CONTENTS
Executive Summary i
Introduction 1
Jewish Household & Population Estimates 7
Demography 15
Vulnerable Populations & Social Services 34
Jewish Connections 43
Intermarriage & Raising Children Jewish 68
Jewish Communal Issues 82
Philanthropy 87
Conclusions & Implications for Community Planning 96
Appendices
A Note on Methodology A1 Screening Questions A17 Survey Questionnaire A22
EXHIBITS
Jewish Household & Population Estimates
Exhibit 1. Estimated Number of Jewish Households, Number of Jewish Persons, Number of People Living in Jewish Households 7
Exhibit 2. Jewish Household and Jewish Population Numbers as a Percentage of All Households and All People Living in San Diego County 8
Exhibit 3. America’s Largest Jewish Communities 9-10
Exhibit 4. Map of Jewish San Diego County Geographic Areas: 2003 11
Exhibit 5. San Diego County Jewish Households and Jewish Persons by Geographic Areas 12
Exhibit 6. Average Household Size, Jewish Households by Geographic Areas 13
Exhibit 7. Jewish Persons and Non-Jewish Persons in Jewish Households by Geographic Area 14
Demography
Exhibit 8. Place of Birth: Survey Respondents 15
Exhibit 9. Newcomer Status: Years Respondent Has Lived in Area 16 Exhibit 10. Newcomers to Jewish San Diego by Key Geographic Sub-Areas, Survey Respondents 17 Exhibit 11. Plans to Move from Current San Diego County Residence by Geographic Area 18
Exhibit 12. Age of All People in Jewish Households 19
Exhibit 13. Age of Jewish and Non-Jewish Persons Living in Jewish Households 20
Exhibit 14. Decile Analysis: Jewish and Non-Jewish Persons Living in Jewish Households, U.S. Census Data for San Diego County: 2000 21
Exhibit 15. Age and Gender Patterns 22
Exhibit 16. Age of All People in Jewish Households, by Geographic Area 23 EXHIBITS (continued)
Exhibit 17. Marital Status by Gender of Respondent 24
Exhibit 18. Marital Status by Geographic Area of Residence 25
Exhibit 19. Household Structure of Jewish Households 26
Exhibit 20. Household Structure of Jewish Households, Compared with Phoenix 27
Exhibit 21. Education, by Age and Gender: Respondents and Spouses 28
Exhibit 22. Employment Status, by Age and Gender: Respondents and Spouses 29
Exhibit 23. Annual Income of Jewish Households 30
Exhibit 24. Annual Income of Jewish Households, Compared with NJPS Western Region Data 31
Exhibit 25. Jewish Household Annual Income by Geographic Area 32
Exhibit 26. Jewish Household Annual Income by Age of Respondent 33
Vulnerable Populations & Social Services
Exhibit 27. Numbers and Percentages of Seniors Who Live Alone, by Age of Respondent, Estimated Numbers Without an Adult Child in Area 34
Exhibit 28. Relationship of Household Structure, and Household Subjective Financial Status 35
Exhibit 29. Percent of Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold 37
Exhibit 30. Percent of Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold, By Geographic Area of Residence 38
Exhibit 31. Percent of Jewish Households Reporting a Long-term Condition Which Limits Employment, Education, or Daily Activities by Age of Respondent 39
Exhibit 32. Percent of Households With Social Service Needs 40
Exhibit 33. Difficulty in Getting Assistance for Social Service Needs 41
Exhibit 34. Utilization of Jewish Agencies in Seeking Assistance for Social Service Needs 42 EXHIBITS (continued)
Jewish Connections
Exhibit 35. Importance of Being Jewish to Respondents, Jewish Respondents Only 44
Exhibit 36. Importance of Being Jewish by Age of Respondent, Jewish Respondents Only 45
Exhibit 37. Importance of Israel, Jewish Respondents Only 46
Exhibit 38. Importance of Being Connected to the Jewish Community of San Diego County, Jewish Respondents Only 47
Exhibit 39. Importance of Being Connected to the Jewish Community of San Diego County, by Age of Respondent, Jewish Respondents Only 48
Exhibit 40. Comparative Importance to Jewish Respondents of Being Jewish, Israel, and Being Part of a Jewish Community 49
Exhibit 41. Denomination of Jewish Respondent 50
Exhibit 42. Relationship of Jewish Respondent Denomination and Interest in Being Part of a Jewish Community in San Diego County 51
Exhibit 43. Percent of Jewish Households in Key Western Jewish Communities Which Belong to a Synagogue or Temple 52
Exhibit 44. Congregation Membership of Jewish Households by Newcomer Status, and by Household Income 53
Exhibit 45. Percent of Jewish Respondents Who Attend Religious Services, by Congregation Membership Status of Households 54
Exhibit 46. Jewish Organization Affiliation and Disconnection 55
Exhibit 47. Subjective Feelings of Connection and Disconnection to the Jewish Community in San Diego County 56
Exhibit 48. Subjective Feelings of Disconnection from Jewish Community in San Diego County by Newcomer Status of Respondent 57
Exhibit 49. Did Financial Cost Prevent Congregation Membership and/or Jewish Community Center Membership? 58 EXHIBITS (continued)
Exhibit 50. Percent of Households Reporting that Financial Cost Has Prevented Household from Congregation or JCC Membership, by Household Income 59
Exhibit 51. Jewish Ritual Observance Indicators 60
Exhibit 52. Ritual Observance Indicator Comparisons: San Diego County and NJPS Western Region, USA 61
Exhibit 53. Yom Kippur Fasting by Denomination, Jewish Respondents Only 62
Exhibit 54. Jewish Cultural Activity Participation, All Households and by Congregation Membership Status 63
Exhibit 55. Childhood/Teenager Jewish Experiences, Jewish Respondents Only 64
Exhibit 56. Childhood/Teenager Jewish Experiences Typology, Jewish Respondents Only 65
Exhibit 57. Impact of a Jewish Childhood on Yom Kippur Fasting, Jewish Respondents Only 66
Exhibit 58. Impact of a Jewish Childhood on Current Congregation Membership, Jewish Respondents Only 67
Intermarriage & Raising Children Jewish
Exhibit 59. Inmarriage and Intermarriage, Percentages of Currently Married Respondent/Spouse Couples 68
Exhibit 60. Inmarriage and Intermarriage: Percentages by Married Respondent/Spouse Couples and by Jewish-Born Persons 69
Exhibit 61. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rate Comparisons, Percentages of Married Couples, San Diego County and the Western Region, USA 70
Exhibit 62. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rates by Year of Marriage, Married Respondents/Spouse Couples 71
Exhibit 63. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rates by Age of Respondent, Married Respondents/Spouses Only 72
EXHIBITS (continued)
Exhibit 64. Intermarriage Rates by Geographic Area, Currently Married Couples 73
Exhibit 65. Jewish Connection Variables by Household Inmarried/Intermarried Status 74
Exhibit 66. Estimated Number and Percentage of Children in Jewish Households by Whether the Household is Inmarried or Intermarried 75
Exhibit 67. Are Children Being Raised Jewish by Intermarriage Status 76
Exhibit 68. Attitudes Towards Raising Children with Jewish Values and Perspectives, All Survey Respondents 77
Exhibit 69. Jewish Values and Beliefs for Children, by Intermarriage Status 78
Exhibit 70. Formal Jewish Education of Children Ages 6-17 Being Raised Jewish or Jewish and Something Else 79
Exhibit 71. Impact of Financial Cost on Sending a Child to a Jewish Day School Compared with Phoenix and the NJPS Western Region, USA 80
Exhibit 72. Jewish Education of Children Ages 6-17 Being Raised Jewish or Jewish and Something Else by Household Intermarriage Status 81
Jewish Communal Issues
Exhibit 73. Importance of Issues Facing the Jewish Community of San Diego, All Survey Respondents 83
Exhibit 74. The Most Important Issue Facing the Jewish Community of San Diego, All Survey Respondents 84
Exhibit 75. Importance of Jewish Communal Concerns by Household Intermarriage Status 85
Exhibit 76. Personal Experiences with Anti-Semitism in the Year Preceding the Survey 86
EXHIBITS (continued)
Philanthropy
Exhibit 77. Charitable Provisions in a Will 87
Exhibit 78. Charitable Provisions in a Will, by Age of Respondent 88
Exhibit 79. Charitable Provisions in a Will, by Household Income 89
Exhibit 80. Philanthropic Contributions of Jewish Households in the Year Preceding the Study 90
Exhibit 81. Household Contributions to Local Jewish Federations, San Diego County and Western Region Comparisons 91
Exhibit 82. Philanthropic Contributions of Jewish Households by Age of Respondent 92
Exhibit 83. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Respondent Age and Newcomer Status 93
Exhibit 84. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Geographic Area of Residence, Israel Travel by Respondent, and Whether the Household Belongs to a Jewish Congregation 94
Exhibit 85. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Intermarriage Status and Household Income 95
A Note on Methodology
Exhibit A1. 95% Confidence Level Interval Estimates by Number of Interviews and Survey Data Percentage A13
Exhibit A2. Zip Codes and Geographic Areas A14
Exhibit A3. Sample Disposition A15-A16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jewish Community Study of San Diego: 2003
The 2003 Jewish Community Study of San Diego is the first scientific study of the Jewish community in San Diego County, designed to provide empirical data about Jewish households and Jewish persons who reside in the County. At the beginning of the 21st century, Jewish communal professionals and lay leaders concluded that a population/demographic study of the San Diego Jewish community would be useful to develop scientifically valid and reliable data which could help inform policy decisions and programmatic actions within the Jewish community. Key findings from the study are summarized below.
Jewish Household & Population Estimates
46,000 Jewish households live in San Diego County. At least one adult in these households currently considers himself/herself to be Jewish. 89,000 Jewish persons live in these Jewish households.
In addition, 29,000 non-Jewish persons (adults who do not consider themselves to be Jewish and children who are not being raised Jewish) live in these Jewish households.
A total of 118,000 people (Jews and non-Jews) reside in Jewish households in San Diego County. They represent 4.1% of all people residing in San Diego County.
San Diego County’s Jewish community is the third largest Jewish community in the western United States, and the thirteenth largest nationally (by number of Jewish households).
46% of San Diego County Jewish persons live in two North County geographic sub- areas: North County Coastal (26%) and North County Inland (20%).
Greater East San Diego (21% of San Diego County Jewish persons), La Jolla/Mid- Coastal (16%), and Central San Diego (14%) are three other areas in which significant numbers of Jewish persons and Jewish households reside.
The average household size (all people) for San Diego County Jewish households is 2.6; U. S. Census data for 2000 show an average of 2.7 persons per County household.
Central San Diego Jewish household average size is only 2.0 people.
i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Demography
The San Diego County Jewish community has a significant number of people who have moved to San Diego from other locations:
o 11% of respondents were born in San Diego, and another 15% were born elsewhere in California; o 19% were born outside the United States, including sizeable groups from the Former Soviet Union, Israel, Mexico, and South Africa; o 17% were born in New York State.
The San Diego County Jewish community has large numbers of newcomers:
o 8,700 Jewish households moved to San Diego County within the five years preceding the 2002-2003 survey; o Another 5,700 moved to the area between six and nine years preceding the survey; o Thus, 31% of San Diego County Jewish households are relative newcomers to the area and to the Jewish community; o 45% of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal Jewish household respondents moved to the San Diego area in the past ten years.
More children than seniors live in San Diego County Jewish households: 20% of all persons are under age 18, while 15% are at least age 65.
The Jewish community is older than the general community. U.S. 2000 Census data for San Diego County show that 27% of the population are under age 18, while 11% are seniors.
Only 13% of all people living in La Jolla/Mid-Coastal and Central San Diego Jewish households are children; these two areas have significant numbers of young adults ages 18-34.
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Demography (continued)
60% of survey respondents are currently married, 6% are living together, 11% are divorced or separated, 8% are widowed (11% of the women, 4% of the men), and 15% have never been married:
o 78% of North County Inland, 63% of North County Coastal, and 59% of Greater East San Diego survey respondents are married;
o 22% of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal and 24% of Central San Diego respondents have never been married.
30% of San Diego County Jewish households include a minor child:
o 6% of all households are headed by a single parent of a child under age 17.
25% of the Jewish households include a senior.
29% of the households contain one or more adults ages 40-64, and no minor children.
69% of respondents and spouses have earned at least a bachelor’s degree (35% have a graduate degree):
o Among respondents/spouses under age 65, 39% of the males and 35% of the females have a graduate degree;
o Among senior respondents/spouses, 41% of the males and 22% of the females have a graduate degree.
Reported household income varies considerably:
o 31% of Jewish households report annual incomes of at least $100,000;
• 41% of respondents ages 50-64 report annual $100,000+ incomes;
o 24% of Jewish households report annual incomes under $35,000;
• 40% of Central San Diego Jewish households report annual incomes under $35,000;
• 40% of senior respondents report annual incomes under $35,000.
iii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vulnerable Populations & Social Services
Approximately 3,400 Jewish seniors live alone — 7% of all Jewish San Diego County households: o 16% of all Jewish seniors ages 65-74 live alone; o 30% of Jewish seniors age 75+ live alone; o Half of these seniors living alone do not have an adult child who lives in the San Diego area.
Approximately 2,600 Jewish households are single parents with minor children: o 40% report annual incomes under $35,000; o 71% of the single parents subjectively feel that they “cannot make ends meet” or are “just managing;” o In comparison, only 25% of married couples with minor children report that they are not making ends meet or are just managing.
10% of Jewish households are below 150% of the federal poverty guidelines (based on household size and income): o For a one-person household, the 150% poverty level is $13,400 annually; o For a two-person household, the 150% poverty threshold is approximately $18,000; o For a three person household the 150% poverty threshold is between $22,000 and $23,000.
14% of single parent Jewish households and 20% of seniors living alone are below the 150% poverty standard.
16% of Jewish households report that a member has a “physical, mental or other health condition that limits employment, education, or daily activities, and has lasted for at least six months:” o 26% of respondents age 65-74 and 34% of respondents age 75+ report that someone in their household has been severely limited (or incapacitated) for at least six months.
iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Vulnerable Populations & Social Services (continued)
9% of Jewish households include a child with a learning disability.
6% of Jewish households include a special-needs person (other than a learning disability).
14% of respondents report that someone in the household had a serious emotional or behavioral problem in the year preceding the study.
10% of the households required assistance for an elderly person in San Diego.
Getting assistance for these social service needs was either very difficult or somewhat difficult for a significant number of Jewish households:
o 78% reported that it was difficult to get assistance for a special needs person;
o 33% reported difficulty getting assistance for a serious emotional or behavioral problem;
o 42% had difficulty getting assistance for an elderly person.
48% of households needing assistance for an elderly person had contacted a Jewish agency for assistance.
26% of households needing assistance for a special needs person had contacted a Jewish agency.
19% of households needing assistance for a household member with a serious emotional or behavioral problem had contacted a Jewish agency.
Jewish Connections
64% of Jewish respondents say that “being Jewish” is “very important” to them.
68% of Jewish respondents say that Israel is very important to them.
31% of Jewish respondents say that being part of the Jewish Community of San Diego is very important for them: o 20% of respondents under age 35 report that being part of the Jewish community is very important.
v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Jewish Connections (continued)
40% of Jewish respondents identify as Reform Jews, 22% as Conservative Jews, 3% as Orthodox Jews, 3% as Secular Humanist, and 3% as Reconstructionists:
o 17% say they are non-denominational Jews or are “Just Jewish;”
o 11% are secular Jews who consider themselves Jewish, but say that they do not have a religion.
29% of the Jewish households report synagogue or temple membership:
o Jewish congregation membership in San Diego County is near the low end of congregation membership levels when compared to other western Jewish communities.
Congregation membership is strongly influenced by household income: 20% of households with annual incomes under $35,000 are congregation affiliated, compared to 44% of households with incomes of at least $100,000.
While 37% of congregation members feel that they are strongly connected to the Jewish community in San Diego, only 4% of respondents in non-congregation affiliated households feel strongly connected to the Jewish community.
Ritual observance levels are similar to other western region Jewish communities:
o 64% of Jewish households report always or usually attending a Passover Seder; o 68% say that they always or usually light Chanukah candles; o 20% of the households report lighting Shabbat candles (always, usually); o 8% always keep kosher and 3% report usually keeping kosher; o 49% of all Jewish respondents report that they did not fast at all during the Yom Kippur preceding the survey.
vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Jewish Connections (continued)
60% of Jewish households report having attended a Jewish cultural event in the three years preceding the study — 84% of congregation affiliated Jewish households: o 43% had visited a Jewish museum; o 45% had visited a Jewish website; o 46% had read a Jewish newspaper.
70% of Jewish respondents had some formal Jewish education as a child, 54% had been a youth group member, 43% attended an overnight summer camp with Jewish content as a child/teen, and 39% had (as a teen) celebrated b’nai mitzvah (68% of male Jewish respondents and 19% of female Jewish respondents).
24% of all Jewish respondents report not having any Jewish education or any Jewish summer camp or youth group experiences; 36% report multiple Jewish childhood experiences as a child (at least five years of Jewish education, a Jewish summer camp experience, and Jewish youth group experiences):
o 35% of respondents without any childhood experiences fasted all day on Yom Kippur;
o 51% of Jewish respondents with multiple Jewish childhood experiences fasted all day;
o 26% of respondents without Jewish childhood experiences report that their household belongs to a Jewish congregation, compared to 43% of respondents with multiple Jewish childhood experiences.
Intermarriage and Raising Children Jewish
44% of currently married respondents are intermarried:
o In 45% of current marriages, both spouses were raised Jewish;
o In 11% of current marriages, both spouses consider themselves to be Jewish, although one spouse was not born Jewish (“conversionary inmarriages”).
vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Intermarriage and Raising Children Jewish (continued)
The comparable intermarriage rate for western region Jewish couples is 44%;1 o Recent studies have documented a 46% intermarriage rate in Tucson and a 40% rate in Phoenix; o Other western local community studies reported lower intermarriage rates: Denver 39%, and Las Vegas 23%.
15% of currently married respondents who were married prior to 1970 are intermarried, compared to 34% of those married in the 1970s, 51% married in the 1980s, and 60% of those married since 1990.
Intermarried Jewish households report much lower levels of Jewish affiliation and ritual observance: o 41% of intermarried households report someone attends a Passover Seder, compared to 87% of inmarried-by-birth/conversionary Jewish households; o 17% of intermarried respondents feel “a lot” connected to the Jewish community, compared to 60% of inmarried respondents.
There are 23,700 children living in San Diego County Jewish households:
o 7,000 children live in inmarried households, and another 2,400 live in conversionary Jewish households. Almost every child in these households is being raised Jewish.
o 4,300 children live in “other” types of households, many of them single-parent households; 57% are being raised Jewish and another 14% “Jewish and something else.”
1 NJPS: 2001 data recalculated by UAI for San Diego County comparisons
viii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Intermarriage and Raising Children Jewish (continued)
10,000 children live in intermarried households: o 21% are being raised “Jewish;” o 29% are being raised “Jewish and something else;” o 39% are not being raised as Jews; o 11% of the children have their religious status “undecided,” according to the interviewed parent .
52% of children (ages 6-17) in intermarried households who are being raised Jewish (or Jewish and something else) have not had any Jewish education.
Among inmarried and conversionary households, only 12% of the children have not had any Jewish education.
Jewish Communal Issues
Fighting anti-Semitism is the most important of 14 specific Jewish communal issues that respondents were asked to review and rate as to their importance:
o 82% of survey respondents rated anti-Semitism as a “very important” issue, and 42% rated it the most important issue of the 14 listed topics.
52% of respondents in intermarried Jewish households view anti-Semitism as the most important of the listed issues for Jews in San Diego County, compared to 30% of inmarried and conversionary Jewish respondents.
17% of survey respondents report having personally experienced anti-Semitism in the year preceding the study:
o Central San Diego and La Jolla/Mid-Coastal respondents were somewhat more likely to report an anti-Semitic experience.
ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Philanthropy
70% of survey respondents have wills, but only 14% have made a provision for a charity in their will (7% have made a Jewish charitable provision): o 20% of respondents in households with annual incomes of at least $150,000 have made a Jewish charitable provision in their will.
Jewish households tend to be charitable:
o 85% of Jewish households report some charitable contribution during the year preceding the study;
o 79% report having made a contribution to a non-Jewish charity;
o 52% report having made a contribution to a Jewish charity (including the United Jewish Federation);
o 28% report a contribution to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County.
The percentage of Jewish households which report Jewish charitable giving to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County is at the low end of donation levels in other local, western Jewish communities:
o The percent of households reporting Jewish federation donations was higher in Denver: 37%, and Los Angeles: 41%;
o The percent of households reporting a Jewish federation donation in Phoenix was 25%.
Actual per capita (Jewish person) contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County exceed the per capita federation giving rate in Phoenix and Las Vegas, are equal to per capita federation fundraising in Denver, and are just slightly lower than per capita contributions in Los Angeles.
x
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Philanthropy (continued)
Younger respondents (ages 18 – 34) are least likely to report household donations to any charitable cause (41% report not making any charitable donations):
o They are least likely to donate to Jewish causes (26%) or to the United Jewish Federation (10%);
o When they donate, they tend to donate exclusively to non-Jewish charities and causes.
Relatively low Jewish and United Jewish Federation contribution rates are found among newcomers to the area, households which are not affiliated with a congregation, intermarried households, and households with annual incomes under $50,000.
Travel to Israel is strongly related to Jewish donation patterns:
o 45% of respondents who have traveled to Israel report a household contribution to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County, compared to 18% of respondents who have not been to Israel.
Among the most affluent Jewish households, contribution rates are higher, but a sizeable, untapped market exists for Jewish and United Jewish Federation contributions:
o 67% of households with annual incomes of at least $150,000 report contributions to a Jewish charity (but one-in-three does not);
o Less than half — 46% — of the most affluent households report a United Jewish Federation contribution.
xi
INTRODUCTION
Why the Study Was Conducted
The 2003 Jewish Community Study of San Diego is the first scientific study of the Jewish community in San Diego County, designed to provide empirical data about Jewish households and Jewish persons who reside in the County for planning and policy purposes. It was conducted in response to Jewish communal professionals and lay leaders who concluded that a population/demographic study of the San Diego Jewish community would be useful to develop scientifically valid and reliable data which could help inform policy decisions and programmatic actions. The United Jewish Federation of San Diego County commissioned the study and selected International Communications Research (ICR) of Media, Pennsylvania and Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) of New York to conduct the study, under the guidance of a local oversight committee.
The Community Study had several purposes:
• To develop an estimate of the size of the San Diego County Jewish community;
• To understand the basic population characteristics of the Jewish community of San Diego County; and
• To support more informed decisions in planning, fundraising, service delivery, and connecting people to Jewish communal life.
1 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTRODUCTION
The Final Report and the Survey Data File
This Final Report is a revision and expansion of the survey results presented to Jewish communal leaders in September, 2003 (“A Leadership Briefing”). The Final Report expands upon the data presented then, and includes some comparisons to the recently released western regional data from the 2000-01 National Jewish Population Survey, which became available in September and November, 2003. The Final Report also contains a Research Note on Methodology and the survey questionnaire in an Appendix.
In addition, the electronic data file has been transferred to the planning department of the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County, and staff members have been trained in using the electronic data file. This data set (over 700 variables) provides the capacity for the community to continually analyze critical policy issues and to answer additional questions for future planning purposes.
In this context, the release of this Final Report does not imply the conclusion of data analysis from the 2003 San Diego County Jewish Community Study. Instead, the Final Report should serve as a stimulus to continued data exploration and policy decision analysis by the organized Jewish community of San Diego County.
Definitions and Scope
A Jewish household is defined as a household including one or more Jewish persons at least 18 years old.
For the purposes of this Report, a Jewish person is someone who:
• Self-identifies as a Jew, or
1 • Is a child being raised as a Jew.
1 Respondents, spouses, and other adults who consider themselves “Jewish & Something Else” are included in the survey estimates as Jewish persons; only 3% of survey respondents self-defined themselves as “Jewish & Something Else.” Children who are being raised “Jewish & Something Else” are also included in the Jewish persons estimate. 2 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTRODUCTION
San Diego County
The area studied included the vast majority of the populated portions of San Diego County, including six sub-areas designated for the study: South County, Central San Diego, La Jolla/Mid-Coastal San Diego, Greater East San Diego, North County Coastal and North County Inland. Zip codes in which respondents potentially resided are shown in the Appendix. The sampling design was structured to provide reliable and valid estimates of the Jewish community at the county level.
Survey Methods
The estimates in this report are based on randomly generated interviews with respondents in 1,080 Jewish households who were interviewed between October 2, 2002 and March 6, 2003. Copies of the interview questions, as well as the screening questions used to determine if a household was Jewish, are appended.
89% of the survey respondents considered themselves to be Jewish, while another 3% viewed themselves as “Jewish and something else.” In 8% of the interviews, a non- Jewish spouse who felt comfortable answering questions about the household’s Jewish life completed the survey.
Phone Calls: Random Sampling Design
Altogether, 292,283 phone calls were made to 93,226 different phone numbers in the study area in order to identify Jewish households, and then complete the interviews.
The sampling methodology was designed to include random samples of Jewish households “known” to the United Jewish Federation, as well as random samples of households “unknown” to the United Jewish Federation. The two samples are independent and complementary. Prior to sample selection, the households on the Federation List were electronically unduplicated from the initial random sampling frame which had been generated through standard GENESYS random digit dialing (RDD) techniques.
A total of 286,481 calls were made within the residual RDD sampling frames (after the “known” Jewish households were electronically purged) to complete 531 interviews.
In contrast, only 5,802 calls were needed within the List sampling frames to complete 549 interviews.
3 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTRODUCTION
Response Rates and Cooperation Rates
Two traditional measures of a Jewish community survey’s quality are: (1) the survey’s response rate during the screening phase used to locate and interview Jewish households, (2) the interview completion/cooperation rate.2
The response rate (the percent of working phone numbers from which information on respondent religious identity was collected during the “screening phase” of the study) was 36%, an acceptable response rate for contemporary research studies. As a yardstick, a comparable screening phase response rate for the 2001 National Jewish Population Study was 28%.
