llfllltlllfllll llllllillllllllllflflll

 

3 1293 00996 4099 770.31%» -- -——A 62-!
..____.___..._.. P .4... ...__ 4. 1"“- V
THrois '1;-_._._ _.~....L.' ‘... -8 .
3:"--:_2 C5434,“
é;&.*u.—'-;::] ‘h-"
.3..-“ n: ,5 '7'4
33.1 “F. v ;-*

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

Educational Needs of Hispanics
in the Lansing, Michigan
Area: A Survey

presented by

Carmen Gonzalez-Toro

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.Sc. p. AEE '
degree in

 

 

@WW

Major professor

 

Date INN-8;

0-7639 MS U i: an Aflirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

MSU

LIBRARIES

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

_ ' no :5;-
‘ zoo ABZF 04
~ 2.b
‘ 276 .3:
; ;ocr 291995 '
l “ 338

 

JUE ézlgoh

 

 

EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF HISPANICS
IN THE LANSING, MICHIGAN AREA:

A SURVEY

BY

Carmen Gonzalez-Tore

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF SCIENCE

Department of Agriculture and Extension Education

1985

ABSTRACT

EDUCATIONAL NEEDS OF HISPANICS
IN THE LANSING, MICHIGAN AREA: A SURVEY

BY

Carmen Gonzalez-Toro

This study surveyed a sample of the Hispanic popu-
lation in Lansing, Michigan to assess the degree of their
awareness and participation in Cooperative Extension
Service (CBS) programs. Hispanics are a special popu-

lation with minimal formal education. It is believed that

-the CES through its programs could provide significant

educational resources to this group.

The data were collected through interviews with key
informants and by mailed questionnaires from a sample of
Hispanic residents in the area. The sampling procedures
consisted of 1) non-probability sampling for the identifi-
cation of the key informants and 2) a random sample from
mailing lists provided by churches and other agencies.

This study has reinforced the idea that a strong
relationship exists between people's awareness of an
educational program and their participation. Both
respondent groups perceived the 4-H youth program and the
home economic program as "highly needed." It has also
further shown that those people who participate in
educational programs tend to be those who are more

highly skilled, employed, middle aged and more educated.

To my

To my

To my

father, Felipe Gonzalez-Alcover
who taught me the first steps through
nature and agriculture,

husband, Juan L6pez-Garriga
whose insight and encouragement gave me
the will power to make it this far,

son, Marti
for whom I hOpe to instill a love
of nature and human kind.

Acknowledgement

I want to express my most sincere appreciation and
gratitude to my thesis Chairman, Dr. 0. Donald Meaders,
for his counsel and guidance throughout the deve10pment
of this study; to Dr. Fred Peabody, for his interest and
assistance in the planning and conducting of this study.

A special thanks is expressed to Dr. Frank Fear for
his direction and encouragement during the deve10pment
and analysis of the findings for the study, and also to
his student, Mr. Rick Landes, for his help in the proces-
sing and interpretation of the data.

A special note of gratitude is extended to Dr.
Jospeh Levine, for his assistance at the final stages of
this thesis.

I also want to extend a thank you note to my dear
friend and "office—partner", Mrs. Consuelo Quiroz,

whose informal advice and criticisms were always helpful.

-iii-

CHAPTER

II

III

IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0

INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. Statement of the Problem. . . . . . . .

a. Need for the Study. . . . . . . .
b. Objectives. . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Research questions. . . . . . . . . . .
3. Definition of terms. . . . . . . . . .
4. Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. The Cooperative Extension Service. . .
2. CES Broadened Audience. . . . . . . . .
3. Needs Assessment for Extension Program

Planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5 Approaches in Needs Assessment. . . . .
6. Hispanic Profile in Michigan. . . . . .

a. Education. . . . . . . . . . . . .
b. Income. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
c. Hispanic Settlement History in

LanSingO O O O O O I O O O O O O O

METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P0pulation and Sample Description. . .
Sampling Procedures. . . . . . . . . .
Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . .
Responses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. Analysis of the Data. . . . . . . . .

Uluwal-J
O

INDINGS. I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

F

l

2. Awareness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 Participation. . . . . . . . . . . . .

4

5

6. Awareness and Program Participants's
Profile. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a. Mail Questionnaire Respondents. .
b. Key Informants. . . . . . . . . .

7. T-test Results. . . . . . . . . . . . .
8

. Additional Findings. . . . . . . . . .

_iv-

4. Needs Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . .

. Description of the Respondents. . . . .

. Reasons for Nonparticipation. . . . . .
. Program Priorities. . . . . . . . . . .

PAGE

vi

vii

O O O
0 O O
bbbbNNl-J

\D\I\l

11
13
16
18
20
.20

21

.24
.24
.25
.26
.29

30

32
32
.36
.36
38
40

.47
.47
.49

.52

CHAPTER

V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. .
l. smarYo O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
2 O conClus ions 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O
3. Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . .
4. Implications for Further Research. . .
LIST OF REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A Mail Questionnaire Example. . . . . . . . .
B Key Informant Interview Schedule. . . . . .
C Sample Cover Letter for the Mail
Questionnaires. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
D Sample First Follow-Up/Reminder Card. . . .
E Sample Second Follow-Up/Reminder Letter. .
F Respondent's Data. . . . . . . . . . . . .
G T-test Results: Comparison of Mail
Questionnaire Respondents Versus Non-
respondents (Interviewed by Telephone). . .
H Comparison of Demographic Information from

Sample (Mail Questionnaire Respondents),
Census Data and Nonrespondents. . . . . . .

u-v-

PAGE

. 53
.53
.53
.55
.56

. 58

.60

. 60
76

. 83
. 85
.86
.88

.108

.111

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE PAGE
1 Proportion of Hispanics, Whites and Blacks
Population over Age 24 Who Have Not
Completed High School (1980). . . . . . . . . . .2
2 Country of Origin for the Hispanic
Residents in Michigan and Ingham County. . . . .19
3 Demographic information of Hispanic
Residents in the Ingham County,
Michigan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4 Sample Size and Questionnaires Returned. . . . .29
5 Nonrespondent Sample Size and Completed
Interviews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6 Hispanic Ethnic Background. . . . . . . . . . ..34
7 Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
TOpic Areas in Home Economic Proqram. . . . . . 43
8 Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
Topic Areas in 4-H Youth Programs. . . . . . . .44
9 Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
TOpic Areas in Agriculture and Marketing
Program. 0 O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O .45
10 Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
Topic Areas in Natural Resources and Public
Policy Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
11 T-test Results: Comparison of Mail Question-

naire Respondents versus Nonrespondents
(Interviewed by Telephone. . . . . . . . . . . 108

12 Comparison of Demographic Information from

Sample (Mail Questionnaire Respondents),
Census Data and Nonrespondents. . . . . . . . .111

_vi..

FIGURE
1

2

LIST OF FIGURES

Respondents Age Distribution. . . . . . . . . . 35
Educational Levels of Respondents. . . . . . . 35

Mail Questionnaire Respondents Income
Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Awareness of Extension and Its Programs. . . . 37

-vii-

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The Cooperative Extension Service (CES) was
established primarily to serve the rural population,
farmers and homemakers. However, over time, the CES
has moved towards serving the needs of people in many
aspects of life. It has been greatly affected by the
interaction with other industries and agencies, and by
its need to serve a broad and diversified clientele group.
Programs have been developed and made available to the
population at large. The preparation of several youth
programs for rural and urban clientele, also nutri-
tional prgrams created to improve the lives of low-
income families are examples of these efforts. More
recently, great attention had been given to issues
concerning resource develOpment and public affairs. Hence,
CES must remain relevant as peOple's situations change.
This is expecially true now, when increased emphasis
to work with minority groups has been made evident
throughout CES.

Hispanics,as a minority group in Ingham County,
are a special segment of the pOpulation with minimal

formal education. Nonformal educational programs, such

-1-

-2-

as the COOperative Extension Service, have the potential

to greatly help this sector of the pOpulation.

I. Statement of the Problem

A. Need for the Study
The purpose of the CBS is to disseminate selected
knowledge resources from the land-grant universities to
the public in a practical manner and in a way which
enables peOple to help themselves. Thus, the basic
purpose of the CES, as described by Vines and
Anderson (1976), is:
"To aid in diffusing among the people of the
United States useful and practical information
on subjects related to agriculture and home
economics, and to encourage the application
of the same."
The Hispanics in Michigan, like the Hispanic resi-
dents in Ingham County, due to their lower level of

education, are at a comparative disadvantage when

compared with other groups (Arce and Estrada, 1983).

TABLE 1. PrOportion of Hispanics, Whites and Blacks
Population over age 24 who have not
completed High School (1980).

 

Hisp. Whites Blacks
State of Michigan 50.7% 30.2% 44.8%

Ingham County 49.0% 20.9% 31.0%

 

-3-

Any existing gap between the Hispanic clientele
served by the different CES programs and those that
could benefit by making use of the available programs
continues as a challenge for Extension. Although
participation figures are available from the CES
office, very little information has been documented in
regard to the scope of Hispanic participation in Michigan
CES programs and the reasons for participation or lack
of participation. Generally, Hispanic participation in
CBS programs is perceived as being low or less than
anticipated based upon need.

The CBS faces an enormous opportunity to reach more
Hispanics with its programs and to help them c0pe with
modern society and overcome their educational limitations
by providing some practical skills and learning experi-
ences.

The researcher hopes to provide information in
regard to needs, characteristics and interests of the
Hispanic population in the area. This was assumed to
be particularly useful for a nonformal educational agency
such as the CBS in their mission of dissemination of
research-based information for a broad audience. It
is believed to be particularly useful to the personnel
involved in prOgram planning, where the knowledge of
the target audience and their involvement in the planning

process plays a significant role.

B.

Objectives

This study has been planned to learn more about the

present and potential Hispanic audience of the CBS and

to better understand their needs and interests as a

basis for planning useful programs. More specifically,

the objectives of this study are:

2.

l.

2.

to identify the degree of HiSpanic
participation in CBS programs;

to identify the possible reasons for
participation or lack of participation
in CBS programs; and

to assess the perceived educational

needs of the Hispanic population in the
Ingham County area as those needs relate

to the current four program areas offered by
the CBS in order to identify future

program priorities.

