Final Report on the Summer 2006 Survey for the Department of Justice’s Weed and Seed Project.

— filed under: Central City, Featured, Final Report, Hoffman Triangle

Click here to get the file

Size 10.0 MB - File type application/pdf

Full screen

File contents

Final Report on the

Summer 2006 Survey
for the Department of
Justice’s Weed and Seed
Project.

November 2, 2006

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements ........................................................................ 4
Introduction ................................................................................. 5

Background on Neighborhoods...................................................... 6

Tremé/Lafitte ......................................................................... 6

Central City............................................................................ 6
Bywater ................................................................................ 7
Algiers District ........................................................................ 7

Descriptive Statistics ...................................................................... 9

Demographics ......................................................................... 9
Housing ................................................................................12

Vulnerability..........................................................................12
Crime and Safety ....................................................................13
Employment ..........................................................................16
Owners and Tenants.................................................................19

Algiers .................................................................................22

Limitations and Lessons Learned .......................................................24

Limitations for Central City ........................................................24

Non response ......................................................................24
Central City........................................................................25
Bywater.............................................................................26
Algiers ..............................................................................27
Tremé...............................................................................27
Population estimates .............................................................27

Female headed households......................................................28
Clusters .............................................................................29

Lessons Learned......................................................................29

Non-response and population estimation .....................................29
Female headed households......................................................30
Clusters .............................................................................31

References .................................................................................32
Annex A: Methodology....................................................................33

Sampling Scheme ....................................................................33
Central City weighting and analysis ..............................................35
Weighting .............................................................................35

Design weights.....................................................................35
Non-response weights ............................................................35

Overall weighting .................................................................37

Analysis................................................................................37
Central City Population Estimate .................................................38

Annex B: Tables ...........................................................................40

Descriptive Statistics................................................................40

Employment ..........................................................................57
Owners versus Renters..............................................................66

Head of Household Characteristics in Tremé ...................................77

Male versus Female in Tremé......................................................80

Algiers .................................................................................83

Annex C: Maps .............................................................................91

Map 1: Central City Survey .........................................................91

Map 2: Central City Occupancy....................................................92
Map 3: Central City Ownership ....................................................93

Map 4: Central City Flooding.......................................................94
Map 5: Central City African American ...........................................95

Map 6: Central City Caucasian ....................................................96

Map 7: Central City Hispanic ......................................................97

Map 8: Central City New Residents ..............................................98

Map 9: Central City Schools .......................................................99
Map 10: Central City Child Care ................................................ 100

Map 11: Central City Safety ..................................................... 101
Map 12: Central City Health Care ............................................... 102

Map 13: Central City Access to Information about Available Resources .. 103
Map 14: Central City Community Center...................................... 104
Map 15: Bywater Flooding ........................................................ 105

Map 16: Bywater Safety.......................................................... 106
Map 17: Bywater Crime .......................................................... 107
Map 18: Bywater Job Loss ........................................................ 108
Map 19: Tremé Flooding .......................................................... 109
Map 20: Tremé Safety............................................................ 110
Map 21: Tremé Crime ............................................................. 111
Map 22: Tremé Job Loss ......................................................... 112

Acknowledgements

A special thanks to New Orleans Police and Justice Foundation for your support of this
study.

Authors:
Jeff Coates, MPH – Recovery Action Learning Laboratory
Maya Matthews-Sterling, MPH – Recovery Action Learning Laboratory
Adam Papendieck, MPH – Recovery Action Learning Laboratory
Megan Dieterich

Assistance with Data Analysis and Editing By:
Todd Noletto
Aaron Wise
Jennifer Weiss

Technical Assistance Provided By:
Dr. Nancy Mock, Tulane University School of Public Health
Joshua Rodd, MPH – The Payson Center for International Development and Technology

Transfer

Introduction

Operation Weed and Seed

Weed and Seed is a community based strategy sponsored by the Department of
Justice (DOJ), which aims to prevent, control and reduce violent crime, drug

abuse, and gang activity in designated high-crime neighborhoods. Weed and

Seed is a multi-agency approach to crime prevention and community

development

Recovery Action Learning Laboratory
The Recovery Action Learning Laboratory (RALLY) is a not-for-profit corporation
created to support evidence-based decision making in disaster and recovery

settings. RALLY particularly focuses on providing information in support of the

nonprofit sector and also emphasizes primary data collection in the post-

Katrina settings.

