1 / 27

LGBT Caucus Survey

LGBT Caucus Survey. Administrated by David Moskowitz, PhD Membership Chair. Background & Goals. Lack of diversity has always been of concern to the LGBT Caucus The organization may be mainly comprised of White, educated, older gay men Goals were to: Test the above hypothesis

keiki
Download Presentation

LGBT Caucus Survey

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LGBT Caucus Survey Administrated by David Moskowitz, PhD Membership Chair

  2. Background & Goals • Lack of diversity has always been of concern to the LGBT Caucus • The organization may be mainly comprised of White, educated, older gay men • Goals were to: • Test the above hypothesis • Document the demographics and differing interests of our Caucus members • Figure out what members may want us to improve • Document the effectiveness of Caucus communication • Examine perceptions of accessibility to the website and its importance • Ensure that members are comfortable with the cost of membership

  3. The Survey • The survey was hosted on surveymonkey.com • It was available/open for over three months • Periodic reminders by the Chair • 61 started; 59 completed in entirety • 96 registered members for 2009-2010 (61.5%)

  4. Demographics • Gender: • Female: 33.3% (20) • Male: 65.0% (39) • MtF: 1.7% (1) • FtM: 0 • Intersex: 0 • Refuse: 0 • Age • Mean:46.94 (13.37) • 100% - 79 years • 75% - 57.2 years • 50% - 46.5 years • 25% - 37 years • 0% - 24 years • Race (check all that apply): • Asian: 1.7% (1) • White: 94.8% (55) • African American: 6.9% (4) • American Indian: 3.4% (2) • Pacific Islander: 0 • Other: 6.9% (4) • Ethnicity • Hispanic origin: 6.9% (4) • Non-Hispanic origin: 93.1% (54)

  5. Demographics • Sexual Orientation: • Bisexual: 8.2% (5) • Gay: 62.3% (38) • Straight: 1.6% (1) • Lesbian: 23.0% (14) • Queer: 4.9% (3) • Questioning: 0 • Refuse: 0 • Member of APHA? • No: 5.0% (3) • Yes: 95.0% (57) • Education: • 4yr undergrad degree: 4.9% (3) • Masters: 41.0% (25) • PhD: 45.9% (28) • MD: 4.9% (3) • JD: 3.3% (3) • Membership in Caucus? • Former member: 8.3% (5) • Student member: 16.7% (10) • Current member: 81.7% (49) • Mean length of membership: 7.34 yrs (SD = 7.31) • 100% - 35 years • 75% - 10 years • 50% - 4.5 years • 25% - 2 years • 0% - 0 years

  6. Location of Members • TX -3.6% (2) • NC – 1.8% (1) • MT – 1.8% (1) • MD – 1.8% (1) • VA – 1.8% (1) • FL – 1.8% (1) • GA – 5.5% (3) • MI – 1.8% (1) • NJ - 1.8% (1) • PA – 16.4% (9) • NY – 14.5% (8) • KY – 3.6% (2) • MA – 7.3% (4) • IL – 7.3% (4) • WA - 7.3% (4) • NV – 1.8% (1) • DC – 9.1% (5) • CA – 9.1% (5) • WI – 1.8% (1)

  7. Location of Members 20% 11% 40% 29.%

  8. Conference Attendance • Likely to attend the conference in Denver? • Very Likely – 55.7% (34) • Somewhat Likely – 13.1% (8) • Not sure at all – 4.9% (3) • Somewhat Unlikely – 6.6% (4) • Very Unlikely – 19.7% (12) • Ever attended an APHA conference? • Yes – 96.7% (59) • No 3.3% (2) • If no then, why (check all that apply)? • Work conflict – 1 • Financial reasons/costs - 2

  9. Conference Attendance • If attended in Philadelphia, did you attend the Business meeting (BM)? • Did not attend that particular APHA meeting – 18.6% (11) • Did not attend the BM– 39.0% (23) • Yes, attended the BM– 42.4% (25)

  10. Costs • What do you think about the cost of membership? • Way too low – 0% (0) • It’s low – 11.9% (7) • Just right – 64.4% (38) • It’s high – 13.6% (8) • It’s way too high – 1.7% (1) • Not sure – 8.5% (5)

  11. Emails From The Chair • Do you receive emails from the chair? • Not sure – 1.7% (1) • No – 5.1% (3) • Yes – 93.2% (55) • What percent of the time do you read them? • Never – 0% (0) • 20% - 3.6% (2) • 40% - 5.5% (3) • 60% - 7.3% (4) • 80% - 36.4% (20) • 100% - 47.3% (26)

  12. Emails From The Chair • What do you think about the frequency of the emails? • Too infrequent – 3.6% (2) • Just right – 92.9% (52) • Too frequent – 3.6% (2) • Are the emails valuable? • Not at all valuable: 0% (0) • Not valuable: 3.6% (2) • Sometimes valuable: 26.8% (15) • Often valuable: 62.5% (35) • Always valuable: 7.1% (4)

