DOCSLIB.ORG

Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation: Final Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation: Final Report University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Philadelphia and Camden: Community Partners Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation in Arts Access Evaluation—2004-2009 6-2009 Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation: Final Report Mark J. Stern University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Susan C. Seifert University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/siap_cpaa Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons, Civic and Community Engagement Commons, Public Policy Commons, and the Urban Studies and Planning Commons Stern, Mark J. and Seifert, Susan C., "Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation: Final Report" (2009). Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation. 3. https://repository.upenn.edu/siap_cpaa/3 SIAP's evaluation of the Community Partners in Arts Access (CPAA) initiative in North Philadelphia and Camden, NJ was undertaken with support by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The Philadelphia and Camden Cultural Participation Benchmark Project, in collaboration with Alan S. Brown & Associates and Research for Action, provided baseline data and concepts. Regional cultural participation estimates were made possible by access to the Philadelphia Cultural List Cooperative database provided by the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/siap_cpaa/3 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Community Partners in Arts Access Evaluation: Final Report Abstract This research report evaluates the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Community Partners in Arts Access (CPAA) initiative to expand cultural participation among residents of North Philadelphia and Camden, NJ. The initiative had two phases. From September 2003 to December 2004, Knight invited 35 cultural organizations to participate in a planning process with a focus on organizational capacity, audience development, and action plans to broaden, deepen, and diversify participation. In December 2004, Knight awarded grants to 19 organizations to carry out their action plans over the next three years. The final evaluation report concluded that CPAA met its goals. Both regional and benchmark participation rates had increased from the beginning to the end of the initiative. By 2008 the gap between levels of cultural participation in North Philadelphia and Camden and the rest of the metropolitan area had been reduced significantly. This conclusion, however, belies the complexity that attended the initiative as it unfolded. Knight began CPAA in 2003 with an orthodox theory of organizational capacity building but by 2006 had shifted its focus to community transformation, and grantees had to rethink their projects. SIAP maintained its evaluation design: waves of grantee and regional participant data-gathering; a survey of artists living or working in North Philadelphia and Camden; and ongoing interviews and participant-observation with CPAA grantees. The qualitative record allowed SIAP not only to document what actually happened but also to make sense of changing theories of action during the course of the initiative. Disciplines Arts and Humanities | Civic and Community Engagement | Public Policy | Urban Studies and Planning Comments SIAP's evaluation of the Community Partners in Arts Access (CPAA) initiative in North Philadelphia and Camden, NJ was undertaken with support by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. The Philadelphia and Camden Cultural Participation Benchmark Project, in collaboration with Alan S. Brown & Associates and Research for Action, provided baseline data and concepts. Regional cultural participation estimates were made possible by access to the Philadelphia Cultural List Cooperative database provided by the Greater Philadelphia Cultural Alliance. This research report is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/siap_cpaa/3 COMMUNITY PARTNERS IN ARTS ACCESS EVALUATION: FINAL REPORT A report to: The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation Prepared by: Mark J. Stern and Susan C. Seifert University of Pennsylvania Social Impact of the Arts Project June 2009 Mark J. Stern and Susan C. Seifert Philadelphia l June 2009 For information, contact: Susan C. Seifert, Director Social Impact of the Arts Project University of Pennsylvania l School of Social Policy & Practice 3701 Locust Walk, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6214 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.sp2.upenn.edu/SIAP/ TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction and Executive Summary 2. The Long and Winding Road: Theories of Action in CPAA The Community Indicators Project The Community Partners Program The Conservation Company/TCC Group The RAND Model of Cultural Participation The Centrality of Organizational Capacity Theories of Action in Practice: CPAA Grantees’ Perspective Arts as Transformative Experience Placing Young People at the Center of Change Arts for Community Mobilization and Empowerment Arts as Catalyst of Community Progress and Well-being Community Transformation The Reinvestment Fund Social Capacity and Civic Institutions Public Assets and Infrastructure Economic Assets and Market Relationships Flows of Information, Capital and People Conclusion Outputs Outcomes Impacts 3. Outputs: The CPAA Grantees—Who They Were and What They Did North Philadelphia CPAA Grantees Located in North Philadelphia Regional Grantees Serving North Philadelphia School District of Philadelphia-based programs Camden, New Jersey CPAA Grantees Located in Camden Regional Grantees Serving Camden 4. Outcomes: How Cultural Participation Changed in North Philadelphia and Camden Between 2004 and 2008 The Changing Social and Economic Context Population Income and Property Values Methods for Estimating Cultural Participation Regional Participation Findings Regional Participation in 2004 Regional Participation in 2008 Socio-economic Profile Benchmark Participation in CPAA Communities Findings The Role of Artists in North Philadelphia and Camden’s Cultural Ecology Methods and Data Findings Conclusion 5. Impacts: What Are