RALLY was born from early efforts by Tulane faculty and students to respond to

recovery planning and intervention needs. Several Tulane graduates form the

core team of RALLY. RALLY began conducting neighborhood assessments in

New Orleans in early October of 2005. Since then, RALLY has contracts and

collaborations with a number of nonprofit organizations in New Orleans.

The New Orleans Police Foundation has contracted RALLY to undertake

household level assessments in the three designated Weed and Seed

neighborhoods of Bywater/Algiers, Central City and Tremé/Lafitte. The
following information is intended to aid the Weed and Seed operation with

their mandate to prevent, control and reduce crime through law enforcement
and community involvement and to help create sustainable programs for

There are actually four distinct neighborhoods

developing neighborhoods. The primary objectives of the RALLY assessments
were:

•

To provide basic demographic information for targeted neighborhoods

•

To determine normative and expressed needs related to the Seed

element of the Weed and Seed program

Background on Neighborhoods

Tremé/Lafitte

Throughout the city’s history, the neighborhood of Tremé has been known for

its rich cultural and economic value. Tremé’s cultural diversity and various
ethnic groups provided the foundation for the birthplace of Jazz music and

Second Lines, of which many of its musicians called Tremé home. Over the
years, projects that were to benefit the greater good of the city inadvertently

affected the unity of one of New Orleans most well established communities.
In the 1960s, nine blocks of historic homes and gathering places were torn
down to make way for Armstrong Park. The 1960s saw the leveling of the open

space and live oak trees along Claiborne Avenue for the I-10 project. Today,
Tremé’s glory days continue to fade into history as locals attest to the

existence of crack houses, violence, and lack of safety on their streets. The

2000 Census indicates there were 8853 residents in 3429 households. This
figure includes the Lafitte housing project (which was excluded from this
study).

Central City

Dating back to the 1830’s, Central City has been the home to many immigrants
and working class people of New Orleans. According to the 2000 Census, there

were 8147 households with a total of 19072 people, of which 87% were African-
American, residing in the neighborhood. With the closures of parts of the C.J.

Peete and Guste housing projects prior to the hurricane, the neighborhood was
most likely smaller than in 2000 even before Katrina affected the area. Once
an important hub for the healthcare industry for African-Americans, Central

City is now marked with crime and poverty with over 49% of its residents living

in poverty.

Bywater

Most of what is now the Bywater neighborhood was plantation land until the

early 1800’s. Development of the area saw a large influx of free people of

color and numerous immigrants from Ireland, Germany, and Haiti. Today, the

Bywater neighborhood has an interesting mix of residential, commercial and
industrial activity, along the riverbank. The neighborhood has become a

residential hotspot for artists,

and as a result, many galleries
can be found throughout the

neighborhood. The 2000 Census

indicates that there were 5096
residents occupying 2263

households. Poverty rate in

Bywater was 38.6% in 2000.

Algiers District

Located on the west bank of the Mississippi, Algiers is composed of 8

neighborhoods. For most of its history Algiers was a village sandwiched
between the commercial activity on the River and the agricultural activity of

the vast majority of its 13,000 acres. With the opening of the Greater New

Orleans Mississippi River Bridge in 1958, the Right Bank of New Orleans began
to take on the appearance of a modern suburb, with new brick houses built on

slab foundations and its population rapidly increasing. A total of 49076
residents in 18467 households occupy the district. Like some neighborhoods in

the East Bank, Algiers is a checkerboard of income levels. Some neighborhoods
have poverty rates as high as 48.3% and some as low as 9.9%. The district is

home to a country club, a housing project, and a naval support area.

Descriptive Statistics

Demographics

The results are based on 114 completed surveys in Tremé, 132 in the Bywater

neighborhood, and 134 in Central City as well as eighteen completed surveys in

public housing units and low income areas in the Algiers district

Table A shows Rally’s summer 2006 population estimates for Central City,

Bywater and Tremé, along with estimated occupancy rates.

Table A: Estimated populations and occupancy rates.
Central City

Estimate

Range (95% conf.)