  13. What Might Be Added? • More on policy activities • Aging in the LGBT community • LGBT state, local, and federal health initiatives • Job postings • Postings of members’ problems to circulate to other members for answers • Membership numbers • Opportunities for involvement • How mission statement and values are being advanced • More information on research (e.g., on Intersex)

  14. The Website • How often have you visited the website in the past 6 months? • 0 times: 44.1% (26) • Why (check all that apply)? • No reason: 7.7% (2) • Did not occur to me: 80.8% (21) • No reason to visit it: 23.1% (6) • Nothing of value on it: 3.8% (1) • 1-5 times: 47.5% (28) • 6 or more: 8.5% (5)

  15. The Website • Why do you visit the website? To find out: • What the Caucus is doing: 67.7% (21) • Membership info: 22.6% (7) • LGBT research opportunities: 12.9% (4) • LGBT health program opportunities: 19.4% (6) • Annual conference information: 58.1% (18) • Find out about the Exec. Committee: 16.1% (5) • Contact info for Exec. Committee members: 12.9% (4)

  16. How Is the Caucus Doing? Keeping members in touch with one another…

  17. How Is the Caucus Doing? Keeping members abreast of job and research opportunities in public health…

  18. How Is the Caucus Doing? Keeping LGBT healthcare rights center-stage…

  19. How Is the Caucus Doing? Providing high quality research seminars at the annual conference…

  20. How Is the Caucus Doing? Providing for LGBT visibility at the annual conference…

  21. Interest in LGBT Topics for the Future • LGBT Health Policy/Advocacy – 72.4% (42) • Gay/Bisexual Men’s Health – 69.0% (40) • Sampling/Measurement in LGBT Research – 58.6% (34) • Research on aging LGBT Pops. – 56.9% (33) • Lesbian/Bisexual Women’s Health – 50.0% (29) • Internet-Based LGBT Research – 50.0% (29) • Serving Cultural/Linguistic Minority LGBT Pops. – 48.3% (28) • LGBT Youth Research – 46.6% (27) • Gender Identity/Transgender Health – 44.8% (26) • Alcohol, Tobacco, Drugs Use in LGBT Pops.– 44.8% (26) • HIV/STI Surveillance Issues – 43.1% (25) • Mental Health/Quality of (LGBT) Life – 43.1% (25) • Domestic and Other Types of Violence against LGBT Pops. – 41.4% (24) • Research on LGBT Sex Workers – 27.6% (16) • Disable LGBT Pops. – 24.1% (10)

  22. Interest in LGBT Topics for future seminars • Other areas: • What White MSM are missing from the national AIDS agendas • Cultural influences on LGBT identity development • LGBT civil rights and health • LGBT cultural competency in healthcare • Positive LGBT health aspects • LGBT health disparities • LGBT awareness and the NIH • LGBT issues and the public school health curriculum • Healthy identity development • LGBT promotion in health careers • Research/advocacy for intersex persons • LGBT health issues around chronic diseases

  23. Open-Ended Responses About the Caucus • Needs more active members to push APHA on the issues • More outreach to LGBT people who don’t work on HIV/AIDS or gender-specific areas of public health (e.g., environmental, lab, dental) • Make socializing easier; members more approachable • More opportunities for members to connect • More intellectual stimulation about LGBT issues and opportunities • More strategic plans, goals, and partnerships with other LGBT health organization • More timely communication (e.g., regarding dues) • More communication throughout the year • “New blood” to run the EC

  24. Summary • Low degree of diversity • Gay, White, Educated, and Male • Response: Increase diversity through outreach to different organizations; encourage members to wrangle new potential members in • Members not attending the Business Meeting • Almost 40% attended the conference but not the business meeting • Response: Increase the visibility of the meeting; post- meeting survey to assess satisfaction by the members

  25. Summary • Low traffic on the website • Almost 50% never visited the website; 80% because it did not occur to them • Response: Update the website with more information and send reminders to the membership of the new information available • Not keeping members in touch • Members said that the Caucus was not keeping members in touch with one another • Response: Create a listserv to facilitate communication with one another and also to post jobs, new research, new programs, or serve as a forum for questions

  26. Summary • New topics for research seminars • Response: Going into 2011, we can begin thinking about expanding our research categories • New blood in the Caucus and on the Executive Committee • Goes back to the question/response on diversity • Response: Encourage younger professionals to join the Caucus; students too. Encourage members to run for office

  27. Thanks! • Thanks for all of your input. Please contact me for additional information at: David Moskowitz, PhD Dept. of Communication University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio, TX 78249 210-458-5040 membership@aphalgbt.org

More Related