Once a Jewish household was identified through the screening process (1,268 Jewish households), a cooperation rate of 85% was obtained — 1,080 of the identified Jewish households provided usable interviews.
Non-Jewish Household Interviews
Over 13,700 San Diego County households gave sufficient information for their religious identity to be established.
Over 12,400 of these households were non-Jewish. The identification of non-Jewish households was an essential step in estimating the number of Jewish households in the study area. The screening questions were designed to allow the interviewers to first identify households as Jewish or non-Jewish, and then ask a few questions of non- Jewish households (e.g., number of telephone lines in the household), which were important for Jewish households estimation calculations. The cooperation of the non- Jewish households was an essential component of the survey’s success.
2 In some Jewish community studies, the distinction between screening response rates and interview cooperation/completion rates is not presented as clearly as desired. Both are important. A high interview cooperation rate of Jewish identified households is critical; cooperation rates of 75%-80%+ are typical. Response rates vary enormously, and high response rates (above 40%) are becoming increasingly difficult to achieve given the massive explosion of telemarketing, and the reluctance of individuals to stay on the phone long enough to answer even one survey question. “Overnight” surveys reported in the mass media typically achieve a 10% response rate. The Research Note in the Appendix provides a complete sampling disposition. 4 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTRODUCTION
Survey Sampling Error
Because so many screening interviews were completed at random from contacts with Jewish and non-Jewish households, the quantitative data are statistically reliable:
(1) Estimates of the number of Jewish households in the San Diego County area are accurate within a maximum of +/- 7.7% at the standard 95% confidence interval;
(2) Survey data reported for the entire interviewed sample of 1,080 Jewish households are accurate within a maximum potential error range of +/- 4.1% (traditional 95% confidence level).
Comparative Information in the Report
In addition to the findings of the 2003 San Diego County Study, this Final Report includes comparative information in order to help put the findings in perspective. In some cases, comparisons are made to U. S. Census data reported for San Diego County.
At times, data from the San Diego County Study are compared to the results of recent local community surveys from Jewish communities in the western United States:
• Denver: 1997, • Las Vegas: 1995, • Los Angeles: 1997, • Phoenix: 2002, and • Tucson: 2002.
Finally, a few comparisons are made to western regional Jewish data from the recently released NJPS 2000-01 (the National Jewish Population Survey). The western NJPS data have been recalculated and reanalyzed by UAI to make the definition of Jewish households and the data from these households more comparable to the San Diego County study than the published NJPS: 2000-01 report results, which include (at times) households in which there is no one who considers themselves Jewish currently.
5 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTRODUCTION
How to Read the Data in This Report
Numbers in this Final Report are rounded to the nearest hundred, and percentages are rounded to the nearest full percentage. At times, due to rounding, the reported numbers may not add to 100% or to the appropriate numerical total. However, the convention that is employed shows the totals as 100%, or the proper numerical total.
Where the sum of a column (row) equals 100%, the percent sign is included in the first entry of the column (row), and in the 100% total. This convention is employed to assist the reader in understanding which percentages add to 100%.
When a percent sign is shown for each entry (each cell in the table), this indicates that the printed percentages are not intended add to 100%, but reflect a percentage of a table where the complete table is not shown to facilitate presentation. These separate cell percentages should be compared to adjacent cells.
Where the value in the cell is less than one percent, including when there are not any cases for that cell in the data file, <1% is shown.
6 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
What Is the Size of the San Diego County Jewish Community?
There are three answers to the question: what is the size of the Jewish community in San Diego County? Each of these numbers has critical implications for community planning, decision-making, and service provision.
• There are an estimated 46,000 Jewish households in San Diego County where at least one adult considers himself/herself to be Jewish;
• 89,000 Jewish persons live in these households - adults who consider themselves to be Jewish or a child being raised Jewish;
• 118,000 people live in these Jewish households. In addition to the 89,000 Jews, there are an additional 29,000 non-Jewish persons living in these households. Typically, the non-Jewish household members are a non-Jewish spouse or children not being raised Jewish.
Exhibit 1. Estimated Number of Jewish Households, Number of Jewish Persons, Number of People Living in Jewish Households, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Households – at least one adult considers themselves Jewish 46,000
Jewish Persons – adults who consider themselves Jewish and children being raised as 89,000 Jewish
People Living in Jewish Households — 118,000 includes non-Jews
7 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
The Jewish Community in Context
Jewish households represent 4.5% of the total number of all households living in San Diego County.3
People in Jewish households constitute 4.1% of all people in San Diego County.
Jews represent 3.1% of the county population.
Exhibit 2. Jewish Household and Jewish Population Numbers as a Percentage of All Households and All People Living in San Diego County, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Number Jewish Numbers as a % of General Community
Jewish Households 46,000 4.5%
All San Diego County Households (Including 1,020,000 Jewish households)
Jewish Persons in 89,000 3.1% Jewish Households
All People in Jewish 118,000 4.1% Households
All People in San Diego 2,892,000 County
3 San Diego County data based on Claritas database estimates, rounded to the nearest thousand, at the time that interviews began for the Jewish Community Study. 8 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
San Diego County’s Jewish Community Is One of America’s Largest The Jewish community of San Diego County is larger than many Jewish communities long considered to be significant Jewish areas. After Los Angeles and San Francisco, San Diego County is the third largest Jewish community in the American West.
Exhibit 3. America’s Largest Jewish Communities.4
Number of Jewish Year of Community Number of Jews Households Study
New York 8 County Area 643,000 1,412,000 2002
Los Angeles 247,700 519,000 1997
Broward County (FL) 133,000 234,000 1997
Chicago 120,000 261,000 1990
Philadelphia 99,300 206,000 1997
Boston 97,000 227,300 1995
San Francisco Bay Area 90,660 210,000 1986
Miami 74,500 129,000 1994
Washington, DC 67,000 165,000 1983
South Palm Beach (FL) 61,300 123,000 1995
West Palm Beach (FL) 52,900 95,000 1999
Metro West (NJ) 47,000 109,700 1998 San Diego County 46,000 89,000 2003
4 Source: Ira M. Sheskin, How Jewish Communities Differ: Variations in the Findings of Local Jewish Population Studies, New York: The North American Jewish Data Bank, 2001, plus additional studies by Ukeles Associates, etc. 9 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
More Jewish households live in San Diego County than were reported in recent studies in Atlanta, Baltimore, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh — communities traditionally seen as major Jewish areas.
Exhibit 3 (cont’d). America’s Largest Jewish Communities.
Number of Jewish Community Number of Jews Year of Study Households San Diego County 46,000 89,000 2003
Phoenix 44,000 82,900 2002
Detroit 42,500 94,000 1989
South Broward (FL) 39,000 80,000 1990
Atlanta 38,100 85,000 1996
Baltimore 36,600 91,400 1999
Cleveland 33,710 81,500 1996
Denver 32,000 66,700 1997
Las Vegas 29,100 75,000 1995
St. Louis 24,600 54,000 1995
Seattle 22,940 37,200 2001
Pittsburgh 20,900 42,200 2002
Tucson 13,400 22,300 2002
10 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
San Diego County Map
Exhibit 4. Map of Jewish San Diego County Geographic Areas: 2003
11 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
Jewish Households Live in Five Major Geographic Areas
The Jewish community of San Diego County is dispersed throughout the county, and is not concentrated in one or two major “Jewish” areas.
Just under half of all Jewish households and all Jewish persons (adults who consider themselves Jewish and children being raised Jewish) reside in the two “North County” areas — an estimated 12,300 Jewish households in North County Coastal and another 8,400 in North County Inland.
However, significant numbers of Jewish households also reside in Greater East San Diego (9,400), La Jolla/Mid-Coastal San Diego (7,900), and in Central San Diego (7,200).
The wide geographic dispersion of Jewish households throughout the county makes Jewish communal programming efforts more challenging than if only one or two Jewish “neighborhoods” existed.
Exhibit 5. San Diego County Jewish Households and Jewish Persons by Geographic Areas, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Area Number of Jewish Percent of Number of Percent of Households Total* Jewish Persons Total
North County Coastal 12,300 27% 23,500 26%
North County Inland 8,400 18 18,100 20
Greater East San Diego 9,400 21 18,800 21
La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 7,900 17 14,400 16
Central San Diego 7,200 16 12,200 14
South County 500 1 1,400 2
Zip Code Information 300 <1% 500 <1% Not Available
TOTAL 46,000 100% 88,900 100%
* In all tables, data may not add perfectly, or percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding for presentation. 12 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
Geography: Average Household Size of Jewish Households
The average household size (all people) in Jewish San Diego County is 2.6; San Diego County’s average household size in the 2000 census was 2.7.
Central San Diego has the lowest average household size (2.0), followed by La Jolla/Mid-Coastal (2.4 persons per Jewish household). All other areas approximate the San Diego County norm.
Exhibit 6. Average Household Size, Jewish Households by Geographic Areas, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Area Number of Jewish Number of All People in Average Households Jewish Households Household Size North County Coastal 12,300 32,100 2.6
North County Inland 8,400 23,700 2.8
Greater East San Diego 9,400 25,700 2.7
La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 7,900 19,100 2.4
Central San Diego 7,200 14,600 2.0
South County 500 2,000∗ *
Zip Code Information 300 600 * Not Available
TOTAL 46,000 117,800 2.6
∗ Data estimates for South County are presented only as a baseline for future population analyses. The number of interviews completed is too small for any detailed analyses. Thus, South County will be eliminated in all future geographic analyses. 13 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH HOUSEHOLD & POPULATION ESTIMATES
Geography: Jewish Persons and Non-Jews in Jewish Households
One-fourth of all people living in Jewish households in San Diego County are non- Jewish — the percentage is similar in all sub-areas.
Exhibit 7. Jewish Persons and Non-Jewish Persons in Jewish Households by Geographic Area, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Area Number of Number of All People in % Non-Jewish Jewish Persons Non-Jewish Jewish Persons in Jewish Persons Households Households North County Coastal 23,500 8,600 32,100 27%
North County Inland 18,100 5,600 23,700 24%
Greater East San Diego 18,800 6,900 25,700 27%
La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 14,400 4,700 19,100 25%
Central San Diego 12,200 2,400 14,600 25%
South County 1,400∗ 600∗ 2,000∗ *
Zip Code Information 500 100 600 * Not Available
TOTAL 88,900 28,900 117,800 25%
∗ Again, data estimates for South County are presented only as a baseline for future population analyses. The number of interviews completed is too small for any detailed analyses, other than the estimate of the number of Jewish households. Extreme caution should be used in interpreting the estimates of the number of people living in the households interviewed in the South County area.
14 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Place of Birth
Respondents interviewed for the Jewish Community Study of San Diego County were typically born elsewhere, and then moved to San Diego County. Only one-fourth of all survey respondents were born in California: 11% in San Diego County, and another 15% elsewhere in California.
Exhibit 8. Place of Birth: Survey Respondents, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
PLACE OF BIRTH PERCENT
San Diego County 11%
Other California 15
Other USA 55
New York 17
New Jersey/Pennsylvania 7
Mid-Western States 14
Western States 5
All Other States 12
Foreign Born 19
Former Soviet Union 3
Israel 2
South Africa 2
Mexico 1
Other non-USA 11
TOTAL 100%
15 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Newcomers
Not only are San Diego County Jewish community survey respondents non-locally born, but significant numbers are recent arrivals to the area. Over 8,700 (of 46,000) Jewish households have moved to the area during the five years preceding the study. Another 5,700 moved here between six and nine years before study. Thus, 31% of San Diego County Jewish households moved to San Diego County within the past ten years.
Another sizeable and significant group, 46% of survey respondents, have lived in the area for at least twenty years, or were born in San Diego County.
Exhibit 9. Newcomer Status: Years Respondent Has Lived in Area, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Years Lived in San Diego County
40+ Years or Born 0-5 Years 16% 19%
6-9 Years 12%
20-39 Years 30%
10-19 Years 23%
16 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Geography & Newcomers
The La Jolla/Mid-Coastal area has the highest percentage of newcomers to San Diego County, while Greater East San Diego has the highest percentage of long-term residents among survey respondents.
• 45% of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal respondents moved to San Diego County within the ten years preceding the survey (27% in the last five years);
• 65% of Greater East San Diego respondents have lived in the County for at least twenty years.
Exhibit 10. Newcomers to Jewish San Diego by Key Geographic Sub-Areas, Survey Respondents, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
North North La Jolla/ Central San Greater East Area County County Mid-Coastal Diego San Diego Coastal Inland
Newcomers to San Diego County In 17% 18% 27% 23% 15% Last Five Years
Newcomers: Lived San Diego County 17 8 18 9 6 6-9 Years
Lived In San Diego 28 27 18 26 14 County 10-19 Years
Lived In San Diego County 20 Years + 38 47 37 41 65 or Born in Area
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
17 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Plans to Move in the Next Two Years
The majority of survey respondents (72%) do not expect to move from their current address within the two years following the survey.
• Only 28% of all respondents planned to move (13% “definitely”, 15% “probably”) from their current residence.
• Younger respondents were more likely to indicate that they might move from their current residence: 61% of respondents under age 35 planned to move from their current residence compared to only 15% of respondents ages 50 and over.
• Geographic area of residence was minimally related to plans to move from current residence.
Exhibit 11. Plans To Move From Current San Diego County Residence by Geographic Area, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Respondents Who Plan to Move from Residence Within Two Years After the Survey
La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 17% 18%
Central San Diego 16% 19%
North County Inland 14% 10% Definitely Move North County Coastal 11% 14% Probably Move Greater East San Diego 9% 15%
Respondents 18-34 31% 30%
Respondents Ages 30-49 13% 14%
Respondents Age 50+ 6% 9%
18 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Age Structure: All People in Jewish Households
The San Diego County Jewish community has more children under age 18 than senior adults. Children represent 20% of the San Diego Jewish community, while 15% of all people in Jewish households are seniors.
But, compared to the general county population, the Jewish community is older.
• 20% of all the people living in Jewish households are under age 18; U.S. Census data (2000) indicate that 27% of the San Diego County population are under the age of 18;
• 15% of people in Jewish households are seniors age 65+; U. S. Census data show that only 11% of the San Diego County population are age 65+.
Exhibit 12. Age of All People in Jewish Households, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Under 6 6%
Ages 6-12 7%
13-17 7%
18-34 23%
35-49 23%
50-64 20%
65-74 7%
75+ 8%
19 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Age: Jews and Non-Jews
Differences in the age structure of Jewish persons vs. non-Jews living in Jewish households typically provide some insight into possible future demographic shifts within the community. Jewish persons tend to be older than non-Jewish persons living in the 46,000 Jewish households in San Diego County.
• 37% of Jewish persons are at least 50 years old compared to only 22% of non- Jewish persons in Jewish households;
• 57% of non-Jewish persons are between the ages of 18 and 50, compared to 43% of Jewish persons.
Exhibit 13. Age of Jewish and Non-Jewish Persons Living in Jewish Households, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Adults and Jewish Non-Jewish Persons in
Raised Children Only Jewish Households
AGE Number Percent Number Percent
0 - 5 5,400 6% 1,200 4%
6 - 12 6,700 8 1,700 6
13 -17 5,000 6 2,900 11
18 - 34 17,800 21 8,200 31
35 - 49 18,900 22 7,100 26
50 - 64 18,400 21 3,700 14
65 - 74 6,200 7 1,500 6
75+ 7,900 9 600 2
TOTAL (data not available for 5% 86,300 100% 26,900 100% of all people in Jewish households)
20 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Age: Decile Patterns
Decile patterns are a second traditional way to describe age patterns within communities. In general, Jewish persons tend to be older than non-Jewish persons in Jewish households and the general San Diego County population.
• 13% of Jewish persons are age 70+ compared to only 8% of the general San Diego population (and 5% of non-Jews in Jewish households);
• 10% of Jewish persons are children under the age of ten; 15% of the general San Diego County population are children under the age of ten;
• Compared to the general population, a higher proportion of Jewish persons are between the ages of 50 and 59.
Exhibit 14. Decile Analysis: Jewish and Non-Jewish Persons Living in Jewish Households, U. S. Census Data for San Diego County: 2000, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent of Percent of Percent of All Jewish Persons in Non-Jewish San Diego County DECILE Jewish Persons in Jewish Households Households Households (Census Data)
0 - 9 10% 7% 15%
10 – 19 12 18 14
20 – 29 12 20 16
30 – 39 14 16 16
40 - 49 15 17 15
50 – 59 17 11 10
60 – 69 7 6 6
70+ 13 5 8
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
21 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Gender and Male-Female Age Patterns
Approximately half of all people living in San Diego County Jewish households are males and half are females.5 Males are slightly more prevalent among the young age groupings, while females are slightly more prevalent among the older age groups.
Exhibit 15. Age and Gender Patterns, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
All People in Jewish Households6
Percent of Age AGE Males Females Grouping Which is Female
0 - 17 12,100 10,700 47%
18 - 34 14,500 11,600 44%
35 - 49 12,500 13,400 52%
50 - 64 10,500 11,700 53%
65+ 7,700 8,600 53%
TOTAL 57,300 56,000 49%
5 Among Jewish persons only (adults and children), to be precise, 50.3% are males and 49.7% are females. 6 Please note that for approximately 5% of all people living in Jewish San Diego County households, information on age was not reported by the survey respondent. Numbers may not add precisely due to rounding. 22 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Age and Geography
The La Jolla/Mid-Coastal area and Central San Diego have the lowest proportion of children. Both have a sizeable cohort of adults ages 18-34 compared to the other sub- areas.
• Over one-third of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal and Central San Diego household members are young adults, ages 18-34.
• The North County areas (Coastal and Inland) have the highest proportion of children.
• The proportion of seniors in each area is similar.
Exhibit 16. Age of All People in Jewish Households, by Geographic Area Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
North County North County La Jolla/Mid- Central San Greater East AGE Coastal Inland Coastal Diego San Diego
0 – 17 23% 25% 13% 13% 21%
18 – 34 16 18 37 34 20
35 – 49 28 23 15 22 22
50 – 64 20 20 18 17 22
65 – 74 7 6 9 6 7
75+ 6 8 8 8 8
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
23 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Marital Status
Approximately 60% of survey respondents were married at the time of the survey, while another 6% report that they were “living together” with a partner.
As is typical in Jewish community surveys — reflecting the nature of the American Jewish community — male respondents are more likely to report that they have never been married, and female respondents are more likely to be widowed.
Exhibit 17. Marital Status by Gender of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Marital Status Male Female All Respondents∗ Respondents Respondents
Married 60% 59% 60%
Living Together 5 6 6
Divorced 9 11 10
Separated 2 <1% 1
Widowed 4 11 8
Never Married 19 12 15
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
∗ Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. 24 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Marital Status and Geography
North County Inland survey respondents are most likely to be married, while respondents in the La Jolla/Mid-Coastal area and in Central San Diego are considerably less likely to be currently married.
• Almost four-of-five (78%) North County Inland respondents are married;
• Fewer than half of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal and Central San Diego respondents are married;
• The major living areas for Jewish “singles” (never married adults) are Central San Diego and the La Jolla/Mid-Coastal area.
Exhibit 18. Marital Status by Geographic Area of Residence, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
North County North County La Jolla/ Central San Greater East Marital Status Coastal Inland Mid-Coastal Diego San Diego
Married 63% 78% 48% 45% 59%
Living Together 5 6 7 6 5
Divorced 11 5 9 14 12
Separated 1 <1% 3 2 <1%
Widowed 6 8 11 8 9
Never Married 13 3 22 24 14
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
25 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Children in the Household & Household Structure
Household structure is diverse within the Jewish community. Several basic household patterns are crucial for Jewish communal planning: (1) 46% of San Diego County Jewish households include a non-senior adult, without any minor children; (2) 30% of the Jewish households include minor children (24% are married parents, 6% are single parents); and, (3) 25% of the households include a senior (often the respondent).7
Exhibit 19. Household Structure of Jewish Households, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Estimated Number Household Structure Percent of Households
No Children in Household (Adults in Household Ages 18-64)
• Single, Under Age 40, No Children 5,300 12%
• Married, Under Age 40, No Children 2,300 5
• Married/Single, Ages 40-64, No Minor Children in Household 13,100 29
Children in Household (Adults in Household Ages 18-64)
• Single Parent, Ages 18-64, Minor Children 2,600 6
• Married, Ages 18-64, Minor Children in Household 10,800 24
Senior Household (Adults in Household Age 65+)
• Age 65+ person in household, Married or Lives in 8,100 18 Household with Another Person
• Respondent Lives Alone, Age 65+ 3,400 7
TOTAL (Information not available for 1,400 households) 45,600 100%
7 Intergenerational households (approximately 500) with both a senior and a minor child are included in this household structure variable as a senior household with more than one person. 26 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Household Structure: San Diego County and Greater Phoenix
San Diego County’s Jewish household structure is similar to Jewish household structure in Greater Phoenix, a western Jewish community which is slightly smaller than San Diego County (in terms of Jewish households and Jewish persons).
• San Diego County’s Jewish community has a larger proportion of single parent households (6% vs. 3%).
Exhibit 20. Household Structure of Jewish Households Compared with Phoenix, Jewish Community Study of Greater Phoenix: 2002, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Household Structure San Diego Greater County Phoenix
No Children in Household (Adults in Household Ages 18-64)
• Single, Under Age 40, No Children 12% 10%
• Married, Under Age 40, No Children 5 4
• Married/Single, Ages 40-64, No Minor Children in Household 29 35
Children in Household (Adults in Household Ages 18-64)
• Single Parent, Ages 18-64, Minor Children 6 3
• Married, Ages 18-64, Minor Children in 24 21 Household
Senior Household (Adults in Household Age 65+)
• Age 65+ person in household, Married or Lives 18 21 in Household with Another Person
• Respondent Lives Alone, Age 65+ 7 6
TOTAL (Information not available for 1,400 households) 100% 100%
27 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Educational Achievements
The San Diego County Jewish community reflects generally high levels of educational achievement. Sixty-nine percent (69%) of respondents and spouses have at least a bachelor’s degree; 35% have a graduate degree.
Among male respondents and male spouses, age has no impact on educational attainment. The same proportion (39%) of those under 65 and those 65 and older (41%) had earned a graduate degree; Among female respondents and female spouses, younger respondents and spouses are more likely to have earned at least a master’s degree: 35% of female respondents/spouses under age 65 have a graduate degree compared to 22% of senior female respondents/spouses.
Exhibit 21. Education, by Age and Gender: Respondents and Spouses, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Age 18-64 Ages 65+
Male Female Male Female Highest Degree Respondents & Respondents & Respondents & Respondents & Male Spouses Female Spouses Male Spouses Female Spouses
High School Diploma, Associates 29% 29% 32% 49% Degree - RN
Bachelor’s Degree 32 36 27 29
Master’s Degree, 39 35 41 22 Doctoral Degree
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
28 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Employment
The employment status of respondents (and their spouses) within the San Diego County Jewish community reflects the partly retirement and partly working-residential nature of San Diego. While one-fifth (21%) of respondents/spouses in San Diego County Jewish households are retired, over four-in-ten (46%) are employed, typically fulltime, and another 20% are self-employed.
• Seniors are typically retired (three-of-four), with male seniors being more likely to work, or be self-employed;
• Among those under age 65, male respondents/spouses are more likely to be self-employed: 29% of the men vs. 20% of the women;
• Approximately 2% of under age 65 respondents/spouses report being unemployed, a low percentage in national perspective.
Exhibit 22. Employment Status, by Age and Gender: Respondents and Spouses Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Ages 18-64 Ages 65+
Male Female Male Female Employment Respondents & Respondents & Respondents & Respondents & Status Male Spouses Female Spouses Male Spouses Female Spouses Self employed 29% 20% 9% 3%
Employed 58 51 14 12
Unemployed 1 3 <1% 3
Student 5 4 <1% <1%
Retired 6 8 77 78
Homemaker, <1% 14 <1% 4 Volunteer
Disabled <1% <1% <1% <1%
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
29 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Income
In terms of total household income, the San Diego County Jewish community appears to be reasonably comfortable, but some households have decidedly lower incomes. Senior respondents (who have lower incomes) tend to be more likely to refuse to answer questions about their income.8
31% of San Diego County Jewish households report annual incomes of at least $100,000: 17% in excess of $150,000, and 14% between $100,000 and $150,000. In contrast, 24% of Jewish households in San Diego County report annual incomes under $35,000.
Exhibit 23. Annual Income of Jewish Households, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Over $150,000 17%
$100,000-149,999 14%
$50,000-99,999 26%
$35,000-49,999 19%
Under $35,000 24%
8 The overall refusal rate for the question on household income among respondents who completed the survey was 31%, relatively high for UAI Jewish community studies. Approximately 42% of all senior respondents refused to provide annual household income. 30 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Income: Jewish San Diego County and Western Region Jewish Data
Compared to western regional data from the 2000-2001 National Jewish Population Survey,9 San Diego County Jewish households are somewhat more affluent:
• While 31% of San Diego County Jewish households report annual incomes of at least $100,000, for the western USA, NJPS estimated that 23% of Jewish households earned at least $100,000;
• In the western USA, 49% of Jewish households report incomes below $50,000, compared to 43% in San Diego County.
Exhibit 24. Annual Income of Jewish Households, San Diego County, Compared with NJPS Western Region Data, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
ANNUAL HOUSEHOLD SAN DIEGO COUNTY WESTERN USA INCOME 2003 NJPS 2001
Under $50,000 43% 49%
$50,000 - $99,999 26 28
$100,000 - $149,000 14 13
$150,000 + 17 10
TOTAL 100% 100%
9 Data for the western region from the NJPS 2000-01 study has been recalculated to include only households in which an adult currently is Jewish. The NJPS refusal rate on income in the western region was approximately 20% overall, and higher for seniors. Please note that the NJPS paid survey respondents a minimum of $25 to complete the survey — an interesting way (apparently) to decrease refusal rates of those who decided to complete the questionnaire. The Demographic Study Oversight Committee and the Federation staff in San Diego County, as in almost every other local community Jewish population/demographic study, were unwilling to use communal funds to “incentivize” respondents. It is possible, of course, that the $25 payment encouraged poorer Jewish households to respond, thus increasing the proportion of Jewish households under $50,000 annually. 31 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Income & Geography
Respondents from the La Jolla/Mid-Coastal and the North County Coastal and Inland sub-areas are most likely to report annual incomes of at least $100,000, while Central San Diego and Greater East San Diego respondents are least likely to report similar household incomes.