the Long-term Effects of CPAA? Social Capital and Civic Institutions Engaging Place Communities Outreach Workers and Neighborhood Residencies Public Events and Festivals Artist-driven Community Projects Youth Arts Strategies Engaging Institutional Communities Public Assets and Infrastructure Public Institutions Philadelphia Housing Authority School District of Philadelphia Public Space and Community Facilities Economic Assets and Market Relationships Applying the Organizational Development Model Social Entrepreneurship and Risk Mitigation Human Capital ii Real Estate Development Flows of Information, People, and Capital Community Arts Centers as Networked Enterprises CPAA Arts Partnerships Community Partners 6. CPAA’s Legacy The Benchmark Report’s Analysis of Assets and Challenges North Philadelphia and Camden’s Cultural Sector in 2008 References iii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report evaluates the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation’s Community Partners in Arts Access (CPAA) initiative, an effort to expand cultural participation in North Philadelphia and Camden, New Jersey. The initiative emerged from the Foundation’s Community Partners Program and its efforts to identify issues of concern in the twenty-six communities in which the Foundation is active. The initiative had two phases. In September 2003, a group of thirty-five cultural organizations were invited to participate in a planning process that would include organizational capacity building, training in audience development, and developing an action plan to expand cultural participation. Eventually, in December 2004, a group of nineteen organizations were awarded a total of $4.8 million to carry out their work between 2005 and 2008. In contrast to many evaluation efforts that begin after a project is already underway, CPAA was being evaluated before it even began. The Foundation asked the University of Pennsylvania’s Social Impact of the Arts Project (SIAP) to lead a research team—that included Alan Brown and Research for Action—to document the state of cultural participation in North Philadelphia and Camden in 2004 and 2005. This research led to the Philadelphia and Camden Cultural Participation Benchmark Report, co-authored by Mark Stern and Susan Seifert. That report included a detailed analysis of two elements of cultural participation: an estimate of regional participation drawn from the organizational records of a cross-section of metropolitan Philadelphia cultural organizations and an estimate of “benchmark” participation focused on organizations located in or serving North Philadelphia and Camden. These two estimates served as the basis on which this evaluation has judged the outcomes of CPAA. 1 This report concludes that CPAA met its goals. The participation analysis finds that both regional and benchmark participation rates increased from the beginning to the end of the initiative. By 2008, the gap between the levels of cultural participation in North Philadelphia and Camden and the rest of the metropolitan area had been reduced significantly. However, this simple conclusion belies the complexity that attended CPAA as it unfolded. Most important to that history was a change in the Foundation’s program emphasis—a change that we document in Chapter 2. Where CPAA began with an orthodox theory of increased organizational capacity leading to a planned strategy for audience-building, by 2006 grantees were told that they should rethink their
Load more

Recommended publications
  • INVEST in NEIGHBORHOODS: an Agenda for Livable Philadelphia Communities
    INVEST IN NEIGHBORHOODS: An Agenda for Livable Philadelphia Communities Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations May 2003 PACDC Members CDC Members Bridesburg/Kensington CDC Production Kensington Area Revitalization Project, New Kensington CDC Over the past ten years, our CDC Center City members have leveraged over $650 Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation million in investment to our neigh- borhoods. They have: Chestnut Hill/Germantown East Falls Development Corporation, Greater Germantown Housing Development Corpora- Developed nearly 3,500 homes and tion, Mt. Airy USA, Nicetown CDC, Urban Resources Development Corporation apartments for first time home buyers, lower income families and special needs Lower North Philadelphia populations Advocate CDC, Asociación de Puertorriqueños en Marcha, Inc., Friends Rehabilitation Pro- gram, Kensington South CDC, Project H.O.M.E., Renaissance CDC, Spring Garden Civic Asso- Created over 1.1 million square feet ciation, Women’s Community Revitalization Project, Yorktown CDC of commercial and facilities space, including supermarkets and retail space, job training centers, child care centers, Near Northeast Philadelphia and charter schools Frankford CDC, Frankford United Neighbors CDC, Mayfair CDC Assisted or created over 2,000 Olney/Oak Lane businesses Campus Boulevard Corporation, Fern Rock-Ogontz-Belfield CDC, Greater Olney Circle of Friends CDC, Inter-Community Development Corporation, Ogontz Avenue Revitalization Corporation, Provided job training or placement for
    [Show full text]
  • Yorktown Historic District Other Names/Site Number NA
    NPS Form 10-900 OMB No. 1024-0018 (Expires 5/31/2012) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This form is for use in nominating or requesting determinations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "N/A" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions. Place additional certification comments, entries, and narrative items on continuation sheets if needed (NPS Form 10-900a). 1. Name of Property historic name Yorktown Historic District other names/site number NA 2. Location Roughly bounded by 1000-1100 blocks Cecil B. Moore Ave., 1600 block street & number N. 10th St., 1000 block W. Oxford St., 1300-1500 blocks N. 11th St., 1100 not for publication block W. Stiles St., 1200 block of W. Flora St., and 1200-1500 blocks N. 13th St. city or town Philadelphia vicinity state Pennsylvania code PA county Philadelphia code 101 zip code 19122 3. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, I hereby certify that this X nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property X meets does not meet the National Register Criteria.
