% 41.4% 88.5% 'i3 3.4% 3.4% 920% i 3 :5. 4% 3.4% 95.47. 4 4.5% 4.6% 100.07. -------- IiH -------- 1()0. ()% --------- 100.x% f i L. i i i j 1 I' I � I . i { i I { 1: VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY c� ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT HOUSE FARM 1 63 71.6% 71.6% 71.6% 1< I : 1 !JL1, 1i S0NL-"ONE HAS ENCOURAGED TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT=88 FREPUENCIES AND STATISTICS 51 .TYPE OF RF_'SIDENCE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT HOUSE FARM 1 63 71.6% 71.6% 71.6% C014DOMINIUM 2 3 6 6.8% 6.8% 78.4% FlPARTMFNf 4 1 1.1% 1.1% 79,5% HOARDING HOUSE 5 16 18.2% 18.2% 97.7% HOI.)BING THE ELDERLY 6 0 2 0.0% 0.0% 97.7% NO RESPONSE, 0 2.3% 2.3% 100.0% 0 ------- 0.0% -------------------------88 -------- 00.0% 1----- --------- 100.0% 6) DO YOU OWN YOUR HOME? - VALUE LABEL VALUE FRFQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ..YES..... 1 66 75.0% 75.9% 75.9% ,NO.,.., NO . RESPONSE .. 2 0 21 23.9% 24.1% 100.0% - 1 -------- 1.1% .. 88 -------- 100.0% --------- 100.0% IF YES, WHAT IS THE TAX -ASSESSED VALUE? •' VAI.IJE I_ADF.L ~ ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT UNDER $10,000 $10.000 -, 39,999 4 4.5% 7.3% 7.3% ..40,000 - 69,999 10 23 11.4% 18.2% 25.5% - 70,000 - 99,999 it 26.1% 41.8% 67.3% 100,000.- 124,999 12.5% 20.0% 87.3% 125.000 AND OVER 5 5.7% 'e. 9.1% 96.4% -- NO RESPONSE 2 T% 3. h% 100,0% 33 --100.0% 37.5% 88 100.0% MEAN 59H94 STD ))EV 32 335 MINIMUM 800 -------------------------------- MAXIMUM 15,0000 DH :I I" i N11. I? Ho.; ciVCOURAGED TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT I.IVING ARRANGEMENT=88 FI4F.nUF..NCTIFS AMD S1'T1S1'I1- 71 .IF YOU ARE P17NI INC-; AN APARTMENT, WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT IJ j i INCLUDING UTILITIES: j ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VAL.UE L.ABE:L. FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TINDER $200 5 5.7% I- 35.7% I" i N11. I? Ho.; ciVCOURAGED TO CONSIDER A DIFFERENT I.IVING ARRANGEMENT=88 FI4F.nUF..NCTIFS AMD S1'T1S1'I1- 71 .IF YOU ARE P17NI INC-; AN APARTMENT, WHAT IS YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY RENT? INCLUDING UTILITIES: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VAL.UE L.ABE:L. FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT TINDER $200 5 5.7% 35.7% 35.7% Y200 - 399 6 6.8% 42.9% 78.6% 400 - 599 1 1.1% 7.1% 85.7% 6U0 - 799 2 2.3% 14.3% 100.0% 800 _ yyy 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% _�.. _. 1 u00 AND OWN 0.0.7. 0.0% 100.0% -.� NO RESPONSE 74 84.1% -------- --------- H5 100.0% 100.0% MEAN 3'7.8.'78h STD DEV 192.923 _..-_._.MINIMUM 99 MAXIMUM 780 - EX!:I_UDIN6 UTILITIES: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL FRERUENCY PERCENT PERCENT. PERCENT UNDER.$200 2 2.3% 25.0%.. 25.0% $200 - "99 5 5.7% 62.5% 87.5%. . 400 - 599 0 0.0% 0.0% 87.5'% _. 600 _ 799 1 1.1% 12.5% 100.0% 800 999 0 - 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 1.000 ANO OVER 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% NO. RESPONSE a0 -------- 90.9% -------- --------- __. .. aG 100.0•% 100.0% MEAW 294.625 SCD DEV 181.407 MINIMUM i15 MAXIMUM -----------^ 730 -------------------------------------------------------- 8) APPROXIMAIE CURRENY ANNUAL INCOME. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, 81iOW COMB INET, 1NIt!lME". fCHFCI:. f1f•IE:7e gDJUS'(ED CUMULATIVE VALI.IF.. 1.A13E.1_ �'.�I. !.IE. �!--'FIJI IE IW P� PEFI;EMC PERCENT PERCENT $ 0 - q.999 1 ... 36.4;: 38.6% 38.6% 14)., 00(1 - 1.b,4Yy ... 18 21.7% 60.27. 16.600 - '24,999 :• 14 15.9% 16.9% 77.1% '25,1.100 - :'4,994 4 9 IU. 27. IU. 8% 88.0% ooi! - 49.99P `i 7 8.0%. 8.4% 96.4% 5+1.00f1 AND OVER b .. ;t. 47. ,.6% 100.0% NU RESPONSE 0 `' _._.......__.._ ''• 7" _._._-_'__- _-_-_-__- 8H i?C . o'•. 100.0% ------------------- 491 B i, i i 1 36 76.6% 140T APPLICABLE. 0 ----- I, 23.4% -------- 1 47 100.0% is i 1 1 � , I it I APPENDIX D-12 nIU:1. 0 i WouLD LIKE Tu MOVE INTO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY=47 FR'EQUENC'IES AND STATISTICS 31) WHTCH, IF ANY, OF THE FOLLOWING DO YOU FEEL WOULD INCREASE YOUR INTEREST IN CHANGING YOUR CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT TO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): VALUE. LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADMISSION INTO.HOSPITAL OR TEMPORARY STAY IN NURSING. HOME. 1 8 17.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 39 83.0% -------- -------- 47 100.0% CHANGE IN PHYSICAL HEALTH. 1 36 76.6% 140T APPLICABLE. 0 ----- 11 23.4% -------- 1 47 100.0% _ `REACHING.A PARTICULAR _AGE., 1 15 31.9% - NOT APPLICABLE .. 0 —_-32 68.1% --100.0% .._. , , -. .... 47 ''• '1 FEELINGS OF.:ANX1E'IY DUE TO LCINELINES.S' 1 11 23.4% NOT APPLICABLE. 0 -------- 36 76.6% -------- 47 100.0% i i i I i 1 i i I I� i � 1 1 'dU, SO 1 �;UULfi 1.1. h.t '10 I'1UVE I:WTO HOUSUdS FON IHE ELDERLY=47 I•hiFla!F..NL;fIdS ANO S'I'AT'IS1'ICS 29) IOWA 17I'I'Y HAS SEVERAL SUBSIDIZED HOUSI14G FACILITIES AND 'SERVICES; GIVEN THIS SITUATION, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS BEST DESCRIBF_S YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD EVALUATING HOUSING ANT) SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? VALUE LABFL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I"WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE iIFFERIN6 STIBSIDIZF..D RENT. 1 6 12.8% NOT AFPI.fCABI.E 0 41 87.2% .- -------- --------- 47 100.0% PLIE TO MY' INCOME, I CAN ONLY CONSIDER 1 16 34.0% SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES. NOT ANPL.ICABLF 0 3166.0% -------- --------- 47 100.0% Iii: x:I I V I WOULD NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/ SERVICES AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. 1 1 2.1% NOT APPL ICABLE 11 46 97.9% -------- -------- 47 100.0% I WOULD PRFFFR 1'0 RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT 72.3% .� - -,-- ------- REGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. 1 I 10. 6% 0 42 89.4% NI:IIAPPI ICABI.E -------- I i --------- 'dU, SO 1 �;UULfi 1.1. h.t '10 I'1UVE I:WTO HOUSUdS FON IHE ELDERLY=47 I•hiFla!F..NL;fIdS ANO S'I'AT'IS1'ICS 29) IOWA 17I'I'Y HAS SEVERAL SUBSIDIZED HOUSI14G FACILITIES AND 'SERVICES; GIVEN THIS SITUATION, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS BEST DESCRIBF_S YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD EVALUATING HOUSING ANT) SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? VALUE LABFL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I"WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE iIFFERIN6 STIBSIDIZF..D RENT. 1 6 12.8% NOT AFPI.fCABI.E 0 41 87.2% .- -------- --------- 47 100.0% PLIE TO MY' INCOME, I CAN ONLY CONSIDER 1 16 34.0% SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES. NOT ANPL.ICABLF 0 3166.0% -------- --------- 47 100.0% Iii: x:I I V I WOULD NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/ SERVICES AS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. 1 1 2.1% NOT APPL ICABLE 11 46 97.9% -------- -------- 47 100.0% I WOULD PRFFFR 1'0 RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT 72.3% .� - -,-- ------- REGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. 1 10. 6% 0 42 89.4% NI:IIAPPI ICABI.E -------- --------- 47 100.0% RECFIVIN13 WHAT' I 1:ONS'1.DEH III Bt9. H "RANHAIN" .IS TI4F CINLY WAY I WOULI) S 10.6% CUN:iIDER CHANGING MY 1-.1.VLNt; ARRAIJGF.ME'NT. 1 61111 APPLICABLE 0 -------- 47 89.4% --------- 47 100.0% I WOtll_D INCRFA4E I -HE i-,RnPnRIIIIN 01= 'I HF INCOMF I SPEND ON HOUSIWPI AND RELATED SERVICES TO HAVE THE HUtIi1NCi/:9l•.RVICES 1 I PREFER. NOT AFPI..IC AR... 0 13 27.7% I' I: 34 72.3% .� - -,-- ------- F. 1 _ 1 IvOI_ILia LIKF. TO MOVE 114TO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY=47 FRROLIE.NCIES AND .. j 0 27 57.4% — 47 100.0% i'. 1 2 4.3% 1 _ 1 IvOI_ILia LIKF. TO MOVE 114TO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY=47 FRROLIE.NCIES AND S'T'ATISTICS 1' 0 27 57.4% — 47 100.0% i'. 1 2 4.3% , i 71 II f j 100.0% OU. 30 1 IvOI_ILia LIKF. TO MOVE 114TO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY=47 FRROLIE.NCIES AND S'T'ATISTICS 29 C11N' T VALUE LABEL 1 All CONTE14T WITH MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT. NOT APPLICABLE " NONE OF THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE_ OF MY ATTITUDE. NOT APPLICABLE ----------------------------------------- i19 ------------------------- VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I 1 20 42.6% — 0 27 57.4% — 47 100.0% i'. 1 2 4.3% 0 45 95.7% 71 47 ----------------------- ---- ------- ---------/(3/ 100.0% 1W31 ;. I i 1 I 1 r 140. 'tu I' WOULD L.)KE TO 1"OVE INTO HOUSING FOR 1 -HF. ELDERLY -47 I J i I--------------- rREOLIENC1ES AND STATISTICS . 8) APPROXIMATE CURRENT ANNUAL INCOME. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, �. SHOW COMBINED INCOME (CHECK ONE): ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALLIE FREOUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT $ 0 - 91999 1 14 29.6% 34,1% 34.1% - 10,000 - 16,499 2 13 27.7% 31.7% 65.9% -I 16.500 - :4.999 3 8 17.0% 19.5%. 85.4% I J 25,000 - 34,999 4 3 6.4% 7.3% 92.7% 35,000 - 49,999 5 1 2.1% 2.4% 95.1% _ 50,000 AND OVER 6 2 4.3% 4.9% 100.0% :.. NO RESPONSE l'. 6 12.8% -------- --------- -------- 47 100.0% 100.0% 1' MEAN.: .. > .: 2.437 STD DEV 1.566 .. . ------ - - - - �. U J i , -----------------------------------------------' APPENDIX D-13 r •- W0. ::' NUT Egg JSFIED WJFH Cf.1RREI41 LIVING ARRANGEMENTS=29 ...,_ FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS . . , ,.-: _.----------------------------------------------------- 'SBf• IF N0, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST -------------------- DESCRIBES WHAT WOULD BEST �. 1 - MEET YOUR CURRENT NEEDS (CHECK: ONLY ONE) : - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i. HOME HEALTH AND/OR - I: • EXISTING COMMUNITY I I- SERVICES 1 0 0.0% - 0.0% 0.0% - ., II I, TNDF_'NENDENi' LIVING - ONE-BEDROOM APART. 2 5 17.2% 20.0% 20.0% INDEPENDENI' LIVING - TWO-BEDROOM APART. 3 - 12 41.4% 48.0% 68.0% JJ{ q„ INDEPENDENT LIVING - EFFICIENCY APART. 4 1 3.4% 4.0% 72.0%. ASSISTED LIVING - ' .`. •' ' PRIVATE ROOM 5 0 0.0% 0.0% 72.0%. r ASSISTED LIVING "` •• SEMIPRIVATE ROOM 6 1 3.4% 4.0% 76.0% ASSISTED LIVING - r EFFICIENCY APART. 7 1 3.4% 4.0% (30.0% ASSISTED LIVING - I ,r GROUP HOME 8 1 3.4% 4.0% 84.0% CONDOMINIUM ONE-BEDROOM 9 3 10.3% 12.0% 96.0% ,..,: •. ..:::.:,: FT..�.. CONDOMINIUM - I, TWO-BEDROOM 10 1 3.4% 4.0% 100.0% CONUOMINIT.IM i THREE-BEDROOM 11 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% is NURSING HOME 1"l. 0 0.0% q.0% 1 I LIFE CARE 13 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% I .. FR NO RF-SPONSE 0 4 -------- --------- L ,.; . ____ ----.'---------------------------------- -------- 119 300.0% ----------------------_---___ 100.0% ... r i 4 i_ µ I [l �� LJ ' '. APPENDIX D-14 28 xnuy[u6 FDR .xF FL9F*L,=55 FRFQUENC[ES AND STATISTICS �| ___________________ _______________________________________________________ 28) WH/CH OF THE FOLLOWING ALTERNATIVES DO YOU FEEL WOULD PROVIDE YOU WITH THE HIGHEST LEVEL OF SECURITY AND INDEPENDENCE | �| AND SOCIAL CONTACT W[TH OTHERS? ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE vAi.UE LABB. VALUE FRFnUENCY PERCENl PERCENT PERCENT CURRENT ARRANGEMENT 1 0 0^0% 0^0% 0^0% m]RRENT ARRANGEMENT/ EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES 2 O 0.0t 0^0% 0^0% rMUSING FOR ELDERLY z 55 100.0%' 100.0% 100^0z CURRENTLY LIVE IN |] HOUSING ELDERLY 4 0 0^0% 0.0% 100.0% I-'D[N7 KNOW 5 0 0^0% 0.0% 100^0% NO RE9PONSEV 0 0.0% -------- 55 ~-_-~~_~ 100.0% ----- 100.0% ` . ^ ~~~~_.^~~--~~~~.-^.~~-^~.~.---~~~~--~~----.~~~.~-~~~~_~~~~~_~-^~~~~~-~~-~~ [l �� LJ ' '. D17:, HilliS114L4 Ff7ik rHE I-LDFRLY=55 FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) APPROXIMATE CURRENT ANNUAL INCOME. IF YOU ARE MARRIED, SHOW COMBINED INCOME (CHECK ONE): VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT 9.999 1 14 10,009)-.16,499 2 25.5% 29.2% 29.2% I L% . 50( .1 24,999 16 3 11 29.1% 33.3% 62.5% 255,001.) 34,999 4 4 20.0% 22.9% 85.4% t 15,000 49.999 5 3 7.3% 8.3% 93.13% 17 50,000 AND OVER 6 5-5/ 6.37 100.0% - 10 WO RESPONSE 0 0.07. 0.0% 100.0% 7 -------- 12.7% -------- 55 100.0% ------ --- 100.0% MEAN 2.245 STU DEV 1.187 ------------------------------------------------------- 77 D17:, n '1 I.:U. 2til Hfii ISINCi f*GR fliE FLDERLY/INCOME OLIA,IFIED-18 J FRFCJLIEhJCIF(i AND STATISTICS i----------------------------------------------------- 30) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR PLAN FOR YOUR "RETIREMENT YEARS"? i VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT .I PLAN TIJ CONTINUE LIVING WHERE I All 1 9 50.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 9. 50.0% 18 100.0% j L WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO HOUSING '1 I.:U. 2til Hfii ISINCi f*GR fliE FLDERLY/INCOME OLIA,IFIED-18 J FRFCJLIEhJCIF(i AND STATISTICS i----------------------------------------------------- 30) WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR PLAN FOR YOUR "RETIREMENT YEARS"? i VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT .I PLAN TIJ CONTINUE LIVING WHERE I All 1 9 50.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 9. 50.0% 18 100.0% 1 O 1 0 . 5 27.8% 1 72.2% __ __ 18 100.0% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% 18 100.0% 1 5.6% 17. 18 100.0% 1 1 5.6% O___ 17 94.4% 18 100.0% 7 38.9% I1— 61_1% 18 100.0% 5 33.3% 12 66.7% IO 1410.11% n j L WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO HOUSING f - j FOR THE ELDERLY. ,J ,.J NOT APPLICABLE II I i, i I tI �,I PLAN 10 LIVE WITH RELATIVES/FRIEND NOT APPLICABLE 1 i. - I i i I PLAN i0 RELY ON EXISTING COMMI.IN TTY - .,....,.':SERVICES, NOT APPI..TCAnL.F - I UM NO'f SI u:•E LIHA f I WILL UO. i� NOI APPL1CADLE fiE.NFIQ ��LLY DI:IfJ'I ISL APJ VERY I=AR IN ADV— ANI'1E OR I INTEND TO MAKE FLANS LA1FR ^ Nf,l l F.PPI_ f L;AHI .F I hM ilPl' I rin 1'0 P.L=.VFL.Lf` A PI.F.F= NI1W. NOI APPLICABLE 1 O 1 0 . 5 27.8% 1 72.2% __ __ 18 100.0% 0 0.0% 18 100.0% 18 100.0% 1 5.6% 17. 18 100.0% 1 1 5.6% O___ 17 94.4% 18 100.0% 7 38.9% I1— 61_1% 18 100.0% 5 33.3% 12 66.7% IO 1410.11% n j f f - j 7`> II I i, i I tI f 1 i. I. . I I i i I ,.I NO. 213 HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY/INC. QUAL./WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO=S � ri! i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS O831 29) IOWA CITY HAS SEVERAL SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FACILITIES AND SERVICES; GIVEN THIS SITUATION, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS BEST DESCRIBES YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD EVALUATING HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE OFFERING SUBSIDIZED RENT 1 0 0.