Research questions

This study attempts to find the answers to the

following questions in order to fulfill the afore-

mentioned objectives:

a.

b.

To what extent is the Hispanic population
now participating in CBS programs?

What elements inhibit Hispanic participa-
tion in CBS programs?

What are the perceived educational needs

of Hispanics for the available CES programs?
What program tOpics are perceived to have the
most significance to the potential Hispanic
audience?

Definition of terms

a.

Assessment - research and planning activity
that is focused on a specific area.

-5-

Educational need - the need that can be
fulfilled through a nonformal educational
setting, specifically, the prOgrams and
topic areas with which the CES deals.

COOperative Extension Service - a nonformal
education service that extends selected
knowledge resources to the people of
Michigan.

Hispanic - any person of Spanish descent or
who originally was from any Spanish-speaking
country in the Caribbean, Latin America or
any person that considers himself/herself
Mexican-American.

Need - the gap between what is viewed as a
necessary level or condition by those
responsible for this determination and
that which actually exists (the difference
between what is and what should be).

Needs assessment — Determining the needs of
individuals with reference to relative
importance of available services.

Need identification - process of describing the
service needs of specified individuals/groups
within a prescribed geographical area.

Nonformal education - any organized learning
activity outside the structure of the formal
system that is consicously aimed at meeting
specific learning needs of a particular
group in the community.

Participation - involvement of the Hispanic
population in programs or involvement in
the program planning activities.

Potential audience - the sector of the Hispanic
pOpulation that is not currently participating
in the CES programs; in the CES context it

is the number of Hispanics according to the
Census report in the area.

4. Limitations

This study was limited to a description and analysis
of the needs as perceived by the resident HiSpanic
population in the Ingham County. It did not include any
reference to programs, services or needs of Hispanic
migrant workers or any comparison with the non-Hispanics.
The findings of this study were only generalizable to
the Hispanic pOpulation in the area.

The sample was drawn from a pOpulation based on the
mailing lists obtained from Churches and local agencies
or services that work directly with Hispanics in the
community. Therefore, it is possible that some Hispanics
living within the Lansing area were not included on the

lists.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this chapter is to present selected
literature related to this study. The literature review
for this study is divided into six sections. In the
first section, an overview of the COOperative Extension
Service is presented with reference to its creation,
purpose and present trends. The focus of the second
section is in regard to the COOperative Extension Service
challenge on serving a broadened audience. The third,
fourth and fifth sections deal with needs assessment for
Extension program planning, needs assessment in general,
and the different approaches to conducting a needs
assessment, respectively. The last section offers a
profile of Hispanics in Michigan with reference to the
settlement history of Hispanics in Lansing and with
Specific sociodemographic information of the Hispanic

residents in Ingham County (presented in a table).

The C00perative Extension Service

The Cooperative Extension Service (CES) was estab-

lished in 1914 by the Smith-Lever Act as a link between

-7-

-3-

the nation's farmers and homemakers and new technological
developments in the areas of agriculture and home econo-
mics. It is an educational proqram supported jointly by
federal, state and local governments with the purpose of
disseminating the knowledge base from the land-grant
universities to the public in a practical manner. Such
educational programs are responsive to the people's

need to increase their individual and collective well-
being (Prawl, 1984). The CBS may be viewed as a dynamic
educational system oriented to the delivery of educational
programs to meet the changing needs of a diverse public,
and by other educational means designed to "help pe0p1e
help themselves" (Vines and Anderson, 1976).

In the beginning, the CES assumed, for programming
purposes, that it's audience was relatively homogeneous.
In the early decades, that was a logical assumption
because the primary concern was with the agricultural
audience and most farms were relatively small and
largely self-sufficient (Nolan and Lasley, 1979). The
present trend of the CES program is toward a broadened
concept of the clientele and services. In order to
provide services for a broad clientele, it is important
for CBS personnel to know the perceptions and awareness
that potential audiences have toward CES (Cosner and
Key, 1981). Furthermore, new programs based on client—

felt needs, characteristics and interests should be

-9-

developed to maintain the present economic trend and

overall social situation.

CES Broadened Audience

Over the years, many new programs have been added
to the CBS in response to the demands of a broadened
audience. Extension faced an expanding audience at
a time of rapid social and economic changes. The
creation of new programs has resulted as a consequence
of efforts to identify the needs of the clientele and
to set program priorities, and the need for identifica-
tion of strategies to increase effectiveness and efficiency
in working with minority groups (Yep and Riggs, 1978).

As reported in the Evaluation of Economic and Social

 

Consequences of Cooperative Extension Programs there are
several reasons for the program expansion. One is the
constantly growing need for Extension assistance by new,
as well as traditional clientele. Many new groups,
including Federal departments and agencies, look for CBS
assistance. Another reason is the tradition of not
restricting CES to commercial agriculture. Civil Rights
rules and regulations, especially those concerning affirma—
tive action, also have done much to broaden CES's
clientele.

Currently, great effort has been made by the CES to

involve minorities, as well as low-income and handicappers,

-10-

in the different progams offered. The methods used are:

l) the establishment of a network with existing agencies/
organizations; 2) the recruitment and involvement of
representatives of those groups as volunteers; 3) the
dissemination of CES information through public channels;
4) the expansion of program offerings in key locations; and
S) specialized services to attract those audiences (special
events, scholarships, personalized outreach, etc.)1

Studies which focused on the identification of
Extension's clientele are few in number. A survey con-
ducted in Oklahoma by Cosner and Key (1981), indicates
that Extension has more contact with people who have
higher income levels, higher educational levels, and
who are not members of minority groups. (This was also
confirmed in Warner and Christenson's National Survey,
1984).

When dealing with a Specific minority group (for
example, Hispanics), it can be found that although
participation figures are available from the CES office,
very little information has been documented regarding
the sc0pe of their participation in CBS programs:
generally, it is assumed to be low. Why is that
happening?

Crawford (1980) noted that the underuse of service

agencies is based partially on an assumed higher need

 

lsee: Michigan CES Five Year Plan of Work, Civil Rights/
Equal Opportunity section, 1984-87.

-11-

among those with very low access to society's resources.
In light of this circumstance, the main concern of
researchers, policymakers, and providers must be:
1) defining the needs of disadvantaged groups in terms
of demographic and personal characteristics that describe
the group; and 2) clarifying the nature and prevalence of
barriers which prevent the use of the services.
Researchers from California working for the Associa—
cion Nacional Pro Personas Mayores found, through an
analysis of the literature, that four main themes have
dominated attempts to explain low use of social services
by Hispanics: 1) Mexican "folk culture" wields a
powerful influence in the barrio (neighborhood), 2)
Mexican-Americans seek social support from family rather
than from institutions, 3) socioeconomic characteristics,
such as income and education, determine use of services,
and 4) racism and cultural prejudice have prevented

Hispanics from utilizing anglo services.

Needs Assessment for Extension Program Planning

Now, one may ask, what do clients need and how can
those needs be met? As mentioned by Whitted (1983), the
CES has always relied upon needs assessment to prioritize
the programs available to the clientele it serves.
Warheit (1974) defines needs assessment as an attempt to

enumerate the needs of a population living in a community.

-12-

In order to do so, Smith (1981) recommends that needs
assessment should invove regular clientele as well as non-
participants. Though not all of the public uses Exten-
sions programs, a large percentage is expected to be
aware of their existance.
"Knowledge of existance of government agencies
is an important determinant of utilization"
(Katz, et a1. 1977)
This level of awareness can be determined by asking people
whether they have heard of the CES or its programs
(Warner and Christenson, 1984).
The need assessment offers several advantages when
planning for programs. Whitted (1983) made reference to
Witkin (1977) when he mentioned that needs assessment

allows the Extension agent to seek information, such as

l) to discover weaknesses and strengths in
regard to the learning of the clientele;

2) to identify discrepancies of different
kinds among the perceptions of different
clientele groups as to how well CBS is
doing it's job;

3) to find unexpected/hidden needs and causes
of ongoing or unresolved problems that may
emerge;

4) to determine if cost effectiveness and evalu-
ation can be used to defend the choice of
programs;

5) to identify program areas;

6) to set priorities; and

7) to involve the community in the needs
assessment process as to gain more

support and acceptance in the resulting
decisions.

-13-

A needs assessment is the starting point for all
Extension programming. The most direct method of
assessing needs is to ask potential learners what their
interest level is for a particular educational tOpic.
The needs assessment can be done in an informal way
(coffee break discussion) or by highly structured
techniques (mail survey).

Identifying educational needs of potential partici-
pants is an important component in designing educational
programs. A needs assessment is a systematic way of
determining these educational needs (Caffarella, 1982).
Greater emphasis on program develOpment to meet the
changing needs of a diverse audience has created a
sharp increase in efforts to strengthen the whose

process of program planning and development.

Needs Assessment

The primary goal of a needs assessment is to gene-
rate usable information. The assessment of information
helps to assure that there will be additional input to
prevent the sole reliance on professional formulations of
service needs and/or to prevent an overriding influence
by the most vocal or powerful community groups in program
planning (Attkisson, 1978). In general, a well executed

needs assessment can (Berkowitz, 1982):

-14-

1) give information not known before;

2) verify (or disconfirm) what was thought
to be known;

3) help prioritize the tasks that are the
most important to do;

4) provide a data base;

5) relate with people not known previously
and so, to extend the contact network;

6) supply feedback on what people think
about activities already going on; and

7) build awareness, trust and support for
program.

Needs assessment is useful in identifying those
factors within the human service network which aid or
impede attempts to meet those needs. First, assessment
may be used to specify current and/or potential resources
that can be channeled or relocated to repond to unmet
needs. Second, an assessment effort is useful in
gaining an understanding of the political and social
value system underlying a particular social area. These
values often determine what needs are identified and
also tend to determine which needs receive priority in
the program planning process. Finally, analysis of
assessment data may suggest new interventions and may
ultimately be helpful in uncovering the etiology of
certain conditions (Attkinson, 1978).