• 37% of North County Coastal Jewish households report annual incomes of at least $100,000, while only 16% report annual incomes under $35,000; North County Inland respondents report almost identical patterns;
• While 36% of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal Jewish households report incomes of at least $100,000, another 26% report annual household incomes under $35,000;
• Central San Diego Jewish households are the least affluent. Forty percent (40%) report incomes under $35,000, while only 21% report incomes of at least $100,000.
Exhibit 25. Jewish Household Annual Income by Geographic Area, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent of Households with Annual Income Under $35,000 and $100,000+
40% Central San Diego 21%
Greater East San 26% Diego 21%
26% La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 36%
16% North County Coastal 37%
15% North County Inland 38%
Under $35,000
$100,000+ 32 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
DEMOGRAPHY
Income & Age of the Respondent
Reported annual household income is strongly related to the age of the respondent, in a “curvilinear” statistical pattern:
• Forty percent (40%) of senior respondents report annual household incomes under $35,000; 15% report annual incomes of at least $100,000;10
• Respondents ages 50-64 report the highest level of affluence; 41% report incomes of $100,000 or more, and the lowest levels of household incomes under $35,000 (only 18%);
• The youngest respondents report household incomes that are between the extremes of the senior and the middle-age respondents; 23% have incomes under $35,000 and 31% have incomes of at least $100,000.
Exhibit 26. Jewish Household Annual Income by Age of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent Households with Annual Income Under $35,000 and $100,000+ by Age of Respondent
40% Senior Respondents 65+ 15%
18% Respondents Ages 50-64 41%
23% Respondents Under Age 50 31%
Under $35,000 $100,000+
10 Among respondents who are at least 75 years of age, 45% report annual household incomes below $35,000 and only 10% report annual incomes of $100,000. 33 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Vulnerable Jews
One important goal of the 2003 San Diego County Jewish Community Study was to provide an estimate of potentially “at risk”/“vulnerable” Jewish households within the Jewish community. Several areas of potential vulnerability were addressed in the study: (a) seniors living alone, (b) single parent households, (c) households with severe financial vulnerability as measured by “poverty estimates,” (d) households with a member with serious health conditions, and (e) households needing social service assistance.
Seniors Living Alone
An estimated 3,400 seniors live alone in San Diego County Jewish households — 7% of all Jewish households in San Diego County. Seniors age 75+ are much more likely to be living alone (30%) than seniors ages 65-74 (16%). Thus, over 70% of seniors living alone are at least 75 years of age. Half of all senior respondents report that they have an adult child living in the San Diego County area. The estimated number of potentially vulnerable isolated seniors is between 500–600 seniors ages 65-74, and perhaps as many as 1,200 seniors ages 75 and over.
Exhibit 27. Numbers and Percentages of Seniors Who Live Alone, by Age of Respondent, Estimated Numbers Without an Adult Child in Area, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Seniors 65-74 Seniors 75+
Percentage of All Seniors in Age Grouping 16% 30% Who Live Alone
Estimated Number of Seniors Living Alone 1,000 2,400 in San Diego County
Estimated Number Living Alone Without an 550 1,200 Adult Child in San Diego County
34 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Single Parent Households
Single parent households are another group traditionally viewed as “at risk.” An estimated 6% of Jewish households (approximately 2,600) in San Diego County are single parent households with minor children — twice the national NJPS average, but a lower percentage than the 9% overall single parent household rate for the general population in San Diego County.
Single parent Jewish households are much more likely to report lower annual incomes than married households with minor children: 40% of single parent Jewish households and only 5% of two parent households report under $35,000 annual incomes.
When asked a subjective question about household finances (“Which of these statements best describes your household's financial situation?”), 71% of single parent households report that they either “were just managing” or “could not make ends meet.”
Exhibit 28. Relationship of Household Structure, and Household Subjective Financial Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% “Just HOUSEHOLD TYPE % “Cannot Make Ends Meet” Managing”
No Children in Household • Single, Under Age 40 9% 40%
• Married, Under 40 <1% 12% • Married/Single, Ages 40-64, no minor children in household 1% 20%
Children in Household
• Single Parent, Ages 18-64, minor children 23% 48%
• Married, Ages 18-64, minor 3% 32% children
Seniors <1% 20% • 65+, Married or Lives in Two
Person or More Household <1% 24% • 65+ Respondent Lives Alone
35 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Financial Vulnerability: Poverty Estimates
The data on household income and the subjective assessments of household financial status provide insight into issues of financial vulnerability within the Jewish community of San Diego County. The survey questionnaire also included a series of questions specifically designed to utilize the federal poverty guidelines11 in order to more accurately estimate the level of poverty within the San Diego County Jewish community.
While the federal poverty guidelines define 100% of the poverty level associated with varying household sizes (see footnote below), they are generally viewed as an unrealistically low threshold, and many federal, state, and local assistance programs utilize multiples of the poverty level — sometimes 125%, often 150%, and even 200% of the federal guidelines.
The questions used for the San Diego County Jewish Community Study included specific questions designed to measure both the 100% and the 150% poverty level – the 150% standard is seen as a much more realistic measure of serious financial vulnerability. For a two-person household (as an example), the 100% federal threshold in 2003 was $12,120; the 150% poverty level was $18,180. In the survey questionnaire, respondents in two-person households who indicated that they had annual incomes under $35,000 were then asked if the household’s income was under $12,000 (100% poverty approximation), between $12,000 and $18,000 (150% approximation), or over $18,000.
• Just under 3% of San Diego County Jewish households which answered the question on income report household size and annual income that place them under the 100% federal poverty guideline thresholds;
• Another 7% report household size and income that place them between 100% and 150% of the poverty guidelines.
.
11 These guidelines are issued each year by the Department of Health and Human Services, and have become known as the “Federal Poverty Guidelines.” The official guidelines provide a way to estimate poverty by utilizing income and household size. For 2003, for example, a one-person household was defined as below the 100% poverty level if the household income was below $8,980; a two-person household’s 100% poverty threshold was 12,120, and a three-person household’s threshold was $15,260. Corresponding 150% poverty level thresholds are $13,400, $18,180, and $22,890. 36 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Poverty: Single Parent and Senior Households
10% of San Diego County Jewish households are below the 150% poverty level. Using the 150% poverty level as a reasonable estimate of serious financial vulnerability among San Diego County Jewish households, the best estimate is that 4,600 Jewish households fall below the 150% poverty threshold.12
A number of sub-groups are more likely to be below the 150% poverty threshold:13
• 14% of single parents;
• 20% of seniors living alone.
Exhibit 29. Percent of Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold
All Jewish 10% Households
Single Parent 14% Households
Seniors Living 20% Alone
12 As indicated previously, answering the question on income was refused by a significant number of respondents. The 4,600 Jewish household 150% poverty estimate assumes that the real income of households which did not report their income was similar to the households which reported their income. If anything, this may be a conservative assumption, since senior respondents (especially those age 75+ living alone) were most likely to refuse to answer any of the specific income questions, and seniors have a higher than 10% adjusted poverty rate. 13 Single persons under age 40 without children are statistically the most prevalent group to fall below the 150% poverty standard: 34% reported household incomes that placed them “in poverty.” Hopefully, these individuals are only temporarily in poverty, since they may still be students, or just starting their careers. Thus, this statistical group is not typically highlighted in Jewish community study reports as being “below poverty.” However, their income levels are quite low, subjectively they feel considerable financial pressure, and their limited resources may be a significant factor affecting their Jewish communal behaviors. 37 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Poverty and Geography
Central San Diego Jewish households are most likely to report annual incomes below the 150% poverty threshold — just under one-in-five Jewish households.
Exhibit 30. Percent of Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold, By Geographic Area of Residence, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Jewish Households Below 150% Poverty Threshold
North County 6% Coastal
North County 7% Inland
La Jolla/Mid- 11% Coastal
Central San 18% Diego
Greater East San 11% Diego
38 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Serious Health Conditions and Activity Limitation
Survey respondents were asked a standardized question (used in many previous studies) which measured the degree of “incapacity” within the Jewish household:
“Do you (or does anyone else in the household) currently have any kind of physical, mental or other health condition that limits employment, education, or daily activities, and has lasted for at least six months?” [IF NECESSARY ADD:] “Daily activities include walking, climbing stairs, dressing, eating, and carrying.”
16% of San Diego County Jewish households report that at least one member of the household had been incapacitated for at least six months. Comparable data for Jewish households from NJPS indicate that 19% of all Jewish households in the western region reported a similar limiting, long-term condition.
• Twenty percent (20%) of these San Diego County Jewish households report incomes below the 150% poverty threshold;
• Age of the respondent is strongly related to reporting an incapacitating health condition in the household; older respondents are much more likely to report such limitations.
Exhibit 31. Percent of Jewish Households Reporting a Long-term Condition Which Limits Employment, Education, or Daily Activities by Age of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Jewish Households Reporting Long-Term, Health-Related Activity Limitation
Respondents Under Age 50 10%
Respondents Age 50-64 18%
Respondents Age 65-74 26%
Respondents Age 75+ 34%
39 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Social Service Needs
A series of questions focused on the social service needs of San Diego County Jewish households. Respondents were asked whether their household included:
14 • Any child in the household with a Learning Disability;
• Any household member for whom Special Needs Assistance was required in the past year, other than for a learning disability;
• Any household member who had a Serious Emotional or Behavioral Problem, such as depression or an eating disorder;
• Any household member who needed Assistance for an Elderly Relative in San Diego County.
Just under three-in-ten Jewish households indicate that at least one of these four social services issues needed to be addressed in the year preceding the survey.
Exhibit 32. Percent of Households With Social Service Needs, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County, 2003
Child With Learning Disability 9%
Other Special Needs Child or Adult 6%
Serious Emotional or Behavioral Problem 14%
Elderly Relative in San Diego 10%
ANY OF THESE FOUR SOCIAL SERVICE ISSUES 28%
14 For the learning disability question, the percentage is based on the number of households with a minor child; for all other social service questions, all households were eligible to answer the questions. 40 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Difficulty in Getting Assistance With Social Service Needs
Households which report needing assistance in the year preceding the survey for a special needs person (other than a learning disability), a household member with a serious emotional problem, or an elderly relative in San Diego County were asked how easy or difficult it was to get assistance for these three social service needs.
• 78% report that it was either very difficult or somewhat difficult to get assistance for a household member with special needs;15
• 33% report difficulty getting assistance for a member with a serious emotional or behavioral problem;
• 42% report difficulty getting assistance for an elderly person in San Diego.
Exhibit 33. Difficulty in Getting Assistance for Social Service Needs, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Households Which Had Difficulty Getting Assistance for Social Service Needs
Special Needs (other 78% than learning disability)
Serious Emotional, 33% Behavioral Problem
Assistance for Elderly Person 42%
15 The percentages who replied “very” difficult or “somewhat” difficult were: (a) Special Needs: 30% very difficult, 48% somewhat difficult; (b) Serious Emotional problem: 8% very difficult, 25% somewhat difficult; (c) Senior Citizen assistance: 15% very difficult, 27% somewhat difficult. 41 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
VULNERABLE POPULATIONS & SOCIAL SERVICES
Jewish Agencies & Social Service Needs
Reported utilization of Jewish agencies for assistance with these three specific social service needs also varied: (a) 26% of the households reported using a Jewish agency when trying to get assistance for a person with special needs; (b) 19% used a Jewish agency for a member with a serious emotional or behavioral problem; and (c) 48% used a Jewish agency to seek assistance for an elderly person in San Diego.
Exhibit 34. Utilization of Jewish Agencies in Seeking Assistance for Social Service Needs, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Households Which Reported Using a Jewish Agency When Seeking Social Service Assistance
Special Needs (other 26% than learning disability) Serious Emotional, 19% Behavioral Problem Assistance for Elderly 48% Person
42 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Connections to the Jewish community are critical components of any Jewish community study. For the 2003 Jewish Community Study of San Diego County, the following issues/topics were addressed:
• How important is being Jewish for survey respondents?
• How important to Jewish survey respondents is being connected to the Jewish community in San Diego County?
• How important is Israel?
• With which denominations within Judaism do respondents self-identify? What factors are associated with denominational identification?
• What proportion of San Diego County Jewish households are affiliated with a congregation? How does congregation affiliation in San Diego County compare with other western Jewish communities?
• Do survey respondents report that the “cost of being Jewish” has prevented them from participating in Jewish communal life?
• What levels of ritual observance exist in Jewish San Diego County? How does observance compare to other regional Jewish communities?
• What percentage of Jewish respondents report having been involved in Jewish study over the past three years, or having gone to a Jewish museum or cultural event?
• What Jewish experiences did respondents have as children or as teenagers? Do Jewish childhood experiences have an impact on current Jewish behavior?
43 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Being Jewish
64% of Jewish survey respondents report that “being Jewish” is very important to them. Only 10% feel that being Jewish is not important.
The percentage who feel that being Jewish is “very important” does not vary much by geographic area of residence: 68% of Greater East San Diego, 65% of Central San Diego, 64% of North County Inland, 63% of North County Coastal, and 58% of La Jolla/Mid-Coastal San Diego Jewish respondents say that being Jewish is very important to them.
Exhibit 35. Importance of Being Jewish to Respondents, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
How Important Is Being Jewish to Jewish Respondents
Not Very, Not At All Important 10% Somewhat Important 26%
Very Important 64%
44 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Being Jewish & Age of Respondent
Being Jewish is most important to senior Jewish respondents — 75% of them say that being Jewish is “very important” to them.
Exhibit 36. Importance of Being Jewish by Age of Respondent, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Jewish Respondents Who Say Being Jewish Is Very Important
Jewish Respondents 53% Under Age 35
Jewish Respondents 56% Ages 35-49
Jewish Respondents 70% Ages 50-64
Jewish Respondents 75% Age 65+
45 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Israel’s Importance to Jewish San Diego County
Israel is exceptionally important to San Diego County Jewish respondents — 69% report that Israel is “very important” to them.
Israel is “very important” to San Diego County Jewish respondents, regardless of their age: 66% of Jewish respondents ages 18-34, 65% of those 35-49, 69% of those 50-64, and 75% of those 65 and older say that Israel is very important to them.
Exhibit 37. Importance of Israel, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent of Jewish Respondents Who View Israel As ...
Not At All Not Very Important Important 2% 5%
Somewhat Important 24%
Very Important 69%
46 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Being Part of the Jewish Community
Being part of the Jewish community in San Diego County is important to 65% of Jewish survey respondents — but “very important” to only 31%.
Exhibit 38. Importance of Being Connected to the Jewish Community of San Diego County, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
How Important Is Being Part of the San Diego County Jewish Community?
Somewhat Important Not Very Important 34% 25%
Not At All Important 10%
Very Important 31%
47 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Geography, Age of Respondent and Being Part of the Jewish Community
Jewish respondents living in Central San Diego are least likely to view being part of the Jewish community as important. Fewer than one-in-five (19%) report that being a part of the San Diego County Jewish community is “very important” for them. Comparable percentages in the other sub-areas are: North County Inland: 38%, Greater East San Diego: 35%, North County Coastal: 29%, and La Jolla/Mid-Coastal: 29%.
Being part of the Jewish community of San Diego County is somewhat less important for two age groupings which are critical for “building Jewish community:” the younger respondents under age 35, and respondents between 50 and 64.
• 42% of Jewish respondents under 35 and 38% of Jewish respondents ages 50- 64 report that being part of the San Diego Jewish community is not very or not at all important to them.
Exhibit 39. Importance of Being Part of the Jewish Community of San Diego County, by Age of Respondent, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Age of Jewish Respondent
Being Jewish Is: 18 - 34 35 - 49 50 - 64 65+
Very Important 20% 34% 31% 34%
Somewhat 38 34 31 33 Important
Not Very 37 24 25 21 Important
Not At All 5 8 13 12 Important
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
48 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Jewish Values & Jewish Connections
Exhibit 40 summarizes the data on Jewish values and Jewish connections presented in the preceding tables. Israel and “being Jewish” are important Jewish values to which the vast majority of San Diego Jewish respondents express strong adherence. Fewer than 10% view these values as not very or not at all important.
In contrast, being part of the Jewish community is seen as very important to one-third of the Jewish survey respondents, somewhat important to another third, and not important to the other third.
Exhibit 40. Comparative Importance to Jewish San Diego County Survey Respondents, Being Jewish, Israel, and Being Part of a Jewish Community, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Value
Level of Being Part of the Being Jewish Israel Importance Jewish Community
Very Important 64% 69% 31%
Somewhat 26 24 34 Important
Not Very or Not At 10 7 35 All Important
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
49 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Denomination 40% of Jewish survey respondents identify as Reform Jews, while 22% identify as Conservative, 3% as Orthodox, 3% as Reconstructionist, and 3% as Secular Humanists. Another 17% of the respondents report that Judaism is their religion, but that they do not identify with any denomination/movement within Judaism. Finally, 11% view themselves as Jewish, but report that they have “no religion.” They are labeled as “No Religion – Secular Jews” in the exhibit below.
Younger respondents are most likely to view themselves as non-denominational Jews.
Exhibit 41. Denomination of Jewish Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Age of Respondent
Respondent All Jewish 18 - 34 35 - 49 50 - 64 65+ Identifies as Respondents
Reform Jew 27% 37% 45% 47% 40%
Conservative Jew 24 19 24 22 22
Orthodox Jew 3 5 3 2 3
Reconstructionist 5 3 4 <1% 3
Secular Humanist Jew 2 <1 3 4 3
Other Jewish Denominations 2 1 1 2 1 Nondenominational “Just Jewish” 23 23 12 13 17
No Religion – Views Self Jewish [Secular Jews] 14 12 8 9 11
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
50 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Being Part of the Jewish Community & Denomination
Denomination is powerfully related to the interest of the Jewish respondents in being part of the Jewish community in San Diego County.
Eighty-five percent (85%) of Orthodox16, 48% of Conservative, and 33% of Reform Jews feel that being connected to the Jewish community in San Diego County is very important to them.
In contrast, only 14% of non-denominational and 6% of Secular Jews view being part of the San Diego County Jewish community as very important.
Exhibit 42. Relationship of Jewish Respondent Denomination and Interest in Being Part of a Jewish Community in San Diego County, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Jewish Respondents Who Say It Is Very Important For Them To Be Part of the Jewish Community of San Diego County
Orthodox Jews 85%
Conservative Jews 48%
Reform Jews 33%
Non-Denominational Jews 14%
No Religion [Secular Jews] 6%
16 There are fewer interviews with Orthodox Jewish respondents than UAI would typically use to present this cross-tabulation analysis; however, the pattern is clear and hardly controversial. There are also too few interviews for confident detailed analysis among Secular Humanist Jews and Reconstructionist Jews. 51 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Congregation Membership
29% of Jewish households report that they pay dues to a Jewish congregation in San Diego County.
Congregation membership in San Diego County is near the low end of the western regional spectrum.
Exhibit 43. Percent of Jewish Households in Key Western Jewish Communities Which Belong to a Synagogue or Temple, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent of Households Which Community, Year Are Congregation Members
San Diego County: 2003 29%
Phoenix: 2002 29%
Tucson: 2002 32%
Las Vegas: 1997 34%
Los Angeles: 1997 34%
Denver: 1997 37%
NJPS: 2001 31% Western Region USA∗
∗UAI recalculation of NJPS 2000-01 western region data for “Jewish households” only, in order to provide as close a comparison to the 2003 San Diego County data as possible. 52 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Congregation Membership, Newcomers to San Diego County, and Income
Congregation membership is related to both household income and newcomer status in San Diego County.
• 19% of the most recent newcomer households (0-5 years in the area) report paying dues to a synagogue or temple, compared to approximately three-of-ten of all other San Diego County Jewish households.
• Similarly, younger respondent households are least likely to be congregation members. Reported congregation membership is 20% among households with respondents under age 35, compared to three-of-ten households with respondents age 35 and older (data not shown below).
• Only 20% of households with incomes under $35,000 annually report paying dues to a Jewish congregation, compared to 44% of households with incomes of at least $100,000.
Exhibit 44. Congregation Membership of Jewish Households by Newcomer Status, and by Household Income, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Households Which Report Congregational Membership
Newcomers: 0 - 5 Years 19% Newcomers: 6 - 9 Years 28%
Lived San Diego County 10 - 19 Years 30%
Lived 20+ Years or Born Area 33% .
Household Income Under $35,000 20%
Income $35,000 - $50,000 23%
Income $50,000 - $100,000 30%
Income $100,000 + 44%
53 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Attendance at Jewish Religious Services
Jewish respondents were asked how often they attended Jewish religious services in the year preceding the survey:
• 31% of Jewish survey respondents say that they never attend Jewish religious services, 9% attend for wedding and bar-bat mitzvah ceremonies only, 12% say that they attend on High Holy Days only, and 24% attend a few times a year;
• 17% attend monthly, and 7% attend services weekly.
Jewish respondents who are congregation members are much more likely to attend services; 35% report attending monthly or several times a month, and 21% report attending services (at least) weekly.
Exhibit 45. Percent of Jewish Respondents Who Attend Religious Services, by Congregation Membership Status of Household, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of All Jewish % of Jewish Respondents % of Jewish Respondents Respondents Who Are Congregation Who Are NOT Jewish Religious Members Congregation Members Services Attended:
Never 31% 4% 44%
Weddings, Bar-Bat 9 1 13 Mitzvah Celebrations
High Holy Days Only 12 12 12
A Few Times a Year 24 28 23 (3-9 times)
Monthly, Several 17 35 8 Times a Month
Weekly, Daily 7 21 1
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
54 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Connections With Other Jewish Organizations
In addition to congregation membership as an indicator of Jewish communal connection, all survey respondents were asked if they were members of another Jewish organization in the area (or regularly participated in another Jewish organization’s activities) — including the Jewish Community Center (JCC).
While 29% of households report congregation-affiliation, an additional 17% are not congregation affiliated but report being members/regular participants in the activities of another Jewish organization in San Diego County, primarily the JCC.
While 46% of all San Diego County Jewish households are organizationally connected to the Jewish community, 54% are not.
Exhibit 46. Jewish Organization Affiliation and Disconnection,∗ Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Affiliation Status of Household Percent
Households Affiliated with the Jewish Community in San Diego County 46%
• Household Belongs to a Synagogue or Temple 29
• Household Does Not Belong to a Congregation, but Reports Being a Member of (or Participating in) the JCC 17 or Other Jewish Organization
Households Not Connected with 54 Any Jewish Organization
Total 100%
55 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Subjective Feelings of Connection and Disconnection
In addition to formal organization membership as an indicator of communal connection, all respondents were also asked the degree to which they felt part of the Jewish community in San Diego County.
Paralleling the formal organization data, 63% of Jewish respondents report that they feel “only a little” or “not at all” part of the Jewish community. Only 37% feel that they are “a lot” or “somewhat” connected to the San Diego County Jewish community.
Once again, congregation membership is a key variable shaping subjective feelings of connection/disconnection: 75% of congregation members feel connected (“a lot” or “somewhat”) to the local Jewish community, compared to only 20% of Jewish respondents not affiliated with a Jewish congregation.
Exhibit 47. Subjective Feelings of Connection and Disconnection to the Jewish Community in San Diego County, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Jewish Extent to Which Respondents Respondents All Jewish Respondent Feels Part of Who Are Who Are NOT Respondents the Jewish Community Congregation Congregation Members Members
A Lot 14% 37% 4%
Somewhat 23 38 16
A Little 28 18 33
Not At All 35 7 48
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
56 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Subjective Feelings of Disconnection by Newcomer Status
Newcomers to the San Diego community are most likely to feel that they are “not at all” connected to the Jewish community in San Diego.
51% of the most recent newcomers report feeling “not at all” connected to the Jewish community, compared to 28% of respondents who were born in San Diego County or who have lived in the area for at least twenty years.
Exhibit 48. Subjective Feelings of Disconnection from Jewish Community in San Diego County by Newcomer Status of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Jewish Respondents Who Feel "Not At All" Connected to the Jewish Community
All Jewish 35% Respondents
Respondents Lived 51% in Area 0-5 Years
Respondents Lived 39% in Area 6-9 Years
Respondents Lived 33% in Area 10-19 Years
Born in Area or Lived 28% in Area 20+ Years
57 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
The Cost of Being Jewish
On both a local and a national level, Jewish communal leaders have expressed concern that the “cost of being Jewish” has become an impediment limiting Jewish organizational connections — that it has, quite simply, become too expensive for many households to fully participate in Jewish communal life.
Respondents were asked whether (in the five years preceding the survey) financial cost had prevented them from joining a synagogue or temple, or joining the Jewish Community Center. 26% of respondents indicate that financial cost (at some time in the five year period) had prevented their household from joining a synagogue or temple,17 while 22% report that cost had prevented a Jewish Community Center membership.
The “cost of being Jewish” appears to be somewhat higher in San Diego County than for Jewish households in the western United States. Among unambiguously Jewish households interviewed for NJPS: 2000-01, 21% indicated that cost had prevented them from joining a congregation, and 16% indicated that cost had prevented them from joining a JCC.18
Exhibit 49. Did Financial Cost Prevent Congregation Membership and/or Jewish Community Center Membership? Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003 and NJPS 2001
% Report Membership Prevented by Financial Cost in Last 5 Years
San Diego County Membership Organization: NJPS West 2001 2003
Congregation – temple, synagogue 26% 21% membership
Jewish Community Center (JCC) 22% 16%
17 14% of current congregation members reported that cost had prevented them from joining a synagogue or temple at some time during the five years preceding the survey. 18 The NJPS questions were the model for the San Diego County versions, and the five year time period was used in both questionnaires. The NJPS: 2000-01 “cost of being Jewish” data were not reported in its report; all data analyses are by UAI. 58 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Income and the Cost of Being Jewish
In San Diego County, even among households with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000, financial cost has been a factor which has prevented synagogue and JCC membership.