    [Show full text]
  • Temple I: North 16Th Street
    Temple I: North 16th Street 1700 block of North 16th Street, Philadelphia, PA The rehabilitation of 58 units of affordable housing in 22 historic brownstone buildings Located in the Lower North Philadelphia Speculative Housing District, these 22 townhomes were built between 1868 and 1875 during a period of extraordinary residential growth linked directly to the northward expansion of Philadelphia’s streetcar lines. Originally built as single-family dwellings for the middle and upper-middle class, they exhibit an exceptional and diverse collection of Victorian architectural styles and original details. You can see this in the elaborate brickwork in the facades along the 1700 block of North 16th Street, as well as in the corbelled window surrounds, glazed tile string courses, beveled brownstone sills and water tables, and elongated wood brackets in the cornice. In 1994, the 22 homes were converted into multi-family buildings through the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program, yielding 58 units of affordable family housing. By April of 2006, after years of mismanagement and neglect, the buildings were deteriorated and in desperate need of major renovation. The neighborhood was riddled with crime and drug problems. At the request of the equity investor, 1260 stepped in to stabilize operations and preserve long-term affordability of the project. The restoration of this block has preserved 58 units of affordable housing for families, and is a part of a larger plan to revitalize the North Philadelphia neighborhood. 1260 refinanced the project using the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Tax Credit Exchange program to obtain a loan from the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • State of North Broad2017
    % 5*$%!"#"$%&'%(&)"*%+)&#,%6748% % % ! THE STATE OFNORTH BROAD 2017 #THINKBROAD !"#"$%&'%(&)" *%+)&#,%-&."$."%/%0)#'"%'&)%0$123.!! TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents 3 Letter from Executive Director 4 North Broad by the numbers 5 Map of North Broad 6 North Broad Street as a neighborhood connector 7 Housing 9 Jobs and businesses 12 Growth and development 16 Development on the North B road corridor 19 Transportation 34 Crime and public safety 39 Quality of life 41 History of North Broad Renaissance 44 The 2020 vision 44 North Broad Renaissance objectives 45 North Broad Renaissance 2016 accomplishments 45 North Broad Renaissance staff 46 THE STATE OFNORTH BROAD 2017 4 LETTER FROM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR The energy on North Broad is incredible. With projects like the Divine Lorraine, the Metropolitan Opera House and the Beury Building, the community has a nervous excitement about this revitalization and the type of opportunities it could mean for their business, homes and families all along North Broad. The 2017 State of North Broad report provides an in-depth look at the changing landscape of North Broad Street and adjacent areas. From new to proposed development to quality of life, this reports aims to keep stakeholders connected and informed about this corridor, and what its revitalization means to them. Overall, you will see that North Broad is experiencing various highs and lows. You’ll see slight increases in statistics like population growth and income, yet the area still struggles with high unemployment and low educational attainment. Overall, our job at the North Broad Renaissance (NBR) is to take this information and data, determine how we can support the positive and mitigate the negative, and work towards inclusive growth than could positively impact the entire North Broad community – including our most vulnerable population.