Needs assessment studies monitor social area charac-
teristics and p0pulation characteristics which influence

needs, wants, and demands for human services. Especially

-15-

important in this regard are the analysis of cultural,
psychological, physical and linguistic barriers to
appropriate service utilization. Needs assessment
analysis, therefore, must focus on issues related to
pOpulation characteristics, environmental characteristics,
individual citizens needs, as well as five other critical
issues related to the overall effectiveness and appropri—
ateness of the total service delivery system (Attkisson,
1978):
l) availability of services relative to
population characteristics and need
states of the social area;
2) accessibility of services relative to
pOpulation need states, environmental
characteristics and distribution of

service resources;

3) awareness of service opportunities among
the residents of the social area;

4) level of service integration and continuity
of services; and

5) level of resources and distribution of
available resources.

Generally, needs assessment is concerned with
learning needs. Labeling a need as educational implies
that it is capable of being satisfied by means of
learning experience which can provide appropriate
knowledge, skills or attitudes (Monette, 1977). In
examining a specific learning group or situation, it
attempts to define relevant learning needs and to

identify how these needs can be met (Monette, 1979).

-16..

Approaches in Needs Assessment

Warheit (1974) suggested five approaches to conduct
a needs assessment. These are: l) the key informant
approach; 2) the community forum approach; 3) the rates-
under—treatment approach; 4) the social indicators
approach; and 5) the field survey approach. For the
purpose of this research project, the key informant and
the field survey approaches were used and discussed in
more detail.

1) key informant - research activity which is
based on information secured from those in
the area who are in a good position to know
the community's needs and utilization patterns.
This method offers several advantages. First,
it is relatively simple and inexpensive to
conduct. Second, it permits the input and
interaction of a great many different indivi-
duals, each with his/her own perspective of
the needs of the community. But, it can
build-in some bias.

Information from key informants enables consideration of
the opinions of front-line human service providers. This
type of data provides important information from agency
representative's opinions and beliefs about needed human
services (Neuber, 1980).

2) Community forum - forum studies are designed
around a series of public meetings to which all
residents are invited and asked to express their
beliefs about the needs and services of those
in the community.

3) rates—under-treatment - based on a descriptive
enumeration of persons who have utilized the
services of a community, one can estimate
the needs of the community from a sample
of persons who have received care or treatment.
Historically, this approach has been widely

-17-

used in research dealing with the prevalence
of mental disorders and treatment patterns
in general populations.

4) social indicators - primarily based on inference
of need drawn generally from descriptive sta-
tistics found in public records and reports.

It is conducted by analyzing statistics on
selected factors which have been found to be
highly correlated with persons in need.

5) survey - it is based on the collection of data
from a sample or entire pOpulation of persons
living in a community. The most common methods
used are interview schedules, or questionnaires,
composed of items designed to elicit information
from respondents. The survey provides the most
scientifically valid and reliable information
obtainable about individuals regarding their
needs and utilization patterns. Consequently,
the utility of such facts for making decisions
is of great value. Despite the great advantage
mentioned above, the survey tends to be more
expensive than other needs assessment approaches.
Also, the reluctanCe of some individuals to
supply information about themselves or other
family members can jeopardize the validity and
reliability of the results.

Neuber (1980) recommends that the accuracy of the
perception of community respondents should be compared
with statistical data and key informant perceptions to
gain a more definitive understanding of important
problems of living in each community.

Attkinsson (1978) suggests that the use of a con-
vergent analysis in which information gathered from a
range of needs assessment methods will yield a reasonably
accurate identification of community needs and an assess-
ment of the relative priorities among the needs

identified.

_18_

Hispanic Profile in Michigan

The Hispanic as a component of the minority group
in Michigan presents a set of unique features that need
to be considered when working with this sector of the
population.

Hispanics are a varied cultural/ethnical group that
includes Chicanos (Mexican-Americans and Mexicans),

Puerto Ricans, Cubans and a smaller number of people from
other Spanish-speaking Latin American countries. This
minority group is heavily represented by poor and working.
class people. Hispanics are predominantly urban dwellers,
with about 80% of them living in cities. Though the
generic label Hispanic is used widely in Michigan,
Hispanics do not often use it to define themselves. It
is important to recognize that cultural and linguistic
differences exists between these groups and sometimes
these differences are magnified when class differences
are added (Saenz, 1984).

Although the Hispanic population in Michigan is not
very significant demographically, several factors contri-
bute to make it more important than sheer numbers would
suggest. The Hispanic population tends to be concentrated
in relatively few parts of the state, thus making it quite
visible and significant in several localities in the state;
Hispanics often represent a very stable and long esta-

blished population of the state, with unusual growth

_19-

potential due to its relative youth; Hispanics in Michigan,
like their counterparts in the rest of the country, consti-
tute a disprOportionate share of the disadvantaged (Arce
and Estrada, 1983).

The April 1980 census count of Hispanics in Michigan
was 162,440. This represents 1.8% of the total pOpulation
of the state. The rate of Hispanic population growth in
Michigan exceeds that of Whites in the state but is
substantially below Hispanic growth rates in most other
states. Michigan's Hispanic population tends to be
concentrated in relatively few areas. Eight counties
(Wayne, Oakland, Saginaw, Ingham, Kent, Genessee, Macomb
and Ottawa) have more than five thousand Hispanics each;
two smaller counties (Lenawee and Bay) have a significant
percentage of Hispanics. These ten counties account for
three-quarters of the state's Hispanic population. Wayne

county alone contains 29% of the total.

-iTAELE 2. Country of Origin for the Hispanic Residents
‘ in Michigan and Ingham County.

 

 

 

Other
Mexico P.R. Cuba Spanish

Michigan 69.1% 7.6% 2.6% 20.7%
Ingham County 78.3% 3.6% 2.9% 15.2%

Nearly 70% of Michiganfs Hispanics are Mexican-
Americans. About 10% are Puerto Rican or Cuban, and 20%

other Spanish. People of Mexican origin are prominent

-20-

among Hispanics in all counties of the state. Their
current distribution coincides with the presence of auto-

related manufacturing or assembly plants.

Education

A salient characteristic of Michigan's population is
its lower level of formal education. Of Hispanics over
24 years of age, 32% have less than six years of schooling,
compared to 14% for Whites. Less than 10% have four or
more years of college, as compared to nearly 15% for
Whites. Michigan's Hispanics are still largely bilingual,
although school-age Hispanic youth are more likely to be

English speakers (Arce and Estrada, 1983).

Income

Regarding family income and poverty level, Hispanics
tend to have a position intermediate between Whites and
Blacks. Michigan has 18.7% of its Hispanics below the
poverty level,versus 7.9% for Whites and 25.8% for Blacks.

Unemployment rates follow a similar pattern. In
April 1980, the percentage of unemployed among Michigan's
Hispanics, Whites and Black were 17.4%, 9.5% and 21.5%
respectively. Ingham, Saginaw and Genessee counties
have the most severe Hispanic unemployments totals in

Michigan.

-21-

Hispanic Settlement History in Lansing*

The Mexicans came to Michigan seeking an opportunity
for employment, and Michigan was known for its auto
manufacturing industry and its agriculture.

Lansing has been predominantly an industrial city
since the turn of the century. Although the first
Chicanos (i.e., persons of Mexican descent and/or birth)
came to the city between 1910 and 1920, they did not
remain. The first permanent settlement dates from the
mid-19303. These early settlers came to work in the sugar
beet industry which, at that time, was a major employer
in the Lansing area. Still, Hispanic settlement remained
minimal for years. The sugar refining plants were closed
during the Depression years. There were only seven
persons of Mexican birth in Lansing by 1940, only two
more than had been counted in 1930.

What really created an influx of Chicanos was the
Emergency Farm Labor Supply Program enacted by Congress
in 1942. The workers who came under the program contri-
buted heavily to the work force in Michigan and in Lansing.
Indeed, 73% of those who came to the Lansing sugar beet
refining district were Texas Chicanos. By 1950, there were

68 Mexican-born residents in the city. Because of their

 

*see: Hawkins, Homer C. and Thomas, Richard W. (eds.),
Blacks and Chicanps in Urban Michigag. Lansing, MI:
Michigan History Division, Michigan Department of
State, 1979.

 

-22-

heavy dependency upon manual work, area Chicanos were hurt
when sugar beet production underwent mechanization in
the 1950's.

As mechanization continues in farming, Lansing Chica—
nos will need to seek other sources of income. Despite
the need to move to other jobs, Lansing Chicanos have
continued to live in traditional areas. In this city
that means the area near the old sugar refinery, which
is located on the city's north side. It is here that

the Chicanos settled.

-23-

TABLE 3. Demographic Information of Hispanic Residents
in the Ingham County, Michigan.

 

Total population 275,520
Hispanic population 10,559
Percent of total Hispanics 3.8%
Hispanic households 2,684
Age
5-17 31.6%
18-64 52.7%
Median age 20
Education
Elementary 31.9%
High School (1-3 years) 17.1%
High School (4 years) 20.6%
College (1-3 years) 18.5%
College (4 years) 16.9%
Labor Force 65.1%
Unemployed 19.2%
Median family income
Income of $15,000 or less 50.4%
Income of $30,000 or more 9.2%
Below poverty level 24.9%

 

*Source: Census of Population and Housing, U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Standard Metropolitan
Area, Lansing-East Lansing, Michigan, August 1983.

 

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this chapter is to give a detailed
explanation of all the steps that this researcher went
through when conducting the actual research. It
includes five sections: 1) the population and sample
description; 2) the sampling procedures; 3) the data
collection; 4) the response rate obtained and how the
nonrespondents were handled; and 5) an overview of the

analysis of the data.