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 5 100.0% -------- --------- 5 100.0% DUE TO MY INCOME, I CAN ONLY CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 WOULD NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/ SERVICES A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 I WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT " REGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 RECEIVING WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A "BARGAIN" IS THE ONLY WAY I WOULD CONSIDER CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEM I NOT APPLICABLE 0 I WOULD INCREASE THE PROPORTION OF THE INCOME I SPEIJD ON HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES TO HAVE THE HOUSING/SERVICES I PREFER. 1 NnT APPI_TCABLF. 0 2 40.0% 3 60.0% 5 100.0% 1 20.0% 4 130.0% 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 100.0% I i i i I 1 I I. 100.0% I ,.I NO. 213 HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY/INC. QUAL./WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO=S � ri! i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS O831 29) IOWA CITY HAS SEVERAL SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FACILITIES AND SERVICES; GIVEN THIS SITUATION, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS BEST DESCRIBES YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARD EVALUATING HOUSING AND SERVICE ALTERNATIVES (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)? VALUE LABEL. VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR A SUITABLE ALTERNATIVE OFFERING SUBSIDIZED RENT 1 0 0.0% NOT APPLICABLE 0 5 100.0% -------- --------- 5 100.0% DUE TO MY INCOME, I CAN ONLY CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/SERVICES. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 WOULD NEVER CONSIDER SUBSIDIZED HOUSING/ SERVICES A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 I WOULD PREFER TO RECEIVE SUBSIDIZED RENT " REGARDLESS OF MY INCOME. 1 NOT APPLICABLE 0 RECEIVING WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A "BARGAIN" IS THE ONLY WAY I WOULD CONSIDER CHANGING MY LIVING ARRANGEM I NOT APPLICABLE 0 I WOULD INCREASE THE PROPORTION OF THE INCOME I SPEIJD ON HOUSING AND RELATED SERVICES TO HAVE THE HOUSING/SERVICES I PREFER. 1 NnT APPI_TCABLF. 0 2 40.0% 3 60.0% 5 100.0% 1 20.0% 4 130.0% 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 100.0% 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 5 100.0% --5 100.0% 2 40.0% 60.0% 100.0 Mil. 28 11,01AolNld FOR 1HF liLDf_hL'I/fiJC. GRIAL./WCIULD LIKE TO MOVE I1470=5 F RI;t�l1EYJCTFR AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2'% CONT VALI.IF_ LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I AM CONTENT NI'TH MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT. 1 2 40.0% NT11' APPt.TrABI-E 0 3 60.0% -------- -------- 5 100.0% 0P7.1 N(1NF OF 'THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE OF MY,ATTITIIDE. NI,11' APPLICABLE 1 20.0% 4 80.0% 5 100.0% i I. i Mil. 28 11,01AolNld FOR 1HF liLDf_hL'I/fiJC. GRIAL./WCIULD LIKE TO MOVE I1470=5 F RI;t�l1EYJCTFR AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2'% CONT VALI.IF_ LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I AM CONTENT NI'TH MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT. 1 2 40.0% NT11' APPt.TrABI-E 0 3 60.0% -------- -------- 5 100.0% 0P7.1 N(1NF OF 'THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE OF MY,ATTITIIDE. NI,11' APPLICABLE 1 20.0% 4 80.0% 5 100.0% i J L.! �i S t I . I I- t w1 (1 I ' J Mil. 28 11,01AolNld FOR 1HF liLDf_hL'I/fiJC. GRIAL./WCIULD LIKE TO MOVE I1470=5 F RI;t�l1EYJCTFR AND STATISTICS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2'% CONT VALI.IF_ LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT I AM CONTENT NI'TH MY CURRENT LIVING ARRANGEMENT. 1 2 40.0% NT11' APPt.TrABI-E 0 3 60.0% -------- -------- 5 100.0% 0P7.1 N(1NF OF 'THE ABOVE IS DESCRIPTIVE OF MY,ATTITIIDE. NI,11' APPLICABLE 1 20.0% 4 80.0% 5 100.0% i i APPENDIX D-15 40. 28 hOUSINO - ELONLY/INC. Cull./VOULD MOvE/INCREASE PROP5RTION OF INCOME CROSSTABULAiION TABLE QUESTION /48 - QUESTION 151 - 1F 1 FOUND THE TYPE OF HOUSING ALTERNATIVE LIKELIHOOD WHICH BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS NON, 1 WOULD OF BECOMING A COUNT I RESIDENT ROW I 1 BE FRIENDS/ WAIT A WAIT FOR FOLLOW MY DO NOT NOT NO RON COL I 1 FIRST REL APPR YEAR FRO PROB. FRIENDS PLAN CHS SURE RESPONSE TOTAL DEFINITELY 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100.01 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.01 50.01 -------- ------- -------- ------- ------ ------ ---- �» - PROBABLY I 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.0% 0.01 100.0I 0.01 0.01 0.0% ' 0.01 0.01 50.0% I MAYBE I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.02 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 PROBABLY NOT i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.0% O.O% 0.0I 0.01 0.02 0.0Z 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.0% 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 DEFINITELY NOT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.02 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 0.02 1 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 COLUMN 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 50.0% 0.02 50.02 0.0Z 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 100.02 /6d/ i I t 1 I 1 - i i APPENDIX D-15 40. 28 hOUSINO - ELONLY/INC. Cull./VOULD MOvE/INCREASE PROP5RTION OF INCOME CROSSTABULAiION TABLE QUESTION /48 - QUESTION 151 - 1F 1 FOUND THE TYPE OF HOUSING ALTERNATIVE LIKELIHOOD WHICH BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS NON, 1 WOULD OF BECOMING A COUNT I RESIDENT ROW I 1 BE FRIENDS/ WAIT A WAIT FOR FOLLOW MY DO NOT NOT NO RON COL I 1 FIRST REL APPR YEAR FRO PROB. FRIENDS PLAN CHS SURE RESPONSE TOTAL DEFINITELY 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 100.01 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.01 50.01 -------- ------- -------- ------- ------ ------ ---- �» - PROBABLY I 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0.0% 0.01 100.0I 0.01 0.01 0.0% ' 0.01 0.01 50.0% I MAYBE I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.02 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 PROBABLY NOT i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.01 0.0% O.O% 0.0I 0.01 0.02 0.0Z 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.0% 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 DEFINITELY NOT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.02 0.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 0.02 1 0.01 0.0% 0.0% 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 COLUMN 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 50.0% 0.02 50.02 0.0Z 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.01 100.02 /6d/ APPENDIX D-16 OPINION VS. PLAN QUESTION 429 HIGHEST LEVEL QUESTION 430 INDEPENDENCE/SECURITY/ RETIREMENT SOCIAL CONTACT PLAN Current Living Arrangement 4 x Live with Relatives i— Community Services 382 49.2 ElderlyHousing 9 1.2 113 21.0 34 4.4 Not Definite/Don't Know 47 6.1 Total Responses 303 39.1 In Elderly Housing 775(2) :J No Response Total Sample (1) Response format: Che I (2) Response format: Ch APPENDIX D-16 OPINION VS. PLAN QUESTION 429 HIGHEST LEVEL QUESTION 430 INDEPENDENCE/SECURITY/ RETIREMENT SOCIAL CONTACT PLAN 4 x 4 x 268 49.7 382 49.2 9 1.2 113 21.0 34 4.4 55 10.2 47 6.1 103 19:1 303 39.1 539(1) 100.0 775(2) 100.0 10 41 590 ck only one. Che all that apply. I i APPENDIX D-17 88 Hf.U.iSING, FOR IHF. FL.UFWI..r=55 I i i i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE •- i VALUE FREQUENCY (i I I I i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS '-• ----------------------------------------------------------------------- .- 38) IF NO, WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES WHAT WOULD BEST MEET YOUR CURRENT NEEDS (CHECK ONLY ONE): VALUE LABEL HOME HEALTH AND/OR EXISTING COMMUNITY SERVICES INDEPENDENT LIVINS - ONE -BEDROOM APART. INDEPENDENT LIVING - TWO-BEDROOM APART. INDEPENDENT LIVING - EFFICIENCY APART. ASSISTED LIVING - PRIVATE ROOM ASSISTED LIVING - SEMIPRIVATE ROOM ASSISTED LIVING - EFFICIENCY APART. ASSISTED LIVING - GROUP HOME CONDOMINIUM - ONE -BEDROOM CONDOMINIUM - TWO-BEDROOM CONDOMINIUM - THREE-BEDROOM NURSING HOME LIFE CARE NO RESPONSE ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE •- VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i I i' j I I 2 8 14.5% 33.3% 33.3% r I. 3 12 21.8% 50.0% 83.3% I I; 4 0 0.0% 0.0% l 5 0 0.0% 0.0% 83.3% 6 1 1.8% 4.2% 87.5% 7 1 1.8% 4.2% 91.7% ii 8 0 0.0% 0.0% 91.7% }. I 9 1 1.8% 4.2% 95.8% 10 1 1.8% 4.2% 100.0% 11 0 0.0% 0.0% 500.0% - 12 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% j 13 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% .,.., _. o ;al 56.47. �i �. `---------- '- -------- 50%------------------------------------------- --i- --------------------------- -------- t0o.0% --------- 100. 0% •- '.- . -'' I _ /63/ i f. i J APPENDIX D-18 j - MAILING LIST - ,j Johnson Cou�tY - ABe 55 and Older J i i Total Population Based on Mailing List (55+/Johnson County)* 3,956 ! f, j Total per Per Frequency Report Under 55 = (8 - 590)(3,956) (54> I' Currently in Elderly Housing = (12 590)(3,956) (80) _ out of Johnson County = (2 - 590)(3,956) 80) - Revised Population I. I I � r i I 0 Based on Johnson County Mailing List provided by Heritage i Area Agency on Aging. Itr 'l I .. APPENDIX D-19 MARKET POTENTIAL - ASSISTED LIVING - FIRST YEAR _ Sample Proportion: p = No. Per Sample = 2 = •00339 Sample Size 590 Variance I -Sp = Estimate of Unknown Population Variance' — { I. .`Sp (.00339)(1-.00 9) " 1 -:jig8 }}} c 2-0j753 ' .0024 ° .2% Confidence Interval: i.' Z = Confidence = 95% = 1.96 = 2 t ZSp = .00339 t 2(.002) P _ (.00061) S .00339 $..00739 Johnson County Market Potential } - 0 S.00339 < 00739 3809 3809 3809 (Adjusted Mailing List) I 1 „ _0- S _ 1 S 28 With 95% Confidence I i I — - ' I. _ I I I , I APPENDIX -D-20;:. - ASSISTED LIVING - FIFTH YEAR MAR&ET'POTENTIAL'- '' � Sample Proportion: = 5 , p = No Pew a 590 .00847 Sample Size Varn�e: Estimate'of'Unknown Population Variance Sp , (.00847)(1-.00847) SP(O 9 , =022 00840 - ' .0038 4S -� 24.3 - f , , I Confidence Interval: J Z = Confidence = 95: = 7.96 = ? r ZSp o .00847 t 2(.004) J p. = .00047 3: .00847,. < �.01647 ' J �.:. Johneon Count Market Potential _ .. .00047 < 00847 < 01647 List) _ � (Adjusted Mailing _8� 32 <' 63 With 95% Confidence p < i i i I /63/ i APPENDIX D-21 MARKET POTENTIAL - CONDOMINIUMS - FIRST.JEAR Sample Proportion: p = No. Per'Sample = 2 ..00339 0 Samples 590 Variance: Sp = Estimate -of Unknown Population Variance SP = '(.05)(1,00 32)_.4. 950 0T .0024 - - .2f = (.00061) < -00339!' < .00739•. Johnson County Market Potential (.003809 09).;< .00339. < 00739 3809 � 3809 (Adjusted Mailing List) -0- < < 28 With 95% Confidence APPENDIX D-22 J MARKET POTENTIAL - CONDOMINIUMS - FIFTH YEAR Sample Proportion: ap = No. Per Sample = 6 = ,01017 Sample Size 590 Variance: Sp = Estimate of Unknown Population Variance Sp = (.01017)(1-.01017) _ 590 01007 100: = = _ - 9 2T.7 .0041 .4f Confidence Interval: Z = Confidence = 95% = 1.96 = 2 * ZSp = .01017 t 2(.004) P .00217 < .01017 < .01817 County Market Potential _Johnson Jj .00217 < 01017 < 01817 3809 3809 — 3809 (Adjusted Mailing List) 8 38 < 69 With 95: Confidence 1 i l� i t I n1yi.; I APPENDIX D-23 MARKET POTENTIAL - SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME RESIDENTS - FIRST YEAR Sample Proportion: P = No. PerSample = 1- 00169 Sample Size 590 - Variance: Sp o Estimate of Unknown Population Variance Sp c (.00169)(1-.00169) Y 0 = �00169 c OA 1 - i Y 77� 'f11 3 .0017 .2% Confidence Interval: Z = Confidence = 95% = 1.96 _ 2 p t ZSp = .00169 t 2(.002) c (.00231) < .00169 < .00569-' Johnson County Market Potential 3809 3869 4' .00569 0. " �'".001 09 3809 (Adjusted Mailing List) -0- C 6 < 22 With 95% Confidence I i — f I i � — � I . I _ t i' — i I" i I r i 1� APPENDIX D-24 RESIDENT ORIGIN A summary of resident origin by various type facility in Johnson County is shown below. RESIDENT ORIGIN IOWA JOHNSON STATE OUT OF FACILITY CITY COUNTY IOWA STATE Oaknoll 50% 25% 2% 23% The Villa 50% -- APPENDIX D-24 RESIDENT ORIGIN A summary of resident origin by various type facility in Johnson County is shown below. RESIDENT ORIGIN IOWA JOHNSON STATE OUT OF FACILITY CITY COUNTY IOWA STATE Oaknoll 50% 25% 2% 23% I � I� The Villa 50% -- Capitol House 75% 5% Liberty Square 24% 21% Ecumenical Towers 25% 8% Iowa City Care Center `80% 15% Beverly. Manor 80% 10%- I � I� I i i j i (1) Assumes 40% origin outside of Johnson County. _ (2) Assumes 20% origin outside of Johnson County. (3) Assumes 5% outside of Johnson County. i APPENDIX D-25 — EXTENDED MARKET POTENTIAL Assisted Living - Private Pay - Year 1 - -0- < 13 < 28 -0- < 13 < 28 — .60 .60 .60(1) .95 .95 .95(3) -0- < 22 < 47 -0- < 14 < 29 Assisted Living - Private Pay - Year 5 I - 2 . < 32 < 63 2 < 32 < 63 t .60 .60 .60(1) .95 .95 .95(3) _ ! 3 < 51 < 105 2 < 4 < 66 s Condominium - Year 1 1 _ -0- < 23 < 28 -0- < 13 . < .28 -80 .80 .80(2) .95 95 .99(3) ; L -0- < 16 < _35 -0- < 14 < 29 Condominium - Year 5 I II I 8 < 39 < 69 8 < 39 < 69 r .80 .80 .80(2) .95 .95 -95(3) 10 < 49 < 86 8 < 41 < 7 _ f _ I (1) Assumes 40% origin outside of Johnson County. _ (2) Assumes 20% origin outside of Johnson County. (3) Assumes 5% outside of Johnson County. i I' j' APPENDIX D-26 DETERMINING FACTORS IN BECOMING A RESIDENT 4 41 - If additional housing were available in Iowa City, what would be the importance of the following factors in determining if you would become a resident? Responses to Question No. 41 ("Very Important") are shown below in order of frequency of response. Adjusted Percent Location 68.4 Amount of Rent 66.5 Services 53.8 Building - One Level 50.9 Size of Apartments/Rooms 49.4 Aesthetic Qualities of Area 46.5 Mors, Than 'one Level of Care 44.1 Amenities 38.8 Opinion of Family 26.1 Friends Living There 20.2 APPENDIX D-26 DETERMINING FACTORS IN BECOMING A RESIDENT 4 41 - If additional housing were available in Iowa City, what would be the importance of the following factors in determining if you would become a resident? Responses to Question No. 41 ("Very Important") are shown below in order of frequency of response. Adjusted Percent Location 68.4 Amount of Rent 66.5 Services 53.8 Building - One Level 50.9 Size of Apartments/Rooms 49.4 Aesthetic Qualities of Area 46.5 Mors, Than 'one Level of Care 44.1 Amenities 38.8 Opinion of Family 26.1 Friends Living There 20.2 A QUESTION #2R - HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY ' LOCATION SERVICES PROVIDED IN, H011(TION TO HOUSING.-.- . AMENITIES I S11E OF APARTMENTS _.� OR ROOMS ... MORE THAN ONE LEVEL OF CARF_ OFFERED IN . THE SAME FACILITY AMOUNT OF RENT ~ 1 OPINION OF FAMILY FRIENDS LIVING THERE AESTHETIC QUALITIES OF THF AREA SURROUNDING THE SITE BUILDING (1N UNE LEVEL rnt i. 1T)I APPENDIX D-27 CROSSTABULATION TABLE nUESTION 441 - DETERMINING FACTORS COUNT 1 ROW % 1 VERY .SOMEWHAT ROW COL % : IMPORTANT IMPORTANT TOTAL /L3/ 35 15 50 - 70.O% 30.0% 13.4% 16.7% -------- 9.1% . I --------- 30 15 45 66.7% 33,3% 12.1% 14.4% -------- 9.1% --------- 14 15 . 