• 26% of respondents in households with annual incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 report that the household was prevented (at some time iin the five years preceding the survey) from joining a congregation because of financial cost;
• 24% of these same households report that financial cost prevented them from joining the JCC.
Exhibit 50. Percent of Households Reporting that Financial Cost Has Prevented Household from Congregation or JCC Membership, by Household Income, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Household Income
Respondents Report Under $35,000 - $50,000 - $100,000 - $150,000+ Household Prevented In $35,000 $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 Last Five Years From:
Belonging to a Temple 40% 28% 26% 21% 10% or Synagogue
Joining the Jewish 33% 25% 24% 14% 11% Community Center
59 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Jewish Ritual Observance
Jewish ritual observance questions in the study focused on four traditional Jewish practices:
• 64% of Jewish households report that they always or usually participate in a Passover Seder;
• 68% of the Jewish households report that they always or usually light Chanukah candles;
• 20% of the households report that they always or usually light Shabbat candles; 19 • 11% always or usually keep a kosher home.
Exhibit 51. Jewish Ritual Observance Indicators, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Passover Seder 64% 20% 16%
Light Chanukah 68% 16% 16% Candles
Light Shabbat 20% 26% 54% Candles
Keep Kosher 11% 10% 79%
Always/Usually Sometimes Never
19 Respondents were asked if anyone in the household participated in a Passover Seder, lit Chanukah Candles, lit Sabbath Candles, or kept a kosher home. Of the 11% of households which always/usually keep kosher, 8% always keep kosher. 60 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Jewish Ritual Observance in Regional Context
Jewish ritual observance in San Diego County is similar to observance levels in comparable regional Jewish communities.20
Exhibit 52. Ritual Observance Indicator Comparisons: San Diego County and Western Region, USA
Attend Passover Light Chanukah Light Shabbat Community, Year Seder Candles Candles
San Diego County: 2003 64% 68% 20%
Phoenix: 2002 62% 64% 16%
Tucson: 2002 61% 68% 17%
Denver: 1997 62% 63% 27%
Las Vegas: 1997 67% 73% 21%
Los Angeles: 1997 74% 71% 26%
NJPS: 2001 Western Region 69% 75% 18%
20Every effort has been made to present comparable data. This task is difficult since question wording often varies from survey to survey, and time period to time period. For example, the 1990 NJPS study, like the San Diego County study, asked whether anyone in the household always, usually, sometimes, never attends a Passover Seder. In 2001, the NJPS questionnaire only asked about the respondent, and whether the respondent had attended/not attended a Seder the preceding Passover. All NJPS western region data has been recalculated by UAI to reflect Jewish household data as opposed to the reported “Jewish adults” data. 61 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Yom Kippur Fasting
49% of Jewish survey respondents report that they did not fast during the Yom Kippur holiday preceding the 2003 survey; 40% fasted all day; 11% fasted part of the day or partially.
The percentages almost exactly parallel NJPS 2001 data for the western United States. Among Jewish households in the western states, 50% of respondents did not fast during the preceding Yom Kippur, 37% fasted all day, and 13% partially fasted.21
Congregation membership was a pivotal variable: 61% of Jewish respondents who were not congregation members report that they did not fast, compared to only 23% of congregation members.
Respondent denominational affiliation is strongly related to Yom Kippur fasting. Only 3% of Orthodox respondents report that they did not fast, compared to 46% of Reform Jewish respondents and 81% of Secular Jews.
Exhibit 53. Yom Kippur Fasting by Denomination, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Jewish Respondents Who Did Not Fast At All During Last Yom Kippur
All Jewish Respondents 49%
.
Orthodox Jewish Respondents 3%
Conservative Jewish Respondents 27%
Reform Jewish Respondents 46%
Non-Denominational Jewish Respondents 66%
Secular Jews [No Religion] 81%
21 The question asked in the San Diego County 2003 study was the same question asked in the NJPS, and focused on the respondent only. Respondents who said that they could not fast due to health reasons (approximately 5% of all San Diego County Jewish respondents) were eliminated from the percentages for both San Diego County and the western region NJPS study. 62 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Participation in Jewish Cultural Activities
Jewish households report moderately high levels of participation in a series of Jewish cultural and communal activities that provide another avenue of participation in Jewish experiences: (a) attending a Jewish cultural event in the preceding three years, (b) reading a Jewish newspaper, (c) visiting a Jewish website, and (d) visiting a Jewish museum.
Exhibit 54. Jewish Cultural Activity Participation, All Households and by Congregation Membership Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Households Which Jewish Life Activity Non-Congregation Belong to a Engaged in By All Households Member Jewish Household Member Households Congregation
Attending a Jewish 60% 84% 50% Cultural Event
Reading a Jewish 46% 78% 34% Newspaper
Visiting a Jewish 45% 64% 37% Website
Visiting a Jewish 43% 60% 36% Museum
63 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Respondent Jewish Experiences as a Child
A significant percentage of Jewish respondents in San Diego County had formal and/or informal Jewish educational experiences as a child or teenager:
• 70% had some Jewish education (11% attended a fulltime Jewish day school);
• 54% were Jewish youth group members, while 43% went to an overnight camp with Jewish content as a child or teenager;
• 39% had a bar or bat mitzvah (68% of the male Jewish respondents vs. 19% of the female Jewish respondents).
Exhibit 55. Childhood/Teenager Jewish Experiences, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Respondents With Jewish Childhood/Teenage Experiences
Any Formal Jewish 70% Education
Fulltime Jewish Day 11% School
Jewish Youth Group 54% Member
Overnight Camp: 43% Jewish Content
Bar / Bat Mitzvah 39%
College Level 24% Jewish Studies
Israel Travel as a 14% Child or Teen
64 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
Childhood Jewish Experiences Typology
Jewish survey respondents were classified into one of three categories which summarized their childhood formal Jewish education experiences and their informal Jewish experiences with a Jewish summer overnight camp and/or a Jewish youth group:
(1) No Jewish Experiences as a child/teenager: no Jewish education, and no camp or youth activities: 24% of all Jewish respondents; (2) Minimal/Moderate Jewish Experiences: 0-4 years of Jewish education regardless of summer camp/youth group involvement, or at least five years of Jewish education as a child but not both camp and youth group participation: 39% of respondents; (3) Multiple Jewish Childhood Experiences: Jewish education for at least five years plus both youth group and Jewish camp experiences: 36% of Jewish respondents.
Exhibit 56. Childhood/Teenager Jewish Experiences Typology, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Minimal - Multiple Jewish Moderate Jewish Experiences Experiences 36% 40%
No Childhood Jewish Experiences 24%
65 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
The Impact of a Jewish Childhood: Yom Kippur Fasting
Jewish respondents who had multiple childhood Jewish experiences are the most likely to report having fasted during the most recent Yom Kippur holiday (51%).
Respondents without Jewish childhood educational experiences are less likely to fast on Yom Kippur (35%).
Exhibit 57. Impact of a Jewish Childhood on Yom Kippur Fasting, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Respondents Reporting That They Fasted All Day on Yom Kippur
Respondents Without Jewish Childhood 35% Experiences
Respondents With Minimal or Moderate 33% Jewish Childhood Experiences
Respondents With Multiple Jewish 51% Childhood Experiences
66 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH CONNECTIONS
The Impact of a Jewish Childhood: Joining a Congregation
Jewish congregation membership in San Diego County is also related to the impact of a Jewish childhood. The contrast is quite sharp between Jewish respondents with no or minimal/moderate Jewish childhood experiences and those with multiple Jewish childhood experiences.
The impact of a Jewish childhood — Jewish education, Jewish youth group experiences, and Jewish camping experiences — on the Jewish connections of adult Jewish respondents is strong, but by no means a perfect relationship. While a Jewish childhood is related to congregation membership, a sizeable proportion of those without Jewish experiences as a child/teenager join synagogues and temples, and a sizeable number of those with strong Jewish childhood experiences are not congregation members.22
Exhibit 58. Impact of a Jewish Childhood on Current Congregation Membership, Jewish Respondents Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Respondents Reporting That Their Household Currently Belongs to a Synagogue or Temple
Respondents Without Jewish Childhood 26% Experiences
Respondents With Minimal or Moderate 25% Jewish Childhood Experiences
Respondents With Multiple Jewish 43% Childhood Experiences
22 Similar patterns exist for other Jewish connection variables. 67 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Intermarriage — and whether interfaith Jewish couples raise their children “Jewish” — are critical, emotionally charged issues within the American Jewish community. Among currently married respondent-spouse couples in San Diego County Jewish households:
(A) 44% of currently married couples are intermarried (a Jewish spouse is married to a non-Jewish person);
(B) In 56% of current marriages, both spouses currently consider themselves to be Jewish:
• 45% of current marriages are inmarriages: the husband and wife were both raised as Jews;
• Just over 11% of current respondent/spouse marriages are conversionary — they involve a marriage between a Jewish raised partner and a non-Jewish raised partner, but the non-Jewish raised person considered himself/herself to be Jewish at the time of the survey interview.
Exhibit 59. Inmarriage and Intermarriage, Percentages of Currently Married Respondent/Spouse Couples, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Inmarriages 45%
Conversionary 11%
Intermarriages 44%
68 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Jewish Couples and Jewish Persons Rates of Intermarriage
As noted above, 44% of currently married San Diego County respondent/spouse couples are interfaith couples — one partner is Jewish, the other is non-Jewish.
When an intermarried couple and an inmarried (Jewish born) couple sit side-by-side at services (or at the JCC, or at home), they represent two couples — one of which is interfaith — but three Jewish persons — one of whom is married to a non-Jew. One-of- two (50%) couples is intermarried, while only one-in-three (33%) Jewish raised persons is intermarried. 23
In San Diego County, the Jewish couples intermarriage rate is 44%, while the Jewish persons intermarriage rate is 31%. While 44% of currently married couples are interfaith couples, 31% of currently married Jewish raised respondents/spouses are married to a non-Jew.
Exhibit 60. Inmarriage and Intermarriage: Percentages by Married Respondent/Spouse Couples and by Jewish-Born Persons, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percent Of Percent Of Jewish Type Of Marriage Marriages Born Persons
Inmarriage 45% 61%
Conversionary Marriage 11 8
Intermarriage 44 31
Total 100% 100%
23 Confusion over calculations of inmarriage/intermarriage rates by couples and by Jewish born persons is (unfortunately) quite common. The “couples” intermarriage rate is always higher than the “Jewish persons” intermarried rate. Most studies report both the couples rate of intermarriage and the percent of Jewish-born persons who are married to a non-Jewish person. 69 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Intermarriage Rates in Regional Context
The current 44% couples intermarriage rate in San Diego County is similar to the overall western regional rate for unambiguously Jewish households (NJPS 2000-01 data reanalyzed by UAI), comparable to the 46% intermarriage rate found in a recent study of Tucson, and slightly higher than the 40% intermarriage rate reported for Phoenix’s recent study. Other western Jewish communities, like Las Vegas and Los Angeles, report much lower intermarriage rates.
Exhibit 61. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rate Comparisons, Percentages of Married Couples, San Diego County and the Western Region, USA
Percent Intermarried Community, Year Couples
San Diego: 2003 44%
Tucson: 2002 46%
Phoenix: 2002 40%
Denver: 1997 39%
Las Vegas: 1997 26%
Los Angeles: 1997 23%
NJPS: 2001 Western Region 44%24
24 The 44% couples intermarriage rate from NJPS 2001 is a UAI calculation of the intermarriage rate among couples in the western region USA where the household is currently unambiguously Jewish. That is, a currently Jewish adult resides in the household, not just a person of Jewish background. The published NJPS numbers included a significant number of Jewish-origin (but not Jewish now) respondents or spouses who were married to non-Jews, so their base rate would be much higher. Also, please note that this calculated western region couples rate is not the “Jewish persons” rate published for the western region in the 2001 study report. The 44% couples rate calculated by UAI for the NJPS western region equates to approximately a 29% persons intermarriage rate, a pattern very similar to the San Diego County Jewish persons intermarriage rate. The published NJPS 42% persons rate includes many households in which no one is currently Jewish. 70 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Intermarriage Rates and Year of Marriage
While the overall intermarriage rate for currently married respondent/spouse couples is 44%, recent intermarriage rates in San Diego County are much higher:
• Among currently married respondents/spouses married prior to 1970, only 15% of the couples are intermarried;
• Among those married from 1970-1979, 34% are intermarried.
• 51% of all couples married in the 1980s are intermarried, while the percentage increases to 60% for couples married since 1990.25
Exhibit 62. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rates by Year of Marriage, Married Respondents / Spouse Couples, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Year of Marriage
Current Marriage Prior to 1970 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-2002 Status
Inmarriages 76% 51% 37% 29%
Conversionary Marriages 9 15 12 11
Intermarriages 15 34 51 60
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
25 All data on intermarriage in San Diego County Jewish households are based on currently married respondent/spouse couples. For marriages that took place since 1990, 60% of currently married couples are intermarried and 46% of currently married Jewish persons are married to non-Jews. The Jewish persons intermarriage rate for San Diego County from 1990–2002 (46%), is almost identical to western region NJPS published data (both studies use currently married respondent/spouse couples as the base for calculations). 71 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Intermarriage and Respondent’s Age
Paralleling the data by year of marriage, intermarriage rates among Jewish couples in San Diego County are significantly higher for younger survey respondents (18-49) than for those 50 and over.
The intermarriage percentage among respondents who are under age 35 (51%) is somewhat lower than the intermarriage rate among respondents ages 35-49 (59%).
Exhibit 63. Inmarriage and Intermarriage Rates by Age of Respondent, Married Respondents/Spouses Only, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003.
Age of Currently Married Respondent
Current Marriage Status: 18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Inmarriage 34% 32% 47% 71%
Conversionary 15 9 16 7 Marriages
Intermarriage 51 59 37 22
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
72 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Intermarriage and Geographic Area of Residence
The intermarriage rate is significantly lower in the La Jolla/Mid-Coastal area than in all other geographic sub-areas — only 30% of currently married couples are intermarried.
Exhibit 64. Intermarriage Rates by Geographic Area, Currently Married Couples, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% of Current Marriages Which Are Intermarriages
North County 49% Coastal
North County 41% Inland
La Jolla/Mid- 30% Coastal
Central San Diego 45%
Greater East San 50% Diego
73 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE
Inmarriage, Intermarriage & Jewish Connections
Inmarried (and conversionary) Jewish couples are significantly more connected to Jewish life than are intermarried Jewish couples. Among the intermarried, lighting Chanukah candles is the most celebrated Jewish observance.
Exhibit 65. Jewish Connection Variables by Household Inmarried/Intermarried Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Connection: Inmarried Jewish Intermarried Jewish Households26 Households
Lights Chanukah Candles∗ 88% 59%
Attends Passover Seder∗ 87% 41%
Has a Mezuzah on Door 81% 40%
Being Jewish is Very Important to Jewish 79% 50% Respondent
Jewish Respondent Feels “A Lot / Some” 60% 17% Part of the San Diego Jewish Community
Jewish Respondent Fasts All Day Yom 52% 30% Kippur∗
Congregation Member 52% 10%
Jewish Respondent Feels It Is Very Important to be Part of the Jewish 52% 11% Community
Lights Shabbat Candles∗ 38% 4%
Jewish Respondent Attends Jewish 38% 8% Religious Services At Least Monthly
Keeps Kosher Home∗ 14% 4%
26 Inmarried and conversionary combined. ∗ Always or usually combined for presentation 74 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Children in San Diego County Jewish Households
There are an estimated 23,700 children under age 18 living in all San Diego County Jewish households:
• Intermarried Jewish households include 10,000 children, 42% of all children in the Jewish community;
• There are 7,000 children living in inmarried Jewish households, and another 2,400 living in conversionary Jewish households;
• Another 4,300 children live in all “other” households, primarily single parent households.
Thus, only 30% of children in San Diego County’s Jewish community live in the traditional two parent, both born and raised Jewish, inmarried household.
Exhibit 66. Estimated Number and Percentage of Children in Jewish Households by Whether the Household is Inmarried or Intermarried, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Type of Marriage Number of Children Percent
Intermarried Households 10,000 42%
Inmarried Households 7,000 30
Conversionary Households 2,400 10
“Other Household Types”∗ 4,300 18
TOTAL 23,700 100%
∗ “Other Household Types” include unmarried partners, divorced-separated-widowed single parents, never married households, and households for which insufficient information was available to classify them as inmarried, conversionary, or intermarried. Some intermarried households could be in this group. 75 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Raising Children Jewish
Of the 23,700 children in the San Diego County Jewish community, 57% are being raised Jewish only, 17% are being raised Jewish and something else, 20% are not being raised Jewish, and for 6%, their status is “undecided.”27
While almost every child in inmarried and conversionary Jewish households is being raised Jewish, of the 10,000 children who are being raised in intermarried Jewish households, 21% are being raised Jewish only, and 29% are being raised as “Jewish and something else.” Half are either not being raised Jewish, or their parents have not yet decided whether the child will be raised Jewish.
Exhibit 67. Are Children Being Raised Jewish by Intermarriage Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Children Are Being Inmarried Conversionary Intermarried All Other Raised As: Households Households Households Households
Jewish 93% 100% 21% 57%
Jewish & 6 <1% 29 14 Something Else
Not Being Raised 1 <1% 39 20 Jewish
Undecided <1% <1% 11 9
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%
27 In terms of estimating the number of Jewish persons living in San Diego County, all children for whom no decision has been made about whether they will be raised as Jews have been classified as non- Jewish, since they are not being raised Jewish currently. 76 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Values and Beliefs: Raising Children Jewish
A series of questions explored parental attitudes and Jewish values on childrearing. Respondents were asked, “Parents have different ideas of how they would like their child/children to be Jewish. How important is it for your child/children… “ to (a) know and appreciate Jewish customs and beliefs, (b) feel positive about being Jewish, (c) be bar/bat mitzvah, (d) understand Tzedakah, the Jewish commitment to charity, (e) be able to read prayers in Hebrew at a synagogue, and (f) marry another Jew as an adult?”
Over 80% of survey respondents think that it is extremely/very important for children to know and appreciate Jewish customs and beliefs, and to feel positive about being Jewish. Almost three-of-four respondents think that understanding Tzedakah is extremely/very important. About half think it is extremely/very important for their children to be bar/bat mitzvah, to be able to read prayers in Hebrew, and to marry a Jewish person.
Exhibit 68. Attitudes Towards Raising Children With Jewish Values and Perspectives, All Survey Respondents, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Respondent Says the Topic Is:
Extremely Very Not Topic: Total Important Important Important
Child Should Feel Positive 49% 35 16 100% About Being Jewish
Child Should Know and Appreciate Jewish Customs and 31% 54 15 100% Beliefs
Child Should Understand Tzedakah: Jewish Commitment 28% 45 27 100% to Charity
Child Should Become a 28% 23 49 100% Bar/Bat Mitzvah Child Should Be Able to 18% 27 55 100% Read Prayers in Hebrew
Child Should Marry Another Jew 18% 26 56 100%
77 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Intermarriage and Values/Beliefs: Raising Children Jewish
Differences between intermarried households and inmarried households are dramatic on many of the values. Nonetheless, three-in-four intermarried respondents believe that it is important for children to feel positive about being Jewish, and to know and appreciate Jewish customs and traditions.
Exhibit 69. Jewish Values and Beliefs for Children, by Intermarriage Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Households Who View Topic as
“Extremely” or “Very” Important
Inmarried Intermarried Topic: Households28 Households
Child Should Feel Positive 98% 74% About Being Jewish
Child Should Know and Appreciate 97% 75% Jewish Customs and Beliefs
Child Should Understand Tzedakah: 91% 49% Jewish Commitment to Charity
Child Should Become 75% 29% a Bar/Bat Mitzvah
Child Should Be Able to 73% 23% Read Prayers in Hebrew
Child Should Marry Another Jew 72% 16%
28 Inmarried and conversionary households combined. 78 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH EDUCATION, INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Formal Jewish Education of Children Ages 6-17
76% of Jewish children ages 6-17 who are being raised Jewish (or Jewish and something else) in San Diego County have experienced some kind of formal Jewish education.29
Exhibit 70. Formal Jewish Education of Children Ages 6-17 Being Raised Jewish or Jewish and Something Else, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Current Supplementary Supplementary Education in Jewish Past Education 21% 22%
Jewish Day School or Jewish Pre- School in Past No Jewish 21% Jewish Day Education School 24% Currently 12%
29 The Jewish education question sequence was not asked for children not being raised Jewish, as is the custom in local Jewish community studies. 79 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH EDUCATION, INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
The “Cost of Being Jewish” and Jewish Day Schools
Respondents with children ages 6-17 (regardless of whether the children were being raised Jewish) were asked whether financial cost (in the five years preceding the survey) had ever prevented them from sending a child to a fulltime Jewish day school.
34% of San Diego County Jewish households with children ages 6-17 report that financial cost had prevented them from sending a child to a Jewish day school during the five years preceding the study. This is a considerably higher estimate than the 23% western region NJPS: 2001 data,30 but a percentage identical to that reported for the 2002 Jewish Community Study of Greater Phoenix.
Exhibit 71. Impact of Financial Cost on Sending a Child to a Jewish Day School, San Diego County: 2003, Greater Phoenix: 2002, and NJPS Western Region: 2001
% of Households Reporting Financial Cost Prevented Them From Sending a Child to a Jewish Day School
San Diego County: 34% 2003
Greater Phoenix: 34% 2002
Western Region 23% NJPS: 2001
30 UAI recalculation of data for the NJPS 2001 western region. 80 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH EDUCATION, INTERMARRIAGE & RAISING CHILDREN JEWISH
Jewish Education and Intermarriage
Formal Jewish education for children being raised Jewish (or Jewish and something else) in San Diego County is strongly related to whether the child lives in an inmarried or an intermarried Jewish household. Inmarried households are much more likely than intermarried Jewish households to give their children a Jewish education:
• 52% of children ages 6-17 being raised Jewish or Jewish and something else in interfaith households have not had any Jewish education;
• In contrast, only 12% of Jewish children in inmarried Jewish households have not had any Jewish education.
Exhibit 72. Jewish Education of Children Ages 6-17 Being Raised Jewish or Jewish and Something Else, by Household Intermarriage Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Education of Children Inmarried and Intermarried All Other Ages 6-17 Being Raised Jewish Conversionary Households Households or Jewish and Something Else Households
Current Jewish Day School 17% 2% 14%
Previous Jewish Day School or 22 19 24 Jewish Pre-School
Current Supplementary 27 18 14 Jewish Education
Past Supplementary 23 10 29 Jewish Education
No Jewish Education 12 52 19
TOTAL 100% 100% 100%
81 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH COMMUNAL ISSUES
All survey respondents were asked a series of questions designed to measure — on both an absolute and a relative basis — respondent views on local San Diego County Jewish community issues.
“Given the limited resources available to address some important issues facing the Jewish community in San Diego, I would like to read you a list of issues and ask how important each is to you.“
After responding to each of the 14 issues, survey respondents who listed more than one issue as “very important” were asked to indicate which (of the listed issues they had rated as “very important”) was the most important of these issues facing the Jewish community of San Diego.
Fighting anti-Semitism is the most important of the 14 listed issues, according to survey respondents. 82% view anti-Semitism as a “very important” issue facing the San Diego Jewish community. Anti-Semitism is rated significantly higher than every other Jewish communal issue included in the list read to respondents.
The next most highly ranked issues are helping Jewish individuals and families in crisis (60%), caring for the Jewish elderly (56%), caring for the Jewish poor (50%), providing daycare for children (48%), and providing Jewish education (47%).
When respondents were asked which is most important of the issues they rated as “very important,” 42% chose fighting anti-Semitism, followed (not very closely) by providing Jewish education (13%), helping Jewish individuals and families in crisis (11%), and caring for the Jewish elderly (10%).
82 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH COMMUNAL ISSUES
Issues Facing the Jewish Community of San Diego
Exhibit 73. Importance of Issues Facing the Jewish Community of San Diego, All Survey Respondents, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Who Say Issue Is a "Very Important" Issue Facing the Jewish Community
Fighting Anti-Semitism 82%
Helping Jewish Individuals and Families in Crisis 60%
Caring for the Jewish Elderly 56%
Caring for the Jewish Poor 50%
Providing Daycare for Children 48%
Providing Jewish Education 47%
Providing Resettlement for Refugees 39%
Helping the Jewish Unemployed 35%
Programs for Interfaith Families 35%
Providing Jewish Arts & Culture 34%
Providing Jewish Programs for College Students 33%
Developing Jewish Adoption Programs 31%
Social Programs for Singles 25%
Seeking Greater Spirituality Through Judaism 23%
83 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH COMMUNAL ISSUES
The Most Important Issue For the Jewish Community of San Diego
Exhibit 74. The Most Important of 14 Listed Issues Facing the Jewish Community, All Survey Respondents, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Who Say Issue Is the "Most" Important of the 14 Listed Issues
Fighting Anti-Semitism 42%
Helping Jewish Individuals and Families in Crisis 11%
Caring for the Jewish Elderly 10%
Caring for the Jewish Poor 3%
Providing Daycare for Children 4%
Providing Jewish Education 13%
Providing Resettlement for Refugees 1%
Helping the Jewish Unemployed 1%
Programs for Interfaith Families 5%
Providing Jewish Arts & Culture 1%
Providing Jewish Programs for College Students 2%
Developing Jewish Adoption Programs 1%
Social Programs for Singles 2%
Seeking Greater Spirituality Through Judaism 2%
84 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH COMMUNAL ISSUES
Intermarried Jewish Households and Communal Issues
Respondents living in intermarried Jewish households in San Diego County are even more likely than inmarried households to see anti-Semitism as a major issue for the Jewish community. 52% of intermarried household respondents view fighting anti- Semitism as the most important of the fourteen listed issues for the community, compared to 30% of inmarried respondents. Inmarried Jewish respondents were more likely to stress providing Jewish education and caring for the Jewish elderly than were intermarried respondents.