2006*

Central City Population

9,582

9,156 - 10,008

Occupancy Rate

32.90%

2000**

Central City Population

19,072

Occupancy Rate

78.80%

Bywater

Estimate

Range (95% conf.)

2006*

Bywater Population

3,283

2,238 - 4,328

Occupancy rate

47%

34% - 60%

2000**

Bywater Population

5,096

Occupancy rate

83.0%

Tremé

Estimate

Range (95% conf.)

2006*

Tremé Population

6,574

5,200 - 7,948

Occupancy Rate

64%

54% - 74%

2000**

Tremé Population

8,853

Occupancy Rate

80.6%

*Figures calculated from RALLY's summer 2006 surveys. Figures are based upon an estimated 80%
occupancy rate among non-responding residences which was observed in Central City. The error from
this estimated rate is not accounted for in the confidence intervals.
**Figures from the 2000 US Census
nc = not calculated

Tremé and Central City are similar with regards to ethnicity makeup, with the

majority of the respondents being self-identified as Black or African American
(83.0% and 84.9% respectively) (Chart 1). In the Bywater neighborhood, the

2 low income clusters were identified based upon the 2000 census-based poverty maps

majority of respondents interviewed are White or Caucasian (62.2%), while only
31.5% of the respondents are considered Black or African American (Chart 1).

The majority of households in Central City (69.5%) contain adults of both sexes.
While 15.9% of households have only male adults and 14.6% of households have

only female adults. The respondents in Tremé report that 46.6% of the

households are headed up by males and 53.4% are female headed households.

Almost half of the responding households from Central City (48.8%), Tremé

(46.1%) and Bywater (45.2%) report having a pre-Katrina household income of

less than $2000 per month. (Annex B, Table 1).

Chart 1: Percentage of population with self-identified ethnicities in the neighborhoods

of Bywater, Central City and Tremé during the 2000 Census and the 2006

Neighborhood Survey.

Bywater Ethnicity: 2000 Census

62%

33%

African
Americans
Hispanic

Caucasions

Bywater Ethnicity: 2006

33%

64%

African
American

Hispanic

Caucasion

Central City Ethnicity: 2000 Census

88%

10%

African
Americans
Hispanic

Caucasions

Central City Ethnicity 2006

88%

African
American
Hispanic

Caucasian

Treme Ethnicity: 2000 Census

93%

2% 5%

African
Americans
Hispanic

Caucasions

Treme Ethnicity 2006

87%

11%

African
American
Hispanic

Caucasion

Housing

The households interviewed in Central City reported a relatively low

percentage of homeownership (33.6%). However, this is an increase from the
pre-Katrina 2000 Census percentage of homeownership in Central City (16.3%).

These results suggest that homeowners are more prevalent among the current

population of Central City. These results are also seen in the reporting

households in Tremé and Bywater, where 53.9% and 50.8% (respectively) of

residents stated that they owned their homes. The 2000 Census illustrated that

21.8% of residents in Tremé and 38.1% of residents in Bywater were

homeowners (Annex B, Table 2). The 2000 Census reported that 83.7% of the

Central City population rented their residences. After hurricane Katrina, only
58.4% of the households surveyed in Central City stated that they rented or

leased their residence. The percentage of respondents who rent their

residence was 44.5% in Tremé and 45.4% in Bywater. The average household

size was 2.72 people in Tremé, 2.6 people in Bywater and 3.04 people in
Central City (Annex B, Table 1).

Vulnerability

Several indications of vulnerability were assessed by the survey, including

chronic disability and adequacy of housing/neighborhood amenities. Reported

chronic disabilities were common among returned households in all three

neighborhoods, although they were highest in Central City and Tremé where
43.5% and 40.2% of respondents, respectively, reported that there was one or

more disabled person in the household. Only about half (43.1% in Bywater,
53.8% in Central City and 46.0% in Tremé) of the sampled respondents that

reported disability among one or more household member indicated that they

were able to access needed services (Annex B, Table 11).