29 48.3% .51.7% 7.8% 6.7% -------- - -'9 1% --------- 26 20 46 56.5% 43.5% 12.3% I - 124% 12.2% ..------ -----------24 17 - 41 41.5% ,. 58. 5%.. 11.0% I 8.1% 14.6% 33 68.8% 31.3% 12.9% t 15.8% 9.1% �9:... 15 24 37.5% 62.5% 6.4% 4,3% -------- 9.1% --------- 9 14 23 39.1% 60.9% 6.2% 4.3% -------- 8.5% t --------- 17 19 36 47,2% 52.8% 9.7% 8.1% -------- 11.6% -------12 19 31 AI.'r% 3R. 7% 8.3% 9.1% ----209 ------164 7.3% 373 P�h.0% 44.0% 100.0% /L3/ APPENDIX D-28 VERY IMPORTANT AMENITIES im 0 43 Which of s do ea ng aton tenough he ltoi ld you feel urate eto important You pay higher monthly receive in housing for the elderly? Responses to Question No. 43 ("Very Important") are shown below in order of, frequency of response. ;.., Adjusted Percent J Security 66.7 Call -Help 60.1 Special Equipment for 40.9 Elderly Extra Storage _ .._. _ 37.2. Nurse on Duty ::.- 36.6 Covered Parking 28.8 Rooms for Guests 26.5 J Group Lounges 23.3 i Chapel/Religious Activities 19.7 Pool/Recreation 16.9 Beauty/Barber Shop 14.5 _ Closed Circuit TV 13.6 im i CROa512.13.14 i , /43 APPIMIX D-29 CRDSSTAPULATION TABLE QUESTION 134 AND 23 - QUESTION 443 - INPORTANCE-OF NURSE ON DUTY HEALTH 15 COUNT I ..I :. NORSE NON ROW% i VERY SOMENBAT LITTLE NO NO ROW COL 1 1 INP. IMP, IMP. IMP. ' RESPONSE TOTAL I ' WORSE NOW AND 6 5 3 �~Y4 6 24 POOR i 25,01 20.81 12.5Z 16.71 25.01 61.5% �.1 50.OZ _:::.71.41 60.01 66.71 66.7% WORSE NON AND i 6 - - 1 2 2 2 13 j ! VERY DEPENDENT i 46.21 7.71 15.41 15.4 15.41 33.31 1 56.OZ-14.31 40.01 33.3% 22.22 NORSE NOW AND 0 1 0 N 0 ^�' 1 - 2 TOTALLY DEPENDENT I 0.01" 50.01 0.01 0.01 50.0% 5.1% ' ' 1 0.01,., 14.3% 0.01 0.01 11,11 i 30.917 - 17.91 12.81 15.4% 23.11 10041 ` r J t i j i L IIS t. CROa512.13.14 i , /43 I APPENDIX D-30 �f VERY IMPORTANT SERVICES �J U 46 - What services do you feel should be provided in an Inde- pendent living facility (in addition to housing) and you would be willing to pay proportionately higher rental ' rates to receive. Responses to Question No. 46 ("Very Important") are -j shown below in order of frequency of response. Adjusted i Percent - 24 -Hour Staffing 41.3 Transportation 34.4 . _. Dinner Daily.. 33.6 Laundry (Linens, etc.) 31.1 Housekeeping 27.7 Activities and Recreation 26.9 Assistance Walking, Lu.r Shopping, etc. 23.2 Group, Trips 23.1 ,J P P ,Lunch,.Daily I, 22.1 rj Personal Laundry 19.3 Breakfast Daily 19.0 Assistance with Existing Community Services 17.7 I Monitoring Medication 16.3 -1 _ _Running Errands ... 12.9 r Assistance with Bathing, etc. 10.4 i I- 1 Educational Seminars 10.0 DIX N0. 41 SERVICcS PROVIDED AND NO. 28Nl ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED 'I ------------------------------------------------------------------------ FREOUCNCIES AND STATISTICS i 46) IF YOU AGREE WITH WHAT SERVICES QUESTION #459 COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: DO YOU LIVING FACILITY (IN-ADDITON FEEL SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN AN INDEPENDENT .w TO HOUSING) TO PAY PROPORTIONATELY HIGHER RENTAL AND YOU WOULD BE WILLING RATES THE COLUMN WHICH INDICATES THE LEVEL TO RECEIVE . OF IMPORTANCE - FACTOR)? TO YOU FOR - BREAKFAST SERVED DAILY VALUE LABEL_ '' ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FR EQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 1 SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 2 0 18.2% 28.6% 28.6% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 0.0% 0.0% 28.6% NO IMPORTANCE 3 4 27.3% 42.9% 71.4% �. _ -"-I NO RESPONSE 2 0 18.2% 28.6% 100.0% �... :_ •. 4 -----31- 36.4% - �. - 100.0% .100.0% LUNCH SERVED DAILY "' -!, . VALUE LABEL.. VALUE FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT _ i• PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 3 -" " SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 -3 27.3% 37.5% 37.5% -27.3%' ' LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 37.5% 75.0% NO IMPORTANCE 2 4 18.2%' 25.0% 100.0% - NO RESPON5E�^ ' 0 0 0.0% 0.07. 100.0% ,. .., 3 -------- -27.3% -- 7. k - --------- -------- 100.0%,: 100.0%,:, 100.0% DINNER SERVED DAILY VALUE LABEL' , VALUE FREQUENCY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT ! VERY IMPORTANT - 1 SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 4 2 .. 36.4% 44.4% 44.4% L, f LITTLE IMPORTANCE 2. 3 18.2% 22.2% 66.7% " NO IMPORTANCE'1 2 18.2% 22,2% 88.9% NO RESPONSE 0 9.1% 11.1% 100.0% .. 2 -------- 18.2% -------- I --------- -------- 100.0%, 100.0% 100.0% f i " DB7 _.. �'.. NO. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND NO. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 46 CONT HOUSEKEEPING ASSISTANCE WITH BATHING, DRESSING, ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 1 9.1% 11.1% 11.1% IMPORTANT 2 7 63.6% 77.8% 88.9% .SOMEWHAT LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 1 9.1% 11.1% 100.0% . - NO IMPORTANCE'." 4 0 0.0% 0.0%. 100.0% • - NO RESPONSE - " 0 2 -------- 18.2% -------- --------- NO IMPORTANCE "- - 3 11 100.0% 100.0% LAUNDR`! (LINENS, TOWELS, ETC.) - - - - ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE "VAI.UE':I:.ABEL ' VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY... IMPORTANT 1 2 18.2% 25.07 25.0% -. SOMEWHAT: IMPORTANT 2 4 36.4% .'50.0%- 75.0% ,LITTLE•IMPORTANCE 3 2 18.2% 25.0% -. 100.0% NO IMPORTANCE:' 4 U 0.0% - 0.0%:,.100.0% -� NO RESPONSE ',: ".- 0 3 ----- 27.3% -------- --------- ..___.... _.. .. __... _. .. 11 100.0% 100.0% PERSONAL LAUNDRY ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE 'LA13E.I_ VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VFRY IMPORTANT 1 2 1B.2% 25.0% 25.0% - SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 3 27.3% 37.5%. 62.5% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 2 18.2% 25.0%.. 87.5% IMPORTANCE. 4 1 9.1% 12.5%, 100.0% ..:NO NO RESPONSE 0 3 -------- 27.3% -------- --------- 11 100.0% 100. ASSISTANCE WITH BATHING, DRESSING, ETC. i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE JVALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT VERY IMPORTANT 1 2 18.2% 22.2% 22.2% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 3 27.3%- 33.3%.. 55.6% LITTLE IMF'OR-IANCE 3 1 9.1% 11.1% 66.7% NO IMPORTANCE 4 3 27.3% 33.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 ---------------- 2 18.2% --------- I1 100.01: 100.07. i i NO. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND NO. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 46 CONT I I L { " i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT• iis i NO. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND NO. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED i FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS 46 CONT MONITORING MEDICATION L { " i ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT• VERY IMPORTANT 1 3 27.3% 33.3% 33.3% SOMEWHAT:IMPORTANT 2 3 27.3% 33.3% 66.7% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 1 9.1% 11.1% 77.8% NO IMPORTANCE 4 2 18.2% 22.2% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 2 -------- 18.2% -------- --------- 11 100.0% \100.0% ' 'ASSISTANCE WITH WALKING, SHOPPING, GETTING TO DOCTOR, ETC. .: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT • VERY:IMPORTANT 1 3 27.3%' .33.3% 33.3% "- 'SOMEWHAT:IMPORTANT 2 2 18.2% 22.2% - 55.6% -- "-'- LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 1 9.1%. 11.1%' :66.7% NO IMPORTANCE 4 3 27.3% 33.3% 100.0% NO RESPONSE -- - 0 2 18.2% -------- -------- --------- 11 100.0% 100.0% ' "•`-TRANSPORTATION ADJUSTED. CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT -•` VERY IMPORTANT - 1 4 36.4% 44.4% 44.4% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 0 0.0% 0.0% 44.4% -'",LITTLE:IMPORTANCE - 3 4 36.4% 44.4% 88.9% NO IMPORTANCE 4 1 9.1% 11.1% 100.0% NONRESPONSE - - 0 2 -------- 18.2% -------- --------- _ I1 100.0% 100.0% RUNNING ERRANDS _. .. ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT • VERY IMPORTANT 1 1 9.1% 11.1% 11.1% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 4 36.4% 44.4% 55.6% •LITTLE IMPORTANCE 3 3 27.3% 3.. 88.9% NO IMPORTANCE 4 1 9.1% 11.1% - 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 2 18.2% -------- --------- --------11 -------- I 1 100.0% 100.0% 0B i f i i L { i ii Np. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND N0. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED ' FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ------------------------- __ ________ STING MUNITY WITH OBTAINING AND CDORDINRTING EXIADJUSTEDMCUMULATIVEVIC 46 I FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT , Np. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND N0. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED ' FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ------------------------- __ ________ STING MUNITY WITH OBTAINING AND CDORDINRTING EXIADJUSTEDMCUMULATIVEVIC 46 CONT' AS5IS1'RNCE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT , r' VALUE LABEL VALUE 28.3% 33.3% 33.3% ! �' VERYIMPORTANT 1 3 55.6% 2 18.2% 22.2% . SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT. 3 2 18.2'%. .22.22 .77'66 100.0% LITTLE 111PORTANCE 4 2 18.2% 22.2% Iw No IMPORTANCE 0 2 18.2% NO RESPONSE ----- --------------.�. --100.0% 11- 100.0% EDUf,ATIONAL SEMINARS AND SPEAKERS/COUNSELING ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT f VALUE LABEL 9.1% 11.1% 11.1% , i i VERY IMPORTANT 1 1 2 3 27,3% 33.3% 44.4% . JJJ SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 2 18.2% 22.2% .7% 3 33.3% 10000.0% I LITTLE IMPORTANCE 27,3% 4 3 2 NO IMPORTANCE 0 2 18.2% - '.. NO RESPONSE -------- ____11 ! u 100.0% 100.0% _ GROUP TRIES FOR ELDERLY PLANNED SERVERAL TIMES A YEAR ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE i PERCENT VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT VALUE LABEL 27.3% 33.3% 33.3% ly u VERY IMPORTANT 1 3 2 q 36.4% 44.4% 77.8%; 88.9% SOMEWHAT IMPORTA14T 1 q•1% 3 11.1% 100.0% I is ' LITTLE IMPORTANCE 4 9, 1% 11.1% NO IMPORTANCE 0 2 18.2% --------- - ,:•.:' NO RESPONSE 11 100.0% 100.0% 'i I ACTIVITIES AND RECREATION ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALLIF FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i f ,. VALUE LABEL 27.3% 33.3% 33.3% rL VERY IMPORTANT 3 1 556% 88.9% 5 45,;% 100.0% I SOMFWHA1 IMPORTANT 3 1 9,1% 11.1% 100.0% LITTLE IMPORTANCE 4 0 0,0% 0.0% NO IMPORTANCE U 2 18.2% i NO RESPONSE --- -------- --------100.0% 11 100.0% 100.0% I I i I 4.3/ IJU. 41 SERVICES PROVIDED AND NO. 28 ELDERLY HOUSING AND NO. 8 INCOME QUALIFIED FREQUENCIES AND STATISTICS ------------- 46 CONT 24-HOUR STAFFING ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT i . 1 6 54.5% 66.7% 66.7% VERY. IMPORTANT 2 2 18.27. 22.27. 88.9% ' SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 3 1 9.1% 11.1% 100.0% L-, LITTLE IMPORTANCE 4 0 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% NO IMPORTANCE 0 2 1B.2% ...., -.. I NO RESPONSE ... - _----11- -------- --------- 100.0% 100.0% ------------ --------77-- ------------------ i 1 I i APPENDIX D-32 ABILITY TO PAY # 8 - Approximate current annual income. If you are married, show combined income. Shown below are responses to Question No. 8 and the per- cent of elderly sampled who are income -qualified. Income Category $ 0 - $ 91999 $10,000 - $16,499 $16,500 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 and Over Total,Responses No Responses Total Sample Total - $16,500 and Over - $25,000 and Over Percent of Frequency Total Responses 127 24.75 156 30.3 93 18.1 67 13.0 44 8.5 28 5.4 515 700.05 75 590 232 45.05 139 27.05 I 1 J j i j. APPENDIX D-32 ABILITY TO PAY # 8 - Approximate current annual income. If you are married, show combined income. Shown below are responses to Question No. 8 and the per- cent of elderly sampled who are income -qualified. Income Category $ 0 - $ 91999 $10,000 - $16,499 $16,500 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 and Over Total,Responses No Responses Total Sample Total - $16,500 and Over - $25,000 and Over Percent of Frequency Total Responses 127 24.75 156 30.3 93 18.1 67 13.0 44 8.5 28 5.4 515 700.05 75 590 232 45.05 139 27.05 APPENDIX D-33 NO. :>ii I Wf.!I;I.D I-Z,'.'.E Tu IICJVF INTO HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY=47 I �h , : FREQUENCIES (IND SI-14TISTICS WHXCH OF THE FOLLOWING BEST DESCRIBES YOUR ATTITUDE ABOUT YOUR CURRENT MONTHLY LIVING EXPENSES? VALUE LABEL VALUE FREQUENCY PERCE14T ADJUSTED PERCENT CUMULATIVE PERCENT I CA14140T ALWAYS !.PAY. MY BILLS 1 1 2.1% .2.2% 2.2% I' CAN BARELY PAY MY BILLS 2 4 8.5% 8.7% 10.9% I WORRY A LOI ABOUT PAYING MY BILLS z; 9 17.0% 17.4% 28.3% MY MONTHLY LIVING EXPE14SES ARE SOMEWHAT OF A PROBLEM 4 10 21.3% 21.7% 50.0% @1LLS"ARE NO PROBLEM FOR ME 5 23� .48.9%- 50.0% 100.0% NO RESPONSE 0 1 -------- 2.1% ----------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- 47 100.0% 100.0% ii 7L APPENDIX D-34 WILLINGNESS TO PAY Shown below is the average rent per month the elderly in Johnson County are willing to pay based on, responses to Question Nos. 39,,40, 44, and 47. IEfficiencyAssisted Living epe viqw,0_Bedroom Semi -Private f dPrivate ''� Efficiency One-Rendtro;i 336- $ 415 Per Month $ 215 271 352 34.7 Average,Re.nt Standard Deviation 121 158 163 251 211 282 iI Minimum -Rent Per Month, -0- -0- -0-is -0- Maximum Rent Per Month 600 1,100 1,000 1,2531 ,000 2,000 Ij Revised Average with Average Tor Amenities 297 353 434 429 418 497 R6vised kverag6 with Average for Services 303 359 440 435 424 503 Revised Average with Average for Amenities �.A' 441 522 5 17 506 585 7 n ObESION td3 ANENITIES THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT NURSE ON DUTY BEAUTYIBARBER SHOP COVERED PARKINS CHAPEL WITH ACTIVITIES POOLAEALTH 6 RECREATION AREA GROUP LOUNGES CALL -HELP SYSTEM BUILDING SECURITY CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION EK' -RA STORAGE SPACE SPECIAL EQUIPMENT ROOM AND ACCOM- MODATIONS FOR $GEST COLUMN TOTALS APPENDIX D-35 CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION H4 - WOULD PAY FOR AMENITIES COUNT I ROW I 1 LESS THAN $601 AND NO ROW COL I 1 $26 $26-50 151-100 $101-300 $301-500 $501-600 OVER RESPONSE TOTALS 7 16 24 9 3 3 0 89 151 4.61 10.6% 15.91 6,0% 2.0% 2.01 0.0% 58.9I 9.3Z 6.21 8.31 9.6% 8.71 6.7% 15.0% 0.0% 9.91 3 B 6 5 2 2 0 32 58 5.2% 13.81 10.31 0.6% 3.4% 3.4% 0.01 55.21 3.6% 1-__ 2_71 4.11 2.4% 4.9% 4.4% 10.01 0.0% 3.61 - --- ------ -------- 6 ----- 6 15 19 7 2 1 0 69 119 5.0% 12.61 16.0% 5.91 1.7% 0.8% 0. OZ 58.0% 7.3% 5.3% 7.BZ 7.61 6.81 4.4% 5.01 0.01 7.71 3 6 13 4 2 1 0 49 BO S.BI 10 -OZ 16.31 5.01 2.5% 1.3% 0.01 61.31 4.9% -y2.7% 4.1% 5.2Z 3.91 4.41 5.0% 0.01 5.5I 2 10 10 6 2 1 0 37 68 2.91 14.7% 14.7% 8.81 2.91 1.51 O.OZ 54.4% 4.2% I. BI 5.21 4.01 5.8% 4.4% 5.01 0.015 4.11 1--- -• ------ - - -•----- ------ -------- --- -•--- 1 - 4 11 16 9 4 1 0- 50 95 1 4.21 11.6% 16.81 9.51 4.21 :1.11 0.01 52.61 5.9% 3.5% 5.11: 6.4% 8, 71 ' 8.91 5.01 0.0%: 5.61 -----•- ----------- ---- -' 19 29 38 14 5 3 ! 