Population and Sample Description

The target population was described as Hispanic
residents in Ingham County; neither Hispanic seasonal
workers nor migrant labor workers were considered. The
sample frame of the Hispanic residents in the community
consisted of 1,746 recognizable Spanish surnames taken
from mailing lists gathered from: 1) local Hispanic
churches because a good cross-section of the Hispanic
population go to church and have a continual assistance;
2) agencies directly serving the Hispanics in the area;

and 3) the Ingham County CES office clientele mailing

-24-

-25-

list which were built based on the willingness of people
to be included in order to receive regular information
from Extension. The researcher chose to use this approach
trying to get a complete listing of the Hispanic population
in the area. On the other hand, representation of people
that have participated and that have not participated in
CBS programs was easily obtained. Also, a more reliable
and unbiased sample with a better representation from
Hispanic households in the area was achieved by using
the combination of the different sources of mailing lists.
From the identified population of 1,746, the actual
sample was selected at random. The sample size was 290
based on 1/6 of the total sample frame. The majority of
the sampled individuals were residents of the greater
Lansing area, where the Hispanic population tends to
cluster mainly because: 1) the majority of them have jobs
with the auto-related industry in the area; and 2) histori-
cally, they have inhabited the north side of the city (where
they first settled when working for the sugar beet

industry).

Sampling Procedures

The sampling procedures used were: 1) non-

probability sampling* approach for the identification

 

Isee: Warheit, G.J. et a1. Planning for Change: Needs
Assessment Approaches, Rockville, MD: Nat. Inst. of

Mental Health, 1974, pp. 104-7; Babbie, E. Survey Research
Methods, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub. Co., 1973, p. 167.

 

 

-26-

of the Hispanic leaders; and 2) a random sampling proce-
dure for the selection of Hispanic residents in the area.
Within the nonprobability sampling approach, there is
the purposive sampling design. One of the techniques
used in the purposive design is called "snowball
sampling",* in which a Hispanic person identified as
"knowledgeable" gives names of Hispanic leaders. Those
influential people in the Hispanic community, were
contacted by telephone and asked to identify the names of
key Hispanic persons. In this way, the persons whose names
were mentioned most frequently were identified as key
informants.** Thirty key informants were identified as
being knowledgeable of their community, its people and
their needs. Of this group, sixteen were selected for

interviews.

Data Collection

The data were collected through interviews with key
informants, and also, by mail questionnaires to a

sample of the Hispanic residents in the community. The

 

*Suggested by Dr. Frank Fear, Professor of Resource
DevelOpment, Department of Resource DeveIOpment,
Michigan State University; Sudman, Seymour, A lied
Sampling, New York: Academic Press, 1976, p. 250.

**see: Cole, Jacquelyn M. and Cole, Maurice F. Advisory
Councils, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
I983, Appendix F; Werheit, G.J. et al., p. 28-32.

-27-

key informant approach was chosen because of its previous
success with Hispanics (Delgado, 1979) and its high
response rate. It also provides important information
from agency representatives about their opinions and
beliefs regarding needed human services (Neuber, 1980).
The responses by the sample of residents compared with
key informants Opinions enables the development of a
more accurate picture of community needs. Attkisson
(1978) called this the convergent analysis technique.

Based on personal experiences conducting on-site
interviews with Hispanic migrant farmworkers to determine
housing improvement needed to up-grade the labor camps
facilities in Michigan, this researcher found that they
usually will answer that they feel everything is fine.
Very often they do not give any more details. That was
one of the main reasons for the use of the mail
questionnaire device instead of personal interviews.

Mail questionnaires, in this sense, gave the advan-
tage of confidentiality for the Hispanic respondents
to express their opinion by selecting from the available
choices and given no compromise or direct relation with
personal identification. It also gave the sense of being
part of a larger group.

Interviews were scheduled with the identified
Hispanic leaders in the community to collect opinions
from them about the educational needs and perceptions

of CES potential Hispanic clientele. In this key

-23_

informant approach basically the same format was used
as was used in the mail questionnaires (minor changes
were made) sent to the sampled Hispanic residents.

The data gathered included three major categories:
1) awareness and participation in CES programs; 2) need
or importance of CES programs in a) natural resources
and public policy, b) 4-H, c) agriculture and marketing
and d) home economics; and 3) demographic information
about the respondent and his/her family. The respon-
dents were asked to select among the topic areas inclu-
ded in each of the CES programs the ones that s/he
identified as a need in his/her criteria.

The questionnaire was available in both Spanish
and English for the benefit of those that might feel
more comfortable or that have a better understanding of
one or the other. The questionnaire device was chosen
by this researcher because it has the advantage of
being a standard instrument no matter whether the
questions asked are close or open-ended, and also,
because it offers the advantage of reaching more people
in a minimum amount of time. The questionnaire was
developed through pre-testing with Hispanic residents
in the community, with some CES staff that had experience
with Hispanic people and with MSU professors who were

knowledgeable about questionnaire design.

-29-
Responses
After the mailed questionnaire packages went out,
two consecutive follow-ups were sent with a two week

interval between each one. As a result a 26.5% return

rate was achieved.

TABLE 4. Sample Size and Questionnaires Returned.

 

Net Questionnaires

 

 

Sample Sample* Returned** % Returned
290 234 62 26.5

 

*Sample minus (incorrect addresses and those identified
as non-Hispanic persons).

**Questionnaires were mailed to all persons in the net
sample.

The relatively low rate of return made it necessary
to determine the extent to which the nonrespondents were
like/unlike the respondents. A "double-dip"* procedure
was used for studying the nonrespondents. Once the
deadline for the return of the questionnaires had passed,
a random (14%) sample was drawn from the list of non-
respondents. The same questions asked on the mailed
questionnaire were asked by this researcher in telephone
interviews over a two-week period. After several

attempts to reach the people by phone during the day,

 

isee: Miller, Larry E. and Smith, Keith L. "Handling
Non-response Issue." Journal of Extension (Sept./Oct.
1983), PP. 45-50.

 

-30-

the actual contacts were made during the evenings (most

people work or were busy during the day time).

TABLE 5. Nonrespondent Sample Size and Completed

 

 

 

 

Interviews.
Completed
Nonrespondents Interviews**
$9331 Sample Net Sample Number Percent
172 29 22* 14 63.6

 

*Two persons had recently moved.

**Eight persons refused to be interviewed (illness,
family problems, or "too busy").

These data from the telephone interviews were then
statistically compared with the data from the mail
respondents to determine similarities and differences in

the responses.

Analysis of the Data

The data gathered were analyzed using Statistical
Package for Social Science (SPSS) program for item
analysis with frequency and percentage distribution. In
addition, a T-test was conducted to compare the two
samples, mailed questionnaire respondents and non-
respondents.

The needs assessment analysis focused on issues
related to the Hispanic population characteristics, and

expressed needs and awareness of the situation. A

-31-

priority setting for consideration in future program
planning by determining the rank ordering of the
expressed needs from the most critical to the least
critical was used.

Responses of Hispanic residents, who have used the
CES programs in the past or that have not participated
in CBS programs were compared, with the Opinions
expressed by the "key informants." In this way, the
researcher identified selected factors that inhibit
Hispanic CES program participation. The data gathered
reflect some indication as to the awareness of the CES:
as an agency and the programs it offers. Also, the
data reveal which segment of the Hispanic population
particpates in CES programs, what their needs are and

SO on.

CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

The data presented in this chapter are derived from
the usable responses from the sampled groups; mailed
questionnaire respondents and key informants. The
principal findings of this study are introduced and
discussed in four sections: 1) description of the
respondents; 2) awareness level; 3) participation; and
4) perceived need or importance of the four CES program
area tOpics. In several areas, graphics or tables are
presented in order to assist the reader. In addition,

a section is included to present an overview or profile
of the sampled groups with regard to the awareness and
program participation as related to individual sample
characteristics, such as age, sex, education and income.
Also, the T-test results and some additional findings

are included.

Description of the Respondents

Data were collected through interviews with 16 key
informants and by mail questionnaires to a sample of

Hispanic residents in the Ingham County. Responses from

-32_

-33-

62 completed mail questionnaires were received. Because
the return rate was perceived as low, a nonrespondent
procedure was utilized to determine similarities or
differences between the two groups. Afterwards, a T-test
was conducted where it was found that nonrespondents were
not significantly different from the mail questionnaire
respondents. Although there was only a 26.5% return

rate for the mail questionnaires, we are more confident
of the likelihood of the sample being representative of
the population (see Appendix F).

When considering the age categories for the mail
questionnaire respondents, the most frequently occurring
age group was found to be 25-34 years of age (33.9%),
followed by 45-64 years of age (27.1%). The median age
for the mail questionnaire respondents was 35-44 years
of age, which differs from the census data for Ingham
County, that reports a median age for the Hispanic
population of 20 years. The mail questionnaire respon-
dents consisted of 39% females and 59.3% males. The
ethnic backgrounds of the mail respondents were found
to be: 70% Mexican; 11.7% Cuban; 3.3% Puerto Rican;
and 15% other Spanish origin. They had achieved a
relatively low level of formal education (43.1% had
completed high school). They were mostly skilled workers
and a considerable number of them maintain jobs with the
auto industry in the area. They have an employment rate

of 72.9%. Although a random sample was conducted, the

-34-

income level for the mail respondents (49.1% earning over
$25,000 a year) appears to be somewhat higher than
anticipated. Census data reported a mean income for

the Hispanic population in the Ingham County at $17,204.
The mean income for the mail questionnaire respondents was
$20-24,999.

For the key informants, the most frequent age group
was found to be 35-44 years of age (50%). Sex distribution
among key informants was 37.5% for females and 56.3% for
males. They were mostly of Mexican heritage (61.5%),
followed by 15.4% Puerto Rican and 7.7% either Cuban or
of other Spanish origin. Key informants achieved a higher
level of education (53.3% have had some courses beyond
the college level) and are engaged in mostly professional
occupations. They are all currently employed. Income
for the key informants was found to be over $25,000

per household, based on their occupational level.

TABLE 6. Hispanic Ethnic Background.

 

Mexican Puerto Rican Cuban Other

 

Mail Respondents 70% 3.3% 11.7% 15.0%
(n =60)

Key Informants 61.5% 15.4% 7.7% 7.7%
(n =13)

TOTAL* 68.5% 5.5% 10.9% 13.7%

 

*Total figures were drawn from data collected from the
study.