Exhibit 75. Importance of Jewish Communal Concerns by Household Intermarriage Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Respondents in Inmarried Respondents in Which of the 14 Listed Issues is the Most & Conversionary Intermarried Important for the Jewish Community Jewish Households Jewish Households
Fighting Anti-Semitism 30% 52%
Helping Jewish Individuals 10% 14% and Families in Crisis
Caring for the Jewish Elderly 12% 7%
Caring for the Jewish Poor 3% <1%
Providing Daycare for Children 5% 3%
Providing Jewish Education 18% 7%
Providing Resettlement for Refugees 2% 5%
Helping the Jewish Unemployed <1% <1%
Programs for Interfaith Families 6% 7%
Providing Jewish Arts & Culture 1% <1%
Providing Jewish Programs for College 3% <1% Students
Developing Jewish Adoption Programs 1% <1%
Social Programs for Singles 2% <1%
Seeking Greater Spirituality 2% 3% Through Judaism
85 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
JEWISH COMMUNAL ISSUES
Personal Experiences With Anti-Semitism
One-in-five respondents (20%) who think that anti-Semitism is the most important of those issues facing the San Diego Jewish community report that they had personally experienced anti-Semitism in the year preceding the survey. Overall, one-in-six survey respondents (17%) report that they had personally experienced anti-Semitism in the year preceding the survey.
Western regional data from NJPS 2001 indicate that 28% of Jewish respondents in unambiguously Jewish households had experienced anti-Semitism during the year preceding the NJPS survey.
In San Diego County, senior respondents (8%) are least likely to report personal anti- Semitic episodes. Congregation members (26%) are more likely than non-members to report personal experiences with anti-Semitism. North County Coastal respondents (13%) and North County Inland respondents (12%) are least likely to report anti-Semitic encounters.
Exhibit 76. Personal Experiences with Anti-Semitism in the Year Preceding the Survey, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Who Report Personally Experiencing Anti-Semitism in the Year Preceding Survey
All San Diego Jewish Community Study Respondents 17% North County Coastal Respondents 13% North County Inland Respondents 12% La Jolla/Mid-Coastal Respondents 20% Central San Diego Respsondents 25% Greater East San Diego Respondents 18% . Respondents in Inmarried Households 13%
Respondents in Intermarried Jewish Households 17% . NJPS 2001 Western Region Jewish Respondents 28%
86 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Wills and Charity
The majority of survey respondents within the San Diego County Jewish community have a will, but only a small minority report provisions for any charity or cause within that will.
• 70% of all respondents have a will;
• 14% have made a provision in the will for a charity;
• 7% have a provision for gifts to a Jewish charity.
Exhibit 77. Charitable Provisions in a Will, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Jewish Charity Non-Jewish Charity Provision Provision Only 7% 7% No Will 30%
Will, No Charity Provision 56%
87 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Senior Respondents and Wills.
Older respondents are more likely to have a will; only 9% of senior respondents do not have a will. Senior respondents are slightly more likely than younger respondents to have planned for charitable giving to a Jewish charity; 8% have planned a Jewish contribution, while another 5% have planned a non-Jewish gift only.31
Exhibit 78. Charitable Provisions in Will, by Age of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Age of Respondent
Charitable Will Status 18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
No Will 68% 41% 23% 9%
Will, No Charitable Provision 24 48 57 78
Charitable Provision: 3 6 11 5 Non-Jewish Only
Jewish Charitable Provision 5 5 9 8
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
31 Male-female differences are small, but consistent. Overall, 5% of female and 10% of male respondents have provided for a Jewish charity in a will. Similarly, among senior respondents, 6% of females and 10% of males have made provision for a Jewish charity in their will. 88 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Income and Wills.
Income is related to having a will, but the differences between respondents with incomes between $50,000-$99,999, $100,000-$149,999, and $150,000 and above are minimal.
Of the most affluent households ($150,000+ income), 20% have made a provision in their will for a Jewish charitable contribution — but, 71% have either not made charitable provisions to any charity in their wills, or do not have a will. The households without charitable provisions represent a challenge and an opportunity, not only for Jewish charitable organizations, but for all charitable organizations in San Diego County.
Among respondents age 50 and over, the percentage of affluent ($150,000+) Jewish household respondents with Jewish charitable plans rises to 30%.
Exhibit 79. Charitable Provisions in a Will, by Household Income, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Annual Household Income
$50,000 - $100,000 - $150,000 & Charitable Will Status Under $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 Over
No Will 45% 27% 25% 19%
Will, No Charitable 48 61 65 52 Provision
Charitable Provision: 4 6 5 9 Non-Jewish Only
Jewish Charitable 3 6 5 20 Provision
TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100%
89 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Annual Philanthropic Donations.
While only a minority of respondents have made plans for charitable contributions in their wills, the vast majority of Jewish households in San Diego County make current contributions to charitable causes:
• 85% of survey respondents report that their household made some charitable contribution in the year preceding the study;
• Jewish households in San Diego County contribute to non-Jewish as well as to Jewish charities: 79% of Jewish households report a charitable donation to a non-Jewish cause/charity;
• 28% of the respondents report a household contribution to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County (UJF);
• Including contributions to the UJF and/or other Jewish causes, 52% of the interviewed households report having made a contribution to a Jewish charity.
Exhibit 80. Philanthropic Contributions of Jewish Households in the Year Preceding the Study, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Percentage of Households that Contributed to:
The United Jewish Federation of San 28% Diego County
Any Jewish Cause (including 52% Federation)
Non-Jewish 79% Causes
Any Charitable 85% Cause
90 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Local Jewish Community Donation Comparisons.
The percentage of Jewish households which contribute to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County is lower than the reported contribution rate for many western Jewish communities of comparable size.
Phoenix reported a 25% Federation gift rate in a 2002 UAI study, the lowest in the region. The 28% reported contribution to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County was the second lowest among the five cities with recent studies included in the exhibit below.
However, contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County on a per capita (Jewish person) basis are the same as Denver, slightly lower than Los Angeles, and higher than Phoenix and Las Vegas.
Exhibit 81. Household Contributions to Local Jewish Federations, San Diego County and Western Region Comparisons
% Households Contributions in Reporting Donations 2002 to Federation Contributions Per Community, Year 32 to Local Jewish Annual Campaign Jewish Person Federation (Unrestricted)
San Diego County: 2003 28% $7,083,000 $80
Phoenix: 2002 25% $4,997,000 $60
Denver: 1997 37% $5,307,000 $80
Los Angeles: 1997 41% $43,918,000 $85
Las Vegas: 1997 44% $1,561,000 $21
32 Contributions per capita rounded to the nearest dollar. 91 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Younger Respondents and Philanthropy
One of the key concerns in Jewish philanthropy is the issue of charitable contributions among younger Jewish households. The basic pattern on a national basis appears to be decreasing levels of contributions to charitable causes, especially Jewish causes. In San Diego County, younger respondents are least likely to contribute to charitable causes: 41% of the youngest respondents report that their household did not make a charitable contribution, four times the “no” contribution percentage in all other age groupings. In addition, only 26% of respondents ages 18-34 report a household Jewish contribution, compared to 49% of those 35-49, 61% of those 50-64, and 66% of those at least 65. Respondents under age 50 are more likely to report non-Jewish donations only than are respondents who are at least age 50.
Exhibit 82. Philanthropic Contributions of Jewish Households by Age of Respondent, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Households Which Contributed to Charitable Organizations
41% Do Not Make
Ages 18 - 34 33% Any Charitable Contribution 26% Contributes to Non-Jewish
8% Charity Only
Ages 35 - 49 43% Contributes to
Some Jewish 49% Cause
10%
Ages 50 - 64 29%
61%
9%
Ages 65+ 25%
66%
92 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Contributions to the United Jewish Federation and to Any Jewish Cause
Philanthropic contributions to the United Jewish Federation and to any Jewish charitable cause (including the Federation) are strongly related to many of the variables that have been explored in previous sections: the age of the respondent, newcomer status in San Diego County, geographic area of residence, Israel travel by the respondent, congregation membership status, intermarriage status, and annual household income.
Other than geographic area of residence, all of the other socio-demographic variables are related to contributions in patterns that are replicated in many other Jewish communities. The challenge for the Jewish community is to transcend these factors, and thus enhance philanthropic giving. Age, newcomer status, and intermarriage status are particularly interesting and challenging issues, especially in western American Jewish communities.
Exhibit 83. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Respondent Age and Newcomer Status, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Households Which % Households Which Donate to United Jewish Donate to Any Jewish SELECTED VARIABLES Federation of San Diego Cause County
Age of Respondent:
18 - 34 10% 26%
35 - 49 25% 49%
50 - 64 32% 61%
65+ 43% 66%
Newcomer Status:
Lived 0-5 Years in Area 9% 33%
Lived 6-9 Years 29% 48%
Lived 10-19 Years 34% 56%
Lived 20+ Years or Born 37% 60%
93 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Contributions to the United Jewish Federation and to Any Jewish Cause (cont’d)
Contributions to the United Jewish Federation are least likely from households living in Central San Diego, and most likely from Greater East San Diego and North County Inland. Israel travel and congregation membership are especially strongly related to Jewish and Federation philanthropy.33
Exhibit 84. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Geographic Area of Residence, Israel Travel by Respondent, and Whether the Household Belongs to a Jewish Congregation, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Households Donate to % Households Donate SELECTED VARIABLES United Jewish Federation of to Any Jewish Cause San Diego County
Geographic Area of Residence:
North County Coastal 25% 52%
North County Inland 35% 67%
La Jolla/Mid-Coastal 28% 49%
Central San Diego 19% 39%
Greater East San Diego 32% 51%
Israel Travel by Respondent:
Never Traveled to Israel 18% 44%
Has Traveled to Israel 45% 68%
Household Congregation Status:
Not a Member 16% 38%
Pays Dues to a Jewish Congregation 56% 85%
33 Four-of-ten (39%) respondents have traveled to Israel. Among those who have not traveled to Israel as a child or an adult, almost half (47%) report that at some time during the five years preceding the survey, cost has been a factor in preventing someone in the household from traveling to Israel. 94 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
PHILANTHROPY
Contributions to the United Jewish Federation and to Any Jewish Cause (cont’d)
Only 12% of intermarried Jewish households in San Diego County contribute to the United Jewish Federation, versus 47% of inmarried households.
More than half of all Jewish households with annual incomes of at least $150,000 do not contribute to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County, and a third do not contribute to any Jewish cause.
Exhibit 85. Household Contributions to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County and to Any Jewish Cause by Intermarriage Status and Household Income, Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
% Households Donate to % Households Donate SELECTED VARIABLES United Jewish Federation of to Any Jewish Cause San Diego County
Intermarriage Status:
Intermarried Household 12% 34%
Inmarried Household 47% 80%
Annual Household Income:
Under $50,000 16% 37%
$50,000 -$100,000 29% 57%
$100,000 -$150,000 39% 67%
$150,000 ++ 46% 67%
95 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING
The Jewish community of San Diego County joins other western American Jewish communities in an exciting period of growth. San Diego County is now a major locus of Jewish households in the United States, exceeding the numbers of households in many areas traditionally defined as major centers of American Jewish life. The large number of new Jewish households which have moved to the area in the past five years suggests that it is likely that this growth is continuing.
This rapid growth of Jewish households and the sheer size of the community represents both a formidable challenge and an opportunity for community leadership and institutions.
Jewish San Diego County is similar to many other western Jewish communities. The size of the community, geographic dispersion, and large numbers of newcomers combine to define the need for Jewish community building, and at the same time to establish the obstacles to that task.
SERIOUS CHALLENGES
• A geographically dispersed community;
• A higher percentage of single parent households than is typical nationally;
• Large numbers of newcomers and younger people not presently known to the community;
• A small percentage who feel connected to the San Diego Jewish community or who feel it is “very important” to be part of the San Diego Jewish community;
• Low participation in Jewish organizational life;
• Low congregation affiliation rate;
• High intermarriage rate;
• Low percentage of children being raised Jewish among the intermarried;
• A small percentage of community members under 35 who make a contribution to a Jewish cause, and to the United Jewish Federation.
96 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING
SUBSTANTIAL ASSETS
In facing these challenges, the community does have substantial assets:
• High percentage who feel being Jewish is very important (including many intermarried households);
• High percentage who feel connected to Israel;
• High percentage of parents of San Diego County children who feel it is “extremely/very important” for children to know and appreciate Jewish customs and beliefs, and to feel positive about being Jewish;
• An annual campaign that is relatively strong on a per capita Jewish person basis compared with other western communities;
• The quality of life in San Diego County.
Some Specific Planning Issues
After reviewing the data from the 2003 Jewish Community Study of San Diego County, Ukeles Associates, Inc., would like to highlight a few key findings of the study which have planning implications.
• Large numbers of newcomers and younger people seem to be disconnected from San Diego County’s Jewish life. Unless additional special efforts are made to welcome newcomers, the patterns of minimal-to-moderate Jewish communal involvement over the last ten years will be repeated.
• A small group of Jewish households is strongly connected to Jewish life in San Diego. For a significant majority, the importance of being Jewish and the strength of connections to Israel are positive building blocks for the emergence of Jewish community.
• But, most Jews in San Diego County are not even known to the Federation. A community-wide effort to encourage Jewish households to connect to Jewish life is necessary to grow the sense of Jewish community.
97 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
CONCLUSIONS & IMPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY PLANNING
• By western American standards, the rate of congregational membership is not unusual, but neither is it a cause for celebration. A community-wide effort to encourage people to join a congregation is important, since congregational life can serve as a gateway to Jewish community. The community may need to experiment with ways to overcome resistance to congregation membership.
• The large number of children residing in intermarried San Diego County Jewish households, and the small percentage being raised “Jewish,” suggest that the Jewish community has a substantial stake in interfaith households. Interfaith parents do not stress equally some common Jewish values, such as Tzedakah. Programs to help Jewish interfaith households (and unaffiliated non-intermarried Jews) become familiar with critical Jewish values which have universal appeal, such as Tzedakah and making the world a better place, might help alter the landscape of Jewish life.
• The study found a number of vulnerable households: low income households, seniors living alone, single parent households, and households that report difficulty in getting assistance for an elderly relative. This suggests that the community needs to seriously consider what can be done to improve access to services, and to assist individuals and families seeking assistance from both Jewish and non-Jewish auspices.
The Future
Hopefully, this portrait of Jewish households and the people living in them can help the continuing efforts of Jewish agencies and organizations in San Diego County to build a stronger 21st century Jewish San Diego. The completion of the 2003 Jewish population study should mark the transition to the next stage of community study and analysis.
98 ______The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, Final Report, Ukeles Associates, Inc. (UAI) & International Communications Research (ICR).
Demographic Study of the San Diego Jewish Population: 2003
APPENDICES TO THE FINAL REPORT
A Note on Methodology
Screening Questionnaire
Jewish Household Survey Questionnaire
United Jewish Federation of San Diego County
Prepared By
Ukeles Associates, Inc. Jacob B. Ukeles, Ph.D., President Ron Miller, Ph.D., Research Director
International Communications Research
Melissa Herrmann, Vice-President and Project Principal Investigator David Dutwin, Ph.D., Account Manager
Marketing Systems, Group – GENESYS Dale Kulp, President and CEO
June, 2004 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
The Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Overview
1,080 telephone interviews were conducted between October 2, 2002 and March 6, 2003 with randomly selected Jewish households living in San Diego County, who were selected and interviewed so that they would be representative of all Jewish households living in the county.
Interviewing was conducted by ICR, International Communications Research of Media, PA, using their computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) system. Survey questions were designed by a project team, which included a 24 member United Jewish Federation of San Diego County Demographic Study Oversight Committee, chaired by Andrea Oster; Federation staff, coordinated by Michael Hirsh, the Director of Planning & Allocations; Melissa Herrmann, Vice-President of ICR’s Social Science Research Group; and Dr. Ron Miller, Research Director for Ukeles Associates, Inc. of New York (UAI).
Survey questions were discussed, selected and revised by the combined project group to provide information about the size and characteristics of the San Diego County Jewish community, to allow comparisons (when appropriate) to western region local Jewish community studies and to the National Jewish Population Study, NJPS: 2000- 2001.
Research Definitions
• For this study, a Jewish household was defined as a household including one or more Jewish persons at least 18 years old.
• For the purposes of this report, a Jewish person was:
• An adult who self-identifies as a Jew, or
• A child who is being raised Jewish.
Geographic Definitions
After survey interviewing was completed, interviews were organized into six geographic areas: South County, Central San Diego, Greater East San Diego, La Jolla/Mid-Coastal, North County Coastal and North County Inland. The zip codes included in these areas are summarized in Appendix Exhibit A-2.
A1
A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
The Interviewing Process
The interviewing process included two interrelated steps using the ICR CATI system: (1) An initial “screening” interview with randomly selected potential respondents, which was designed to identify both Jewish and non-Jewish households; and, (2) A “Jewish household interview” with respondents in Jewish households, which typically required 25-30 minutes to complete.
Copies of the screening questions and the Jewish household interview questions follow this Note on Methodology.
Respondents were asked in the screening process if they considered themselves to be Jewish. Respondents who said that they were Jewish were immediately switched to the Jewish household interview, and the same interviewer attempted to complete the interview.
• Respondents who said that they were “Jewish and something else,” or were “not sure” if they were Jewish, were asked a series of questions so they could provide some more detail, and the interview was completed (if possible), unless the respondent indicated that he/she was a Messianic Jew.
• Messianic households were not interviewed; they were asked a few key questions (e.g., number of voice telephone lines in the household) and then thanked for their cooperation.
• Non-Jewish respondents were asked if any other adult member of their household considers himself/herself Jewish. If there was no adult in the household who was Jewish, respondents in these non-Jewish households were asked only a few additional questions, which were used for estimating the number of Jewish households in San Diego County.
If another adult in the household was Jewish (but not the respondent), the CATI system switched to the Jewish household interview, and the interviewer tried to complete the interview, explaining the purpose of the survey in more detail. Interviewers attempted to be certain that a non-Jewish respondent felt comfortable answering questions about the household’s Jewish life experiences, but interviewers were instructed not to ask for the Jewish household member immediately.
A2 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Non-Jews in Jewish households who wanted to complete the survey were interviewed, although a series of questions about Jewish childhood experiences typically asked of Jewish respondents were not asked. The goal of including non-Jewish respondents (in Jewish households) was to insure a representative sample of intermarried households, since ICR and UAI were concerned that a missed opportunity to interview that household might result in an undercount of intermarried households, especially if the Jewish household member was not home at the time of the contact.
If the non-Jewish respondent indicated that he/she felt uncomfortable or wanted the Jewish adult to answer the survey, the interviewer attempted (on this call and in “callbacks”) to complete the Jewish household interview with the Jewish household member.
89% of the Jewish household interview respondents were Jewish, 3% viewed themselves as “Jewish and something else,” and 8% were non-Jewish.
The key screener questions:
S2. “Do you consider yourself to be Jewish or non-Jewish?”
1 Jewish 2 Jewish and Something Else 3 Not Sure 4 Non-Jewish 5 Messianic Jew; Jew for Jesus, “Completed Jew”
Non-Jewish respondents were asked a second household screening question (if at least two people lived in the household):
S3. “Is there anyone else in the household who considers himself or herself to be Jewish?”
1 Yes 2 Jewish and Something Else 3 Not sure if person considers self Jewish 4 No, no one Jewish
A3 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Callbacks and Number of Calls
A total of 93,226 telephone numbers were dialed a total of 292,283 times to complete the screening and interview phases of the Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003.1
• 32,107 residential households were contacted.
• 13,735 households provided sufficient information so that their religious group identification could be determined:
• A total of 12,468 households were classified as non-Jewish for estimation and weighting purposes (including 80 Messianic households and 255 households in which no adult considered themselves to be Jewish, but one of the adults had a Jewish mother or father);
• 1,268 Jewish households were identified during the screening phase; 1,080 interviews are included in the survey data file.2
Response Rate
• The overall response rate for the screening phase of the study was 36%, calculated using the AAPOR (response rate “4”) model; that is, approximately 36% of all potentially working residential numbers were successfully contacted during the screening process.3 This calculation includes as a negative outcome all phone calls made to numbers that appear to be working, but for which a household was not reached.
1 The screening phase allowed for a minimum of eight callbacks to each working number included in the survey samples, as opposed to the industry standard of four total calls. The goal of these extra callbacks was to make sure that the interviewed Jewish households were representative of the Jewish community, not just those available at home on a given night. Callbacks were rotated by the interviewing firm (ICR: International Communications Research) by day of the week, and time of night (or day). Thus, unless the telephone carrier indicated that a phone number was “not working,” or a “fax/data” line, or it was clear that the telephone number was non-residential, a minimum of nine phone calls was the standard interview default before a number was “abandoned.”
2 The complete “sample disposition” is summarized in Appendix Exhibit A3. 971 respondents completed the interview in its entirety; another 109 provided sufficient information to be included in the final interview data file. 188 Jewish household potential respondents were either unwilling or unable to complete a usable survey interview. 3 Prior to the survey, the research team had estimated that a 40% response rate was an attainable goal, even though previous ICR-UAI studies had achieved higher response rates in other Jewish community studies.
A4 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
• From another perspective, a contacted household response rate of 43% was obtained. Of the 32,107 households which were reached, 43% provided data on the household’s “religious” status, which was used for Jewish household estimation purposes.
Interview Cooperation Rate
• The identified Jewish household interview cooperation rate was 85%; that is, 85% of the 1,268 identified Jewish households provided sufficient responses to the “Jewish household interview” questionnaire to be included in the survey data file.4
• 77% of potential households completed the survey in its entirety, while another 8% provided sufficient information (including demographic information) to be included in the data file.
Sampling Design: Stratified Random Sampling
Each possible telephone number in San Diego County was assigned to one of two sampling frames: (1) Federation List Sampling Frame A sampling frame representing households known to the United Jewish Federation of San Diego County (UJF) — phone numbers from the Federation list. The numbers on the UJF list were electronically unduplicated by household for multiple entries by MSG- GENESYS (Marketing Systems Group, Inc.), which was responsible for sample design, Jewish household estimation, data file weighting, and overall statistical control for the project. Only households with valid telephone numbers within the survey area were included in the “List” frame (since prior Jewish community survey experiences by MSG- GENESYS and UAI had indicated that a sizeable portion of names on any Jewish federation list were duplicates, or incomplete). A conservative approach was utilized, since a potentially Jewish household with semi- complete information that was eliminated from the List sampling frame would then be reachable through a residual random digit dialing (RDD) frame. The number of households which remained on the Federation List for sampling purposes was just over 11,000, after all unduplication and elimination procedures by MSG-GENESYS.
4 Prior to the study, the research team had projected a cooperation rate of 70%-75%.
A5 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Prior to field interview operations, MSG-GENESYS, UAI and ICR had planned for the likelihood that only 85%-90% of households randomly sampled from the Federation List sampling frame would be Jewish, while 10%-15% would be non-Jewish. (2) Residual RDD Sampling Frame The second, independent and complementary sampling frame used for the survey was the residual RDD sampling frame — designed to represent all potential Jewish households not known to UJF, as well as the vast majority of non-Jewish households in the county. The residual RDD sample was constructed using the GENESYS sampling system, so that every possible phone number in San Diego County was generated internally by the GENESYS system. Then, telephone numbers on the Federation List were electronically purged from the potential RDD pool, hence the term “residual” RDD sampling frame. The two complementary sampling frames included all potential numbers in San Diego County, unduplicated and in separate sampling frames. The Federation List frame was assumed to have mostly working phone numbers, while the residual RDD frame was assumed to have many non-working phone numbers, as well as valid phone numbers.
Within the residual RDD sampling frame, telephone exchanges were further subdivided by MSG-GENESYS into three residual RDD strata, using a system developed by MSG- GENESYS and UAI for prior MSG-GENESYS, UAI, ICR Jewish community surveys: (1) “High” density residual RDD exchanges, where MSG estimated that the percent Jewish of all households contacted through these exchanges would be 5% or higher; (2) “Medium” density residual RDD exchanges, where the estimate was that the proportion of Jewish households would be between 2% and 5%. (3) “Low” density exchanges, where it was estimated that less than 2% of the households would be Jewish, and MSG estimated that the overall Jewish percentage was probably around 1.4%. These exchanges were eliminated from the residual RDD sampling frame after discussions with the Demographic Oversight Committee, since the cost of interviewing in these exchanges would have been prohibitive.
Within the residual RDD sampling frame, therefore, only two strata were utilized: the high density and the medium density exchanges.
A6 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Independent Random Samples After electronic unduplication of the List and residual RDD sampling frames, independent random samples were generated by MSG from the List and residual RDD sampling frames. A total of 2,000 telephone numbers were generated from the List sampling frame, and were sent to ICR for interviewing; 1,998 were ultimately called. Another 87,000 telephone numbers were initially randomly generated from the high and medium density residual RDD sampling strata. Prior to the residual RDD sample being sent by MSG to ICR, MSG utilized its automated GENESYS ID-plus system to eliminate electronically in advance all phone numbers in the residual RDD sample that were non-residential (businesses, government offices), non-working, or fax-data lines.5 Almost 30,000 phone numbers were eliminated as non-working, fax-data, or non-residential by MSG via ID-plus, so ICR received a pool of over 57,000 residual RDD phone numbers for its residual RDD dialing and interviewing process. ICR requested and received an additional pool of approximately 4,000 telephone numbers from the residual RDD sampling frame after three to four months of interviewing (these were not pre-screened via ID-plus), which were needed because of the difficulty in locating Jewish households in the residual RDD sampling frame. (Note: All phone numbers of “known” Jewish households had been eliminated from the residual RDD frame, so the proportion of Jewish households was reduced.) Added to the original residual RDD sample of approximately 87,000 numbers, a total of 91,228 numbers formed the base of the residual RDD sampling frame (see Appendix Exhibit A3: page A15).
Sampling Frames, Calls, and Interviews The goal of the sophisticated sampling design was to maintain random sampling procedures that would allow for proper estimation of the number of Jewish households in San Diego County, but which would also be efficient and economical. Completing a residual RDD interview ultimately cost at least ten times the cost of completing a Federation List interview, since so many calls needed to be made repeatedly to numbers where no answer was received, or the number was continuously busy and could not be immediately assigned as non-working.