0. 154:: 262 1 7.3% 11.1% 14.5% 5.31 1.91 1.1% 0.01 58.61 16.21 16.8% 15 -OZ 15.31 13.6% 11.1% 15.01 0.01 17.1% '- 1 29 39. _ IS 21 6 --- 2 0 M 157 292 1 9.81 13.1%. 14.51 , 1.1%_ 2.0% 0.7% 0.0Z 52.91 18.31 1 25.7% 20.21 17.3% 20.4%` 13.3% 10.01 0.01 17.5% -----•-- -----•• -------- --••--- ----- -- ----- ------- _- -3 5 B 4 4 1 0 27 52 ' 5.8% 9.61 15.4% 7.71 7.7Z 1.91 0.01 51.91 - 3.2% 1 2.71 2.6% 3.21 3.9Z 8.91 5.01 0.0% 3.01 ------ -•------ - ------- ------ ----- -----• . 20 22 23 6 5 2 0 80 15B 12.7% 13.9% 14.6% 3.81 3.2% 1.31 0.0% 50.61 9.71 17.11 11.41 9.21 5.81 11.11 10.01 0.0% 8.9% 1 8 23 2. 11 5 2 0 97 169 I 4.1113.61 IS 61 6.5%. 3.01 1.21 0.0% 57.42 10.4% 1 7.11 11.9% 9.2% 10.7% I1.1% - 10.01 0.0% IO.BI 1 ------ -•------ ------- ----- ------- -------- ------ --_-.. 9 7 26 7 5 i 0 57 112 1 8.0% 6.3% 23.2% 6.3% 4.5Z 0.91 0.01 50.91 6.91 1 8A1 .3.61 10.4% 6.8% 11.1% 5.01 DAL 6.31 -••-- ---•-••• -----•- -------• ------•• ----- 113 193 249 103 45 20 0 698 1621 7.0% 11.9% 15.4% 6,4% 2.6% 1.21 0.0% 55.4% 100.0% i I i i { i i f 1 i I ObESION td3 ANENITIES THAT ARE VERY IMPORTANT NURSE ON DUTY BEAUTYIBARBER SHOP COVERED PARKINS CHAPEL WITH ACTIVITIES POOLAEALTH 6 RECREATION AREA GROUP LOUNGES CALL -HELP SYSTEM BUILDING SECURITY CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION EK' -RA STORAGE SPACE SPECIAL EQUIPMENT ROOM AND ACCOM- MODATIONS FOR $GEST COLUMN TOTALS APPENDIX D-35 CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION H4 - WOULD PAY FOR AMENITIES COUNT I ROW I 1 LESS THAN $601 AND NO ROW COL I 1 $26 $26-50 151-100 $101-300 $301-500 $501-600 OVER RESPONSE TOTALS 7 16 24 9 3 3 0 89 151 4.61 10.6% 15.91 6,0% 2.0% 2.01 0.0% 58.9I 9.3Z 6.21 8.31 9.6% 8.71 6.7% 15.0% 0.0% 9.91 3 B 6 5 2 2 0 32 58 5.2% 13.81 10.31 0.6% 3.4% 3.4% 0.01 55.21 3.6% 1-__ 2_71 4.11 2.4% 4.9% 4.4% 10.01 0.0% 3.61 - --- ------ -------- 6 ----- 6 15 19 7 2 1 0 69 119 5.0% 12.61 16.0% 5.91 1.7% 0.8% 0. OZ 58.0% 7.3% 5.3% 7.BZ 7.61 6.81 4.4% 5.01 0.01 7.71 3 6 13 4 2 1 0 49 BO S.BI 10 -OZ 16.31 5.01 2.5% 1.3% 0.01 61.31 4.9% -y2.7% 4.1% 5.2Z 3.91 4.41 5.0% 0.01 5.5I 2 10 10 6 2 1 0 37 68 2.91 14.7% 14.7% 8.81 2.91 1.51 O.OZ 54.4% 4.2% I. BI 5.21 4.01 5.8% 4.4% 5.01 0.015 4.11 1--- -• ------ - - -•----- ------ -------- --- -•--- 1 - 4 11 16 9 4 1 0- 50 95 1 4.21 11.6% 16.81 9.51 4.21 :1.11 0.01 52.61 5.9% 3.5% 5.11: 6.4% 8, 71 ' 8.91 5.01 0.0%: 5.61 -----•- ----------- ---- -' 19 29 38 14 5 3 ! 0. 154:: 262 1 7.3% 11.1% 14.5% 5.31 1.91 1.1% 0.01 58.61 16.21 16.8% 15 -OZ 15.31 13.6% 11.1% 15.01 0.01 17.1% '- 1 29 39. _ IS 21 6 --- 2 0 M 157 292 1 9.81 13.1%. 14.51 , 1.1%_ 2.0% 0.7% 0.0Z 52.91 18.31 1 25.7% 20.21 17.3% 20.4%` 13.3% 10.01 0.01 17.5% -----•-- -----•• -------- --••--- ----- -- ----- ------- _- -3 5 B 4 4 1 0 27 52 ' 5.8% 9.61 15.4% 7.71 7.7Z 1.91 0.01 51.91 - 3.2% 1 2.71 2.6% 3.21 3.9Z 8.91 5.01 0.0% 3.01 ------ -•------ - ------- ------ ----- -----• . 20 22 23 6 5 2 0 80 15B 12.7% 13.9% 14.6% 3.81 3.2% 1.31 0.0% 50.61 9.71 17.11 11.41 9.21 5.81 11.11 10.01 0.0% 8.9% 1 8 23 2. 11 5 2 0 97 169 I 4.1113.61 IS 61 6.5%. 3.01 1.21 0.0% 57.42 10.4% 1 7.11 11.9% 9.2% 10.7% I1.1% - 10.01 0.0% IO.BI 1 ------ -•------ ------- ----- ------- -------- ------ --_-.. 9 7 26 7 5 i 0 57 112 1 8.0% 6.3% 23.2% 6.3% 4.5Z 0.91 0.01 50.91 6.91 1 8A1 .3.61 10.4% 6.8% 11.1% 5.01 DAL 6.31 -••-- ---•-••• -----•- -------• ------•• ----- 113 193 249 103 45 20 0 698 1621 7.0% 11.9% 15.4% 6,4% 2.6% 1.21 0.0% 55.4% 100.0% i i { i f i 1 I APPENDIX D-36 • CROSSTABULATION TABLE I -� QUESTION 146 QUESTION 647 - WOULD PAY FOR SERVICES IADPAYI SERVICES THAT COUNT 1 ARE VERY RON % 1 LESS THAN $501 AND NO RON. '. J IMPORTANT _ COL Z I $26 $26-50 151-75 $76-100 $101-20D $201-400 $401-50D -- --+ OVER RESPONSE _--- � TOTALS BREAKFAST SERVED --.-1- .----0- --_-5 _ 1 _ _-- 2 7 5 �2 0 40 62 DAILY 1 0.02 0.11 1.61 3.21 11.31 8.11 3.2% 0.01 64.51 6.3I J 0.01 6.01 8.3I 3.81 7.01 8.31 10.2% 0.01 6.6% LUNCH SERVED - 3 7 0 3 9 2 2 0 45 73 ' - DAILY 4.1% 9.6% 0.0% 6.0% 12.31 2.7% 2.71 0.01 61.6% 7.41 '- 4.9% 0.4% 0.01 9.6% 9.01, 3.31 IB.21 0.0% 7.42 • - DINNER SERVED .. 3 9 2 6 10.. 7 - 2. 0 79 118 - DAILY 2.5% 7.6% 1.72 5.1% B.51 5.91 1.71 0.01 66.9% - 11.91 4.9% 10.0% 16.71 11.51 `- 10.01 11.71 18.21 0.02 13.01 .. I HOUSEKEEPING {_ 11 --1 ._7• 7 -- 6 -"- 0 0 60 96 4.21 11.51 1.01 7.31 7.3% 6.31 0.0% 0.01 62.51_,.. 9.71 ' 6.6t 13.11 8.31 13.51 7.0% 10.01 0.01 0.0% 9.85 LAUNDRY ILINENS, I B 13 1 5 B 5 1 0 67 108 TOWELS, ETC.) 1 7.4% 12.01 0.91 4.6% 7.4% 4.61 0.91 0.02 62.01 10.91 •1 13.1% 15.7% 8.3% 9.6% 8.01 8.31 9.12 0.01 11.01 PERSONAL LAUNDRY 1 5 6 2 4 4 4 2 0 34 63 7.92 12.7% 3.2% 6.3% 6.31 6.3% 3.21 0.01 54.0% 6AZ 8.22 9.61 16.71 7.7% 4.01 6.71 10.2% 0.01 5.6% ' ASSISTANCE WITH 1 2 1 0 1 4 2 0 0 23 33 BATHING, DRESSINS, 1 6.1% 3.01 0.0% 3.01 12.1% 6.11 0.01 0.01 69.71 3.3% ETC. 1 3.31 1.2% 0.02 1.91 4.0% 3.3% 0.01 0.01 3.81 MONITORING 3 5 1 1 6 4 0 0 33 53 I MEDICATION 1 5.7% 9.41 1.91 1.91 11.32 7.51 0.0% 0.0I 62.35 5.41 1 4.9I 6.01 B.3% 1.9% 6.0% 6.7% 0.0% 0.01 5.4% ASSISTANCE WITH 1 --- _-- -•-...- --••. __..-•- --'--• __-_ _._..._• ••--•- ' 1 -� WALKING, SHOPPING, 1 4 5 1 4 10 6 0 0 4B 78 _i BETTING TO DOCTOR. 1 5.1% 6.41 1.3% 5.11 12.81 7.71 0.0% 0.01 61.52 7.91 ETC. 6.63 6.0% 8.31 7.7% 10.02 10.01 0.0% 0.01 7.92 -', TRANSPORTATION 11 9 2 6 14 7 1 0 70 120 9.2% 7.5% 1.7% 5.0% 11.71 5.81 0.81 0.01 58.3% 12.11 i••_____ 18.0% 10.81 16.72 11.5% 14.0% 11.7Z 9.1% 0.0I 11.5% ' � RUNNING ERRANDS 1 ------- 2 _______ 1 0 _______ _______ 1 _______ 6 ••______ 4 0 ---••--• ---- 0 -- 27 41 • i 4.9% ' 2.41 0.0% 2.4% 14,6% 9.81 0.0% 0.01 65.9% 4.11 I 3.33 1.21 0.0% 1.9% 6.01 6.71 0.0% 0.0% 4.4% AL3 ASSISTANCE WITH I -•••-• •----- _•••____ -------- ---•--•• ----- -• ------- --- ---- -••• - '; OBTAINING AND CO- i 5 6 0 4 9 6 1 0 24 55 •..I. ORDINATING C09- I 9.1% 10.9% 0.0% 7.3% 16.4% 10.91 1.B1 0.01 41.6% 5.6% �-. MUNITY SERVICES 1 ' 8.2% 7.21 0.0% 7.7% 9.0% •-••-•-• 10.01 -------- 9.1% 0.0% ----I--- ----- 3.9% - I EDUCATIONAL I •••••-•• •----•- 4 - 4 ----- 1 ••-••- •-••••- 1 3 2 0 0 15 32 SEMINARS/SPEAKERS/ 1 12.51 12.5% 3.1% 9.414' 9.4% 6.31 0.0% 0.01 46.9% 3.21 COUNSELING I 6.6% 4.SI 8,3% 5.8% 3.0% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 2.52 I`- /463/ CROSSTABULATIOR TAPLE (cont. ) QUESTION 146 QUESTION 111 - VOULD PAY FOR SERVICES IADPAY) SERVICES THAT COUNT 1 ARE VERY RON Z I LESS THAN $501 AND NO RON IMPORTANT -COL Z 1 126 $26-50 151-75 $16-100 $101-200 1201-400 1401-500 OVER RESPONSE TOTALS GROUP TRIPS 1. 9 12 Z 5 B / 0 0 43 BS SEVERAL TIMES 1 10.81 - 14.5% 2.IZ 6.01 9.61 4.61 0,01 0.01 51,81 8.41 A YEAR 1 11.81 14.51 16.71 9.61 8.01 6.71 .0,0I 0.01 7.01 '- ACTIVITIES AND 1 9 11 1 5. 7 7 1 0 55 96 RECREATION '1 9,41, 11.5% 1.OZ 5.21 7.31 7.3I 1.01 O.OZ 57.31 9.7Z -- 14.81- 13.31 B,31 9.62. 7.01 11.71 9.11 0.01 9.01 2A -HOUR STAFFING. ^^ 16. 4 1_ - 10 l5 _ B 1 0 ^ BI N4 11.12. 6.11 0.71 6.91. 10.4 5.61. 0.71 0.01 58.31 14.61 - " 26.21 -. 10.81 - 8.31 19.21....15.OZ 13.32 9.11 0.01 13.82 r•� COLUMN.ty ^ 88 116 16 69 `127 79 13 0 747 989 TOTALS. • 6.21 8.41- 1.21 5.31, 10.11 6.11 1.11 O.OI 61.71 IOO.OI r r r . ',. •. '.. . 1. . 1 m: i VAL.LIE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT UP TO E 35.000 i L `- 23.1% 23.7% 23.7% t- 2 i i 1 58.5% 1,1 APPENDIX D-37 til;. PUFCHbISE 1NFTG.I0 OF RENT AND NO. 3-•- PRICES FREQ1,1ENGIES AND STATISTICS IF I FOUND THE TYPE HOUSING ALTERNATIVE WHICH BEST MATCHED MY NEEDS NOW. I WOULD PREFER TO (CHECK ONE): ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE 1..ABEI., VALUE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PAY RENT TO COVER IHE COSTS. 1 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% PAY AN ENTRANCE FEE AND MONTHLY RENT TO COVER THE COSTS. 2 0 .O. U% 0.0%, O.0% PURCHASE INSTEAD - OF RENT. 3- -' 39 -100.0% 100.0% 100.0% WOULD CURRENTLY .. CONSIDER NO ALTERNATIVES OTHER THAN HAVING - - MY OWN HOME. 4 0 0.0% 0.0% NO RESPONSE 4 0 :_.0.0% .. _. -------- ------- --------- 39 100.0% 100.0% 33) IF I DECIDED 1'D PURCHASF. INSTEAD OF RENT, THE MAXIMUM I'WOULD BE WILLING TO PAY FOR ELDERLY HOLISI14G TO MEET MY NEEDS IS: ADJUSTED CUMULATIVE VALUE LAPEL VAL.LIE FREQUENCY PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT UP TO E 35.000 1 9 23.1% 23.7% 23.7% I.1P TD $ 5u,0u0 2 15 58.5% 39.5% 63.2% UP 1'0 $ 75.000 3 7 17.9% 18.4% 81.6% IIF• 10 1100.00( 4 2 5.1% 5.3% 86.8% OVER $100,000 5 U 0.0% 0.0% 86.8% I AM NOT INTEFFSI'FI) IN PURCHASIIJG HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY. 6 5 12.8% 13.2% 100.0% NO RESPONSF 0 1 2.6% -------- --------- -------- 79 100.0% 100.0% f.ROGS1 Y t t I 1 1 1 is APPENDIX D-38 CROSSTABULATION TABLE QUESTION 141 - DUESTION 142 - FREFERENCE OF LOCATION OF FACILITY LOCATION COUNT 1 RON I I DOWNTOWN AWAY FROM NO NOT NO RON COL I I AREA DOWNTOWN PREFERENCE [WT. RESPONSE TOTAL VERY ' IMPORTANT -- .- -- 137 ' - BO _ 45 y 54- _--_9 325 42.2% 24.6% 13.81 16.62 2.81 68.41 78.31 68.41 50.61 67.5% 64.3% SOMEWHAT IMPORTANT 1 32 32 38 1B 5 125 1 25.62 25.6% 30.4% 14.4% 4.01 26.31 18.3% 27.4% 42.71 22.5% 35.72 LITTLE IMPORTANCE -- 3 4 2 3 0 12 1 25.01 33.31 16.72 25.0% 0.01 2.51 1 1.7% 3.4% 2.21 3.81 0.01 N0 IMPORTANCE 1 -__3 --' i- _^4 y_ 5 -~ 0 13 I 23.1% 7.7% 30.B% 38.53 0.0% 2.71 1.71 0.9% 4.53 6.3I 0.01 COLUMW'1' 175 '•'-117 89 BO 14 475 TOTAL_ ••,36.81 24.6% IBJ% 16.8% 2.91 100.0% CROSS6 t 1 I: QUESTION 110 - DO YOU LIVE IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY IN ANOTHER C17Y IN JOHNSON CO. IN RURAL JOHNSON CO. OUTSIDE JOHNSON CO. APPENDIX D-39 CROSSTABULATION TABLE COLUMN TOTAL QUESTION 1 41 - IMPORTANCE OF LOCATION COUNT 1 PON I t VERY SOHENHAT LITTLE NO NO RON COL I 1 RESPONSE TOTAL --_ _- 269 _ 92 9 .10 80 460 1 58,5% 20,0% 2.01 - 2.2% 17.4% 79.7% 1 148.6% 74.01 8.91 1.71 .190.5% l8 12 2 1 12 45 40,01 26,71 4.40 2.2% 26.7% 7.6% 1 9.9% 9.81 2.0% 0.81. 28.61 ,.. 32 20 1 2 IS 70 45.7% 28.6% 1.4% '2.91 21.4% _12.11 1 17.71 16.3% 1.01 1.5% , ..35.7% 1 I 1 0 0 0 2 _.... 1 50,0% 50.01 0.0% 0.01- 0.0% 0.31 0.6% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% ; - 0.0% - .---320 - 125 _ 12 13 101 577 55.5% 21.7% 2.11.' 2.32:.. 18,51 100.01,_,, . . �J QUESTION 110 - DO YOU LIVE IN THE CITY OF IOWA CITY IN ANOTHER C17Y IN JOHNSON CO. IN RURAL JOHNSON CO. OUTSIDE JOHNSON CO. APPENDIX D-39 CROSSTABULATION TABLE COLUMN TOTAL QUESTION 1 41 - IMPORTANCE OF LOCATION COUNT 1 PON I t VERY SOHENHAT LITTLE NO NO RON COL I 1 RESPONSE TOTAL --_ _- 269 _ 92 9 .10 80 460 1 58,5% 20,0% 2.01 - 2.2% 17.4% 79.7% 1 148.6% 74.01 8.91 1.71 .190.5% l8 12 2 1 12 45 40,01 26,71 4.40 2.2% 26.7% 7.6% 1 9.9% 9.81 2.0% 0.81. 28.61 ,.. 32 20 1 2 IS 70 45.7% 28.6% 1.4% '2.91 21.4% _12.11 1 17.71 16.3% 1.01 1.5% , ..35.7% 1 I 1 0 0 0 2 _.... 1 50,0% 50.01 0.0% 0.01- 0.0% 0.31 0.6% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% ; - 0.0% - .---320 - 125 _ 12 13 101 577 55.5% 21.7% 2.11.' 2.32:.. 18,51 100.01,_,, . . APPENDIX D-40 "M TABLE - CROSSTABULA QUESTION 1 42 - PREFER FACILITY LOCATED - OUESTIDN 110 - 00 YOU LIVE COUNT1 ROW % 1 DOWNTOWN AWAY FROM NO NOT RESPONSE ND ROW TOTAL - COL % 1 AREA DOWNTOWN PREFER INT _ 155 IN THE CITY �' 96 ---_80 17.41 9A 21.31 31 460 6.71 79.11 - • OF fONA CITY 33.7% 85.61 20.91 78.0% 79.21 75.4% 73-_11k j IN ANOTHER CITY 16 35.6% 6 13.32 MITI 20.0% 13.3% 7.81 IN JOHNSON CO. B.BI 4.91 1.91 6.91 14.35 9 21 - i IN RURAL I 12.91 30.01 18.61 31.4% 7.1% 12.11 ' JOHNSON CO. 1 I S.OI 17.11 12.9% 16.9% ` 21.92 .. " . ..._ .... J OUTSIDE 50.0% 0.02 0.01 50.01 0.05 0.31- I•, .' JOHNSON CO. 0.65 0.01 0.01 0.81 0.01 I ~. 181 _ 123 101 ` 130 42 571 . _. COLUMN . _ 31.45 2t.3i 11.55' 22.51" 7.32-, 100.01. TOTAL 1" I. . CRO1617 j i 'I I I APPENDIX D-41 CROSSTA8ULATION (ABLE 4Uli S'I't CtlV 048 - QUESTION #18 ANSWER YES AND j GELOME RESIDENT QUESTION #19 ANSWER TRY TO CONVINCE .J OF HOUSING FOR COUNT 1 ELDERLY NOW ROW % 1 - COL -/-I- -------- OEF I W I TEL.Y 3 . , 4. 7% .. ...... I PROBABLY 7 10.9% MAYBE 13 PROBABLY NOT ---_-17 26_6% j OEFINITEL.Y NOT IS - I 28.1% i . i -------- iii NO RESPONSE .. 6 ..... 4% COLUMN ----9 .64 ' To f AL. ....... 100.0% .... :J 1 I I I J I- , I APPENDIX D-42 CROSSIABULATIOA TABLE QUESTION 050 - QUESTION 119 - PART MOST LIKELY TO PLAY NHEN DISCUSSING HO BEST SOURCE OF COUNT 1 111FORMATION ROW 1 1 MAINLY CONVINCE BOTH NEITHER NO RON COL 1 1 LISTEN MY IDEAS RESPONSE TOTAL _---___ -------- ------ ----- -»----- __-- RADIO __-RADIO 119 33 11 5 14 1B2 65.4% IB.I% 6.01 2.71 7.71 13.4I • 13.6% 12.41 13.91 IDA% 16.12 TELEVISION 131 49 12 10 16 218 60.IZ 22.51 5.51 4.6% 7.31 16.11 15.0% 10.4% 15.21 21.71 1B.4% NENSPAPER i 239 63 22 12 27 363 65.9% 17.42 6.IZ 3.3% 7.4% 26.8% 27.31 23.72 27.8% 26.1% 31.0% NEWSLETTERS I 198 56 21 10 15 300 66.02 _ 18.72 7.0% 3.31 5.0% 22.21 22.62 21.11 26.6% 21.72 17.2% COMMENTS FROM 1 79 24 6 4 11 124 FRIENDS ETC. i 63.71 19.41 4.81 3.2% 8.91 9.2% 9.0% 9.01 7.61 8.7% 12.61 ____ ___ ---- -» - INFORMATION 1 63 21 4 4 3 95 THROUGH MAIL 1, 66.31 22.1% 4.2% 4.2% 3.21 7.01 7.21 7.9% 5.1% 8.7Z 3.4% PERSONAL 1 47 20 3 1 1 72 RESEARCH 1 65.31 27.91 4.21 1.41 1.41 5.31 5.4% 7.5% 3.8% 2.21 1.1% -------- ------- -------- -_"'»' --___-- COLUMN B76 266 79 46 87 1354 TOTAL 64.7% 19.6% 5.9% 3.4% 6.4Z 100.0% CROSS20 i I1 1 i i APPENDIX D-42 CROSSIABULATIOA TABLE QUESTION 050 - QUESTION 119 - PART MOST LIKELY TO PLAY NHEN DISCUSSING HO BEST SOURCE OF COUNT 1 111FORMATION ROW 1 1 MAINLY CONVINCE BOTH NEITHER NO RON COL 1 1 LISTEN MY IDEAS RESPONSE TOTAL _---___ -------- ------ ----- -»----- __-- RADIO __-RADIO 119 33 11 5 14 1B2 65.4% IB.I% 6.01 2.71 7.71 13.4I • 13.6% 12.41 13.91 IDA% 16.12 TELEVISION 131 49 12 10 16 218 60.IZ 22.51 5.51 4.6% 7.31 16.11 15.0% 10.4% 15.21 21.71 1B.4% NENSPAPER i 239 63 22 12 27 363 65.9% 17.42 6.IZ 3.3% 7.4% 26.8% 27.31 23.72 27.8% 26.1% 31.0% NEWSLETTERS I 198 56 21 10 15 300 66.02 _ 18.72 7.0% 3.31 5.0% 22.21 22.62 21.11 26.6% 21.72 17.2% COMMENTS FROM 1 79 24 6 4 11 124 FRIENDS ETC. i 63.71 19.41 4.81 3.2% 8.91 9.2% 9.0% 9.01 7.61 8.7% 12.61 ____ ___ ---- -» - INFORMATION 1 63 21 4 4 3 95 THROUGH MAIL 1, 66.31 22.1% 4.2% 4.2% 3.21 7.01 7.21 7.9% 5.1% 8.7Z 3.4% PERSONAL 1 47 20 3 1 1 72 RESEARCH 1 65.31 27.91 4.21 1.41 1.41 5.31 5.4% 7.5% 3.8% 2.21 1.1% -------- ------- -------- -_"'»' --___-- COLUMN B76 266 79 46 87 1354 TOTAL 64.7% 19.6% 5.9% 3.4% 6.4Z 100.0% CROSS20 i APPENDIX D-42 CROSSIABULATIOA TABLE QUESTION 050 - QUESTION 119 - PART MOST LIKELY TO PLAY NHEN DISCUSSING HO BEST SOURCE OF COUNT 1 111FORMATION ROW 1 1 MAINLY CONVINCE BOTH NEITHER NO RON COL 1 1 LISTEN MY IDEAS RESPONSE TOTAL _---___ -------- ------ ----- -»----- __-- RADIO __-RADIO 119 33 11 5 14 1B2 65.4% IB.I% 6.01 2.71 7.71 13.4I • 13.6% 12.41 13.91 IDA% 16.12 TELEVISION 131 49 12 10 16 218 60.IZ 22.51 5.51 4.6% 7.31 16.11 15.0% 10.4% 15.21 21.71 1B.4% NENSPAPER i 239 63 22 12 27 363 65.9% 