Hmtm=2u 95 mtcmmjn-L:

”1.2002. >..E<w>

 

 

so .. 6 ..
\NQ‘ Xq/x \/ \/ Qq
somewavoxge
- - . - P _ - -
Emu-s .9
rum
Bean-Ema

mEouc. mwcmtcoummm

m.-_mc-.-n-$mm3_u .62
m men-0E

wZJDDIum .uo 4w>wu_

 

 

\ anE 1.22 I.
fi—uca .n_2_ >wv. l

 

mficmnconmmm
*0 m_m>m:_
.mcoszJUm
N mean-E

HE “E mm<w>

 

 

HmmnE 1.22 I

875 m2. >mv_ l

Sean-£65

mm< mficmnconmmm
_ EDGE

 

-35-

Awareness

In order to know the awareness level, the sampled
groups were asked, "Have you ever heard of the Inghwn County
or MSU Cooperative Extension Service, sometimes called Agricultural
Extension Service?" (see Appendix A). The response was
found to be higher among key informants (81.3%); for the
mail questionnaire respondents the response was 48.2%.

When comparing the awareness level by specific program
area, in all sampled groups, the 4-H youth program showed
up as the most recognizable. A high of 87.5% and 77.8%
was found for the key informants and mail questionnaire
respondents, respectively. Because of the agricultural
tradition of the CES, one would expect a greater recogni-
tion of the agriculture and marketing program. Instead,
key informants presented an awareness level of 60% for
both the agriculture and home economics programs. Mail
respondents have a little more awareness of the home
economic program (48.1%) than for the agriculture program
(43.3%). The natural resource and public policy program
was found to be the least recognizable of the four program
areas of Extension by both groups, as shown in Figure 4

(p. 37).

Participation

Participation in CBS programs among the sampled

groups was found to be 40% for key informants (n==15)

-37-

0x2
mwu mamz 0w E... Irv m<

D

D _
DN
om
0v
am
am
on
am
am

 

322 m
.62 me- n

  

mEmtmn-tn. m: tcm Enzmcmfixw .5 mmmcmtmzé
v mung”.

BHVMV .LNBCIHBd

-33-

and 16.4% (n =55) for the mail questionnaire respon—
dents.

From those mail questionnaire respondents who have
participated in Extension programs in the past, it was
found that they most often participate in the programs
2—3 times a month (10%, n =30). 54.5% said they had
read Extension articles in the newspaper and half of them
have listened to an Extension radio or TV program
sometime during the past two years. Very little volunteer
work (9.1%) was reported by this sample group. Note that
only 11 people from the mail questionnaire respondents
completed this section of the questionnaire.

From the mail questionnaire respondents who have
participated in Extension proqrams, 37.5% of them
expressed their preference for the Cristo Rey Community
Center as the most convenient place for Extension meetings,
followed by the Capitol Federal Savings Bank facilities
(20.8%).

Reasons for Nonparticipation

No differences were made in evidence with regard
to the reasons for nonparticipation in a specific CES
program area. In general, people seem to be interested
in the home economics topic areas. One person wrote in
the space provided at the bottom of the home economic

section of the questionnaire: "This particular program

-39-

could really help me and I believe will help and benefit
others."

For the nonrespondents and for the mail questionnaire
respondents, the common reasons for the unwillingness to
take advantage of the programs was found to be as
follows: 1) too busy, no time available; 2) depends on
schedule available; 3) would have to know more details
or information of the various programs offered; and 4) too
old to participate. Specific comments were mentioned for
the 4-H youth program and for the agriculture and marketing
program. Some respondents said: "I offered services a
number of years ago in our area and I was "turned-off" as
I was not an "old 4-H person." They also said that they
would participate if their children got involved. For
the agriculture program, some of the respondents mentioned
they were not farmers, not interested in growing things,
and that too many farmers are in financial trouble.

Furthermore, the key informants were asked what
their perception for the Hispanic unwillingness to
participate in Extension prOgrams was. They mentioned
that: 1) it depends on the family income level (low-
income families generally do not get involved in
activities in the community); 2) unemployment is very
high in the Hispanic community (they need to cope with
that situation); 3) if the Extension materials are

presented by a Hispanic, there will be better

-40-

participation; 4) if the meetings are held in places near
their homes and close to their interests, Hispanics are
more likely to attend; 5) lack of bilingual information
about CES programs hinders attendance; 6) Extension staff
need to know the peOple; 7) lack of knowledge of services
provided is a hindrance; 8) there is a lack of motivation
on the part of the Hispanics; 9) the programs offered do
not necessarily meet the cultural aspects of Hispanics;
and 10) language may be a problem.

Although only 14.8% (n =27) of the mail respondents
identified English language as a problem for program
participation, key informants perceived a great need for
bilingual programs in order to be effective in dissemina-
ting program content. The key informants, with an average
of 13.9 years of working in the community, agreed (92.9%)
that Hispanics have little understanding of the English

language, especially those persons over 40 years of age.

Program Priorities

To determine program priorities, the respondents
were asked to select, among the topic areas included in
each of the four CES programs, the ones that s/he
identify as a need in his/her criteria. After that, a
rank ordering of the expressed needs was established
based on the mean values from those who answered each
item. The results are presented in tables by CES

program area .

-41..

All topics listed for the home economic program
area were found to have a mean of 3 (moderate need) or
more. Table 7 (p. 43) shows a comparison of means for
the home economic program topics between sample (mail
respondents) and key informants where the means were rank
ordered for the sample to illustrate priorities. There
was a high need for most of the topics under the home
economic program. Marketing home produced goods and
services was rank ordered low, based on the mean value
by the mail questionnaire respondents. In contrast, the
key informants lower mean value for the perceived need
on the topics included in the home economic program was
reported to be weight control and fitness.

A great need was identified under the 4-H youth
program (Table 8) for food and nutrition, family and
group relation, careers, developing leadership in youth
and caring for kids. A moderate need was found for
environmental education, personal appearance, working
with handicappers and growing flowers, fruits and
vegetables. Very low need was perceived for shooting
sports and clowning.

For the agriculture and marketing (Ag ng) program
(Table 9), priorities were set for home vegetable
production and home fruit production. Some differences
in perception were found for soil conservation, farm
land preservation, farmer to consumer market, and crop

production. The sampled group, mail questionnaire

-42..
respondents, identified a moderate need for the afore-
mentioned topic areas, but a low need for the same topics
was perceived by the key informants. Very low need was
found for raising pleasure horses.

Priorities for the natural resources and public
policy (NRPP) program (Table 10) were set for under-
standing local government, community development, leader-
ship training and development, and tax policies for state
and local government. Differences in priorities were
found for oil and gas develOpment, land use planning and
management and wood for energy, where the mail respondent‘
(sample) expressed a moderate need for them; instead, the
key informants perceived a low need in those areas for
Hispanics. Very low need was reported for maple syrup
production, followed by woodlot management and pond
management.

Some respondents expressed their concern and interest
to get some information about other topics not listed as
CES program tOpic areas. Under the natural resources
and public policy they mentioned topics such as small
business development and toxic substances effect on
environment, for example, on pesticides. For the 4—H
youth proqram they expressed their concern for informa-
tion regarding morals and values, and child abuse. Bud-
geting and family dynamics were mentioned as tOpics of

interest under the home economic program.

TABLE 7. Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for

Topic Areas in Home Economic Program.

 

Topic

*
Mean Values

 

 

Health Care

Coping with Inflation
Home Energy Conservation
Weight Control and Fitness
Parenting

Self-Esteem

Stress and Depression

Management of Food for
Low-Income Families

Family Financial Planning
Planning for Retirement

Changing Values and
Life Styles

Healthy Diets

Public Affairs

Cutting Food Costs

Food Preservation
Coping with Unemployment

Home Maintenance and
Repairs

Leadership Development

Marketing Home Produced
Goods and Services

Sample
3.70

3.61
3.60
3.59
3.58
3.57
3.57

3.39

3.06

Key

Informants

 

3.29
3.43
3.58
3.08
3.53
3.53
3.40

3.36

3.73
3.40

3.43

3.50
3.21
3.53
3.39
3.36

3.58
3.40

3.36

 

*Mean values calculated from assigned values for High
Need (4), Moderate Need (3), Low Need (2) and No Need (1).

-44-

TABLE 8. Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
Topic Areas in 4-H Youth Program.

 

 

 

 

Topic Mean Values*
Key
Sample Informants
Food and nutrition 3.74 3.81
Family and Group Relation 3.69 3.73
Careers 3.67 3.79
De¥eloping Leadership in 3.66 3.81
outh

Caring for Kids 3.62 3.60
Environmental Education 3.45 3.42
Personal Appearance 3.44 3.08
Grifiénieiiifiiiig m... 3-35 3- 21
Working with Handicappers 3.35 3.14
Dairy Production 3.14 3.82
Field Crop Production 3.12 3.27
Crafts 3.10 3.15
Bicycling 2.96 2.92
Photography 2.94 3.00
Livestock Production 2.92 2.58
Dog Care and Training 2.74 2.67
Raising Rabbits and Poultry 2.63 2.73
Horses 2.61 2.58
Entomology 2.54 2.42
Raising Goats 2.53 2.67
Clowning 2.50 2.17
Shooting Sports 2.46 2.08

 

*Mean values calculated from assigned values for High
Need (4), Moderate Need (3), Low Need (2), and No
Need (1).

-45-

TABLE 9. Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
Topic Areas in Agriculture and Marketing

 

 

 

 

Program.
TOpic Mean Values*
Key
Sample Informants

Home Vegetable Production '3.42 3.36
Home Fruit Production 3.42 3.31
Soil Conservation 3.39 2.85
Farm Land Preservation 3.33 2.92
Farmer to Consumer Market 3.29 2.86
Crop Production 3.28 2.77
Organic Gardening 3.28 3.15
Pesticide Use on Farm 3.26 3.00
Wm
Pe:§3c;2:d::e in the Home 3.21 3.15
Farm Business Management 3.21 2.79
"set: 222.32%”:
Farm Taxes 3.15 2.78
Understanding Soil Testing 3.10 3.07
Copfigrgfiié Fruit, Vegetables 3.10 2.92
Livestock Production 3.10 2.46
Landscape Maintenance 3.09 2.79
Greenhouse for House Plants 2.90 2.85
Indoor Plants 2.90 2.64
Raising Pleasure Horses 2.42 2.15

 

*Mean values calculated from assigned values for High

Need (4), Moderate Need (3), Low Need (2) and No

Need (1).

