2017 U.S. Air Force Community Feedback Tool Feedback Community Force Air U.S. 2017 Airmen, their families, and Air Force civilian employees face a range of personal and work-related challenges. To assist Air Force leaders and service providers in identifying the needs of their communities and prioritizing efforts to address them, the Air Force sponsored the 2017 Air Force Community Feedback Tool—a self-reported needs assessment of Air Force community members. The holistic approach asked participants about such issues as military practices and culture, work-life balance, and health and well-being (all chosen as top problems in the past year). The survey also asked about help-seeking behaviors, experiences with military and nonmilitary resources, and attitudes toward military resources and military life in general. A minority of those who reached out to resources had unmet needs, and survey responses suggested avenues to address these and other challenges. More than 88,000 active, guard, and reserve airmen; spouses of airmen; and Air Force civilian employees responded to the survey between August and October 2017. This report synthesizes results across the Air Force and draws lessons from the findings. Sims et al. Sims 2017 U.S. Air Force Community Feedback Tool Key Results Report for Air Force Headquarters PROJECT AIR FORCE Carra S. Sims, Laura L. Miller, Thomas E. Trail, Dulani Woods, Aaron Kofner, $46.00 Carolyn M. Rutter, Marek N. Posard, Owen Hall, Meredith Kleykamp www.rand.org ISBN-10 1-9774-0382-4 ISBN-13 978-1-9774-0382-7 54600 R C O R P O R A T I O N RR-3084-AF 9 781977 403827 For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR3084 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0382-7 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2019 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover credits: Top: left, Tech. Sgt. Lealan Buehrer; middle, Tech. Sgt. Nadine Barclay; right, 2nd Lt. Brittany Curry. Bottom: Airman 1st Class John Nieves Camacho; middle, Greg L. Davis; right, Master Sgt. John Nimmo, Sr., U.S. Air Force. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface This report provides Air Force-level results from the 2017 Air Force Community Feedback Tool and documents the study methods. The web-based survey was administered in August and September 2017. All active, guard, and reserve airmen; their spouses; and Air Force civilian employees were eligible and invited to participate. The top priority of the survey was to provide local commanders and service providers input from their own local Air Force communities about their most significant problems and needs. Thus, in April 2018, reports for internal Air Force use were provided for major active and reserve Air Force installations and guard wings and for additional installations where large numbers of airmen are stationed. The next set of reports, provided in May 2018, aggregated feedback across installations. These reports were prepared for all major commands and the Air Force District of Washington. In June 2018, results from guard members and guard spouses were provided to the Air National Guard. This final report describes overall feedback from across the entire Air Force. The large sample sizes enable more-detailed analysis of differences across demographic subgroups and types of locations than was feasible at the installation or major command level. The main purpose of this report is to highlight many key findings from the survey that could help inform the Community Action Plans of local Community Action Boards and Community Action Teams but not to provide an exhaustive catalog of all possible findings that could be derived from the survey. This goal was chosen after an Air Force comprehensive review of reports from previous community assessment surveys. The research team consulted with the sponsor to identify what types of key findings should be highlighted. Leaders and program staff can use data specific to their areas of responsibility to help make their programs, policies, and outreach efforts more effective or to confirm that what they have in place meet the population’s needs. The research reported here was commissioned by the commander of the Air Force Medical Operations Agency from May 2016 to May 2018, Brig Gen Robert I. Miller, on behalf of the Air Force Community Action Board. It was conducted within the Manpower, Personnel, and Training Program of RAND Project AIR FORCE as a part of a fiscal year 2016 project, “Air Force Comprehensive Needs Assessment.” RAND Project AIR FORCE RAND Project AIR FORCE (PAF), a division of the RAND Corporation, is the U.S. Air Force’s federally funded research and development center for studies and analyses. PAF provides the Air Force with independent analyses of policy alternatives affecting the iii development, employment, combat readiness, and support of current and future air, space, and cyber forces. Research is conducted in four programs: Strategy and Doctrine Force; Modernization and Employment; Manpower, Personnel, and Training; and Resource Management. The research reported here was prepared under contract FA7014-16-D-1000. Additional information about PAF is available on our website: http://www.rand.org/paf/ This report documents work originally shared with the U.S. Air Force in April and September 2018. iv Contents Preface ........................................................................................................................................... iii Figures .......................................................................................................................................... vii Tables ............................................................................................................................................. ix Summary ......................................................................................................................................... xi Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................... xxiii Abbreviations ............................................................................................................................. xxiv 1. Overview of Approach and Key Methodological Points .......................................................... 1 Air Force Community Feedback Tool Objective ...................................................................................... 1 Community Member Definitions .............................................................................................................. 2 Survey Recruitment and Administration ................................................................................................... 3 Overall Air Force Population Characteristics and Response Rates .......................................................... 4 Time to Complete the Survey .................................................................................................................... 6 Analytic Approach .................................................................................................................................... 7 Constraints and Limitations .................................................................................................................... 11 Organization of This Report .................................................................................................................... 15 2. Self-Rated Health and Resilience-Related Measures .............................................................. 17 Exploring Variation in Responses: Limited-Activity Days and Perceived Resilience ........................... 23 Findings and Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 28 3. Self-Reported Problems and Needs in the Past Year .............................................................. 30 Types of Problems: All and Sole or Most Significant ............................................................................ 30 Needs for Assistance with Top Problems ............................................................................................... 36 Exploring Variation in Responses: Sole or Most Significant Type of Problem ..................................... 45 Findings and Conclusions ......................................................................................................................