17.42 6.IZ 3.3% 7.4% 26.8% 27.31 23.72 27.8% 26.1% 31.0% NEWSLETTERS I 198 56 21 10 15 300 66.02 _ 18.72 7.0% 3.31 5.0% 22.21 22.62 21.11 26.6% 21.72 17.2% COMMENTS FROM 1 79 24 6 4 11 124 FRIENDS ETC. i 63.71 19.41 4.81 3.2% 8.91 9.2% 9.0% 9.01 7.61 8.7% 12.61 ____ ___ ---- -» - INFORMATION 1 63 21 4 4 3 95 THROUGH MAIL 1, 66.31 22.1% 4.2% 4.2% 3.21 7.01 7.21 7.9% 5.1% 8.7Z 3.4% PERSONAL 1 47 20 3 1 1 72 RESEARCH 1 65.31 27.91 4.21 1.41 1.41 5.31 5.4% 7.5% 3.8% 2.21 1.1% -------- ------- -------- -_"'»' --___-- COLUMN B76 266 79 46 87 1354 TOTAL 64.7% 19.6% 5.9% 3.4% 6.4Z 100.0% CROSS20 Li Ile 3� ��u I I1 1 Li Ile 3� ��u 1 i Area i W City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: August 23, 1985 TO: City Council FROM: City Manager RE: Material in Friday's Packet Memoranda from the City Manager: a. Dubuque Street Parking Ramp Expansion b. Municipal Lease c. Civic Center Expansion and Remodeling Memorandum from the City Attorney regarding Vevera lawsuit. Memoranda from the Traffic Engineer regarding: a. Painting of Gilbert Street/U.S. Highway N6 b. Pedestrian Phase at Benton Street/Riverside Drive c. Phasing for the Signalization of Clinton Street/Iowa Avenue Memorandum from the Chair of the Historic Preservation Commission reg street names which allude to historical themes. Memoranda from the Department of Planning and Program Development: a. 1986 Community Development Block Grant Funds b. Process for notification and meetings with neighbors on applications for LSRDs. LSNRDs and Rezonings c. Vista Park Village Memoranda from the Department of Housing and Inspection Services: a. Congregate Housing Development Funding b. Potential Fraud - Robert Gustoff Publicity regarding the Airport Breakfast, August 25, 1985. News Release regarding Asphalt Resurfacing Project. Legislative Bulletin, August 15, 1985. I .M 1 City of Iowa city MEMORANDUM Date: August 23, 1985 To: City Council From: City Manager/Z� Re: Dubuque Street Parking Ramp Expansion The Dubuque Street parking ramp was designed by Walker Parking Consultants and constructed in 1980 by Knutson Construction Company. The structural system included 53 poured -in-place columns designed to support the loading generated by the original four tiers of parking plus two additional tiers. The column caps were designed so that they could be easily removed to expose the column steel and provide a level surface for future extension of the columns. A copy of the "as -built" plans of the parking ramp was submitted to the City in January 1981, and a copy of the column cap detail "as -built" is attached. Max Selzer Construction was awarded a contract in June 1985 to add the two additional tiers to the Dubuque Street parking ramp. The additional two tiers were designed by Hansen Lind Meyer. The column caps were removed by Max Selzer Construction and the following deficiencies were observed: 1. The hose protectors extend several inches below the column cap. 2. The building paper (masonite) was installed at various angles to horizon- tal (one was installed vertically). 3. The /4 ties below the cap are either missing or are located an unaccept- able distance below the column cap. 4. The four corner bars (column steel) are not centered on the columns. 5. The column steel was not extended into the column cap. The above deficiencies are existing in a majority of the columns and, therefore, substantial additional work and expense will be necessary to provide suitable bearing surface .for the new columns. It currently is estimated that this work will cost somewhat in excess of $100,000. This corrective work will delay completion of the parking ramp expansion. See attached letter of August 6, 1985, from Mr. John Benz. Letters have been sent to the original architect and contractor (Walker Consultants and Knudson) advising them of the deficiencies and requesting that they contact the City in order to take corrective action and accomplish a satisfactory financial settlement. If the City does not receive a prompt resolution, litigation will be instituted. cs/sp I M R TIES .. `:•' �:`•;:::;:'... ,�� q' loNG uPSE : �?OTEGTOjZS ' .^,,:. JAt'> lOr OF •NOSE ' ` r 1• I I RC -MOVE" GONG:. AtCOVS � GNA/AFL�i;: TO L'X(9fND :GOL. �.}• .l.,.S.1r {��1 r.r r " '<i�.i�. .r{ .O�.r, i "•..r..t�M OU24.' pArEfe; ' COL : t;>i& LF_�:4• CENTRN IN COLUTA • �� . .GONG., . COL:•' . . Fu1ul� '•. �awELP . SpLICA f r XTE(aSIoN •G: 6�1¢IES T' 4 co(eNEle.:,t�i►f�?"(?Yr) R ': ;r,l}:•+�IA�It �'j4`rti. `,,t 1.. f}31, ,t1Y `�'k ,'i.ii & .•^.t� �!, ,.Jrj,�.,'il,,.fi, �,,.� 1 r; ,.,'�.�r-fix •;•.•s{,•', 3a is .".• ',•,,..:. .^,,:. r 1• r � �1.' �.}• .l.,.S.1r {��1 r.r r " '<i�.i�. .r{ .O�.r, i "•..r..t�M ': ;r,l}:•+�IA�It �'j4`rti. `,,t 1.. f}31, ,t1Y `�'k ,'i.ii & .•^.t� �!, ,.Jrj,�.,'il,,.fi, �,,.� 1 r; ,.,'�.�r-fix •;•.•s{,•', 3a August 6, 1985 Mr. Neal Berlin City Manager 410 East Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 RE: Iowa City Parking Ramp Dear Neal: RECEIVED AUG 8 1985 Hansen Lind Meyer This morning we had a joint meeting of representatives from the City, Selzer Construction Company and Hansen Lind Meyer. This meeting served to resolve the very difficult issue we have encountered in the extension of the columns for the additional two floors on the downtown parking ramp. I felt our meeting was very fruitful and that all parties left with a good understanding of what was needed to accomplish the changes necessitated by this pre-existing condition. As Selzer Construction Company removed the existing concrete caps which covered the ends of the existing column, it became apparent that the reinforcing steel is dissimilar from column to column and does not reflect the details in the contract documents available to us that were used in the construction of the existing parking ramp. As a result of this difference in what we had reasonably anticipated and the actual condition, it is going to be necessary to add a steel plate with reinforcing bars to attach the new columns, and in many instances it will be necessary to weld new reinforcing bars on top of the existing bars to reach the elevation at which this steel plate connection must be placed. It will also be necessary to further remove the existing concrete around the tops of some of the existing columns to expose the existing reinforcing bars to the point where we can work with them. This change in the design of the column connection has two major impacts: cost and time. First is to the cost. Selzer Construction Company will identify the estimated cost for making these changes, and we will then recommend that we proceed with the changes on a time and material basis since there is such a wide variation in existing conditions and it is impossible to accurately project the real cost. As to the construction time, Selzer Construction Company will also identify their estimate of the impact. I want to let you and the City Council know at this time that it is unlikely that we will be able to have the new portion of the ramp open for occupancy on the scheduled date. Since we are heading into the cold part of the season, it 1n fact may be impossible to finally complete the new portion of the ramp prior to spring when the weather warms up i sufficiently to allow placement of the concrete topping slab and sealer which will go on top of the new precast. i _., IU( iunt :LwvaCiIY. `w.I I . .:i_?=! cuumearvnu Clncdpu il.lnns i . ... -07i!0 PL1IIO tl y1 Jl�iIOJ O. FbIII L1 I 1630 i i August 6, 1985 Mr. Neal Berlin City Manager 410 East Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 RE: Iowa City Parking Ramp Dear Neal: RECEIVED AUG 8 1985 Hansen Lind Meyer This morning we had a joint meeting of representatives from the City, Selzer Construction Company and Hansen Lind Meyer. This meeting served to resolve the very difficult issue we have encountered in the extension of the columns for the additional two floors on the downtown parking ramp. I felt our meeting was very fruitful and that all parties left with a good understanding of what was needed to accomplish the changes necessitated by this pre-existing condition. As Selzer Construction Company removed the existing concrete caps which covered the ends of the existing column, it became apparent that the reinforcing steel is dissimilar from column to column and does not reflect the details in the contract documents available to us that were used in the construction of the existing parking ramp. As a result of this difference in what we had reasonably anticipated and the actual condition, it is going to be necessary to add a steel plate with reinforcing bars to attach the new columns, and in many instances it will be necessary to weld new reinforcing bars on top of the existing bars to reach the elevation at which this steel plate connection must be placed. It will also be necessary to further remove the existing concrete around the tops of some of the existing columns to expose the existing reinforcing bars to the point where we can work with them. This change in the design of the column connection has two major impacts: cost and time. First is to the cost. Selzer Construction Company will identify the estimated cost for making these changes, and we will then recommend that we proceed with the changes on a time and material basis since there is such a wide variation in existing conditions and it is impossible to accurately project the real cost. As to the construction time, Selzer Construction Company will also identify their estimate of the impact. I want to let you and the City Council know at this time that it is unlikely that we will be able to have the new portion of the ramp open for occupancy on the scheduled date. Since we are heading into the cold part of the season, it 1n fact may be impossible to finally complete the new portion of the ramp prior to spring when the weather warms up i sufficiently to allow placement of the concrete topping slab and sealer which will go on top of the new precast. i _., IU( iunt :LwvaCiIY. `w.I I . .:i_?=! cuumearvnu Clncdpu il.lnns i . ... -07i!0 PL1IIO tl y1 Jl�iIOJ O. FbIII L1 I 1630 i i Page Two Neal, you will recall that some months ago various members of the Council asked our opinion as to when the project could be completed, we responded at that time that it would be possible to complete it for the Christmas shopping season but not probable. Unfortunately Murphy's law has prevailed and not only have we had some things go wrong (the existing construction was not as delineated on the documents available to us), but it has had the greatest possible impact on the completion date and cost. I think it is important for you and the Council to understand, however, that the worst case scenario we're talking about involves the additional parking and should not reduce the availability of the present parking once the precast concrete is erected. assureplease earliest possible completionhere is yofitheelse projectthat we need to be doing to Yours truly, HANSEN LIND MEYER, P.C. b fi dodglas Benz, AIA Principal JDB/dei cc: Mr. Max Selzer 8441.00 t, i I { I i { i E t, City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: August 23, 1985 TO: City Council �� FROM: City Manageri�5 /-�✓`'� RE: Municipal Lease Enclosed are two pieces of information prepared by Eden Hannon & Company of Alexandria, Virginia, which describe municipal leases. The firm specializes in innovative public sector financing and is very interested in both the sewer plant and the Civic Center expansion. Iowa City is the hometown of Mr. Greg Eden, President of Eden Hannon and Company. 1633 b rrq The Tax -Exempt Municipal Lease By Greg Eden and Lisa Cole 1633 -- r Lvi Tit 1 3 al MAI, YEARBOOK 1985 STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEASING It is estimated that $3.Sbn In new tax "crept leases were originated by stale and local govemments during the 1984 calendar year. At least $600m of the $3.5b total volume originated in California alone. State and local governments continue to cite the need to provide equipment and facilities to their constituencies at the lowest possible cost. Because of the ongoing difficulty in allocating funds for the total purchase from a single years budget, governmental units prefer to spread the cost of acquisition over the time period the equipment or facilities will be in service. The tax-exempt lease is an Instalment sale agreement which allows a qualifying governmental unit to agree to pay the asset's purchase price plus Interest In a series of Instalments. The seller retains a security Interest In the equipment or facility until such time as the last payment is madeby the governmental unit. Due to §103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended, the Interest component Is deemed exempt from federal taxation. For Institutional and retail Investors, the tax-exempt lease offers an attractive yield when compared with other Investments of similar terms. Since the tax-exempt lease affords the Investor a pa back of principal and Interest, Its average ife is shorter than a comparable term municipal bond given the Interest only yield of the bond until maturity. In addition, experience has suggested that the dsk once associated with tax-exempt lease non -appropriation provisions Is largely mitigated by the economic incentive to make each years payments as a result of the rapid build-up of equity and tale residual value of the asset acquired by thegovernmental unit. During the last year the Interest differential In yields between lax-exemt leases and comparable term municipal bonds continued to narrow based upon the growing perception of the absence of risk associated with the lease transaction. This trend is due to several factors, notably, the large number of existing issues now outstanding and the small number of documented Instances of non -appropriation by governmental units. Interest rate yields also responded to a variety of credit enhancement devices which have own In popularity during the previous year. nsurance companies, including Fil eman's Fund Insurance Company, Chubb & Son, Inc. and Continental Insurance Company, either Introduced financial guaranty policies or continued to develop existing policies modeled along (hose of MBIA and AMBAC to provide investors with the payment in the event of non- appropriation omappropriation or default by a governmental unit. In several Instances the Insurance policy also provides the tax-exempt lease transaction with the highest credit rating (AAA) Issued by Standard & Poor's Corporation, based upon the absolute certainty of payment of the Issue to the Investor. Although there has been considerable activity recently to develop a pooling arrangement consisting of tax-exempt leases, no Investment banking firm has Introduced an Insured unit Investment trust to the marketplace. The theory associated with the pooling arrangement concludes that investors will