-46-

TABLE 10. Mean Values for Ratings of Importance for
TOpic Areas in Natural Resources and Public

Policy Program.

 

 

 

 

Topic Mean Value*
Key
Sample Informants

Ungerstanding Local 3.49 3.13

overnment
Community Development 3.47 3.38
Leadership Training

and Development 3'36 3'25
Tax Policies for State

and Local Government 3'35 3'00
Oil and Gas Development 3.22 2.57
Land Use Planning and

Management 3'20 2'50
Wood for Energy 3.08 2.40
Development of Wild Life

Habitat 2.94 2.36
Woodlot Management 2.87 2.29
Pond Management 2.64 2.21
Maple Syrup Production 2.59 2.21

 

*Mean values calculated from assigned values for High
Need (4), Moderate Need (3), Low Need (2), and No
Need (1).

-47-

Awareness and Program Participant's Profile

This section covers an overview of respondent's
characteristics as they related to the awareness and
to the participation in CBS programs. None of the cross—
tabulations used to obtain this information evidenced a

statistically significant relationship between variables.

Mail Questionnaire Respondents

Mail respondents (n =54) over 45 years of age were
more likely to be aware of CES as an agency; people 34
years of age or younger were less likely to be aware
and an almost equal proportion of those between 35—44
years of age were aware or unaware. Females were less
aware of CES as an agency than males. There was
relatively little difference in the level of awareness
of the CES as an agency based on the level of schooling
completed. Those who were not employed were less likely
to be aware. Almost no difference was reported when
considering the income categories; however, those who
received $10-14,999 were more likely to be aware and
those who received $20-24,999 were less likely to be
aware of CES.

Awareness of the agriculture programs in the Mail
Respondent group shows that peeple over 45 years of
age were more likely to be aware, people 44 years or
younger were less likely to be aware. Both females and

males are less likely to be aware of the agriculture

-43-

program. Considering the educational level it was found
that those who got some training beyond high school were
more likely to be aware of the program. Both employed and
unemployed were less likely to be aware of the agriculture
program. There was relatively little difference in the
level of awareness of the agriculture programs based on
income; mail questionnaire respondents were mostly
unaware.

The awareness for the 4-H youth program among the
mail respondents was found to be high for all age
categories. Both females and males were highly aware
of the program. There was a high awareness level for
the 4-H youth program in regard to the school achieve-
ment, however, those with post high school training were
less likely to be aware. People employed were more
likely to be aware. There was relatively little
difference in the level of awareness of the 4-H program
based on income, they were mostly aware.

The awareness of the home economic program indicates
that those 25-34 and over 65 years of age were more
likely to be aware of the program. Females were less
likely to be aware than males. Those whose educational
level was junior high or less were more likely to be
aware of the home economic program. Those unemployed
were more likely to be aware of the home economic
program. People whose yearly income was $S-9,999 were

more likely to be aware of the program.

-49-

The awareness level for the natural resource and
public policy program was reported to be more likely in
peOple 45-64 years of age. Both females and males showed
a low awareness for the program. Only people with post-
high school training were more likely to be aware of
the program. Low awareness was reported for those both
employed or unemployed. Also, a low awareness level was
found among the different income categories.

Participation in CBS programs by the Mail Respondent
Group was indicated to be high among those from 25-64
years of age. Males were less likely to participate in
CES programs. There was relatively little difference in
the participation based on schooling completed, employment

and income.

Key Informants
Among key informants, those who are 35-44 or 45-64
years of age were more likely to be aware of the CES as
an agency. Females were more likely to be aware of CES.
When considering the educational level, those who
studied beyond the baccalaureate degree or who had some
post-high school training were more likely to be aware.
For the agriculture program, those key informants
35-44 years of age were more likely to be aware of the
program. Females were more likely to be aware of the
agriculture program. Those with post-high school training
or beyond the baccalaureate degree were more likely to be

aware.

-50-

Awareness for the 4-H youth program was found to be
higher among those key informants between 25-64 years of
age. Both females and males were highly aware of the
program. There was relatively little difference in
awareness for the 4-H youth program based on the
educational levels. They were more likely to be aware.

Awareness for the home economic program was higher
for those 35-64 years of age. Females were more likely
to be aware of the program. Those with an educational
level beyond high school were more likely to be aware
of the program.

For the natural resources and public policy program
the key informants most likely to be aware of the
program were those 19-24 years of age. Both females and
males were more likely to be unaware of the proqram. There
was relatively little difference in awareness for the
natural resources and public policy program. When
considering the educational level of the key informants,
they were less likely to be aware of the program.

Participation in CES proqrams by the key informants
was more likely for those 19-24 or 35-44 years of age.
Males were less likely to be the participants in the
programs. Those who had some post-high school training
or who had a baccalaureate degree were more likely to

be participants in the programs.

-51-

T-test Results

A T-test was conducted between the nonrespondents and
the mail questionnaire respondents in order to determine
statistical similarities between the two groups. No
significant statistical difference between means was
found for awareness, participation, or for the demographic
characteristics. Some exceptions, though, came across
when considering the perceived need for some specific
CES program topic areas (see Appendix E).

For the natural resources and public policy topic
areas, the oil and gas deveIOpment, maple syrup produc-
tion, and land use planning and management were found
to have a statistically significant difference in their
means. Nonrespondents were less likely to see the NRPP
program topic areas as needed. For the 4-H youth program,
the topic areas of field cr0p production, dairy production,
environmental education and raising goats were the ones
found statistically different. Nonrespondents were less
likely to see these 4-H program topic areas as needed.

For the agriculture and marketing program, it was found
that the tOpic areas included in this program present

significant differences in their means. No differences
were found among the means of the topic areas included

under the home economic program.

-52-

Additional Findings

When asked, "What was the most effective way to
inform you and your family about services provided by
agencies in your community?", both, mail questionnaire
respondents and key informants (43.3% and 46.7%,
respectively) agreed that television was the most
effective way to inform Hispanics. This was reinforced
when conducting the phone interviews with the non-
respondents that one person said "I watch TV and if I

don't see the information there, I don't trust it."

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

This study surveyed a sample of the Hispanic resi-
dents in the Lansing, Michigan area where data were
gathered from two groups. Key informants and mail
questionnaire respondents were asked to:

a) assess the degree to which that population

participates in and is aware of, the

Cooperative Extension Services (CES);

b) to identify the possible reasons for parti-
cipation in CBS programs, and

c) to assess the educational needs of Hispanics
in the Lansing area as those needs relate
to the current program area topics offered
by the CES and to identify priorities for
future programs.
The two groups were found to be different in a variety
of areas, such as awareness level, participation level

and in their characteristics, for example, income,

education and employment.

Conclusions

Based on the data acquired from this study, the key

conclusions are as follows:

-53-

-54-

Hispanic residents in the Lansing area have
a very low level of participation in CBS
proqrams.

This study has reinforced the idea that a
strong relationship exists between people's
awareness of an educational proqram and

their participation. It has also further
shown that those who participate in educa-
tional programs tend to be those who are more
highly skilled, employed, middle aged and
more educated.

a) Higher income Hispanics are more likely
to get involved in community activities
offered to the general public.

b) The bias toward higher levels of income
for the mail questionnaire respondents
(anticipated versus found) may be
attributed to the possibility that
people earning more might be more willing
to answer the questions.

The most frequently mentioned reasons for
Hispanic nonparticipation in CBS programs were
(and arranged in descending order):

a) no time available to participate;
b) too old to participate;

c) lack of awareness of services provided
as expressed by the need for more informa-
tion about the programs offered;

d) depends on family income and location
where meetings are held;

e) lack of bilingual information; and
f) language problem.

Priorities for the 4-H youth programs serving
the Hispanic audience should be made on the
following program area topics: food and
nutrition, family and group relationships,
careers, youth leadership, caring for kids.
For the home economics program area the high
priority topics include coping with inflation,
home energy conservation, weight control and
fitness, parenting and self-esteem.

The
obtained

1.

-55-

There was a relatively low awareness of the NRPP
and AG ng programs when compared to the two
other CBS programs. The lack of knowledge or
visibility of the NRPP program could account

for it; for the Ag ng program, misconceptions
about the agriculture business can be pointed
out as the possible reasons.

Young respondents (less than 35 years of age)
were less aware of Extension programs than
persons in the older age groups.

There was a difference between the means for
the perceived needs identified by the mail
questionnaire respondents and the perceived
needs identified by the key informants in
several of the CES program topic areas. Indi-
viduals in the community may have some needs
that they feel are important, but the leaders
as observers of the group, may not perceive
the needs in the same way.

Recommendations

recommendations that follow are based on data
from the survey and the literature review:

Given that not all Hispanics know English, it
is important that information about programs
be distributed in Spanish. The need exists
for bilingual and bicultural programs sensi-
tive to Hispanic needs.

In order to communicate effectively with the
Hispanic community for planning and conducting
CES programs, it may be necessary to employ
more Hispanics or to hire persons with Spanish
speaking abilities. This would add additional
awareness and understanding of the Hispanic
cultural lifestyles to help Extension staff
work more effectively with this minority group.
This approach would be expected to result in a
higher level of participation if the program
content appealed to their needs.

-56-

Educational programs or materials distributed to
this audience should be simple and easy to
understand, so that Extension personnel can be
able to reach the needs of the people at a

level that people can understand.

Increased use of media, especially radio and
television, appears to be appropriate for the
delivery of information and to create awareness
throughout the Hispanic community about educa-
tional programs.

The most effective way to gather information
from Hispanics is through personal inter iews
or informal talks. According to Delgado and
the present study findings, personal interviews
are a better method for gathering data from
Hispanics since they prefer personal, rather
than impersonal, contacts.

Implications for Further Research

There is a need for further research that focuses

on the identification of strategies that helps to

increase effectiveness and efficiency for the Cooperative

Extension Service staff and other nonformal educational

agencies to wOrk with Hispanics and/or other minority

groups.