    [Show full text]
  • Closing the Gap: Housing (Un)Affordability in Philadelphia
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (City and Regional Planning) Department of City and Regional Planning 3-1-2003 Closing the Gap: Housing (un)Affordability in Philadelphia Amy E. Hillier University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Dennis P. Culhane University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cplan_papers Part of the Urban, Community and Regional Planning Commons Hillier, Amy E. and Culhane, Dennis P., "Closing the Gap: Housing (un)Affordability in Philadelphia" (2003). Departmental Papers (City and Regional Planning). 1. https://repository.upenn.edu/cplan_papers/1 Report commissioned by Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, 2003. Publisher URL: http://www.cml.upenn.edu/presentations/CLOSINGtheGAP3.pdf This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cplan_papers/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Closing the Gap: Housing (un)Affordability in Philadelphia Disciplines Urban, Community and Regional Planning Comments Report commissioned by Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition, 2003. Publisher URL: http://www.cml.upenn.edu/presentations/CLOSINGtheGAP3.pdf This journal article is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/cplan_papers/1 closing the Housing (un)Affordability GAP in Philadelphia Amy Hillier & Dennis Culhane Cartographic Modeling Laboratory University of Pennsylvania March 2003 Commissioned by the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition This report was commissioned by the Philadelphia Affordable Housing Coalition (PAHC) with funds from the William Penn Foundation, the Samuel S. Fels Fund, the Prudential Foundation and members of PAHC. The PAHC was formed in 2001 by organizations who see Philadelphia’s affordable housing crisis up close, every day, from the front lines.
    [Show full text]
  • Philadelphia, 1982–2007: Toward the Postindustrial City
    Philadelphia, 1982–2007: Toward the Postindustrial City T THE TIME OF ITS TERCENTENNIAL, Philadelphia’s outlook appeared bleak. Few people would have predicted much of a Afuture for the city. By almost every measure, the 1970s had been a disaster. In that single decade the population dropped 260,000. The employment base seemed to be collapsing, as manufacturing jobs fell 40 percent. The resulting erosion of the tax base left the city with a chronic fiscal crisis. In 1976 alone, local property taxes rose by one-third. Under the administration of Mayor Frank Rizzo (1972–80), violent crime jumped, despite his trademark swagger and tough talk. Racial animosities ran deep—in City Council chambers and in the neighborhoods. In impoverished districts, especially in lower North Philadelphia, landlords simply abandoned their properties, which became derelict fire hazards and havens for drug addicts and gangs. The schools struggled to teach amidst the social chaos. Homeless people were sleeping on the sidewalks. In January 1982, after 134 years, the Philadelphia Bulletin, long the leading newspaper, ceased publication. It was an ominous sign. In the ensuing quarter century, Philadelphia—its government and business leaders, and its residents and workers—struggled to adjust to a new economic reality, but with only mixed results. On the positive side, Center City became an exciting destination, with shimmering new office towers, thousands of new residents, and droves of tourists. The economy held its own in the growth sectors of information, health, and education. The city government made progress attacking the decay of its most dis- tressed neighborhoods and, with state help, improved its schools.