trade a lower yield for the security of purchasing a pro rata portion, or certificate of participation, in a large number of transactions as opposed to a single Issue. To date It appears the front-end costs of such an Insured pooling arrangement make this Investment unattractive In the present marketplace. At least one company has recently Introduced an uninsured fund composed of at least 65% municipal leases. Whether the structure and yields will appeal to the marketplace remains to be seen. On June 27,1984, the US House of Representatives and Senate passed the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984. Portions of the Act affecting leasing by tax-exempt entities were originally introduced on May 24, 1983, by Congressman Pickle and later Zorporaled Into provisions Introduced to Senate by Senators Dole and Metzenbaum. In general, the leasing provisions reduce the tax benefits that would otherwise be available for tangible property used by tax-exempt entities. Various provisions of the Act affect the availability of depreciation and Investment tax credits In operating lease and sale leaseback arrangemcnls as well as for the'service conlract , II Is Important to note, however. that the Act did nothing to affect the benefits associated with the traditional tax-exempt lease transaction structure. With the growing acceptance of the tax. exempt lease by Institutional and retail Investors, transactions customarily are being structured similarly to municipal bond offerings. In June, 1984, Los Ang9eles County, California, awarded an 518.4m municipal lease Issue Incorporating a daily floating rate feature. This feature required the Issuer to set the periodic payments assuming a high Interest rate, and use any excess payments to prepay some of the issue. The Issuer, therefore, receives the benefit of a relatively good interest rate and the economic savings of being able to retire the principal amount at an earlier date to reduce the total Interest payments over the life of the Issue. During the next year, It is likely that other techniques, such as interest rate differentials, put features and uneven amortisation schedules will be developed In an effort to further reduce the net Interest cost paid by the governmental unit while still providing investors with the yield and flexibility they desire from the tax-exempt lease. At least one stale, New Jersey, has attempted to reduce the overall net Interest costs of tax-exempt leases by entering Into a master lease that Includes of a consolidation of outstanding tax-exempt leases coupled with the Issuance of new certificates of participation to anticipate leasing needs for the coming year. During June, 1984 New Jersey sold approximately $37m of certificates of participation under this master lease concept. In addition to the cost savings associated with one Issuance, state authorities cited the savings In lime on the pan of slate officials by having a single sale cover a year's purchases. The Association for Municipal Leasing & I'Mance continued to expand Its membership and provide Investors, manufacturers and governmental units with Information affecting lax -exempt leasing and project financing. With a membership of 100, the Associatlon held Its third annual meeting in San Francisco In November, 1983 and Its semi. annual seminar In May, 1984 In Atlanta. The tax-exempt lease continues to adapt to the changing needs of governmental units while offering Institutional and retail Investors a short -learn tax-exempt Instrument with a I= degree of risk. The growing volume and acceptance of tax-exempt leasing In the US offer the best rationale for Its future probability of success. This article was written by Greg Eden, President, Eden Hannon&Company, 101 North Columbus Street, Alexandde,Vi Ink, 22314 and Isreprinted hem Wadd l.psing"t'aadwok 1985, pubtlehed by HawWnaPobllahmUmited, isdield House,2 Church Stree6Cagonhall, Essex C0617U,Fnaland16 M City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 23, 1985 To: City Council From: City Manager/ Re: Civic Center Expansion and Remodeling Proposals have been received from 11 firms for architectural and engineering services for the proposed new office building east of the Civic Center. In addition, 8 proposals have been submitted for the Civic Center remodeling project. Lists of all firms submitting proposals for each project are attached. Two selection committees will review proposals and make recommendations to the City Council. Members of the committees are: New Building Remodeling George Strait George Strait Rosemary Vitosh Denny Gannon Neal Berlin Dale Helling Chuck Schmadeke Harvey Miller Don Schmeiser Bob Keating Doug Boothroy Terry Timmins Committee members will complete a rating sheet for each proposal. Ratings from all committee members will be compiled and then the committees will meet to select finalists and to conduct interviews. Final recommendations from each committee should be to the Council no later than September 24, 1985. bdw/sp Attachment cc: All Committee Members I63� t I i i i. CIVIC CENTER - NEW CONSTRUCTION Brooks Borg and Skiles, Architects -Engineers 700 Hubbell Building Des Moines, Iowa 50309 (515) 244-7167 Robert J. Mathieu (Will appoint a project manager after learning more about project) Brown Healey Bock, PC Architects, Planners 800 First Avenue, N.E. Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 (319) 365-9426 Herbert M. Stone, Project Architect Bussard/Dikis Associates, Ltd. 300 Homestead Building 303 Locust Street Des Moines, Iowa 50309 (515) 288-3141 H. Kennard Bussard, FAIA, Principal -in -Charge David A. Duimstra, AIA, Project Manager DeWild Grant Reckert & Assoc. Co. 1001 Office Park Road Suite 300 West Des Moines, Iowa 50265 (515) 225-8346 Edward L. Cable, AIA, Principal -in -Charge and Project Manager The Durrant Group One Dubuque Plaza Dubuque, Iowa 52001 (319) 583-9131 Charles M. Kurt, AIA, Project Director Hansen Lind Meyer Drawer 310 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 (319) 354-4700 John D. Benz, AIA, Project Director Koffron-Nagle-Voightmann Architects -Planners Drawer 3249 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 (319) 354-0000 Arthur L. Koffron, Person in Charge 163 s Neumann Monson, Architects and Planners 226 South Clinton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7878 Roy C. Neumann, AIA, Person in Charge William Nowysz and Associates 328 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7002 William Nowysz, Person in Charge The Schemmer Associates Inc. Northwest Tower, Suite 509 Davenport, Iowa 52806 (319) 391-0885 Donald A. Smith, AIA, Project Manager Wehner Pattschull Pfiffner, PC 201 Day Building Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-9715 John F. Pfiffner, AIA, Project Architect and Project Manager 163' i; 1 i 1 Neumann Monson, Architects and Planners 226 South Clinton Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7878 Roy C. Neumann, AIA, Person in Charge William Nowysz and Associates 328 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7002 William Nowysz, Person in Charge The Schemmer Associates Inc. Northwest Tower, Suite 509 Davenport, Iowa 52806 (319) 391-0885 Donald A. Smith, AIA, Project Manager Wehner Pattschull Pfiffner, PC 201 Day Building Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-9715 John F. Pfiffner, AIA, Project Architect and Project Manager 163' i; 1 i 1 r, i i i 1: i. 1 i I i I j CIVIC CENTER - REMODELING Brown Healey Bock Architects/Planners 800 First Avenue N.E. Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52402 (319) 365-9426 Herbert M. Stone, Project Architect Bussard/Oikis Associates, Ltd. Architects and'Interiors 300 Homestead Building 303 Locust Street Des Moines, Iowa 50309 (515) 288-3141 H. Kennard Bussard, FAIA. Principal in Charge The Durrant Group Inc. One Dubuque Plaza Dubuque, Iowa 52001 (319) 583-9131 Charles M. Kurt, AIA, Project Director Hansen Lind Meyer, P.C. Drawer 310 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 (319) 354-4700 John 0. Benz, AIA, Project Director Koff ron-Nagle-Voightmann, Architects -Planners Drawer 3249 Iowa City, Iowa 52244 (319) 354-0000 Arthur L. Koffron, Person in Charge Neumann Monson, Architects and Planners 226 South Clinton Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7878 Roy C. Neumann, AIA, Person in Charge William Nowysz and Associates, Architects 328 East Washington Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-7002 William Nowysz, AIA, Person in Charge Wehner Pattschull Pfiffner, PC 201 Day Building Iowa City, Iowa 52240 (319) 338-9715 John F. Pfiffner, AIA, Project Architect and Project Manager I 1434 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM DATE: 21 August 1985 TO: Pity Council /�.��%� Fes: Terrence L. Timmins, City Attorney Ci RE: Vevera Lawsuit This memo is to report to the City Council the outcome of the lawsuit entitled Robert A. Vevera v. City of Iowa City. As the Council is aware, this lawsuit was a declaratory judgment action wherein the plaintiff was seeking a ruling from the Court that he was entitled to pension benefits or, alternatively, reinstatement to the Iowa City Police Department on the basis of the Civil Service Commission order of July 21, 1975. The Commission's order had af- firmed with modification Mr. Vevera's discharge from the Police De- partment by "placing him on a leave of absence without pay until his fifteen (15) years of service are completed, at which time he is discharged from the Iowa City Police Department." Later in said order, the Commission had "recommended" that Mr. Vevera be granted his earned pension benefits. Assistant City Attorney David Brown tried this case to the court on June 13, 1985. On August 8, 1985, the Court entered a declaratory ruling. In that ruling, the Court essentially held as follows: 1. Plaintiff is not entitled to pension benefits as a result of the Civil Service Commission order of July 21, 1975. 2. Plaintiff is not entitled to reinstatement as an Iowa City Police Officer of any rank. 3. The Civil Service Commission order of July 21, 1975, has no effect on the Board of Police Trustees and their determination of service "creditable" under Section 411.4, the Code. With regard to paragraph three of the above ruling, 9411.4, Code of Iowa, provides that the Board of Trustees shall not "allow credit as service for any period of more than one month duration during which the member was absent without pay." 1635 ■ i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 19, 1985 To: Charles Schmadeke, Director of Public Works From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineerd+� Re: Painting of Gilbert Street/U.S. Highway -#6 Recently Public Works received a referral inquiring about the painting of Gilbert Street/U.S. Highway 6. Traffic Engineering employees painted the center line of Gilbert Street on the 16th of April., 1985 and painted the lane lines for Gilbert Street on the 17th of April, 1985. This once -a -year painting is consistent with the City Council's policy decision to paint the City's center lines and lane lines only once a year. The markings along U.S. Highway 6 are placed and are the responsibility of the Iowa DOT. I am unsure as to the date that these markings were placed, but if this information is required I will be happy to contact the Iowa DOT and see if a date can be determined. Should you have additional questions or require additional comment, please don't hesitate to contact me. bjl/8 IG3� i I i' is I 1 ( L, I i City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 19, 1985 To: Charles Schmadeke, Director of Public Works From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer---/ ? Re: Pedestrian Phase at Benton Street/Riverside Drive Recently Public Works has received a referral inquiring as to the pedestrian phase at Benton Street/Riverside Drive. The pedestrian phase at this intersection is an exclusive phase. That is, when the pedestrians receive a walk indication, all vehicular traffic does have a red signal displayed.' The referral also inquired as to the "right turn on red" - pedestrian conflict. Right turns on red are not prohibited at this intersection. It is important for the operation of this intersection that right turns not be prohibited on red. If right turns were prohibited during red signals, the capacity of this already congested intersection would be further reduced. While it is possible that certain rude drivers who are making right hand turns may encroach upon pedestrians walking during the exclusive pedestrian phase, the overall operation of the intersection requires that right turns be allowed on red. Should you require additional information or additional comment, please don't hesitate to contact me. bjI/7 /637 t j. City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 19, 1985 To: Charles Schmadeke, Director of Public Works From: James Brachtel, Traffic Engineer---/ ? Re: Pedestrian Phase at Benton Street/Riverside Drive Recently Public Works has received a referral inquiring as to the pedestrian phase at Benton Street/Riverside Drive. The pedestrian phase at this intersection is an exclusive phase. That is, when the pedestrians receive a walk indication, all vehicular traffic does have a red signal displayed.' The referral also inquired as to the "right turn on red" - pedestrian conflict. Right turns on red are not prohibited at this intersection. It is important for the operation of this intersection that right turns not be prohibited on red. If right turns were prohibited during red signals, the capacity of this already congested intersection would be further reduced. While it is possible that certain rude drivers who are making right hand turns may encroach upon pedestrians walking during the exclusive pedestrian phase, the overall operation of the intersection requires that right turns be allowed on red. Should you require additional information or additional comment, please don't hesitate to contact me. bjI/7 /637 f: -r t i 1 i f: -r _1 j I, City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 19, 1985 To: Charles Schmadeke, Director of Public Works From: James Brachtel S`� Re: Phasing for the Signalization of Clinton Street/Iowa Avenue Recently Public Works has received a referral inquiring as to the correctness of the phasing at Clinton Street/Iowa Avenue. The signal phasing that is in place now is the same phasing that was in place prior to the reconstruction of the ten block of South Clinton Street. No changes have been made in the phasing since the reconstruction of the ten block of South Clinton Street. This phasing includes an exclusive pedestrian phase now as it did prior'to the construction. Should you require further information or comment, please don't hesitate to contact me. bjl/6 138 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 23, 1985 To: Mayor McDonald and