Respondents of all neighborhoods reported the absence of common

household/neighborhood amenities. The most poignant for all three

“Crime is doubling and tripling because
everyone is pushing uptown since downtown
is destroyed. Its like jail when the jails get
overcrowded that is when the tension comes.
It’s turf wars.”
- African American male late 50’s

neighborhoods were the lack of garbage pick up at least once a week (11.0% of
respondents in Bywater reported not having this service, 11.7% in Central City

and 17.6% in Tremé), the absence of air-conditioning in the home (15.5% for
Bywater, 13.0% for Central City and 13.7% for Tremé) and a lack of adequate
neighborhood lighting (12.5% in Bywater, 25.6% in Central City and 25.6% in

Tremé). In addition to these problems, 45.0% of the reporting households in
Bywater, 40.5% of the responding household in Central City and 33.5% of the

reporting household in Tremé reported signs of serious pest infestations. Roof

leaks were also reported as a problem in over 20% of the households in all

neighborhoods. Mold due to Katrina was reported by 17.1% of the respondents
interviewed in Bywater, by 17.2% of respondents in Central City and by 23.6%

of respondents in Tremé (Annex B, Table 4).

Crime and Safety

Crime and Safety has become a major source of anxiety for all three

neighborhoods following Hurricane Katrina. Almost fifty percent (47.8%) of
responding households in Tremé report crime as a current post-Katrina

problem. In Bywater, 38.8% of surveyed households claim that crime is a post-

Katrina problem. The percentage of respondents who reported crime as a post-

Katrina problem was extremely high in Central City at 62.0%. (Annex B, Table
12). One resident from Central City, an African American female in her mid-

60’s, expressed the common

concern that the crime situation is

bigger now following the storm

and that the killing is out of hand.

An African American female from

Central City in her late 50’s

responded, “It’s gonna take 7 to 8 years to get better.” There has been a stark

change in the overall perception of safety among the households surveyed in
Central City. Prior to Katrina 83.1% of the responding households expressed

feeling safe in their neighborhood out alone during the day and 68.5% felt safe

alone at night. Following Katrina, only 60.7% felt safe during the day and mere
34.8% felt safe out alone in Central City during the night (Annex B, Table 14a).

This trend is accentuated by the Metropolitan Crime Commission’s preliminary
results from their Central City Community Survey conducted in August of 2006.
They found that 42% of households felt somewhat or very safe prior to Katrina

and that only 28% felt somewhat or very safe following the Hurricane

. The

results from this survey also show that 80% of Central City households are

afraid of crime in their neighborhood.

A number of suggestions were made by respondents in focus groups and the
survey with regards to dealing with crime and safety in Central City. Most

responding households felt that educating youth would deter crime (88.5%).

Eighty-seven percent of the households surveyed felt that improving policing
techniques would reduce crime (Table B). This opinion was reinforced in the

focus groups and ideas of how to improve the policing techniques were
discussed. An African American female in her mid-60’s from Central City said,

“police should walk the street like they used to.”

A concern that must be addressed is the prevailing inconsistency of
respondents wanting a higher police presence (86.2%) but their unwillingness

to report crimes in Central City. One respondent in a focus group, an African

American female in her late 50’s, expressed a fear of retaliation by those
reported upon. She said, “to tell you the truth, a lot of people see what’s

going on but they are afraid to talk. Their friends will kill you if they looking at

you talking to the police.” Others suggested that the inconsistency between

not being willing to report a crime but still wanting more police in the

neighborhood is not rooted in a fear of retaliation but rather stems from the
relationship between police in the community and the residents. “They (police)

pass you like they don’t even see you,” an African American female in her mid-

Metropolitan Crime Commission, Preliminary Results. “Central City Community Survey.” August 2006.

60’s, exclaimed. Only 45% of the households in Central City feel the NOPD are
trustworthy and only 51% feel they act professionally

Residents of Central City discussed solutions to these issues in the focus group.
One resident, an African American female in her mid-60’s, replied to the notion

that holding a community meeting with the police would help. She said, “Yes,

not just one time but once a month, and maybe bring in different officers. We

get familiar with each other, they get familiar with us.”

Table B: Households’ opinions on managing crime and
safety in Central City.
What should be done about
crime and safety

Increased Police Presence

% 86.2

Con. Int.

(80.5, 90.5)

Supervise youth

81.6

Con. Int.

(73.4, 87.7)

Educate youth

% 88.5

Con. Int.

(80.6, 93.4)

Establish Neighborhood Watch

78.2

Con. Int.

(70.8, 84.1)

Establish rehab programs

% 76.7

Con. Int.