    [Show full text]
  • Pennsylvania Orthoimagery Tile Index
    PA_X29_Y123 PA_X30_Y123 611 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission PA_X28_Y122 PA_X29_Y122 PA_X30_Y122 Riegelsville PA_X27_Y121 PA_X28_Y121 PA_X29_Y121 PA_X30_Y121 PA_X27_Y120 PA_X28_Y120 PA_X29_Y120 PA_X30_Y120 PA_X31_Y120 PA_X32_Y120 32 PA_X33_Y120 DURHAM Pennsylvania PA_X26_Y119 PA_X27_Y119 PA_X28_Y119 PA_X29_Y119 PA_X30_Y119 PA_X31_Y119 PA_X32_Y119 PA_X33_Y119 BRIDGETON PA_X25_Y118 PA_X26_Y118 PA_X27_Y118 PA_X28_Y118 PA_X29_Y118 PA_X30_Y118 PA_X31_Y118 PA_X32_Y118 PA_X33_Y118 PA_X34_Y118 PA_X25_Y117 PA_X26_Y117 PA_X27_Y117 PA_X28_Y117 PA_X29_Y117 PA_X30_Y117 PA_X31_Y117 PA_X32_Y117 PA_X33_Y117 PA_X34_Y117 NOCKAMIXON Orthoimagery Tile Index SPRINGFIELD PA_X24_Y116 PA_X25_Y116 PA_X26_Y116 PA_X27_Y116 PA_X28_Y116 PA_X29_Y116 PA_X30_Y116 PA_X31_Y116 PA_X32_Y116 PA_X33_Y116 PA_X34_Y116 212 PA_X23_Y115 PA_X24_Y115 PA_X25_Y115 PA_X26_Y115 PA_X27_Y115 PA_X28_Y115 PA_X29_Y115 PA_X30_Y115 PA_X31_Y115 PA_X32_Y115 PA_X33_Y115 PA_X34_Y115 TINICUM PA_X23_Y114 PA_X24_Y114 PA_X25_Y114 PA_X26_Y114 PA_X27_Y114 PA_X28_Y114 PA_X29_Y114 PA_X30_Y114 PA_X31_Y114 PA_X32_Y114 PA_X33_Y114 PA_X34_Y114 HAYCOCK PA_X22_Y113 PA_X23_Y113 PA_X24_Y113 PA_X25_Y113 PA_X26_Y113 PA_X27_Y113 PA_X28_Y113 PA_X29_Y113 PA_X30_Y113 PA_X31_Y113 PA_X32_Y113 PA_X33_Y113 PA_X34_Y113 Richlandtown 563 611 RICHLAND PA_X22_Y112 PA_X23_Y112 PA_X24_Y112 PA_X25_Y112 PA_X26_Y112 PA_X27_Y112 PA_X28_Y112 PA_X29_Y112 PA_X30_Y112 PA_X31_Y112 PA_X32_Y112 PA_X33_Y112 PA_X34_Y112 PA_X19_Y111 PA_X21_Y111 PA_X22_Y111 PA_X23_Y111 PA_X24_Y111 PA_X25_Y111 PA_X26_Y111 PA_X27_Y111 PA_X28_Y111
    [Show full text]
  • Changes in Values and the Impact on Preservation in Philadelphia
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Theses (Historic Preservation) Graduate Program in Historic Preservation January 2007 Changes in Values and the Impact on Preservation in Philadelphia Amanda B. Casper University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses Casper, Amanda B., "Changes in Values and the Impact on Preservation in Philadelphia" (2007). Theses (Historic Preservation). 67. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/67 A Thesis in Historic Preservation Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Historic Preservation 2007. Advisor: Gail Caskey Winkler This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/67 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Changes in Values and the Impact on Preservation in Philadelphia Comments A Thesis in Historic Preservation Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Historic Preservation 2007. Advisor: Gail Caskey Winkler This thesis or dissertation is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/67 CHANGES IN VALUES AND THE IMPACT ON PRESERVATION IN PHILADELPHIA: AN ASSESSMENT OF PHILADELPHIA NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARKS Amanda B. Casper A THESIS in Historic Preservation Presented to the Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION 2007 __________________________________ ______________________________ Advisor Reader Gail Caskey Winkler David Hollenberg Lecturer in Historic Preservation Lecturer in Historic Preservation __________________________________ Program Chair Frank G. Matero Professor of Architecture Acknowledgments I would like to express my gratitude to Gail Winkler for her advice, thoughts and endless patience during this process.