City Council From: Margaret Nowysz, Chair, Historic Preservation Commission Re: List of Street Names which Allude to Historical Themes At the Council's request, the Historic Preservation Commission has developed the attached list of names, many of which refer to individuals significant to the history and development of Iowa City. The purpose of the list is to provide developers with a source of street names which are consistent with historical themes. The list has been divided into four categories: 1) Indian names, 2) Natural History themes, 3) Iowa Towns, and 4) Pioneer and Historical names. The community could be divided on a quadrantal basis with one of the four categories of possible names assigned to each quadrant. If this option is implemented, the list suggests, for example, that Indian names be reserved for the southeast quadrant. A quadrant has been recommended for the remaining three categories as well. If the list is acceptable to the Council, the Commission recommends that it be sent to all developers who could select from these names at the time the street names for their preliminary subdivision plats are chosen. If you would like additional information on the persons on the list or desire more names, please do not hesitate to contact me. bj5/4 /639 ■ STREET NAMES WITH HISTORICAL THEMES SELECTION LIST INDIAN NAMES (Southeast Quadrant) + Blackhawk Rantcheyaime Wapello I Poweshiek Tama Wappashiek i NATURAL HISTORY I (Southwest Quadrant) Flowers Minerals Songbirds i Bluestem Agate Goldfinch Coneflower Geode Oriole Goldenrod Pipestone Robin f Shooting Star Wild Rose 3 I _ IOWA TOWNS j (Northwest Quadrant) i Adelphi Corydon Jewell Red Oak ? Afton Danbury Kellogg Remsen Agency Deep River Keystone Rock Valley Alexander Defiance Lanesboro St. Ansgar Alta Vista Delhi Larchwood Sergeant Bluff Aplington Diagonal Laurens Sheffield Avoca Eagle Grove Le Claire Shell Rock i - Bancroft Elk Horn Lime Springs Sigourney ) 1- Belle Plaine Essex Lone Tree Solon Belmond Farmington Lost Nation Spirit Lake I Bloomfield 'Fayette Marengo Steamboat Rock Blue Grass Garden Grove Mediapolis Strawberry Point Bondurant Gladbrook Morning Sun Tipton I Boone Gowrie Mystic Traer Buffalo Center Graettinger New Albin Underwood Calmar Grinnell New Market Vinton Charter Oak Guttenberg Orange City Waverly I, Clarinda Harpers Ferry Pella What Cheer Clear Lake Honey Creek Pleasant Hill Woodbine f Coggon Huxley Postville Zwingle 1{ i I I I Ib39 PIONEER AND HISTORICAL NAMES (Northeast Quadrant) Adams - Brick Mason Berryhili - Builder, Landowner Brossart - Associated with the St. James Hotel j Buck - Grocer j Butler - Associated with the First Capital i Byington - Capitalist Cox - Surveyor, selected the name "Iowa City" Dondore - Wagon shop Dunkel - Associated with a local hotel and movie house Felkner - Legislator Folsom - Lawyer Frierson - Gaymon - Gower - Irish - Newspaper editor Judson - Surveyor Lathrop - Historian Lovelace - Architect, College Block Mendenhall - Merchant Murray - Doctor Parvin - Territorial Secretary, Masonic Lodge Sanders - Historian Sanxay - Iron stove merchant Trowbridge - Sheriff Robinson - Builder 1 Workman - Builder Names Associated with Local Townships Cedar. Liberty Scott Nolan Gross Parrott 1 Sutliff Harris Ten Eyck Hill i . Clear Creek Hirt Union Stover Dennis Rohrer Fellows Madison Paul Washington Babcock Fry Fremont Yoder Sweet Monroe i DuPont Graham Morse Pleasant Valley I � Clark j I+ Hardin Fountain Packard Kelso Morford Myers Skinner I Walker i j 1631 Names Associated with the Writers' WorkshoD Marvin Bell John Leggett Ted Berrigan Robert Lowell John Berryman Flannery O'Connor Vance Bourjaily Robert Penn Warren John Cheever Phillip Roth Frank Conroy W. D. Snodgrass Paul Engle George Starbuck John Gardner Mark Strand John Irving Kurt Vonnegut Donald Justice Margaret Walker Joseph Langland Angus Wilson Names Associated with the Colleqe of Art Achepohl Lester Longman Albrizio Virginia Myers Stuart Edie Ray Parker Emil Ganzo Martha Ranney Phil Guston Frank Seiberling Mauricio Lasansky Jane Wilson Horst Jansen Grant Wood Other Names Associated with the University Nellie Aurnes - English professor May Brodbeck - Vice -President of Academic Affairs Bertha Horach Shambaugh Records - Seydel - grocery Startsman - Strub - dept.store Whetstone - druggist Wieneke - stationery shop Bowen - doctor Banbury - Bastardes - Newell - portrait painter Musser - lumber Marquardt - boarding hse. Moon - doctor b druggist Tanner - wagon works Crum - newspaper 1639 Additional Names Bowersox - sorghum mill Bloom - mayor Horack - Rate - glove factory Townsend - photographer Englert - ice, brewery James -photographer Maresh - metalsmith Patterson - lawyer McInnery - tavern Welch - china shop Otto - C1ose - glove factory Reno - banker Holubar - metalsmith Dey - railroad Graf - bottling works Emonds - priest, St.Mary's Hartsock - dry goods Burkley - hotel Hohenschuh - funeral director Carson - Harbestroh - Park House Downey - banker Hummer - minister Coldren - doctor Hotz - contractor Dostal - brewery Hughes - Fink - stationery shop Hoxie - Ham - amusement hall Kosa - meat market Reizenstein - newspaper Crunmey - hotel Pinney - hotel Records - Seydel - grocery Startsman - Strub - dept.store Whetstone - druggist Wieneke - stationery shop Bowen - doctor Banbury - Bastardes - Newell - portrait painter Musser - lumber Marquardt - boarding hse. Moon - doctor b druggist Tanner - wagon works Crum - newspaper 1639 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 21, 1985 To: Iowa City Boards and Commissions and All Interested Groups, Agencies . and Individuals From: Mickey Lauria, Chairperson, Committee on Community Needs rl.t'• Jim Hencin, CDBG Program Coordinator Jj Re: 1986 Community Development Block Grant Funds The Committee on Community Needs (CCN) is again beginning its annual solicitation of ideas and proposals for federal funding through the.Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. All 1986 proposals must be submitted to CCN by October 1, 1985. The City of Iowa City expects to receive approximately $658,800 in CDBG funds for projects beginning January 1, 1986. (This is about 10% less than the current year grant.) Proposals for CDBG funding must meet the following general criteria: 1. Be eligible for expenditure of CDBG funds in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2. Benefit low- and moderate -income persons; aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight;- or meet an urgent community development need resulting from a threat to the health and welfare of the community. 3. Have a reasonable expectation of being completed within one year. In general, the City will not fund project operating expenses through the CDBG program. But capital projects -- those involving the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of facilities or improvements -- which meet the above criteria, will be considered. If you have a project that you wish to propose to CCN, you may obtain a form for its submission, along with other information, from the Department of Planning and Program Development, 'Civic Center, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, or telephone 356-5247 or 356-5248. CCN will hold two public hearings to receive funding proposals on: September 17 - 3:30 p.m., Iowa City Public Library - Meeting Room A October 1 - 7:00 p.m., Iowa City Public Library - Meeting Room A All persons are welcome to attend one or both of these hearings to submit their proposals. Proposals may also be mailed to CCN at the Civic Center if you are unable to attend one of the public hearings. For further information about the CDBG program and the upcoming public. hearings, please contact Monica Moen (356-5247) or Mary Nugent (356-5248). bj2/12 1606 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 21, 1985 To: Iowa City Boards and Commissions and All Interested Groups, Agencies . and Individuals From: Mickey Lauria, Chairperson, Committee on Community Needs rl.t'• Jim Hencin, CDBG Program Coordinator Jj Re: 1986 Community Development Block Grant Funds The Committee on Community Needs (CCN) is again beginning its annual solicitation of ideas and proposals for federal funding through the.Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. All 1986 proposals must be submitted to CCN by October 1, 1985. The City of Iowa City expects to receive approximately $658,800 in CDBG funds for projects beginning January 1, 1986. (This is about 10% less than the current year grant.) Proposals for CDBG funding must meet the following general criteria: 1. Be eligible for expenditure of CDBG funds in accordance with regulations of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 2. Benefit low- and moderate -income persons; aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight;- or meet an urgent community development need resulting from a threat to the health and welfare of the community. 3. Have a reasonable expectation of being completed within one year. In general, the City will not fund project operating expenses through the CDBG program. But capital projects -- those involving the acquisition, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, or installation of facilities or improvements -- which meet the above criteria, will be considered. If you have a project that you wish to propose to CCN, you may obtain a form for its submission, along with other information, from the Department of Planning and Program Development, 'Civic Center, 410 E. Washington Street, Iowa City, or telephone 356-5247 or 356-5248. CCN will hold two public hearings to receive funding proposals on: September 17 - 3:30 p.m., Iowa City Public Library - Meeting Room A October 1 - 7:00 p.m., Iowa City Public Library - Meeting Room A All persons are welcome to attend one or both of these hearings to submit their proposals. Proposals may also be mailed to CCN at the Civic Center if you are unable to attend one of the public hearings. For further information about the CDBG program and the upcoming public. hearings, please contact Monica Moen (356-5247) or Mary Nugent (356-5248). bj2/12 1606 City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 20, 1985 To: City Council and City Manager From: Marianne Milkman, Associate Planner lii. Re: Process for notification and meetings with neighbors on applications for LSRDs, LSNRDs and Rezonings When an application for a Large Scale Residential Development (LSRD), Large Scale Non -Residential Development (LSNRD) or a rezoning is received by the Department of Planning and Program Development, the following steps are taken for notification of the neighborhood: 1. At least seven days prior to the first Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on the application, one or more signs are posted on the subject property. These signs provide information on the date and time of the P&Z meeting and the applicant's request, e.g, zoning change from RM -12 to CC -2. 2. Approximately seven days prior to the first P&Z meeting a public notice is published in the Iowa City Press -Citizen stating the time and date on which the Commission will have public discussion of the application. The nature of the request and specific location of the property for which the application is made is provided in the notice. 3. For rezonings only, a public notice of the City Council public hearing is also published in the Iowa City Press -Citizen not less than seven and not more than 20 days prior to the date of the hearing on the application. Neighborhood residents are not notified individually of the applications to be reviewed by P&Z or the City Council. Contacts and Meetings with Interested Neighbors Neighbors who are interested in the application are provided with the staff report and other pertinent information upon request. Generally initial inquiries are by phone and residents later come in to review or pick up copies of the plans and the staff report. Neighbors attending the informal and/or formal P&Z meetings are generally informed by the chairperson of P&Z of the date and time of the next P&Z meeting, and when the application will be reviewed by Council. Neighbors who ask to be kept informed are sent copies of additional information and alerted by memo or telephone as to the .time and place of the next meeting relating to the application. In addition, staff attempts to contact neighbors who have questions on specific issues as to the status of such issues. However, PPD staff does not automatically notify all persons speaking at a public hearing or phoning in questions of the date of the next meeting to discuss the application or of changes in recommendations. 16w M M 2 If neighbors request.it, staff arranges a special meeting in the neighborhood to explain and provide information on the application. /sp i 1' 2 If neighbors request.it, staff arranges a special meeting in the neighborhood to explain and provide information on the application. /sp i City of Iowa City f - MEMORANDUM =� - Date: August 21, 1985 To: City Council From: Barry Beagle, Associate Planner E.O Re: S-8515: Vista Park Village On August 15, 1985, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the preliminary and final plat of "Vista Park Village" be approved to establish a 25 -lot conventional subdivision in the RS -5 zone. Mr. Hershberger's previous request for preliminary OPD -H plan/plat approval has been withdrawn. In recommending approval, the Commission discussed at length the extension of Peterson Street in order to determine the most equitable method to apportion or assign the cost associated with this extension. The Commission found no reason to deviate from the requirement of the Subdivision Regulations requiring a developer/subdivider to construct or install the required pavement to serve new development. The issue of benefit district assessment was rejected by the Commission, finding that the assessed property owners would not benefit from the extension since their properties were already served by existing street improvements. By letter dated August 21, 1985, Mr. Hershberger wishes to discuss this matter with you at your informal meeting of August 26, 1985. No action by the Council is required, with Mr. Hershberger's plats appearing before the Council for final action at the first formal meeting in September. bj3/14 ie�a I August 21, 1985 617 South Capitol Street Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Phone (319) 351-2506 Iowa City Council RECEIVED AUG211985 Civic Center 410 R. Washington Iowa City, Iowa 52240 Ra: Vista Park Village Subdivision We would request time at your informal meeting August 28, 1985 to discuss the Vista Park Subdivision and the.Peterson Street access Issue so that we can submit the appropriate legal documents required for the passage fo this subdivision. We would request that we be placed on you agenda for final action at the first. formal meeting in September. Very truly yours, Koren ROMES, I C.C� a shberger President LLH/cs w , i i Ii I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM Date: August 22, 1985 To: City Council From: Congregate Housing Committee,, Re: Congregate Housing Development Funding The results from the market analysis conducted by May Zima and Co. show that there is no market for a congregate housing (assisted residential living) project in Iowa City. Therefore we recommend to the City Council that the Congregate Housing development funds be reallocated. Survey responses indicated that elderly persons prefer to remain in their homes as long as possible, however, with the idea of using support services, if needed. Recognizing the need to coordinate existing housing and support services, the City Council is asked to consider the following alternatives. Congregate Services Coordinator. A full-time professionally trained staff person, serving as an "ombudsman," would provide continual support for any elderly persons wishing to remain in their present living arrangement. Responsibilities would include: a. Assessing their current needs. b. Coordinating services among agencies. c. Providing ongoing assessment and management in the provision of serv- ices. As with the Shared Housing Program, the City could contract with an existing agency to administer the program. The program should be designed to be a three-year project funded with CDBG funds. If agreeable with the City Council, the Committee will develop a proposal for Council review and approval. Program development will include input from local service providers. The Congregate Housing Committee also recommends continued support for the following CDBG funded projects. 