(68.3, 83.5)

Improve policing techniques

87.2

Con. Int.

(80.8, 91.7)

Improve street lighting

% 69.8

Con. Int.

(60.7, 77.5)

* Confidence Interval (Con. Int.) at 95%

Metropolitan Crime Commission, Preliminary Results. “Central City Community Survey.” August 2006.

Community Center/Safe Haven

An overwhelming 86.9% of the responding households in Central City felt that a
Safe Haven should be established in their neighborhood. In Bywater, 82.1% of
respondents agreed that there should be a Safe Haven in their neighborhood as

well (Annex B, Table 13). A Safe Haven, as defined by Operation Weed and

Seed is a multi-service center for youth and adults free of drug and violence.

Similar to the desire for a neighborhood Safe Haven, 87.0% of the responding

households in Central City felt their neighborhood needed an organization to

help facilitate the recovery process. This feeling was also echoed in the other

two neighborhoods where 70.5% of Bywater respondents and 81.5% of Tremé

respondents agreed (Annex B, Table 14).

Employment

A significant percentage of residents surveyed in all three neighborhoods
reported loosing a job due to Hurricane Katrina (39.3% in Tremé, 35.8% in

Bywater and 42.1% in Central City). Around 20% of those surveyed in all
neighborhoods reported that finding a job was a current problem for their
household. There was a dramatic increase in the percentage of households, in

all three neighborhoods, that reported being enrolled in an unemployment
insurance program after Katrina as compared to those that reported utilizing
this benefit prior to Katrina. The usage of employment services also

dramatically increased among the households surveyed. When asked if they

had any new sources of income since the hurricane, 44.4% of households in
Tremé, 33.8% in Bywater and 42.5% in Central City reported receiving money

from FEMA, 39.2% of households in Tremé, 22.2% in Bywater and 33.0% in

Central City stated that they got money from the Red Cross and 8.2% of
households in Tremé, 10.9% in Bywater and 7.9% Central City said that

construction work supplied them with a new source of income (Annex B, Table

8). Over seventy-seven percent (77.9%) of the heads of households in Tremé

report being employed prior to Katrina. The percentage of employed heads of
households drops to 60.5% post Katrina (Annex B, Table 28). Of female-headed

households in Tremé only 53.0% report being employed currently, as compared
to 68.9% or male headed households (Annex B, Table 30).

Almost forty percent (39.3%) of households surveyed in Tremé reported loosing

a job due to Hurricane Katrina. A large majority (91.1%) of the respondents

who reported a job loss, self-identified as being African American. It is no

surprise that nearly seventy percent (69.4%) of respondents who reported

loosing a job post-Katrina also reported a decrease in their household income.

Of those who reported not loosing a job due to Katrina, 54.8% stated that there

was no change in their household’s income, implying that those who did not
loose a job due to Katrina experienced a much more staple post-hurricane

environment. It is also the case, that 57.4% of households that testified that

they did not loose a job due to Katrina own their residences, while 50.8% of

household that lost a job are tenants of their residences (Annex B, Table 16).

Of the households surveyed in Bywater, 35.8% reported loosing a job due to
Hurricane Katrina. The majority (55.8%) of these people self-identified as
being Caucasian. The other 44.2% self-identified as being African American.

The majority of households who stated that they did not loose a job are
homeowners (58.1%), while the majority of households that reported a Katrina-

related job loss are tenants (57.1%). Of the households that reported a job

loss, 59.1% claimed to have a pre-Katrina monthly household income of less
than $2000. And, 43.8% of them reported a decrease in their income post-

Katrina. Only 39.9% of households that reported no Katrina-related loss of a

job, testified that they had a monthly household income of less than $2000.
However, 46.6% of this same population reported a post-Katrina household

income decrease (Annex B, Table 15).

The majority of households surveyed in Central City (65%) have at least one
member that is employed either full or part time. The percentage of

households in Central City that contain all unemployed residents is the same as
the percentage of households whose members are all retired (17.5%). The

majority of residents in Central City of all employment status groups were

African American. One hundred percent of the unemployed households

categorized themselves as African American (Annex B, Table 17).