All respondents reached via the Federation List random sampling design could have been reached through a “pure” RDD approach, if MSG had not unduplicated the phone numbers. However, they would have been contacted at much greater cost.
5 Interested readers should visit the MSG-GENESYS website, www.m-s-g.com, for additional information about the company’s state-of-the-art sampling designs and innovative techniques to reduce/manage the costs of survey interviewing.
A7 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
(a) A total of 549 interviews from the Federation List sampling frame are included in the 2003 San Diego County Jewish household survey interview data file. These interviews required a total of 1,998 numbers to be called a total of 5,802 times — approximately one usable interview per 3.6 phone numbers (one interview per 10.6 calls).
(b) In the residual RDD frame, a total of 286,481 calls were made to 91,228 telephone numbers to complete 531 residual RDD interviews — approximately one usable interview per 171.8 phone numbers (one interview per 539.5 calls).
(c) Thus, while 531 of the 1,080 interviews (49%) were completed through the residual RDD sampling frame, 98% of the phone numbers dialed and 98% of the phone calls made were residual RDD frame generated.
(d) Interview completion rates (with an identified Jewish household) varied by sampling frame. 92% of Jewish households contacted through the Federation List completed a usable interview, while only 79% of Jewish households contacted through the residual RDD sampling frame provided a usable interview (79% in both the residual high density and medium density sub-strata).
Estimation and Weighting Procedures
Estimation and weighting procedures occurred independently within each sampling frame.6 The sampling design, estimation and weighting procedures effectively eliminate the potential bias caused by Federation List households being more likely to answer a Jewish-related survey.
The number of Jewish households that each of the two sampling frames represented was calculated independently for each sampling frame, and then the interviews in the data file were weighted independently so they reflect the number of Jewish households estimated for each specific sampling frame.
6 Jewish household estimates were based on the 2002 Claritas estimates of the total number of households in San Diego County. Claritas is a recognized leader among firms which update U.S. Census household-demographic estimates. Please see the Claritas website: www.claritas.com for detailed descriptions and evaluations of the accuracy of Claritas estimates, as well as the procedures used to generate the estimates.
A8 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Federation List Sampling Frame
Within the Federation List frame, a total of 670 respondents indicated the household’s “religious” status — 76 respondents said that they were not Jewish (including Messianic Jews and Jewish origin households), and that no other adult in the household was Jewish.7
The estimated number of Jewish households on the Federation List frame was derived by multiplying the percentage Jewish (88.7%) by the total number of Jewish households which remained on the Federation List sampling frame (over 11,000). There were 594 Jewish households in the List frame, and 76 non-Jewish households — 88.7% = 594/670. Note that Jewish households which would not complete an interview were classified as Jewish for the Jewish “incidence” estimation process; 594 potential respondents lived in a Jewish household, even though only 549 completed a usable interview.
Thus, a total of just under 10,000 Jewish households were estimated to have been on the edited Federation List, and this estimate was built into the data file with appropriate weights.
Three important notes:
• First, the 10,000 Jewish households which appear in the data file as Federation List households should not be construed as the actual number of Jewish households on the Federation List, since the data file estimate represents the households which remained on the Federation List for sampling after it went through a series of adjustments by MSG-GENESYS.
• Second, it is assumed that there are households which were reached through the residual RDD sampling frame which are known to the UJF; some had been purged from the Federation List during “cleaning” of the List, and others might not have been on the List before MSG-GENESYS began the sampling process.
7 The 11% of the households on the Federation List which were non-Jewish matched the pre-survey hypothesis, which was based on prior UAI-ICR-MSG Jewish community survey experience.
A9
A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
• Third, the data file reflects the MSG-GENESYS and UAI estimate that approximately 10,000 Jewish households could have been reached through the Federation List sampling design if everyone on the List had been called and contacted.
The 501 fully completed and 48 partially completed List interviews were then weighted to reflect these 10,000 estimated Jewish households. As a result, each UJF sampling frame interviewed Jewish household represents 18 Jewish households in San Diego County.
Residual RDD Frame
Within the residual RDD frame, separate estimation procedures occurred for each residual RDD sub-strata.
Based upon the survey interviewing, a total of 13,065 households could be classified as Jewish or non-Jewish via residual RDD interviews; 12,391 were non-Jewish, and 674 were identified as Jewish households. The number of all households estimated by MSG-GENESYS to be within each of these residual RDD sub-strata was independently multiplied by the percentage of households which were Jewish to provide the estimate of Jewish households in the residual RDD high and medium density residual RDD household pool.
Following standard survey research procedures, within the residual RDD sampling frames, estimation and weighting procedures adjusted for the number of net telephone voice lines that interviewed households — both Jewish and non-Jewish — reported that they had in their household, so that households with multiple phones (and more likely to be reached via RDD) were not overrepresented in the Jewish household estimate.
• In the High Density sub-stratum, 7,721 households provided information; 6.2% (481) were Jewish. Using Claritas estimates of the number of households within this stratum, approximately 16,600 Jewish households were estimated to live in San Diego County within the residual RDD high density sub-stratum.
• In the Medium density sub-stratum, 5,344 households provided information; 3.6% (193) were Jewish. The estimated/extrapolated number of Jewish households was just under 15,400.
• In addition, a 1.4% estimate was made of Jewish household incidence in the low density residual RDD exchanges which were not sampled because of prohibitive costs. The 1.4% incidence estimate was based on MSG-GENESYS pre-survey analysis of the probable Jewish density within these exchanges. The estimated number of Jewish households within the low density exchanges was about 4,000. This estimate was combined with the medium density residual RDD strata estimate for weighting purposes.
A10 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Thus, a total of 19,400 Jewish households were estimated to have been potentially interviewable within the medium (and low) density residual RDD strata, and are represented in the data file by 152 interviews. Each “medium” density residual RDD interview in the data file represents approximately 128 potential interviews.8
An estimated total of 16,600 Jewish households are represented by the 379 usable interviews in the survey data file from the high density residual RDD sub-stratum, which was 6.2% Jewish. Each high density stratum interview in the weighted data file represents approximately 44 Jewish households in the community.
Thus, the data file which was constructed by ICR, UAI and MSG for the Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003 has a built-in weight variable that allows for projection of the completed interviews to the 46,000 Jewish households estimated to live in San Diego County: 10,000 List households, and 36,000 residual RDD Jewish households (19,400 + 16,600). By independently estimating the number of Jewish households in each sampling frame (and stratum), higher interview completion rates among UJF affiliated households do not bias the estimate of the number of Jewish households in the community.
Sampling Error Estimates All Jewish community sample surveys are subject to sampling errors. Two types of sampling error — potential error in household estimates, and potential error in survey data interpretation — are summarized below:
Household Estimates
The best estimate of the total number of Jewish households in San Diego County is 46,000. At the standard 95% level of confidence used in survey research, the estimate of the number of Jewish households is accurate within a range of +/- 3,600 households, reflecting a potential error range of approximately +/- 7.7% (1.96 standard errors). Thus, the number of Jewish households could be as low as 42,400 or as high as 49,600, but the most likely number is around 46,000.
8 The sampling plan anticipated that the ratio of usable interviews to estimated Jewish households was likely to be much higher in the residual RDD frame than for the Federation List interviewed households; the ratio/multiple was expected to be highest among the medium density residual RDD sampling stratum.
A11 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Survey Responses
In addition to potential errors in the estimates of the number of Jewish households, the reported survey findings are also subject to error. In political election surveys, for example, the reported survey findings are always expressed as the probable “percentage,” but a range of possible error is always included. These sampling errors are a function of both the sample design and the overall sample size, as well as the sample size of subgroups being analyzed.
For the Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003, the responses of Jewish household respondents to the interview questionnaire are also subject to sampling error. While complicated, the discussion below and the table which follows should help the interested reader estimate potential survey error.
(1) The maximum sampling error for survey responses for which 1,000 or more respondents answered a question is +/- 4.2% at the traditional 95% confidence level. (2) While essentially counter-intuitive, the closer the actual survey response percentage is to 50%, the higher the possibility of statistical error, and the further the percentage is away from 50%, the lower the possibility of sampling error. Thus, 29% of interviewed Jewish households report that they are congregation members. Since over 1,000 respondents answered this question, and the percentage was 29%, the 95% confidence level is approximately 29% +/- 3.8%.
The percentage who are congregation members (from a statistical perspective) could be as low as 25% or as high as 33%, but the “best” statistical estimate is that 29% of Jewish households are congregation members
(3) Survey sampling error increases (potentially) as sample size decreases.
The intermarriage rate for San Diego County couples is 31%, a percentage based on just under 700 married households. Thus, the potential error for the percentage intermarried is +/- 4.6%.
In the North County Coastal area, survey data show that 49% of the currently married respondent/spouse couples are intermarried. But, there are only 199 completed interviews among North County Coastal respondents, so the potential sampling error is +/- 9.4%.
A12 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
(4) Appendix Exhibit A1 is a matrix that summarizes potential sampling error at the 95% confidence level for the San Diego County study. The number of cases/interviews is plotted across the top, and the actual survey percentage is plotted on the left side. All standard error estimates have already been multiplied by +/- 1.96 for the standard 95% sampling error range. Using the example of intermarriage in North County Coastal above, there were approximately 200 interviews and the percentage intermarried was estimated to be 49%. The appropriate 95% confidence interval range is 49% +/- 9.4% (which has been bolded for illustration).
Appendix Exhibit A1 95% Confidence Interval Estimates by Number of Interviews and Survey Data Percentage Jewish Community Study of San Diego: 2003
Estimates of Survey Standard Errors: 95% Confidence Level
Number of Interviews Survey %: 100 200 300 400 500 750 1000
1% or 99% 2.5 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 5% or 95% 5.8 4.1 3.3 2.9 2.6 2.1 1.8 10 or 90% 7.9 5.6 4.6 4.0 3.5 2.9 2.5 20% or 80% 10.6 7.5 6.1 5.3 4.7 3.9 3.3 30% or 70% 12.1 8.6 7.0 6.1 5.4 4.4 3.8 40% or 60% 13.0 9.2 7.5 6.5 5.8 4.7 4.1 50% 13.2 9.4 7.6 6.6 5.9 4.8 4.2
NOTE: The standard errors in the above tables have already been adjusted for a 95% confidence interval by multiplying the initially calculated standard error by 1.96. Based upon the sample size and the actual survey percentage, the 95% confidence interval would be the survey percentage plus or minus the 95% confidence level number shown in the table.
A13 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Appendix Exhibit A2 Zip Codes and Geographic Areas Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
Geographic Area Zip Codes Included
South County 91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91932, 92154
Central San Diego 92101, 92103, 92104, 92105, 92106, 92107, 92108, 92110, 92111, 92114, 92116, 92118, 92123
Greater East San 91901, 91935, 91941, 91942, 91945, 91977, 91978, 92019, 92020, Diego 92021, 92040, 92071, 92115, 92119, 92120, 92160
La Jolla/ 92037, 92092, 92109, 92117, 92121, 92122, 92169 Mid-Coastal
North County Coastal 92003, 92007, 92008, 92009, 92014, 92023, 92024, 92054, 92056, 92057, 92067, 92075, 92083, 92084, 92091, 92130
North County Inland 92025, 92026, 92027, 92029, 92046, 92064, 92065, 92069, 92082, 92096, 92124, 92126, 92127, 92128, 92129, 92131, 92145, 92150
A14 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Appendix Exhibit A3: Sample Disposition Jewish Community Study of San Diego County: 2003
LIST RESIDUAL TOTAL RDD
Number of Telephone Dialings Made for Survey 5,802 286,481 292,283
Phone Numbers Called for Sample 1,998 91,228 93,226
A. Non-Contacts 421 43,516 43,937
A1 Fax/Data Lines 28 10,211 10,239
A2 Disconnected Non-Working Numbers 187 20,545 20,732
A3 Chronic No Answer, Busy 206 12,760 12,966
B. Phone Numbers Reached 1,577 47,712 49,289
B1 Business Phone (non-residential) 61 14,861 14,922
B2 Ineligible 16 148 164
B3 Chronic Answering Machine 222 1,044 1,266
B4 Privacy Managers - Dialing Unresolved 14 816 830
C. Total Residential Households Reached 1,264 30,843 32,107
C1 Refusals/Hang-ups 289 11,035 11,324
C2 Call Backs - No Resolution 9+ Calls 261 5,381 5,642
C3 Miscellaneous Non-Information Reasons 11 231 242
C4 Language Not Resolved 23 991 1,014
C5 Says Duplicate 10 140 150
A15 A NOTE ON METHODOLOGY
Appendix Exhibit A3 (continued): Sample Disposition
RESIDUAL LIST TOTAL RDD
D. Households With Identity Information 670 13,065 13,735
D1 Messianic Jewish Household 10 70 80
D2 Non-Jewish 64 12,068 12,132
D3 Jewish Origin Households (no one 2 253 255 currently Jewish in household)
JEWISH HOUSEHOLDS 594 674 1,268
D4 JEWISH - Unable, Refused, Terminated 45 143 188 Quickly
D5 JEWISH - Partial Interview, sufficient 48 61 109 information
D6 JEWISH - Completed Interview 501 470 971
A16
605 West State Street San Diego Screener Media, Pennsylvania 19063-2620
I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O M M U N I C A T I O N S R E S E A R C H
THE 2002 JEWISH COMMUNITY STUDY OF SAN DIEGO SCREENING QUESTIONS: LIST/RDD INTERVIEWS
LIST INTERVIEWS
Hello, I am calling on behalf of the San Diego Jewish Population Survey. The survey is anonymous and confidential. We are NOT asking for money. We are NOT selling anything. My name is ______.
RESIDUAL RDD INTERVIEWS
Hello, I am calling from ICR — International Communications Research. We are NOT selling any products or services. My name is ______. The survey is part of the San Diego Jewish Population Study. We are interviewing both Jewish and Non-Jewish households.
1 RECORD HERE IF RESPONDENT SAYS “NO ONE IS JEWISH” AND HANGS UP
INTERVIEWER PROMPTS AS NEEDED FOR BOTH RDD AND LIST INTERVIEWS
[IF RESPONDENT SAYS “BUT, I’M NOT JEWISH: Then it will take only a minute; we have only a few questions for everyone who lives in the San Diego County area, whether Jewish or not Jewish, and we would appreciate your cooperation.]
[IF NECESSARY: While the study is the San Diego Jewish Population Survey, it is important that we ask households that are not Jewish a few questions, and we would appreciate your cooperation.]
[IF NECESSARY: Your phone number was chosen randomly by a computer program. The survey is anonymous and confidential.]
IF NECESSARY: You may have seen a newspaper story about the survey.]
[IF NECESSARY: “You can call 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx to find out more about this study. It is sponsored by The United Jewish Federation of San Diego County, and has their full support. The results of the survey will be useful in planning programs that are funded by the Federation, which provides services for both Jewish and non-Jewish individuals and families.]
A17 IF NECESSARY: I am calling from ICR, International Communications Research, an Independent research firm which has been asked to conduct the San Diego Jewish Population Survey, and has conducted similar studies in other major American cities.]
S1. May I please speak to one of the heads of the household?
1 Yes, on the phone CONTINUE 2 Yes, coming to phone REPEAT INTRO, THEN ASK Q. S2 3 Head of Household Not home/available CALL BACK OPTIONS 4 Not 18 years old CALLBACK OPTIONS 9 Refused THANK AND TERMINATE
S2. Do you consider yourself to be Jewish or Non-Jewish?
1 Jewish SKIP TO MAIN Q-AIRE 2 (VOLUNTEERED) Jewish and something else, partially Jewish, half Jewish SKIP TO S2a 3 (VOLUNTEERED) Not sure SKIP TO S2a 4 Not Jewish SKIP TO S3 9 Refused SKIP TO S3
A18
(ASK IF S2=2 or 3) S2a. So that we can properly understand your answer, would you please tell me the ways in which you consider yourself: “Jewish and Something Else” — “Partially Jewish” — “Half Jewish” — or What you mean that you are “Not Sure” that you are Jewish?
RECORD VERBATIM.
IF ANSWER INDICATES “MESSIANIC” JEW, JEW FOR JESUS, etc. …PLEASE RECORD BELOW AND SKIP TO S5.
IF ANY OTHER ANSWER, PROBE FOR “JEWISH AND SOMETHING ELSE” DUAL IDENTITY, AND RECORD VERBATIM. THEN SKIP TO MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE
NOTE: SAYING “I FEEL JEWISH AND I FEEL CHRISTIAN” OR “WE CELEBRATE SOME JEWISH HOLIDAYS AND SOME NON-JEWISH HOLIDAYS” IS NOT THE SAME AS SAYING “MESSIANIC JEW” – PLEASE PROBE FOR DETAILS GRACIOUSLY
1 Jesus was a Jew ASK S5-S7; THEN TERM GRACIOUSLY 2 Jews for Jesus ASK S5-S7; THEN TERM GRACIOUSLY 3 Jewish Christian ASK S5-S7; THEN TERM GRACIOUSLY 4 Messianic Jew ASK S5-S7; THEN TERM GRACIOUSLY 5 “Completed Jew” ASK S5-S7; THEN TERM GRACIOUSLY 6 All other (PROBE DUAL IDENTITY)______SKIP TO MAIN Q-AIRE R Refused CONTINUE WITH S3
(ASK IF S2=4 or 9) S3. Is there anyone else in the household who considers himself or herself to be Jewish?
1 Yes, Jewish SKIP TO MAIN Q-AIRE 2 (VOLUNTEERED) Jewish and something else, partially Jewish, Half Jewish SKIP TO S3a 3 (VOLUNTEERED) Not sure SKIP TO S3a 4 No, No One Jewish in Household SKIP TO S4 8 Not sure/NA SKIP TO S4 9 Refused SKIP TO S4
A19 (ASK IF S3=2 or 3) S3a. So that we can properly understand your answer, would you please tell me the ways in which that person considers himself/herself: “Jewish and Something Else” — “Partially Jewish” — “Half Jewish” — or What do you mean that you are “Not Sure” that that person considers himself/herself Jewish?
RECORD VERBATIM.
IF ANSWER INDICATES “MESSIANIC” JEW, JEW FOR JESUS, etc. …PLEASE RECORD BELOW AND SKIP TO S5.
IF ANY OTHER ANSWER, PROBE FOR “JEWISH AND SOMETHING ELSE” DUAL IDENTITY, AND RECORD VERBATIM. THEN SKIP TO MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE
1 Jesus was a Jew ASK S5-S7; TERM GRACIOUSLY 2 Jews for Jesus ASK S5-S7; TERM GRACIOUSLY 3 Jewish Christian ASK S5-S7; TERM GRACIOUSLY 4 Messianic Jew ASK S5-S7; TERM GRACIOUSLY 5 “Completed Jew” ASK S5-S7; TERM GRACIOUSLY 6 All other (PROBE DUAL IDENTITY)______SKIP TO MAIN Q-AIRE 9 Refused SKIP TO S4
(ASK IF S3=4, 8, 9) or (S3a = 9) S4. Did anyone in the household, including you, have a Jewish mother or father?
1 Yes 2 No 8 Don’t know 9 Refused
(ASK IF S2a=1-5 OR S3a=1-5 OR S3=4,8,9) S5. What is your zip code? (IF NECESSARY; FOR GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS- COMPARISONS)
1 Answer given ______(RECORD 5 DIGIT NUMBER) 8 Don’t know 9 Refused
(ASK IF S2a=1-5 OR S3a=1-5 OR S3=4,8,9) S6. Excluding cell phones, how many different telephone numbers (different telephone lines), not extensions do you have coming into your household?
1 Answer given ______8 Don’t know 9 Refused
A20
(ASK ONLY IF S6 = 2+) S6a. How many of these phone numbers are usually used as a business phone, for a fax machine, or for a computer
1 Answer given ______0 None usually used as a business phone/fax/computer 8 Don’t know 9 Refused
(ASK IF S2a=1-5 OR S3a=1-5 OR S3=4,8,9) S7. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? PAUSE. Please include everyone for whom this is the primary residence, including students temporarily away at college.
1 Answer given ______8 Don’t know 9 Refused
THANK GRACIOUSLY AND END INTERVIEW FOR NON JEWISH HOUSEHOLDS, JEWISH ORIGIN HOUSEHOLDS AND MESSIANIC HOUSEHOLDS
A21 53 West Baltimore Pike Media, Pennsylvania 19063-5698
San Diego Questionnaire I N T E R N A T I O N A L C O M M U N I C A T I O N S R E S E A R C H
The 2002 Jewish Community Study of San Diego County
Thank you. Your answers to the Jewish Population Survey questions will be used to identify Jewish communal needs and to plan better services. We do NOT know your name or address. The interview is confidential and anonymous.
1. Were you born in San Diego County?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.1a IF Q.1 = 2, D, OR R) [PROBE FOR STATE, OR COUNTRY IF NOT USA. RECORD VERBATIM AND ALSO CODE] 1a. Where were you born?
1 San Diego County 2 California – other areas 3 Other U.S. States (Specify) ______4 Former Soviet Union 5 Israel 6 Mexico 7 South Africa 8 Other non-USA (SPECIFY)______D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.1b IF Q.1a = 4,5,6,7, OR 8) 1b. In what year did you come to the US?
______(RECORD YEAR) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
1c. For how many years have you been living in San Diego County?
______(RECORD RESPONSE) LL Less than one year NN Always lived here DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused 1d. What is your zip code?
A22 ______(RECORD ZIP CODE) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
2. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? [PAUSE] Please include everyone for whom this is the primary residence, including students temporarily away at college.
______(RECORD #) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
3. For how many years have YOU been living at your CURRENT ADDRESS?
______(RECORD RESPONSE) LL Less than 1 year NN Born there/Always lived in current residence 00 Gives year (SPECIFY)______DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF BORN, ALWAYS LIVED IN CURRENT RESIDENCE, Q.3 = NN, SKIP TO Q4) 3a. Before you moved to your current address, did you live in San Diego County, or somewhere else?
1 San Diego County 2 Somewhere Else D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.3aa IF Q3A = 2) 3aa. Where did you live before moving to your current address?
______(RECORD RESPONSE) D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.3b IF Q.3a = 1) 3b. Before you moved to this current address, did you live in the same zip code in San Diego County that you live in now, or in another zip code?
1 Same Zip Code 2 No, different zip code D Don’t Know R Refused
A23 (ASK Q.3c IF Q.3b = 2) 3c. What was your prior zip code?
______(RECORD ZIP CODE) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.3d IF Q.3c = D OR R) 3d. What is that area called?
______(RECORD VERBATIM) D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
4. How likely are you to move from your current address within the next two years? (READ LIST)
1 Definitely will move 2 Probably will move 3 Probably will NOT move 4 Definitely will NOT move D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A24
Thank you. We have a few questions about religious identity.
5. What is YOUR religion, IF ANY?
[INTERVIEWER. IF NECESSARY: This is not whether you consider yourself Jewish, but whether you feel that you have “a religion”]
PAUSE - IF NO ANSWER IMMEDIATELY, READ:
Would you say it is . . .
1 Judaism - Jewish ASK Q 5a ONLY IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED “NOT JEWISH” ON SCREENER, Q.S2 = 4, [VERY UNLIKELY] INTERVIEWER: PLEASE GET SUFFICIENT INFORMATION SO WE CAN CLARIFY LATER IF RESPONDENT IS JEWISH OTHERWISE, SKIP TO Q 6 2 Judaism and Something Else ASK Q 5a ONLY IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED “JEWISH”, Q.S2 = 1, OR “NOT JEWISH”, Q.S2 = 4, IN SCREENER OTHERWISE, SKIP TO Q 6. IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED “JEWISH & SOMETHING ELSE”,Q.S2 = 2, IN SCREENER, THE ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED IN SCREENER: Q S2a 3 Christian [DO NOT READ: Catholic, Protestant, Episcopalian] ASK Q 5a ONLY IF RESPONDENT SAID CONSIDERS SELF “JEWISH” OR “JEWISH & SOMETHING ELSE”, Q.S2 = 1 OR 2, ON SCREENER OTHERWISE, SKIP TO Q 7
4 NONE - No religion, or SKIP TO Q 7 5 Another Religion SPECIFY ______SKIP TO Q 7 6 (DO NOT READ) Non-Practicing Catholic, Christian SKIP TO Q 7 D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know/Not Sure ASK Q.5a R (DO NOT READ) Refused ASK Q.5a
A25
5a. So that we can properly understand your answer, could you tell me the ways in which you consider yourself “Jewish,” / “Jewish and Something Else.” (RECORD VERBATIM, PROBE FOR JEWISH AND “SOMETHING ELSE” DUAL IDENTITY. CODE. IF ANSWER INDICATES “MESSIANIC” JEW, JEW FOR JESUS, etc. … PLEASE RECORD AND SKIP TO Q.130)
INTERVIEWER NOTE: SAYING “I FEEL JEWISH AND I FEEL CHRISTIAN” OR “WE CELEBRATE SOME JEWISH HOLIDAYS AND SOME NON-JEWISH HOLIDAYS” IS NOT THE SAME AS SAYING “MESSIANIC JEW.” PLEASE PROBE FOR DETAILS GRACIOUSLY
MESSIANIC KEY WORDS 1 Jesus was a Jew 2 Jew for Jesus 3 Jewish Christian 4 Messianic Jew 5 Completed Jew” 6 (DO NOT READ) All Other Answers: PLEASE PROBE ON JEWISH AND SOMETHING ELSE DUAL IDENTITY RECORD VERBATIM IN DETAIL SO WE CAN LATER REVIEW THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENTS AND UNDERSTAND AN EXTREMELY COMPLEX ISSUE. CONTINUE WITH Q 6
R Refused CONTINUE WITH Q6
A26
(SCRAMBLE CODES 1-5; CODE 7 SHOULD ALWAYS BE READ LAST) 6. Do you consider yourself…? (READ LIST) [INTERVIEWER NOTE: PLEASE PAUSE SLIGHTLY AFTER READING ONE OR TWO CATEGORIES SINCE RESPONDENT MAY VOLUNTEER AN ANSWER]
01 Conservative 02 Humanistic 03 Orthodox 04 Reconstructionist 05 Reform 06 No Denomination [Just Jewish] 07 Messianic Jewish – A Jew for Jesus – A Christian Hebrew TERMINATE; SKIP TO Q130 08 (DO NOT READ) CABALISTIC 09 (DO NOT READ) CHABBAD 10 (DO NOT READ) ISRAELI 11 (DO NOT READ) SEPHARDIC 00 (DO NOT READ) OTHER [SPECIFY: ______] DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
7. Were you raised Jewish?
1 Yes, Raised Jewish 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Raised Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish 3 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
7a. Was your mother Jewish?