Examples of some specific questions to be

addressed are:

a)

b)

What can be done to interest those who
normally do not get involved in community
activities and are the ones with great needs?

How do HiSpanics and/or other minority groups
feel about the quality and value of Extension
and its programs?

 

*Delgado, M. "Grass-Roots Model for Needs Assessment in
Hispanic Community." Child Welfare §§(9):57l-6.

 

-57-

c) What methods are being used by Hispanics
and/or other minority groups to obtain
Extension information?

d) How well is Extension reaching special
audiences, such as minority groups?

Younger respondents were not as aware of CES as
older reSpondents. Participation differences based upon
age were not clearly defined. Hence, studies should be
deveIOped to more precisely assess the degree of
participation by younger audiences (especially young
minority people) which could have far reaching impact
on the future of Extension and the programs it offers.

The impact from relying only on "resource peOple"
for information or leaders in the community to assess
the needs of a target audience for program planning

purposes needs further research.

LIST OF REFERENCES

10.

LIST OF REFERENCES

Arce, Carlos and Estrada, Leobardo F. Emplgyment
and Training Needs of Hispanics in Michigan.
Department of Management and Budget, Commis-
sion of Spanish Speaking Affairs, State of
Michigan, October 1983.

 

Attkisson, C.C. et al. Evaluation of Human Service
Programs. New York: The Academic Press, 1978,
Chapter 9.

 

Berkowitz, William R. Community Impact: Creating
Grassroots Change in Hard Times. Cambridge,
MA: Schenkman Publishing Company, Inc., 1982,
Chapter 3.

 

Caffarella, Rosemary S. "Identifying Client Needs."
Journal p£_Extension (Ju1./Aug., 1982): 5.

 

Cosner, Barney L. and Key, James P. "Does the
Public Know?" Journal pf Extension (Nov./Dec.,
1981): 19-23.

 

. Crawford, Jean K. A National Study to Assess the

 

Service Needs of the Hispanic Elderly.
Los Angeles, CA: Associacion Nacional Pro
Personas Mayores, December 1980, p. 7.

 

Delgado, M. "Grass-Roots Model for Needs Assessment
in Hispanic Community.“ Child Welfare £8 (9,
1979): 571-6.

 

Katz, Daniel, et a1. Bureaucratic Encounters.
Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research, 1977, p. 183.

 

Monette, Maurice L. "Needs Assessment: A
Critique of Philosophical Assumptions."
Adult Education 22 (2, 1979): 84.

Monette, Maurice L. "The Concept of Educational

Need: An Analysis of Selected Literature."
Adult Education 21 (2, 1977): 119.

-53-

ll.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

-59-

Nolan, M. and Lasley, Paul "Agricultural Extension:
Who Uses It?" Journal 9: Extension (Sept./Oct.,
1979): 21-27.

 

Neuber, Keith A. Needs Assessment: A Model for
99mmunity Planning. Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage Publications, 1980, p. 105.

 

 

Prawl, Warren et a1. Adult and Continuing Education
Through the C00perative Extensibn Service.
Columbia, MO: Univer. of Missouri, 1984, p. 72.

 

Saenz, Sigfrido, Jr. An Assessment of the Mental
Health Needs of Hispanics in Michigan. Report to
the Michigan Dept. of Mental Health, 1984, pp.3—4.

 

 

Smith, Mary F., ed., Current Issues/Problems in
Evaluating Cooperative Extension Programs.
Gainesville, FL: Cooperative Extension Service,
1981, p. 44.

 

Vines, C. Austin and Anderson, Marvin A. Heritage
Horizons. Madison, WI: Journal g£_Extension,
1979, p. 225.

 

Warheit, G.J. et a1. Planning for Change: Needs
Assessment Approaches. Rockville, MD: National
Institute of Mental Health, 1974.

 

 

Warner, Paul D. and Christenson, James A. The
COOperative Extension Service: A National
Assessment. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1984.

 

 

Warner, Paul D. and Christenson, James A. "Who is
Extension Serving?" Journal pf Extension
(Mar./Apr., 1981): 22-28.

 

Whitted, V.L. Results of the_Ohio Cooperative Service
Needs Assessment for Aggicultural Industry
Procrams. M.S. Thesis, COIumbus, OH: Ohio State
Univer51ty, 1983, p. 12.

 

Witkin, B.L. An énalysis ofNeeds Assessment Tech-
niques for Educational Planning_at State,
Intermediate, and District Levels. 2nd rev.
ed., Hayward: 1977.

 

 

 

Yep, B.H. and Riggs, N.P. "Finding the Hidden Audi-
ence." g. 2; Extension (Jul./Aug., 1978): 5-10.

 

Evaluation of Economic and Social Consequences of
CooPerative Extension Programs. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1980,
p. 173.

 

 

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Mail Questionnaire Example

INTRODUCTION

 

Your responses to the questions included in the following three-part question-
naire will be helpful in getting more educational services to the Hispanic
population in the Lansing area.

The questionnaire seeks information about your use of the Cooperative Extension
Service (Part I), the importance of various possible programs (Part II), and
finally, some information about you and your family (Part 111).

Your responses will be used to plan some programs especially for the Hispanic
community. If you start answering the questions in the English version, please
finish it that way.

PART I Use of Extension Services

Yes No
(Circle One Letter)

1. Have you ever heard of the Ingham County or
MSU Cooperative Extension Service (CES)...
some people know of it as the Agricultural
Extension Service? ...... . ............. . .............. Y N

2. Have you ever heard of the

Agricultural or Marketing Program? ................. Y N
4-H Youth Prograrn?ooo'ooo oooooo ooooooooo ....... .0 Y N
Family Living Education Program or Home Economics?. Y N
Natural Resource and Public Policy Program? ..... ... Y N
3. Do you think that CES offers programs for you? ....... Y N
4. Have you ever participated in Extension Programs?.... Y N

If you answered N0 in the question number 4, skip the remainder of this

Section and answer the questions on PART II.

5. In the past two (2) years, have you or your family
Visited or called the Extension Service? ............
Received an Extension Bulletin or Newsletter?. ......
Listened to an Extension Radio or TV Program? .......
Read Extension Articles in the Newspaper? ...... .....
Attended an Extension Sponsored Meeting or Activity?

Served as a Volunteer or Planning Committee Member?.

K r< K *4 fl *4 M
Z 55 Z 5! Z 25 Z

Served as a 4-H Leader? ....... ..... .......... .......

-60-

..61-

INTRODUCCION

 

I
Su respuesta a las preguntas contenidas en el siguiente cuestionario serviran
para obtener mas servicios educacionales para los hispanos en el condado de Ingham.

El cuestionario trata de obtener informacidn sobre el uso de los progaramas de
Extensidn (PRTE I), la importancia de varios programas (PRTE 11) y finalmente
alguna informacidn personal y de su familia (PARTE III).

I o 0
Su respuesta sera usada para el planeo de programas para hispanos. Sl comienza
a contestar 1as preguntas en la parte que aparece en espafiol, por favor termine
todas sus contestaciones en espafiol.

PARTE I Uso de los Servicios de Extension

I 0
Por favor, marque con un Circulo la letra ® si su respuesta es 81 0 con una @
si su respuesta es No.

Si No

1. JI-Ia oido usted hablar del condado de Ingham o MSU
Cooperative Extension Service (CES)...mucha gente
lo conoce como Servicio de Extension Agricola .......... S N

2. dHa oido usted hablar alguna vez de
Programas de agricultura' y mercadeo (compra y venta)?

Programas 4.1-]. para javenesyooooooooooooooooooooooooo

2222

S
S
Programas de economia domestica (ahorro en la casa)? S
Programas de recursos naturales y asuntos pdblicos?. S

3. dCree usted que el Servicio de Extensidh ofrece
programas para usted?0000000000OOIOOOOOOOIOOOOOOOOOOOOO S N

4. dHa participado usted antes en los programas que ofrece
la agencia de Extensidh?............................... S N
Si su respuesta en la pregunta ndmero 4 es N0, no lea las preguntas que faltan

de esta seccidn y pase a la PARTE II.

5. dEn los pasados dos (2) afios, usted o su familia

Visitd’o llamd a las oficinas de Extensidn?......... S N
Recibid’boletines o informacidh de Extensidh?....... S N
Escuchd'programas de Extensidh por radio 0 televisidh? S N
Leyd'articulos de Extensidh en el periddico?........ S N
Asistio’ a juntas o actividades que hace Extensio’n.7... S N
Sirvid’como voluntario o como miembro de comités

de planeacidh?..................................... S

Sirvid'como lider 4-H (dirigente)?................. S

-62-

How often did you usually participate in the Extension programs?
(Please check the appropriate response.)

 

2 or 3 times a month
once a month

about 6 times a year
less than 6 times a year

not at all

Now I would like your opinion about some of the Extension programs.

If yes, please rate
its usefulness.
Poor Fair Good Excellent

Have you participated
or received information?
Yes No

 

(circle one letter) (circle one number)

Master Gardener Program....... Y N 1 2 3 4
4—H Winter Program....... ..... Y N 1 2 3 4
Family Living News Notes for

the new year ....... ........... Y N 1 2 3

EFNEP Newsletter with recipes. Y N 1 2 3 4

Where will be the most convenient place for you to participate in the

Extension meetings?

 

a.

(Please check the appropriate response.)

In my home

At Cristo Rey Community Center

Walnut Street School

Mason Farm Bureau

Capitol Federal Savings Bank (East Lansing and/or Holt)
Township Hall (Mason and/or Delta)

At Church Facilities

Other (please specify)

 

Since the programs offered by the Extension Service are mostly in

English, does this hinder your participation?

Yes

No

b. Any Comments or Suggestions in regard to the above question?

 

 

 

-63..

' l
6. dCuantas veces participa usted en los programas de Extension?

(Haga una g para marcar su respuesta)
dos o tres veces al mes
una vez al mes
como 6 veces al ano

____menos de 6 veces a1 afio

‘____casi nunca

I . I . ’
Ahora me gustaria saber su opinion acerca de algunos programas de Exten31on.