Not surprisingly, the households in Central City that contain at least one

employed member are less vulnerable with regards to a number of variables

than those households that do not have an employed member. Compared to

employed households, both unemployed and retired households were more
likely to report having a chronic illness or disability. Over thirty percent of
employed household in Central City reported an increase in their income since

the hurricane. Only 21.4% of both unemployed and retired households reported

an increase in income. Half of all retired households reported that their
income has stayed the same since Hurricane Katrina (Annex B, Table 18).

Hurricane Katrina adversely affected households from all three employment
status groups in Central City. However, it is possible to report on some of the

more striking findings. Not unexpectedly, 64.3% of the unemployed households
reported that loosing their job was one adverse impact of Hurricane Katrina. It

is interesting to note that 50.0% of employed households also reported loosing

their job. A large percentage of both groups also reported loosing their
benefits (34.6% of employed households and 28.6% of unemployed households)

(Annex B, Table 18). Generally, retired and unemployed households are less

likely to have common household amenities, such as a working kitchen, air
conditioner, and internet, than employed households. And, they are more

likely to report being beset with pests. (Annex B, Table 17).

Owners and Tenants

A slight majority of the population surveyed in Tremé own their homes as
compared to renting or leasing (55.1% and 44.9%, respectively). Nearly ninety

percent (88.6%) of the tenants surveyed in Tremé are African American. The

majority (78.2%) of homeowners also self-identified as being African American.

A larger percentage of homeowners self-identified as being Caucasian than did

those interviewed that rented their residences (12.9% and 7.2% respectively).

Many more homeowners than renters reported having a pre-Katrina household
monthly income of $3000 or more (44.1% as compared to 19.6%). However, a

higher percentage of homeowners reported an income decrease post-Katrina

than did their leasing counterparts (44.5% and 37.5%, respectively) (Annex B,
Table 20).

In the neighborhood of Tremé, 44.5% of the homeowners surveyed reported

that at least one member of their household had a chronic illness or disability.
Only 33% of people who rent their residence reported a chronically ill or

disability member in their household. However, a larger percentage of renters

reported having problems accessing the care necessary for the illness or

disability than did homeowners. While 22.0% of homeowners claimed that they

could not access any needed care, 45.4% of renters reported not being able to

access necessary care at all. Generally, homeowners tended to report lacking

more household amenities and having more household deficiencies than did

those that rent their residences (Annex B, Table 21).

The percentage of homeowners in Central City has increased as compared to

the 2000 census data, from 16.3% to 36.5%. (In order to more accurately
quantify the percentage of owners versus tenants, the response of

“relative/friend of householder” was filtered out, resulting in an increase of

percentages for both homeowners and tenants.) Conversely, the percentage of
renters has decreased from 83.7% to 63.5% in Central City (Annex B, Table 1,

Table 22). One explanation is that homeowners had more incentive to return
after the storm. Katrina left Central City relatively unscathed structurally and
it is now one of the few habitable neighborhoods in the New Orleans area. As

such, it is predicted that more tenants will become part of the Central City

population.

If it is predicted that more and more tenants will reside in Central City, it

would be worthwhile to look at differences in the characteristics and needs of

people who rent the residences in which they live and people who own their

residences. We can see in Annex B, Table 22 that tenants are more likely to be
from a “minority” race (African American or Hispanic). The tenants surveyed
reported having lower pre-Katrina monthly household incomes than did the

homeowners that were surveyed: 53.4% of the tenants had a household income
less than $2000 per month, whereas, only 37.5% of homeowners reported a
household income below $2000 per month (Annex B, Table 22). However, after

the storm 32.5% of surveyed tenants reported an increase in their income.
Only 13.9% of home owners reported an increase in their income post-Katrina
(Annex B, Table 23).

Tenants also seemed to have fewer complaints about the state of their

residences than did homeowners. A higher percentage of owners than tenants

report lacking heat, air-conditioning and a working kitchen, and having leaky
roofs and mold in their homes. These findings are, perhaps, illustrative of an

improvement in post-Katrina living conditions, as most of the neighborhood’s

new residents are renters (Table C).

Table C: Percent of households that report specific characteristics of
vulnerability by characteristic and residential status.
Characteristics of
Households

Owners of

Residence

Tena

Sections

Final Report on the Summer 2006 Survey for the Department of Justice’s Weed and Seed Project.

File contents