1 Yes, Mother Jewish 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Parent Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish Parent 3 No, Not Jewish D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
7b. Was your father Jewish?
1 Yes, Father Jewish 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Parent Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish Parent 3 No, Not Jewish D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A27
(ASK 7c ONLY IF RESPONDENT CURRENTLY CONSIDERS SELF JEWISH OR “JEWISH AND SOMETHING ELSE” IN SCREENER QUESTION S2, BUT WAS NOT RAISED JEWISH AND DID NOT HAVE EITHER A JEWISH FATHER AND A JEWISH MOTHER, Q.7 = 3 AND [Q.7a = 3 AND Q.7b = 3] AND [Q.S2 = 1 OR 2]) 7c. Did you have a formal conversion to Judaism?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
8. RECORD GENDER. ASK IF NECESSARY
1 Male 2 Female
9 What is your current marital status? [PAUSE - READ IF NECESSARY]
1 Married ASK Q 10 2 Living Together, Unmarried Partner ASK Q 11 3 Separated SKIP TO Q 20 4 Divorced SKIP TO Q 20 5 Widowed SKIP TO Q 20 6 Never Married [Single] SKIP TO Q 20 R (DO NOT READ) Refused SKIP TO Q 20
(QUESTION 10-19 ONLY ASKED OF CURRENTLY MARRIED/LIVING TOGETHER RESPONDENTS, Q.9 = 1 OR 2) PLEASE INSERT “SPOUSE” IF Q.9 = 1; INSERT PARTNER IF Q.9 = 2, AS APPROPRIATE BEGINNING WITH Q 11a
AFTER SPOUSE/PARTNER’S SEX HAS BEEN ASKED IN Q 11a, PLEASE INSERT HE/SHE OR HIMSELF/HERSELF AS APPROPRIATE
(ASK IF Q.9 = 1) 10. In what year did you get married ?
______[CURRENT MARRIAGE] DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK IF Q.9 = 2) 11. For how many years have you been living together with your partner?
______DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A28 (ASK Q.11a IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) 11a. Just to confirm, is your (spouse/partner) male or female?
1 Male 2 Female
(ASK Q.12 IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) 12. Does your (spouse/partner) currently consider (himself/herself) Jewish? INTERVIEWER: PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT “IS YOUR SPOUSE’S/PARTNER’S RELIGION JUDAISM, BUT “Does your spouse consider himself/herself Jewish” even if not religious or no religion.”
1 Yes 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(ASK Q.13 IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) 13. Was (she/he) raised Jewish?
1 Yes, Raised Jewish 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Raised Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(ASK Q.14 IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) 14. Did (she/he) have a Jewish mother?
1 Yes, Jewish Mother 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Mother Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish Mother 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(ASK Q.15 IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) 15. Did (she/he) have a Jewish father?
1 Yes, Jewish Father 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Father Jewish and Something else, Partially Jewish Father 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
A29
(ASK ONLY IF SPOUSE/PARTNER CURRENTLY CONSIDERS SELF JEWISH OR “JEWISH AND SOMETHING ELSE”, BUT WAS NOT RAISED JEWISH AND DID NOT HAVE A JEWISH MOTHER AND FATHER, Q.12 = 1 OR 2 AND [Q.13 = 3] AND [Q.14 = 3 AND Q.15 = 3 ] 16. Did (he/she) have a formal conversion to Judaism?
1 Yes 2 No D Don’t Know R Refused
17. Your (spouse/partner). What is (his/her) religion, IF ANY? Would you say it is . . . [READ LIST]
PAUSE - IF NO ANSWER IMMEDIATELY, READ: Would you say it is . . . [INTERVIEWER NOTE: THIS IS NOT WHETHER SPOUSE/PARTNER CONSIDERS SELF JEWISH, BUT WHETHER PERSON HAS A “RELIGION.”]
Judaism - Jewish ASK Q 19 Judaism and Something Else ASK Q 18 Christian [Catholic, Protestant, Episcopalian) SKIP TO Q 20 NONE - No religion, or SKIP TO Q 20 Another Religion (SPECIFY: ______) SKIP TO Q 20 (DO NOT READ) Non-Practicing Catholic, Christian SKIP TO Q 20 (DO NOT READ) Not Sure ASK Q 19 (DO NOT READ) Refused ASK Q 19
18. So that we can properly understand your answer, could you tell me the ways in which your spouse/partner considers herself/himself “Jewish,” “Jewish and Something Else.”
IF ANY OTHER ANSWER TO Q. 18, PROBE BRIEFLY FOR JEWISH AND “SOMETHING ELSE” DUAL IDENTITY – RECORD VERBATIM
MESSIANIC KEY WORDS Jesus was a Jew ASK Q. 19 Jew for Jesus ASK Q. 19 Jewish Christian ASK Q. 19 Messianic Jew ASK Q. 19 Completed Jew” ASK Q. 19
(DO NOT READ) All Other Answers PROBE ON DUAL IDENTITY – RECORD VERBATIM; CONTINUE WITH Q. 19
A30
(SCRAMBLE CODES 1-5; CODE 6 & 7 SHOULD ALWAYS BE LAST) 19. Does (he/she) consider (himself/herself) …? (INTERVIEWER NOTE: PLEASE PAUSE SLIGHTLY AFTER READING ONE OR TWO CATEGORIES SINCE RESPONDENT MAY VOLUNTEER AN ANSWER]
01 Conservative 02 Humanistic 03 Orthodox 04 Reconstructionist 05 Reform 06 No Denomination [Just Jewish] 07 Messianic Jewish – A Jew for Jesus – A Christian Hebrew 08 (DO NOT READ) CABALISTIC 09 (DO NOT READ) CHABBAD 10 (DO NOT READ) ISRAELI 11 (DO NOT READ) SEPHARDIC 00 (DO NOT READ) OTHER [SPECIFY: ______] DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A31 (ASK Q. 20 and Q. 21 FIRST FOR RESPONDENT, AND THEN FOR SPOUSE/PARTNER, Q.9 = 1 OR 2, IF APPROPRIATE) 20. A few questions now about your employment [IF MARRIED/PARTNER, INCLUDE:] as well as the work and education of your spouse/partner].
First, are you currently: [READ FIRST CATEGORIES- PAUSE –READ AS NECESSARY]
01 Self Employed 02 Employed full time 03 Employed part time – not a student 04 Full time Student 05 Part time Student 06 Retired 07 Homemaker 08 Disabled and unable to work 09 Unemployed and looking for work 10 Unemployed and not looking for work 11 Other (specify ______) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
21. What is your highest education degree?
01 M.D. / D.O / D. D. S. (Physician -Osteopath -Dentist) 02 J. D. , L. L. M., J. S. D. (Lawyer) 03 Ph.D., Ed. D, Doctorate 04 Rabbinical Ordination (Smicha) 05 Masters Degree, Masters Level - all degrees 06 Bachelors (includes Nursing B. S. N) - Bachelors plus some graduate work 07 Associates Degree - Some College - non-BSN Nursing Degrees 08 High School Diploma 09 Technical School Certificate, Degree 10 No High School Diploma, No education DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A32
(ASK Qs. 22, 23 FOR SPOUSE/PARTNER, Q.9 = 1 OR 2, IF APPROPRIATE.) 22. What about your spouse / partner? Is he/she: [READ FIRST CATEGORIES- PAUSE – CONTINUE READING AS NECESSARY]
01 Self Employed 02 Employed full time 03 Employed part time – not a student 04 Full time Student 05 Part time Student 06 Retired 07 Homemaker 08 Disabled and unable to work 09 Unemployed and looking for work 10 Unemployed and not looking for work 11 Other (specify ______) DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
23. What is his/her highest education degree?
01 M.D./D.O/D. D. S. (Physician -Osteopath -Dentist) 02 J. D. ,L. L. M., J. S. D. (Lawyer) 03 Ph.D., Ed. D, Doctorate 04 Rabbinical Ordination (Smicha) 05 Masters Degree, Masters Level - all degrees 06 Bachelors (includes Nursing B. S. N) - Bachelors plus some graduate work 07 Associates Degree - Some College - non-BSN Nursing Degrees 08 High School Diploma 09 Technical School Certificate, Degree 10 No High School Diploma, No education DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
ASK Q. 24+ FOR ALL RESPONDENTS
24. In what year were you born?
______(RECORD YEAR OF BIRTH) DD Don’t know RR Refused
A33
(ASK Q.24a IF Q.24 = DD OR RR) 24a. How old are you?
______(RECORD AGE) RR Refused
(IF REFUSED, STRESS IMPORTANCE FOR PLANNING, CONFIDENTIAL, ANONYMOUS. ASK AGAIN POLITELY) (IF STILL REFUSAL ON YEAR OF BIRTH/AGE, Q.24a = RR, ASK Q. 24b) 24b. Could you please tell me if you are between the ages of…?
1 18 - 34 years old 2 35 - 49 years old 3 50 - 64 years old 4 65 - 74 years old 5 75 years or older R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q. 25 FOR SPOUSE/PARTNER, Q.9 = 1 OR 2, IF APPROPRIATE) 25. What about your spouse / partner? In what year was he/she born?
______(RECORD YEAR) DD Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.25a IF Q.25 = DD OR RR) 25a. How old is he/she?
______(RECORD AGE) DD Don’t know RR Refused
(IF AGE IS REFUSED, INDICATE IMPORTANCE FOR PLANNING, CONFIDENTIAL, ANONYMOUS. RE-ASK POLITELY)
(IF STILL REFUSAL ON YEAR OF SPOUSE/PARTNER’S BIRTH/AGE, Q.25a = RR, ASK Q. 25b) 25b. Could you please tell me if your spouse/partner is between the ages of…?
1 18 - 34 years old 2 35 - 49 years old 3 50 - 64 years old 4 65 - 74 years old 5 75 years or older D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A34 26. Other than you (and your spouse/partner) how many other persons age 18 or older live in the household? (PAUSE) Please include students temporarily living away from home, for whom this is their primary residence.
______[RECORD “0” IF NONE – SKIP TO Q. 34] DD Don’t Know RR Refused
(IF Q.26 >0, ASK Q.27) 27. How old are these other adults?
______(RECORD AGES) DD Don’t know RR Refused
(ASK Q.27B IF Q.27 = D, R) 27b. Could you please tell me if he/she is between the ages of…?
1 18 - 34 years old 2 35 - 49 years old 3 50 - 64 years old 4 65 - 74 years old 5 75 years or older D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(RECORD AGE FOR ALL OTHER ADULTS THEN ASK Q. 28 - Q. 33 ON EACH ADULT, THEN NEXT ADULT, BEGINNING WITH THE OLDEST ADULT CATI INSERTS APPROPRIATE GENDER AFTER Q. 28 ESTABLISHES SEX OF RESPONDENT)
(IF Q.26 = 1, INSERT “this adult”) 28. Is (the [GIVE AGE OF ADULT] year old adult/this adult), male or female?
1 Male 2 Female
A35
29. What is his/her relationship to you? (INTERVIEWER: SHOULD NOT BE "2" OR "3"; IF “2” OR “3” REVIEW MARITAL STATUS SEQUENCE using C.29b and Q.29c)
02 Spouse (husband/wife) 03 Unmarried partner 04 Roommate/House-mate 05 Son 06 Stepson 07 Daughter 08 Step daughter 09 Parent 10 Grandparent 11 Other relative 12 Employee – “Nanny, Housekeeper” 13 Other (SPECIFY) ______RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.29 = 2,3 AND Q.9 NE 1,2 GO TO Q.29b) (IF Q.29 = 2,3 AND Q.9 = 1,2 GO TO Q.29c)
29b. So this means you are married or living with a partner?
1 Married RETURN TO Q.10 – 23 AND ASK ACCORDINGLY 2 Living with Partner RETURN TO Q.10 – 23 AND ASK ACCORDINGLY 3 No GO BACK TO Q.29 ACCORDINGLY
(IF Q.29 = 2,3 AND Q.9 NE 1,2 GO TO Q.29b) (IF Q.29 = 2,3 AND Q.9 = 1,2 GO TO Q.29c)
29C. Is this the same person with whom you talked about earlier?
1 Yes 2 No
30. Does your (Q.29 RESPONSE) currently consider himself/herself Jewish? AGAIN, THIS IS NOT “IS HIS/HER RELIGION JEWISH,” BUT “DOES HE/SHE CONSIDER HIMSELF/HERSELF JEWISH,” EVEN IF NOT RELIGIOUS OR NO RELIGION.]
1 Yes 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Yes, partially Jewish, Jewish and something else 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
A36 31. Was she/he raised Jewish?
1 Yes 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Yes, partially Jewish, Jewish and something else 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(SKIP TO Q.34 FOR CASES IF Q.29 = 5 OR 7) 32. Did he/she have a Jewish mother?
1 Yes 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Yes, partially Jewish, Jewish and something else 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
33. A Jewish father?
1 Yes 2 [VOLUNTEERED] Yes, partially Jewish, Jewish and something else 3 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(REPEAT Q.28 - Q.33 IN TANDEM FOR ALL ADULTS WHO USUALLY LIVE IN THE HOUSEHOLD.) ONLY ASK Q32 AND Q33 FOR RESPONDENT AND, IF APPLICABLE, THEIR SPOUSE/PARTNER
34. Are there any children 17 years of age or less who live in this household?
1 Yes 2 No D Don’t Know R Refused
(ASK Q.35 IF Q.34 = 1) 35. How many? PLEASE INCLUDE ANY CHILDREN 17 YEARS OR YOUNGER WHO ARE TEMPORARILY LIVING AT A BOARDING SCHOOL OR COLLEGE.
______(RECORD “0” IF NONE) DD Don’t Know RR Refused
A37 (IF NO CHILDREN IN HOUSEHOLD,Q.34 = 2 OR Q.35 = 0, SKIP TO Q. 59) (ASK Q.36 IF Q.34 = 1) (INSERT “are these children starting with oldest child” IF Q.35 > 1) 36. How old (is your child) (are these children starting with oldest child)? (IF RESPONDENT IS HESITANT: Let me assure you all of your answers are confidential. We will NOT be asking the children’s names, or even their initials. It just makes it easier to ask questions identifying the children by age.)
______(RECORD AGE) RR Refused
(FOR EACH REFUSAL ON YEAR OF CHILD’S BIRTH/AGE, Q.36 = RR, ASK Q. 37) 37. Could you please tell me if he/she is…? 1 Less than 1 to 5 years old 2 6 to 12 years old 3 13 to 17 years old D (DO NOT READ) Don’t Know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Qs.38-40 FOR EACH CHILD, START WITH OLDEST) (IF Q.35 = 1, INSERT “your child”) 38. Is (the [GIVE AGE] year old child/your child), male or female?
1 Male 2 Female D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
39. Is this child being raised…? (READ LIST)
1 Jewish 2 Jewish and something else 3 Not being raised Jewish, or 4 Has this not been decided yet D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A38 (IF Q.38 = 1 REPRES “HIS/HE/SON/STEPSON,” IF Q.38 = 2 REPRES “HER/SHE/DAUGHTER/STEPDAUGHTER”) 40. What is his/her relationship to you? Is he/she your son/daughter, stepson …? [READ AS NECESSARY]
1 Son 2 Stepson, Partner’s Son 3 Daughter 4 Stepdaughter, Partner’s Daughter 5 Granddaughter/Grandson 6 Other relative 0 Other (SPECIFY) ______D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused (ASK Q.41 AFTER Qs.34 – 40 HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR EACH CHILD UNDER AGE 18) 41. Are any of these children adopted and not biologically related to you or your spouse? [IF ASKED WHY THIS IS IMPORTANT: Some Jewish agencies are interested in providing services involving adopted children, so they are interested in whether any children in Jewish households are adopted - but NOT which child, or any other details.]
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.42 IF Q.36 = 5 – 17 OR Q.37 = 2 OR 3) (SCRAMBLE) (IF Q.35 = 1, INSERT “your child”) 42. Have any of your children ages 6-17 ever, (INSERT STATEMENT) [IF ONLY ONE CHILD AGES 6-17: Has (your [age ] child/your child) ever…?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Been involved in Jewish youth group activities? b. Gone to a summer overnight camp with Jewish content? c. Gone to a summer day camp with Jewish content? d. Gone on a trip to Israel? e. Been involved in sports activities at a JCC or an other Jewish setting? f Been involved in social or cultural activities, such as plays at a JCC, synagogue, or another Jewish setting?
A39 (IF ANY CHILD/CHILDREN AGES 0 - 5 YEARS IN HOUSEHOLD, Q.36 = 0-5 OR Q.37 = 1, ASK Q.43 – Q.47 IN TANDEM FOR EACH CHILD) (IF NO CHILD AGES 0-5, SKIP TO Q.50) (IF Q.35 = 1, INSERT “your child”) 43. Has the (male/female) child who is (INSERT AGE)/your child) ever been enrolled in a Jewish Day Camp?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
ASK Q.44 IF Q.43 = 2) 44. Do you plan to enroll (him/her) in a Jewish Day Camp in the future?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
45. Is this child currently enrolled in a Jewish pre-school?
1 Yes AGES 0 - 5 2 No ASK Q.46 D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know SKIP TO Q. 47 R (DO NOT READ) Refused SKIP TO Q. 47
(ASK Q.46 IF Q.45 = 2) 46. Has this child ever been previously enrolled in a Jewish pre-school?
1 Yes AGES 0 - 5 2 No ASK Q.47 D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know SKIP TO Q. 47 R (DO NOT READ) Refused SKIP TO Q. 47
(ASK IF CHILD IS 0-5 YEARS OLD, Q.36 = 0 –5 OR Q.37 = 1 AND [Q.45 = 2,D,R]) 47. Do you have any current plans to enroll him/her in a Jewish pre-school in the future?
1 Yes 2 No 3 (DO NOT READ) Maybe, perhaps D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
REPEAT AND COMPLETE SEQUENCE 43 – 47 FOR EACH CHILD AGE 0- 5 IN HOUSEHOLD AFTER SEQUENCE Q.43-Q.47 IS COMPLETED FOR ALL CHILDREN AGE 0 - 5, ASK Q.48.
A40 Q. 48, SHOULD BE ASKED ONLY IF CHILD/CHILDREN ARE BEING RAISED JEWISH, JEWISH + SOMETHING ELSE, OR UNDECIDED.
48. When your (child/children) [ADD IF MORE THAN ONE CHILD: ages ___, ___,] (is/are) old enough to go to a Jewish Day School full time, will you send (your child/any of your children) to an all-day Jewish Day School? Will you…? (READ LIST)
1 Definitely send child/children to Jewish Day School 2 Seriously consider sending your child/children 3 Possibly consider sending your children 4 Definitely not send child/children to Jewish Day School D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.49 IF Q.48 = 3 OR 4) 49. What is the major reason you might not send your child/children to a full-time Jewish Day School? Any other reasons? [DO NOT READ LIST; ENTER 3 RESPONSES VERBATIM, AND CODE]
01 I – household - believe in / prefer public schools 02 Public schools better 03 Prefer Private School, non-sectarian [non-religious] 04 Not Interested - not for us 05 Household not religious enough 06 Distance / Too hard to get to 07 Cost / Too expensive 08 Quality of the education not good at Jewish Day School 09 Lack of Extracurricular activities 10 Length of school day/Too long a day at Jewish Day School 11 We’re an interfaith, intermarried family 12 No Conservative Day School nearby 13 No Reform Day School nearby 14 No Jewish Community (non denominational) Day school nearby 00 Other (SPECIFY) ______DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A41 (IF ANY CHILDREN AGE 6-17 IN HOUSEHOLD, Q.36 = 6-17 OR Q.37 = 2 OR 3, CONTINUE WITH Q. 50; IF ALL CHILDREN ARE UNDER AGE 5 ONLY, SKIP TO Q. 57) (ASK Q.50-Q.55 IN SERIES FOR EACH CHILD AGE 6-17, Q.36 = 6-17 OR Q.37 = 2 OR 3) (IF Q.35 = 1, INSERT “your child”) 50. A few questions about the education of your (children ages 6-17/child). What type of school is ([OLDEST CHILD 6-17]/your child) going to on a FULLTIME basis? (READ CATEGORIES)
1 Jewish Day School – Full-time Jewish 2 Public School 3 Non-Jewish Private School 4 At home full-time schooling 5 Already completed school D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.51 IF Q.50 = 1) 51 Did this child ever attend a Jewish Pre-School?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
SKIP TO NEXT CHILD SINCE CHILD IS ENROLLED IN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL, ASK. Q. 50-51 ; IF NO OTHER CHILDREN AGES 6-17, SKIP TO Q. 56
(ASK Q.52 IF Q.50 = 2,3,4,5,D, OR R) 52 Did this child ever attend a Jewish Pre-School?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(CONTINUE WITH Q. 53 FOR CHILD NOT IN JEWISH DAY SCHOOL – ONLY IF CHILD IS BEING RAISED JEWISH, OR JEWISH & SOMETHING ELSE, Q.50 = 2,3, 4, 5, D, OR R, AND Q.39 = 1 OR 2)
A42 (ASK Q.53 FOR EACH CHILD 6-17, [Q.36 = 6 – 17 OR Q.36 = 2 OR 3] AND Q.39 = 1 OR 2 AND Q.50 = 2,3,4,5,D OR R) 53. Has this child ever participated in any type of Jewish education?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.54 IF Q.53 = 1) 54. Is this child currently PARTICIPATING in any type of Jewish education, such as a synagogue/temple religious school, a Hebrew school, the High School for Jewish studies?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.55 IF Q.53 = 1) 55. Did this child ever attend a full-time all Jewish Day School or Jewish Pre-School?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A43 (ASK Q.56 IF Q.36 = 6-17 OR IF Q37 = 2 or 3) (IF ALL Q.38 = 1 USE “Bar Mitzvah,” IF ALL Q.38 = 2 USE “Bat Mitzvah”) (SCRAMBLE) 56. Parents have different ideas of how they would like their children to be Jewish. How important is it for your (child/children) (ages 6-17) to: [READ FIRST ITEM]? Would you say it is extremely important, very important, not very important, or not at all important? How about [READ NEXT ITEM]?
1 Extremely Important 2 Very Important 3 Not Very Important 4 Not At All Important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ROTATE) a. Feel positive about being Jewish b. Be knowledgeable about and appreciate Jewish customs and beliefs c. Be able to read Hebrew prayers in a synagogue/temple religious service d. Become a bar mitzvah (MITS-vah) or bat mitzvah (bat torah or bat mitzvah [if Orthodox]) e. Marry another Jew when they are adults f. Understand Tzedakah (tseh-DAH-kah), the Jewish commitment to charity
SKIP TO NEXT CHILD IF APPLICABLE; IF NONE, SKIP TO Q. 57 (INSERT “Does the child” IF Q.35 = 1; INSERT “Does any child” IF Q.35 GE 2) 57. (Does the child/Does any child) in your household have a learning disability of any kind?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.58 IF Q.57 = 1) (ROTATE 1-3) 58 Has this child’s learning disability…? [READ ITEMS]
1 Prevented him or her from getting a Jewish education 2 Made it very difficult for him or her to get a Jewish education, or 3 Not been an issue in terms of Jewish education D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK ALL RESPONDENTS)
Thank you. Now, a few questions about social activities.
A44 59. How far, in minutes, are you willing to travel to access Jewish services?
______(RECORD MINUTES) DD (DO NOT READ) Don't know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “Is anyone in the household”) 60. This past September, did (you/anyone in the household) attend High Holy Day Services in San Diego County?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “Is anyone in your household”)
61. (Are you) (Is anyone in your household) currently a member of a synagogue or temple? [IF ASKED TO DEFINE, SAY: However you define member.]
1 Yes 2 No 3 Member of independent Havurah 4 No synagogue available/near by D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “or any other member of your household”) 62. In the past year, have you (or any other member of your household) gone to any program or activity at the San Diego JCC – the Jewish Community Center?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “or any other member of your household”) [IF BORN IN MEXICO, Q. 1A=6, ASK:] 63. In the past year, have you (or any other member of your household) gone to any program or activity at the KEN?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A45 (IF Q.61 = 1, INSERT “a synagogue or temple”; IF Q.62 = 1, INSERT “the Jewish Community Center”; IF Q.63 = 1, INSERT “the KEN”) 63a. Other than (a synagogue or temple), or (the Jewish Community Center), or (the KEN), do you or anyone else in the household belong to or regularly participate in the activities of any other Jewish organization in San Diego County? (IF NECESSARY: LIKE HADASSAH [HA-DAS-SUH], THE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE, AIPAC [AMERICAN ISRAEL POLITICAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE])
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(INSERT “or does someone else in the household” IF Q.9 = 1 or 2 OR Q.26 > 0) (SCRAMBLE A – D) 64. Now, we would like to ask some questions about JEWISH OBSERVANCE in your household. We’ll be using a scale of “Always,” “Usually,” “Sometimes,” or “Never.” Do you (or does someone else in the household) (INSERT ITEM)…?
1 Always 2 Usually 3 Sometimes 4 Never D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Light Sabbath candles on Friday night? b. Participate in a Passover Seder? (SAY -der) c. Light Hanukkah candles? (HAH -new-kah) d. Keep kosher at home?
65. Is there a Mezuzah (Meh-ZUH-zah) on any door in your home?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
66. DELETE
A46 (IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “does anyone living in your household”) (SCRAMBLE A – D, PLACE E LAST) 67 In the past three years have you (or anyone else in the household) (INSERT STATEMENT)?