    [Show full text]
  • Philadelphia Neighborhoods Map Pdf
    Philadelphia neighborhoods map pdf Continue Wikipedia's list article Unofficial Map of Philadelphia Neighborhoods Philadelphia Planning Analysis Sections Such a list contains a list of neighborhoods, districts and other locations located in the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. The list is organized with extensive geographical sections of the city. Although there is no official list of neighborhoods, districts and locations, this list was drawn from the sources listed in the References and External Links sections, as well as from published information from secondary sources. Common use of Philadelphia neighborhood names does not respect the official boundaries used by city police, the planning commission or other bodies. Therefore, some of the places listed here may overlap geographically, and residents do not always agree where one district ends and another begins. Philadelphia has 41 postal codes that are often used for neighborhood analysis. [1] Historically, many neighbourhoods were defined by included areas (Blockley, Roxborough), districts (Belmont, Kensington, Moyamensing, Richmond) or boroughs (Bridesburg, Frankford, Germantown, Manayunk) before being enroled in the city by the Consolidation Act of 1854. [2] Adding further complications is the fact that in some parts of Philadelphia, especially in the north, west and south-f wolf center, residents have long been more identified with the name of their part of the city than with a particular neighborhood name. Today, community development corporations, neighborhood
    [Show full text]
  • Lower North [7]
    Report on Elderly in City Planning District: Lower North [7] The City Planning Commission’s web site for the Lower North Planning District is: http://phila2035.org/home-page/district/lower-north/ For further information on this report please contact: Allen Glicksman, Director of Research and Evaluation, 215-765-9000, ex. 5063, [email protected] Information on Total Population Lower North Philadelphia Estimated size of total population 91,761 1,536,704 (number of persons) Percentage Foreign Born 4% 12% Percentage Minority 85% 63% Percentage with incomes less than 37% 21% 100% of poverty (age 25+) Percent vacant properties 23% 13% Ratio of Major Crimes per 1,000 161 98.29 Residents* Number of Grocery / Food Markets 110 1026 Small (1-15 employees) 105 919 Medium (16-100 employees) 4 67 Large (100+ employees) 1 40 Number of Pharmacies 26 407 *(Major crimes include: Homicide, Rape, Robbery, Aggravated Assault, Burglary, Theft and Auto Theft) Information on Older Adult Population of Lower North Planning District Lower North Philadelphia Estimated Population Age 60+(number of persons) 13,463 262,384 Socio-Economic Status: Lower North Philadelphia Demographic Characteristics/Living Arrangements Minority (persons other than white non-Hispanic) 88.3% 47.3% Median age 74 70 Age 75+ 47.8% 35.0% Female 73.2% 60.9% Married or living with partner 29.7% 41.7% Live alone 42.0% 33.2% Children living in household NA 10.5% One or more pets in home 88.3% 36.3% Grandparent (60+) responsible for own grandchildren 2% 2% Language spoken at home / Ability
    [Show full text]
  • Philadelphia 2021: the State of the City April 2021 About This Report
    Philadelphia The the State 2021: of City Report April 2021 April 2021 Philadelphia 2021 The State of the City About this report The annual “State of the City” report is part of The Pew Charitable Trusts’ ongoing work in Philadelphia. Staff members Katie Martin, Jason Hachadorian, and Donna Leong gathered the data and assembled the report. Larry Eichel, senior adviser for Pew’s Philadelphia research and policy initiative, helped write and edit the publication, along with Elizabeth Lowe and Erika Compart. Ned Drummond and Cara Bahniuk created the graphics and designed the report. Contact: Elizabeth Lowe, communications officer Email: [email protected] Phone: 215-575-4812 Project website: pewtrusts.org/philaresearch The Pew Charitable Trusts is driven by the power of knowledge to solve today’s most challenging problems. Pew applies a rigorous, analytical approach to improve public policy, inform the public, and invigorate civic life. Contents 1 A Troubling Year 15 Demographics 27 Education 35 Government 43 Health 57 Housing 69 Jobs and the Economy 81 Public Safety 91 Transportation, Infrastructure, and the Environment 98 Photo Captions A Troubling Year In so many ways, 2020 was a troubling year for Philadelphia, one that raised profound questions about its future. The numbers tell the story of a city facing tremendous challenges, not just from the pandemic and its economic impact but from rising drug overdose deaths and gun violence as well. Philadelphia recorded more than 96,000 COVID-19 cases and 2,500 deaths from the virus in 2020, with the death toll surpassing 3,000 by mid-February 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Districts in Philadelphia
    HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN PHILADELPHIA An assessment of existing information and recommendations for future action January 9, 2007 CRCG # 06-094-01 Emily T. Cooperman, Ph.D., Project Manager Cory Kegerise, M.S., Principal Investigator HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN PHILADELPHIA An assessment of existing information and recommendations for future action January 9, 2007 CRCG # 06-094-01 Emily T. Cooperman, Ph.D., Project Manager Cory Kegerise, M.S., Principal Investigator Prepared for: Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia 1616 Walnut St., Suite 1620 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Prepared by: Cultural Resource Consulting Group 1500 Walnut St., Suite 702 Philadelphia, PA 19102 This report has been supported in part by a grant from the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission Philadelphia Historic Resource Survey Inventory Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia Philadelphia, Pennsylvania CONTENTS Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................1 1.0 STUDY PURPOSE, SCOPE, AND METHODS......................................................... 2 2.0 HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN PHILADELPHIA ..............................................................7 3.0 THE IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN PHILADELPHIA......................................................................................................25 4.0 CONCLUSIONS.....................................................................................................34 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..........................................................................................36
    [Show full text]