1. Housing Modifications for Low/Moderate Income Frail Elderly. 1984 and 1985 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds have been used to provide minor structural repairs and modifications to the homes of the frail elderly, thereby permitting continued safe residence. 2. Shared Housing Program. The Shared Housing Program, established in January 1985, demonstrated that it does provide an alternative to the elderly in Johnson County in terms of a flexible living arrangement which provides financial and support services. bj2/12 /bk3 I City of Iowa City MEMORANDUM OATH August 20, 1985 TO: Doug Boothroy, Director, HIS FROM: Lyle Seydel, Housing Coordinator, Iowa City Housing Authority RE: Potential Fraud - Robert Gustoff After our meeting on Monday, August 19, 1985, I called Regional Inspector General for Investigation, Louis J. Rauber. I discussed, with an admini- strative assistant, the letter received from the Inspector General and indicated that I felt this was an error and we could not consider the ADC payments, which must be repaid, as income for rent purposes. After review and discussion of the case at hand, the administrative assistant agreed and indicated she would discuss the matter with Mr. Rauber who would return my call on Tuesday, August 20, 1985. Mr. Rauber called at 9:20 a.m. on Tuesday, August 20, and indicated he agreed, after reconsideration, that due to the fact that the money was ordered repaid by the court, it cannot be considered as income for rent purposes. Mr. Rauber indicated a memo in the file to this effect would be sufficient, that no further correspon- dence would be necessary and that he considered the case closed. A letter of warning to the Gustoff family will be submitted to you for approval prior to mailing. LGS:mth cc: ✓Neal Berlin, City Manager David Brown, Assistant City Attorney Louis J. Rauber, Regional Inspector General for Investigation IOWA CITY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT South Riverside Drive Iowa City, Iowa 52240 AIRPORT BREAKFAST --AUGUST 25, 1985 OFFICIAL RULES IOWA CITY AIRPORT COMMISSION PAPER AIRPLANE THRONING CONTEST 1. Ladies and Mena Division -- 13 years old and older Girls and Boys Division -- 12 years old and younger Junior Division -- Boys and Girls 6 years old and younger 2. Aircraft must be made from paper issued by the line judge, it will be approximately q x 11 inches. 3. Only one piece of paper may be used, no tape, weights or material of any sort may be added to your aircraft. 4. Aircraft must be hand launched, no mechanical launching device will be permitted. 5. Aircraft will be thrown with the prevailing winds. 6. The aircraft landing the farthest distance from the throwing line wine 7. Decision of the line judge is final. Contact Person: Fred Zehr, Airport Manager 356-5045 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS 7:00 - 12:00 Breakfast served by Old Capitol Sertoma Club 8:00 Hot Air Balloons take off and landings 9:00 - 11:00 Paper airplane throwing contest 9:00 Sky diving 10:00 Radio Controlled Airplanes flying -Iowa City Aerohawks 11:00 Sky diving 11:30 Awards /6 45 CITY OF IOWA CITY CNIC CENTER 410 E. WASHNGTON ST. IOWA CITY, IOWA 52240 (319)356-50M August 21, 1985 PRESS RELEASE Contact Person: Rick Fosse, Project Engineer 356-5144 and Frank Farmer, City Engineer 356-5143 L.L. Pelling Company, contractor for the FY86 Asphalt Resurfacing Project, will begin construction on Monday, August 26, 1985. Motorists should exercise caution in the project areas since construction will necessitate one lane traffic. Those streets with parking will be posted 48 hours prior to construction. The following is a list of streets to be resurfaced: Streets to be Overlayed 1. Clinton Street from Benton Street to Lafayette Street. 2. Keokuk Street from Highland Avenue to 160 feet south of Plum Street. 3. Madison Street from Bloomington Street north to the end of the street.* 4. Market Street from Clinton Street to Madison Street.* 5. Capitol Street from Davenport Street to Jefferson Street.* 6. Davenport Street from Clinton Street to Capitol Street.* 7. Grant Street from Sheridan Avenue to Court Street. 8. Lower Muscatine Road from Franklin Street to Sycamore Street.* *Work on these streets will not begin before September 1, 1985. Streets to be Chip Sealed 1. Rider Street from Woolf Avenue to Black Springs Circle. 2. Bayard Street from Lexington Avenue to Woolf Avenue. 3. Riverside Drive from Park Road to Grove Street. 4. Ferson Avenue from River Street to Park Road. 5. Lexington Street from River Street to Bayard Street. 6. Oakland Avenue from Sheridan Avenue to Court Street. 7. Center Street from Oakland Avenue to Grant Street. 8. Gilbert Street from Kirkwood Avenue to Third Street. 9. Market Street from Dodge Street to Clinton Street. bj3/1 I �s.us AECEIVEDAU3 A WS ��11u�i LEGISLATIVE�'tat•m` BULLETIN o.rrm=s mxY !fir INTERIM SPECIAL BULLETIN August 35, 198S ACTION REQUEST On August 1, 1995 Congress adopted its fiscal 1996 Budget. As adopted, the budget resolution calls for significant increases in de- fense and tax expenditures, few mfotms In needs -tested entitlement programs. and deep cuts In discretionary domestic pregrmea to cities. The Administration and Cungmas are claiming that the agreement mill mnn $27' billion in deficit mductims one the next three years based on cemomir projections used in the Administration's budget request submitted to Congres- las[ .Inter. The Congrason elal Budget office 1s Projecting the nduvtionv to he cat $199 billion over the same period. , The budget resolutiona adopted Is not subject to presidential approval. 'The easalutlon =rely sets targets for the Congress to ret in passing Icgislatim and appropriations for out year. 7barefae, adoption of the budget resolution is.bmt the lira step tonard.ttmdast daflcit seductions assuming all that ls.agmed to will be realised and that the appruprlatim..•�. hills Passed by Congress an not vetoed by the President. The budget resolution provides Congress with a set of lnstruetiune rnllt•J "roconniliatlon instructions" Mich require congresslunal committees to tour action and "Part out legislation to cut spending by September 27, 1985. Appropriation bills am not subject to "mconcillatlon lnstructlonn" hat rather to overall limits. The adoption of a budget resolution does not scan that even the claimed deficit cuts will be realised. Many veteran political observe" In Washington believe that It Is unrealistic to expect Congress to note the cuts in certain Programs, specifically agriculture, assumed In the budget "solution. As adopted the budget resolution assumes full funding of revenue sharing for FY 1966 and termination thereafter. Cities would therefore mcei" their lost quarterly payments in October 1966. Other affected city Programs Include: CDBG: Budget assumes a 13 percent cut in CD9G order an ovenll Appropriations cap. UDAG: Budget mums a 20 percent cut next year and no termination. EDA: Budget assumes a 20 percent cut next year and no termination. HuDAG: Resolution &MIAMS continued funding. Sec. 312: Assume a 30 purest cut in the program. HOUSING: Assume a cut of $1.7 billion in assisted housing. RURAL MOUSING: Assuan A 40 Percent cut in rural housing. 7NANSPOATATTON: Although the budget resolution tuts public transportation 13 gmeet the actual reductim in fou=ls grants Is only 11 percent. The 11 percent reduction results free the fact that Section 3, discretionary grants Program which is funded free highway trust fund revenues, not general revenues, m='ns Intact. Those cuts affect operating, capital, section 9 and section 1B. ENVIRONMENT: assumes an increase in funding for the Superfund program and a freeze at current levels for Section MI municipal vas tenter grants program. MUM: Assumes a IS percent cut. ENERGY: Assumes a freeze in energy conservation programs and holding at the current level funding for low income fuel assistance although it does not assume that this latter program will be made out of the oil overcharge penalty fund. MEDICARE/SOCIAL SECURITY: The budget resolution contains instructions for new taxes for many cities despite declarations that the budget could contain "no tax increase". As adopted the Senate Finance Committee is charged with the responsibility cf producing $8.4 billion in revenue increases over the next three years. The committee apparently has wide discretion in reaching this goal. Revenue assumptions appear based entirely on increased revenues generated from cities and other public employers from the medicate and social security system, despite the fact that the committee would be free to consider any revenue increase actions not currently Included in their assumptions like continuation of the federal cigarette tax. The changes proposed in medicare and social security are as follows: 1. Effective January 1, 1986, all state and local employers not currently paying the combined employer/employee rate for medicare coverage (2.9 percent) wmid be required to do so. 2. All state and local employees hind after December 31, 1985 would be required to belong to the social security retirement system. Therefore, cities would be required to pay a tax equal to 5.7 percent of the salaries of newly hind employees and deduct the remainder to reach the combined 11.4 percent. A possible third change would be to require many cities to remit their Social Security/Nedicare taxes on a mon frequent basis. The frequency would be based on the size of the city's tax and social security withholdings, The proposed change would make payment practices consistent with those required of private employers. However, unlike private employers, the costs to cities would not be deductible. We expect the Senate Finance Committee to consider these changes in September following the August Congressional recess. Estimates, based on 1982 Census of Government figures, indicate that the annual cost to cover currently uncovered employees with medicate in Iowa would be S4.8 million. This figure also includes school personnel so precise dollar Impacts cannot be determined. Nationally, school personnel have a lower percentage of coverage than cities. Indirectly, however, this could put added pressure on state funding programs for schools and greater competition for revenue coming to cities. ACTION BEQUEST Cities affected by this proposed change in medicare/social security should contact House 6 Senate representatives in Washington and argue for a mon balanced consideration of this approach. Point out that: 1. Such proposal would be effective from January 1, 1986, right in the middle of a budget year. 2. Difficulties of Integrating into labor agreements and retirement plans. 1641 i_.._...__.. - _ .. ....... _ r If 1 .3. 3. Cost - unfunded liability i. Being made at the seem time cities ate trying to reconcile FLSA. FLSA UPDATE ACTION CALL REQUESTED Sen. Don Nickles (R -Oklahoma) has introduced S. 1570 along with 24 co-sponsors. The FLSA bill includes the following provisions: 1. An exemption from overtime provisions of the FLSA for state and local employees (this change would also allow use of compensatory time off in lieu of overtime). 2. An exemption from the FLSA for individuals who provide services to state and local government on a volunteer basis. 3. Elimination of the retroactive application of the FISA to state and local government. Broad bipartisan support is necessary if legislative relief is to be achieved prior to October 15 when the Department of Labor has announced it will begin enforcing the FLEA regulations against cities and will seek to impose retroactive liability to April 15. In the House H.R. 2936 has been introduced by Beverly Byron (D -Maryland). it is not as broad as the senate version and would only exempt state and local public safety employees from the overtime provisions of the FLEA. To "sun congressional consideration a strong grass-roots effort from city officials is needed, letters and calls should be directed to members of the House and Senate without delay urging their support and co-sponsorship of the above bills and immediate cmngnniotal action including hearings in the House. News and addresses of the Iowa Congressional delegation an: Senator Charles Crossley Senator Tom Harkin 135 Hart Senate Office Bldg. 705 Han Senate Office Bldg. Washington. D.C. 20510 Washington, D.C. 20510 Ph: (202) 224.3744 Ph: (202) 226-3250 Congressman James Leach Congressman Neal Smith First Congressional District Fourth Congressional District 1514 Longworth Bldg. 2373 Rayburn Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20515 Ph: (202) 225-6576 Ph: (202) 225.4426 Congressman Thomas Teake Congnssamm Jim Pass Lightfoot Second Congressional District Fifth Congnssional District 2244 Rayburn Bldg. 1609 Longworth Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.L. 20515 Ph: (202) 225.2911 Ph: 202) 225-3806 Congressman Cooper Evans Congressmen Berkley Bedell Third Congnssional District Sixth Congressional District 127 Can on Hausa Office Bldg. 2459 Rayburn Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20515 Washington, D.C. 20515 Ph: (202) 225.3301 Ph: (202) 225-5476