1 Yes 2 No 3 (DO NOT READ) No – Do Not Have a Computer 4 (DO NOT READ) No – No Internet Access D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Engaged in Jewish Study with a group or organization? b. Visited a Jewish Museum, including a Holocaust Museum? c. Attended a Jewish cultural event: [IF NECESSARY: Jewish music, Jewish theater, film, dance or art?] d. Used the internet to visit: www.JewishInSanDiego e. Visited any other Jewish Web site
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “does anyone living in your household”) (SCRAMBLE A – G) 68 Do you (or anyone else in your household) regularly read the following newspapers? (READ ITEMS)
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. The Heritage - the San Diego Jewish Press Heritage b. The San Diego Jewish Times c. The San Diego Jewish Journal d. The Union Tribune e. The San Diego Reader f. The North County Times g. A neighborhood newspaper
A47 (ASK Qs. 69 - 86 ONLY IF RESPONDENT IS JEWISH, Q.S2 = 1 OR 2; IF RESPONDENT IS NON-JEWISH, Q.S2 = 3,4,D, OR R, SKIP TO Q. 87) (ROTATE1-4/4-1) 69. How important is being Jewish for you? Is it…? [READ]
1 Very Important 2 Somewhat Important 3 Not very important 4 Not at all important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ROTATE IDENTICAL TO Q.69) 70. How important is it for you to be part of the Jewish Community of San Diego County? Is it…? [READ]
1 Very Important 2 Somewhat Important 3 Not very important 4 Not at all important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ROTATE IDENTICAL TO Q.69) 71. How important is Israel to you? Is it…? [READ]
1 Very Important 2 Somewhat Important 3 Not very important 4 Not at all important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
[SAN DIEGO LIST SURVEY, 1996] (Rotate 1-3/3-1) 72. How does what happens in Israel affect you? Does what happens in Israel: (READ)
1 Strongly Affect You 2 Some what Affect You, or 3 Have No Effect At All on You D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A48
73. How many of the people you consider to be your closest friends are Jewish?
1 None 2 Some 3 About Half 4 Most, or 5 All Are Jewish 0 (DO NOT READ) NO CLOSE FRIENDS D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
74. During the last Yom Kippur (YO-m key-POOR), did you personally fast? [READ]
1 All Day 2 Part of the Day, or Partially Fasted 3 Did You Not Fast 4 (DO NOT READ) COULD NOT FAST DUE TO HEALTH, NURSING, PREGNANCY 0 Other (SPECIFY) ______D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
75. About how often did you go to any Jewish services in the past year? (READ LIST IF NECESSARY – RECORD “HIGHEST” ANSWER IF MULTIPLE RESPONSES)
01 Never 02 Only for weddings and Bar Mitzvahs (MITS-vahs) 03 Only on the High Holy Days [Rosh Hashanah and/or Yom Kippur] 04 A few times a year [3-9 times] 05 About once a month 06 2 or 3 times a month 07 About once a week 08 Several times a week 09 Every Day 97 Other (SPECIFY) ______NN (DO NOT READ) YIZKOR, Memorial Service ONLY DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A49
76. To what extent do you feel like you are part of the Jewish community of San Diego County? Would you say…? (READ ITEMS)
1 A lot 2 Some 3 Only a little 4 Not at all D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
77. Which one of the following comes closest to YOUR position regarding American Jews' financial contributions to Israel? Compared to the past, do you think it is more important, just as important, somewhat less important, no longer important, or do you think it has never been important for American Jews to contribute money to Israel?
1 More Important 2 Just as Important 3 Somewhat Less Important 4 No Longer Important 5 Never been important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
78. AS A CHILD OR TEENAGER, did YOU ever attend an overnight SUMMER camp with Jewish content?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
79. As a child or teenager, were you ever a member of a Jewish youth group?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
80. Did you receive any formal Jewish education as a child or teenager? (IF NECESSARY: IN A SCHOOL OR SYNAGOGUE SETTING)
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A50
(ASK Q.80A IF Q.80 = 1) 80a. For how many years?
______(RECORD YEARS) DD (DO NOT READ) Don't know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.81 IF Q.80 = 1) 81. Did you ever attend a full time, all day Jewish Day School?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.82 IF Q.81 = 1) 82. For how many years?
______(RECORD YEARS) DD (DO NOT READ) Don't know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.8 = 1, INSERT “Bat;” IF Q.8 = 2, INSERT “Bar.”) (IF Q.6 = 03, INSERT “Or Bat Torah”) 83. Did you have a (Bar/Bat) Mitzvah (MITS-vah) (or Bat Torah) ceremony? (IF YES, ASK) Was that as a child or as an adult?
1 Yes, as child 2 Yes, as adult 3 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
84. Have you ever taken college or university-level coursework which primarily focused on Jewish studies or Hebrew?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
85. How many times, if ever, have you ever traveled to Israel before your 18th birthday?
1 Answer given______N Never D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A51
86. How many times, if ever, have you ever traveled to Israel after your 18th birthday?
1 Answer given______N Never D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
86a. DELETED
(SCRAMBLE ITEMS A-G) 87 I’m going to read a few statements. For each one, please tell me if you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree? [READ. REPEAT AS NEEDED TO CLARIFY]
1 Strongly Agree 2 Somewhat Agree 3 (DO NOT READ) NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE 4 Somewhat Disagree 5 Strongly Disagree D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. I have a strong sense of belonging to the Jewish people b. I have a special responsibility to take care of Jews in need around the world c. It’s important for me to have friends who share my way of being Jewish d. When faced with an important life decision, I look to Judaism for guidance e. All Jews should visit Israel at least once f. Although there are many worthy causes, Jews should give preference to Jewish causes
A52
(SCRAMBLE A-N) 88. Given the limited resources available to address some important issues facing the Jewish community in San Diego, I would like to read you a list of issues and ask how important each is to you.
First, is (INSERT ITEM) extremely important, somewhat important, not very important, or not at all important? How about (NEXT ITEM)
1 Extremely Important 2 Somewhat Important 3 Not Very Important 4 Not At All Important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Caring for the Jewish Elderly under Jewish sponsorship b. Providing Jewish Education c. Providing Jewish arts and culture d. Helping Jewish individuals and families in crisis e. Helping the Jewish unemployed f. Fighting anti-Semitism g. Programs for Interfaith Jewish Families h. Caring for the Jewish poor i. Seeking greater spirituality through Judaism j. Providing resettlement services for new refugees (If Necessary.: IN SAN DIEGO) k. Developing Jewish-based adoption programs l. Providing Jewish programs for college students m. Providing social programs for singles n. Providing daycare for children
A53
(IF RESPONDENT RATES MORE THAN ONE ITEM IN Q.88 AS “EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, Q.88 = 1, ASK Q.89 OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q.90 89. "You rated x items as extremely important. Which of these would you say is the MOST IMPORTANT issue facing the Jewish Community of San Diego? Would you say it is 1. (READ ITEMS)..."
(DISPLAY ONLY ITEMS RATED “EXTREMELY IMPORTANT”, Q.88 = 1)
01 Caring for the Jewish Elderly under Jewish sponsorship 02 Providing Jewish Education 03 Providing Jewish arts and culture 04 Helping Jewish individuals and families in crisis 05 Helping the Jewish unemployed 06 Fighting anti-Semitism 07 Programs for Interfaith Jewish Families 08 Caring for the Jewish poor 09 Seeking greater spirituality through Judaism 10 Providing resettlement services for new refugees 11 Developing Jewish-based adoption programs 12 Providing Jewish programs for college students 13 Providing social programs for singles 14 Providing daycare for children NN (DO NOT READ) None of these DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.88b = 1 ASK Q.90) (SCRAMBLE) 90. You rated “Providing Jewish Education” as an important issue. How important is Jewish education for…? (READ ITEM)
1 Very Important 2 Somewhat Important 3 A Little Important 4 Not At All Important D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Young Children b. Teenagers c. College Students d. Adults
A54
ASK ALL RESPONDENTS (SCRMBLE A-C/D-G) (IF Q.34 = 1 ASK ITEMS D-G) (USE “you” FOR ITEMS A-C AND “your family” FOR ITEMS D-G) 92. In San Diego County during the past five years, please tell me if financial cost has prevented (you/your family) from doing any of the following. In the past five years, has financial cost prevented (you/your family) from (INSERT ITEM)?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Belonging to a Temple or Synagogue b. Going to Israel or sending a Child to Israel c. Belonging to a JCC d. Sending a child to a Jewish summer sleep away camp e. Sending a child to a Private Jewish all-day, full-time Day School f. Sending a child to a supplementary religious school g. Sending a child to a Jewish Day Camp
(ROTATE Q.93 AND Q.93A) (SCRAMBLE A – K) 93. There are several institutions and agencies that are supported by the United Jewish Federation in the San Diego area. As I read each, please tell me if you or your family have used any services or programs from that institution in the last year. (READ ITEMS)
1 Yes – used institution 2 No – did not use D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. Agency for Jewish Education b. High School of Jewish Studies c. B’nai B’rith (Beh-nay Brith) Youth Organization d. Day Schools e. JCC f. Hillel of San Diego (Hill – lel) g. Jewish Family Service h. Ken Jewish Community i. Seacrest Village – the Hebrew Home for the Aged j. Jewish Cultural and Services Center
A55 93a. Have (you/you or your family) ever used any services of programs from a synagogue in the past year?"
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(SCRAMBLE A – E) (ASK ITEM E ONLY IF Q.9 = 3,4,5 OR 6; USE APPROPRIATE LANGUAGE BASED ON RESPONSE TO Q.9) 94. For as long as you have lived in San Diego County, have you ever felt unwelcome...?" [READ ITEMS]
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
a. At a Jewish synagogue or temple b. At a JCC c. At the Jewish Federation d. At another Jewish Agency or Organization e. At Jewish Community Events because you are (single/divorced/widowed)
91. Have you personally experienced any anti-Semitism in the past year?
1 Yes 2 No 3 (DO N0T READ) MAYBE/CAN’T SAY FOR SURE D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A56 (IF ONE-PERSON HOUSEHOLD, Q.2 = 1) 95. Do you currently have any kind of physical, mental or other health condition that limits employment, education, or daily activities, and has lasted for at least six months?
(IF TWO OR MORE IN HOUSEHOLD, Q.2 = 2 OR MORE) Does anyone in your household currently have any kind of physical, mental or other health condition that limits employment, education, or daily activities, and has lasted for at least six months? [IF NECESSARY ADD: Daily activities include walking, climbing stairs, dressing, eating, and carrying.]
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “any member of your household”) 96. The following questions will help us learn about services that may be needed in the Jewish community. In the past year, other than for a learning disability, did (you/any member of your household) need assistance for a special-needs child or special-needs adult?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.97 IF Q.96 = 1) 97. Was the person with special-needs a child under age 18 or an adult?
1 Child less than 18 years old 2 Adult 3 (DO NOT READ) Both D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.98 IF Q.96 = 1) (ROTATE 1-4/4-1) 98. How easy or difficult was it to get the help/assistance that was needed for that special- needs person? Was it…? [READ]
1 Very Difficult 2 Somewhat Difficult 3 Easy 4 Very Easy D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A57
(ASK Q.99 IF Q.96 = 1) 99. At any time during your efforts to get help, did you contact a Jewish Agency or Organization?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “or any member of your household”) 100. In the past year, did you (or any member of your household) have a serious emotional or behavioral problem, such as depression, or an eating disorder?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.101 IF Q.100 = 1) 101. Was the person who needed that assistance a child under age 18 or an adult?
1 Child less than 18 years old 2 Adult 3 (DO NOT READ) Both D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.102 IF Q.100 = 1) (ROTATE 1-4/4-1) 102. How easy or difficult was it to get the help/assistance that was needed for that person? Was it…? [READ]
1 Very Difficult 2 Somewhat Difficult 3 Easy 4 Very Easy D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A58 (ASK Q.102a IF Q.100 = 1) 102a. At any time during your efforts to get help, did you contact a Jewish Agency or Organization?
1 Yes 2 No 3 No, follow-up D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q103 ONLY IF RESPONDENT IN Q24, Q24a, Q24b OR ANY HOUSEHOLD MEMBER IN Q25, Q25a, Q25b, or Q27, Q27b IS AGE 18-64 ) (IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “has any member of your household”) 103. In the past, (have you/has any member of your household) had fertility problems?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “or any member of your household”) 104. In the past year, did you (or any member of your household) need assistance for an elderly relative in San Diego County?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.105 IF Q.104 = 1) (ROTATE 1-4/4-1) 105. How easy or difficult was it to get the help/assistance that was needed for that elderly relative? Was it…? (READ)
1 Very Difficult 2 Somewhat Difficult 3 Easy 4 Very Easy D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A59 (ASK Q.105a IF Q.104 = 1) 105a. At any time during your efforts to get help, did you contact a Jewish Agency or Organization?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) 106. We are NOT asking for contributions, but the organized Jewish community is interested in understanding how SAN DIEGO COUNTY Jewish households contribute to charitable causes. During the LAST 12 MONTHS, did (you/your household) contribute to any charity or cause that is NOT specifically Jewish - - like the United Way, a cancer charity, a museum, a hospital, a college alumni association, etc.?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) (ASK Q.107 IF Q.106 = 1) 107. In total - as best you can estimate - was the amount (you/your household) contributed to NON JEWISH charities, causes, organizations in the last 12 months?
1 Less than $100 2 Between $100 and $500 3 Between $500 and $1,000 4 Between $1,000 and $5,000 5 $5,000 or more D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) 108. During the LAST 12 MONTHS, did (you/your household) contribute to The UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A60 (IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) (ASK Q.109 IF Q.108 = 1) 109. In total - as best you can estimate - was the amount (you/your household) contributed to THE UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY [IF NECESSARY: in the last 12 months] [READ]
1 Less than $100 2 Between $100 and $500 3 Between $500 and $1,000 4 Between $1,000 and $5,000 5 $5,000 or more D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) 110. During the LAST 12 MONTHS, other than to the United Jewish Federation, did (you/your household) contribute to ANY OTHER JEWISH CHARITY, CAUSE, OR ORGANIZATION or to Synagogues/ Temples, over and above membership fees/dues]?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “your household”) (ASK Q.111 IF Q.110 = 1) 111. In total - as best you can estimate for the past 12 months - EXCLUDING the amount you gave to the Federation - was the amount (you/your household) contributed to ANY OTHER JEWISH CHARITY, CAUSE, OR ORGANIZATION or to Synagogues/ Temples, over and above membership fees/dues]…? [READ]
1 Less than $100 2 Between $100 and $500 3 Between $500 and $1,000 4 Between $1,000 and $5,000 5 $5,000 or more D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A61 (Q.112 AND Q.114 ONLY ASKED IF DID NOT CONTRIBUTE TO UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY IN THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS [Q. 108 = 2]) 112. You mentioned that your household did not contribute to the Jewish Federation in the past year. What was the most important reason that your household did not contribute to the Federation? (DO NOT READ) RECORD VERBATIM – POSSIBLE CODES BELOW - WILL LATER CODE UP TO 3 REASONS
01 Cannot Afford to Give - Money Issues 02 Synagogue – Jewish School already costs a lot 03 Not Religious – Not “Practicing” Jew 04 Critical comments re: Federation [RECORD IN DETAIL] 05 They do not give enough to Day Schools / Jewish Education 06 Not familiar with Federation 07 Just Moved Here 08 No one asked me 09 Prefer to give to individual charities directly 10 Prefer to Give to Other Jewish organizations 11 Prefer to Give to Non-Jewish charities 12 Do not contribute to any charity 13 No particular reason 14 Israel’s policies towards Palestinians 97 Miscellaneous reasons (SPECIFY) ______NN (DO NOT READ) No reason DD (DO NOT READ) Don’t know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
NO Q.113
(ASK Q.114 IF Q.108 = 2) (IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “anyone in your household”) 114. In the past year, did the Jewish Federation campaign contact (you/anyone in your household) to make a contribution?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
115. DELETED
A62
STATISTICAL INFORMATION
For statistical purposes, we need to ask a few questions.
116. Do you own or rent your residence?
1 Own 2 Rent D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
[ASK IF RESPONDENT OR SPOUSE/PARTNER IS 30+, (Q.24 = 1972 OR EARLIER OR Q.24a = 30+ OR Q.24b = 2,3,4 OR 5) OR (Q.25 = 30+ OR Q.25a = 1972 OR EARLIER OR Q.25b = 2,3,4 OR 5] 117. Do you have a will or any other estate planning document?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.118 IF Q.117 = 1) 118. Have you arranged for a planned gift to ANY charity through a will or other estate planning document, or any other means?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.119 IF Q.118 = 1) 119. Is any Jewish charity going to be the beneficiary of this planned gift?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.120 – 125 ONLY IF SOMEONE IN THE HOUSEHOLD IS 65+, [Q.24 = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.24a = 54+ OR Q.24b = 4 OR 5] OR [Q.25 = 65+ OR Q.25a = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.25b = 4 TOR 5] OR [Q.27 = 65+ OR Q.27b = 4 OR 5]) 120. Are you living in a senior residential community ?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A63 (ASK Q.120a IF Q.120 = 1) 120a. Which one?
1 Answer given______D (DO NOT READ) Don't know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.120b IF Q.120 = 2) 120b. Do you anticipate moving to one in the next 5 to 10 years ?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.120c IF Q.120b = 1) 120c. Do you know which one?
1 Answer given______D (DO NOT READ) Don't know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “household members”) (ASK Q.121 IF ANY MEMBER OF HOUSEHOLD IS 65+, [Q.24 = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.24a = 54+ OR Q.24b = 4 OR 5] OR [Q.25 = 65+ OR Q.25a = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.25b = 4 TOR 5] OR [Q.27 = 65+ OR Q.27b = 4 OR 5]) 121. Do any (you/household members) need transportation assistance that cannot be met by the household itself?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
121a. DELETED
A64 (IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “any senior in your household”) (ASK Q. 122 IF ANY MEMBER OF HOUSEHOLD IS 65+, [Q.24 = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.24a = 54+ OR Q.24b = 4 OR 5] OR [Q.25 = 65+ OR Q.25a = 1937 OR EARLIER OR Q.25b = 4 TOR 5] OR [Q.27 = 65+ OR Q.27b = 4 OR 5]) (SCRAMBLE A – F) (ASK Q.122 THRU Q.124 IN TANDEM) 122. I'm going to list services that seniors sometimes require. Please tell me if (you/any senior in your household) currently requires this service regardless of whether it is being met or not. Does any senior in your household currently require (READ ITEM)?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused a. Fitness classes or training b. Home delivered meals c. Social activities at a community or senior center d. Adult day care e. In home care or assistance f. Consultation with social worker or care manager
(FOR EACH Q.122 = 1, ASK Q.123) 123. Is this service currently being met?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.124 IF Q.123 = 1) 124. Is it by a Jewish organization or agency - or not?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
125. (IF Q.9 NE 1 OR 2) Do you have any adult children, over 21 years old, living in their own household in San Diego County - not including those living with you?
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2) Do you or your (partner/spouse) have any adult children over 21 years old living in their own household in San Diego County - not including those living with you?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A65 (ASK ALL RESPONDENTS) 126. Which of these statements best describes your household's financial situation? (READ STATEMENTS) [IF NECESSARY: “These questions are very important for the Jewish community’s planning purposes.”]
1 Cannot make ends meet 2 Just managing to make ends meet 3 Comfortable - Have enough money 4 Have some extra money 5 Well Off D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF Q.9 = 1 OR 2 OR Q.26 > 0, INSERT “counting everyone who lives in the household”) 127. Income is an important factor for community leaders who want to plan for the Jewish community. The categories we will use are quite broad. All responses are confidential and anonymous. Over the past 12 months, (counting everyone who lives in the household,) was your household income before taxes under $35,000 or over $35,000? [IF NECESSARY, ADD: “Was it under or over $3,000 a month or $700 a week?”]
1 Under $35,000 SKIP TO Q. 128 2 $35,000 and over SKIP TO Q. 129 D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know CONTINUE WITH Q.127a R (DO NOT READ) Refused CONTINUE WITH Q. 127a
IF RESPONDENT IS RELUCTANT OR REFUSES, READ: If you are still uncomfortable, then you obviously do not have to answer. Please remember that I do not know your name or address. The categories are broad and the information is very important.
A66 127a Over the past 12 months, counting everyone who lives in the household, was your household income before taxes under $35,000 or over $35,000?
1 Under $35,000 SKIP TO Q.128 2 $35,000 and over SKIP TO Q. 129 D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know SKIP TO Q.130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
IF RESPONDENT REFUSED IN Q.107, 109, and 111, DO NOT READ, OTHERWISE, IF RESPONDENT IS RELUCTANT OR REFUSES, READ: The categories are quite broad. Income is an important variable for community leaders to help them plan for the community and to convince political leaders to develop new programs. All responses are confidential and anonymous. If you are still uncomfortable, then you obviously do not have to answer. But, please remember that your answers are totally anonymous. REPEAT Q. 127
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 1, Q.2 = 1 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128a. Was your total household income in 2001: under $9,000 annually, between $9,000 and $13,000, or at least $13,000?
1 Under $9,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $9,000 and $13,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 3 Over $13,000 or more SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 2, Q.2 = 2 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128b. Was your total household income in 2001: under $12,000 annually, between $12,000 and $18,000, or at least $18,000?
1 Under $12,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $12,000 and $18,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 3 Over $18,000 or more SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 3, Q.2 = 3 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128c. Was your total household income in 2001: under $15,000 annually, between $15,000 and $22,000, or at least $22,000?
1 Under $15,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $15,000 and $22,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 3 Over $22,000 or more SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
A67 (IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE =, Q.2 = 4 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128d. Was your total household income in 2001: under $18,000 annually, between $18,000 and $27,000, or at least $27,000?
1 Under $18,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $18,000 and $27,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 3 Over $22,000 or more SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 2, Q.2 = 5 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128e. Was your total household income in 2001: under $21,000 annually, between $21,000 and $31,000, or between $31,000 and $35,000?
1 Under $21,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $21,000 and $31,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 3 Between $31,000 and $35,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 6, Q.2 = 6 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128f. Was your total household income in 2001: under $24,000 annually, or between $24,000 and $35,000?
1 Under $24,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $24,000 and $35,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 7, Q.2 = 7 AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128g. Was your total household income in 2001: under $27,000 annually, or between $27,000 and $35,000?
1 Under $27,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $27,000 and $35,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 8+, Q.2 = 8 OR MORE AND Q.127 OR Q.127a = 1) 128h. Was your total household income in 2001: under $30,000 annually, or between $30,000 and $35,000?
1 Under $30,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 2 Between $30,000 and $35,000 SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q. 130
A68 [Q. 129 ASKED IF RESPONDENT ANSWERED $35,000 OR MORE AS TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME. Q.127 OR 127a = 2] 129. Was it between $35,000 and $50,000, between $50,000 and $100,000, between $100,000 and $150,000, or over $150,000 …?
1 Over 150K SKIP TO Q.130 2 100K but less than 150K SKIP TO Q.130 3 50K but less than 100K SKIP TO Q.130 4 35K but less than 50K CONTINUE WITH Q. 129a IF HH SIZE =7+ (Q.7 = 2 OR MORE) PEOPLE OTHERWISE, SKIP TO Q. 130 R Refused SKIP TO Q.130
(IF HOUSEHOLD SIZE = 7 OR MORE AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME IS BETWEEN $35,000 AND $50,000, Q.2 = 7 OR MORE AND Q.129 = 3, ASK) 129a. Was your total household income in 2001: under $40,000 annually, between $40,000 and $45,000, or between $45,000 and $50,000?
1 Under $40,000 2 Between $40,000 and $45,000 3 Between $45,000 and $50,000 R Refused
(MESSIANIC JEWS, Q.5a = 1-6 OR Q.6 = 7) COMPLETE Q. 130, 131, AND 132 AND THEN END INTERVIEW 130. Do you or anyone else in the household have a cell phone?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
131. Excluding cell phones, how many different telephone numbers - - different telephone lines, not extensions - - do you have coming into your household? [IF CELL PHONE CATI PROMPT WILL ADD: … not including the cell phone]
______(RECORD RESPONSE) DD (DO NOT READ) Don't know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
(IF MORE THAN ONE TELEPHONE NUMBER, CONTINUE WITH Q. 132; OTHERWISE, SKIP TO Q. 133) 132. How many of these phone numbers coming into your household - [IF CELL PHONE ADD: not including the cell phone ] - are regularly used as a business phone, for a fax machine, or for a computer?
______(RECORD RESPONSE) DD (DO NOT READ) Don't know RR (DO NOT READ) Refused
A69 (ASK Q. 133-134 IF RESPONDENT IS NOT MARRIED NOT INCLUDING WIDOWED, Q.9 = 3, 4, 6 OR R) (ROTATE 1-3; CODE 4 IS ALWAYS LAST) 133. If you are currently dating, do you…? [READ]
1 Date only Jews 2 Date both Jews and non-Jews 3 Date non-Jews only 4 Or, do you not date 0 Other (SPECIFY) ______D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.134 IF Q.133 = 2 OR 3) 134. Do you prefer…? [READ]
1 Dating Jews 2 Dating non-Jews, or 3 Do you not care 0 Other (SPECIFY) ______D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
135. On one final topic, does anyone in your household consider themselves to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender? [IF ASKED: These and all other questions are confidential. We are trying to determine the Jewish groups with differing opinions and experiences] (INTERVIEWER NOTE: IF THEY JUST SAY “YES” DO NOT PROBE)
1 Gay 2 Lesbian 3 Bisexual 4 Transgender 5 Yes, no details 6 (DO NOT READ) NO - Straight 7 NOT SURE - HESITANT D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
(ASK Q.136 IF Q.135 = 1,2,3,4 OR 5) 136. Does that person/these people feel accepted in the Jewish Community?
1 Yes 2 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
A70 137. Thank you so much. This completes the formal survey. Your answers will be extremely helpful in shaping future decisions about Jewish community programs and services. There may be some group discussions / focus groups that will be held later to talk more about some of the questions we have asked you. Would it be okay if we called you in a few months to see if you have the time to join the group discussions?
1 Yes 2 Not Sure – Hesitant 3 No D (DO NOT READ) Don’t know R (DO NOT READ) Refused
END INTERVIEW I would like to thank you for your time and your assistance in this study.
PLEASE END INTERVIEW GRACIOUSLY.
A71