 

 

Ha participado usted Si contesta si, dcomo
o recibido informacion encuentra los programas?
Si NQ_ Malo Regular Bueno Excelent«

Master Gardener Program....... S N l 2 3 4
Programas 4-H en invierno..... S N 1 2 3
Family living news notes for
for the new year.............. S N 1 2 3
EFNEP newsletters with recipes S N 1 2 3 4

' o I
8. (Donde seria el mejor lugar para usted asistir a lasJuntas de Extension?

(Haga una K para marcar su respuesta)
en mi casa
_____en Cristo Rey Community Center
_____Walnut St. School
Mason Farm Bureau
Capitol Federal Savings Bank (East Lansing y/o Holt)
Township Hall (Mason y/o Delta)

en la iglesia de su preferencia

——.—

otro lugar

 

a. Los programas que ofrece la agencia de Extensioh son en ingles, dseria
eso un problema para que usted participe en los programas de Extensidn?

Si No

I

I
b. dTiene usted alguna idea 0 sugerencia en relacion a la pregunta anterior?

 

 

 

 

 

~64-

PART II Extension programs available in the Ingham County

Please use the following system to indicate the level of need or importance
for helping you in your daily life that you see as appropriate for each item
in the following sections.

A. Natural Resources and Public Policy assist in the wise development and
utilization of our natural resources, as well as provides public affairs

 

 

 

education.
Importance
High Moderate Low “No
Need Need Need Need
(circle one number)

1) Development of wild life habitat ....... 4 3 2 1
2) Woodlot Management............... ...... 4 3 2 1
3) Pound Management....................... 4 3 2 1
4) Wood for Energy ..... . .................. 4 3 2 1
5) Oil and Gas Development ........ ... ..... 4 3 2 1
6) Maple Syrup Production... .............. 4 3 2 1
7) Understanding Local Government ......... 4 3 2 1
8) Tax Policies for State and Local

Finance......... ...... ..... ..... .. ..... 4 3 2 1
9) Leadership Training and Development (how

to coordinate, plan and carry out

meetings)...................... ........ 4 3 2 1
10) Land Use Planning and Management....... 4 3 2 1
11) Community Development (identify people

and Money to Improve the Community).... 4 3 2 1
12) Other 4 3 2 1

 

Participation in the Extension Programs is voluntary and at no cost for the
participants. The activities are held locally in the community or neighborhood.

WOuld you like to participate in the programs that you selected as having a
high need?

Yes No Maybe

 

 

If your answer is NO or Maybe, could you share with me the possible reasons
why you are unwilling to take advantage of the programs?

 

-65...

PARTE II Programas de Extensioh en el condado de Ingham

Por favor, use el siguiente sistema para indicar e1 nivel de importancia o
necesidad que usted considere apropiado para ayudarle en su vida diaria en
cada uno de los siguientes temas en esta seccidh.

A. Recursos naturales (animales, bosques, lagos y rios) y asuntos publicos
(conocer e1 gobierno, participacidh para mejorar su vecindario) orienta
en el desarrollo y utilizacidh de nuestros recursos naturales y ofrece
educacidh sobre asuntos publicos.

Por favor, haga un cfrculo alrededor del numero de su respuesta, por
ej emplo C3)

Importancia o necesidad
Mucha Moderada Poca Ninguna

 

1) Desarrollo de vida silvestre (peces,

patos, venados y otros animales).. ..... 4 3 2 1
2) Mantenimiento de los recursos madereros 4 3 2 1
3) Manejo de estanques o charcas.......... 4 3 2 1
4) Uso de madera para energia (calor en la
casa)... ...... ... .......... ............ 4 3 2 1
5) Desarrollo de yacimientos de gases natu-
rales................ ..... ............. 4 3 2 1
6) Produccioh de sirop de maple ..... . ..... 4 3 2 1
7) Conozca su gobierno local....... ..... .. 4 3 2 1
8) Impuestos y finanzas de gobierno....... 4 3 2 1
9) Desarrollo de liderazgo (como organizar
y dirigir las juntas).................. 3 2 1
10) Planeo y manejo del uso de la tierra.. 4 3 2 1
11) Desarrollo de la comunidad (organizar-
se para mejorar su vecindario)........ 4 3 2 1
12) Otros programas 4 3 2 1

 

La participacioh en los programas de Extensioh es voluntaria y no cuesta nada a
los participantes. Las actividades son llevadas a cabo localmente en la vecin-
dad 0 en su barrio.

die.gustarfa participar en los programas que usted marco'como de mucha necesidad?

Si NO Quizas

 

 

 

0
Si su respuesta a la pregunta anterior es NO 0 QUIZAS,‘dpodria usted decirme las
posibles razones por las cuales usted no esta segura de entrar en estos programas?

 

 

 

.-66.

B. 4-H programs are designed to provide unique experiences for the development
of young people. Programs are guided by the philosophy that Michigan's most
important resource is its youth, and that today's young people will be tomor-
row's leaders. 4-H programs are open to all youth groups and leaders.

Importance
High Moderate Low No
Need Need Need Need

(circle one number)

20) Shooting Sports. ....... ........
21) Family and Group Relation/Stress...
22) Working with Handicappers... .......
23) Other

1) Bicycling ....... . ...... .... ..... ... 4 3 2 l
2) Crafts ............................. 4 3 2 l
3) Careers. . ..... ....... ........... .... 4 3 2 1
4) Clowning ...... ... .. .............. 4 3 2 1
5)Field Crop Production. ........... .. 4 3 2 1
6) Dairy Production ..... .... ........ ... 4 3 2 1
7) Dog Care and Training............... 4 3 2 1
8) Environmental Education............. 4 3 2 1
9) Caring for Kids. ..... ............... 4 3 2 1
10) Foods and Nutrition........ ..... ... 4 3 2 1
11) Developing Leadership in Youth... 4 3 2 1
12) Livestock Production............... 4 3 2 1
13) Raising Goats. ... ...... ...... 4 3 2 1
14) Growing Flowers, Fruits and Vegetables 4 3 2 1
15) Personal Appearances. ,,,,,,,,,,, 4 3 2 1
16) Photography. .......... . ...... 4 3 2 1
17) Raising Rabbits and Poultry. ..... 4 3 2 1
18) Horses ............ .......... ..... 4 3 2 1
19) Entomology (insects). .......... 4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

4 3 2 1

 

Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as high needed?
Yes NO Maybe

 

 

 

If your answer is No or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible reasons why
you are unwilling to take advantage of these programs?

 

 

 

-57-

B. Los programas 4-H estan hechos para dar experiencias unicas en el desarrollo
de la gente j6ven. Los programas tienen la idea de que lo mas importante de
Michigan son los jdvenes y que la gente jdven de hoy seran los lideres del
mafiana. Los programas 4—H los pueden usar cualquier grupo de jdvenes y 1i¥

deres.
Importancia o necesidad
Mucha Moderada Poca Ninguna

1) Bicicletas (ciclismo)..... ..... ........ 4 3 2 1
2) Destrezas manuales (artesanias).....,.. 4 3 2 1
3) Oportunidades de trabajo............... 4 3 2 1
4) Actividades recreacionales (payasos,

diversidh)............................. 4 3 2 1
5) Produccidh de cosechas (maiz, trigo,

frijdles y otros vegetales)............ 4 3 2 l
6) Produccidh de leche, Queso y mante-

quilla................................. 4 3 2 1
7)Cuidado y entrenamiento de perros....... 4 3 2 1
8) Educacidh ambiental (medio ambiente)... 4 3 2 l
9) Cuidado de los nifios................. 4 3 2 1
10) Comidas y su valor nutritivo (cuanto

alimentan)............................ 4 3 2 1
11) Desarrollo de liderazgo en jdvenes

(dirigir y planear las juntas)........ 4 3 2 1
12) Produccidh de ganado (vacas, borregos,

y otros animales)........... ..... ..... 4 3 2 1
13) Crianza de chivos.......,............. 4 3 2 1
l4) Cultivo de flores, frutas y vegetales. 4 3 2 1
15) Apariencia personal (como verse mejor) 4 3 2 1
l6) Fotografia.................... ........ 4 3 2 1
17) Crianza de conejos y gallinas......... 4 3 2 1
18) Caballos.............................. 4 3 2 l
19) Entomologia (estudio de los insectos). 4 3 2 1
20) Deportes de tiro a1 blanco (arco y

f1echa)............................... 4 3 2 1
21)Relaciones familiares.................. 4 3 2 1
22) Trabajando con incapacitados.......... 4 3 2 1
23) Otros 4 3 2 1

 

die gustaria participar en los programas que usted marcd'como de mucha necesidad?

Si No Quizas

v—wv

 

 

 

Si su respuesta a la pregunta anterior es NO 0 QUIZAS, ékodria usted decirme las
posibles razones por las cuales usted no esta segura de entrar en estos programas?

 

 

 

-68—

C. Agriculture and Marketing Programs are designed to help growers produce
effeciently, assure adequate supplies of high-quality agricultural
products, maintain profitable farm operations and keep the state's billion—
plus agricultural industry competitive in national and world markets. The
same knowledge and expertise available to commercial agriculture is offered
also to small farmers and home and yard clientele in a context relevant to
their specific needs.

Importance

 

High Moderate Low ‘Ng
Need Need Need Need
(circle one number)

 

 

1) Home Vegetable Production.. .............. 4 3 2 1
2) Home Fruit Production....... ..... ........ 4 3 2 1
3) Landscape Maintenance. ....... .... ........ 4 3 2 1
4) Indoor Plants.................... ........ 4 3 2 1
5) Organic Gardening (using no chemicals)... 4 3 2 1
6) Farm Land Preservation..... .............. 4 3 2 1
7) Soil Conservation..... ................... 4 3 2 1
8) Livestock Production ..................... 4 3 2 1
9) Crop Production............. ............. 4 3 2 1
10) Farmer to Consumer Marketing............. 4 3 2 1
11) Commercial Fruit, Vegetable and Turf..... 4 3 2 1
12) Greenhouse for House Plants..... ......... 4 3 2 1
13) Agriculture Commodity Marketing.......... 4 3 2 1
14) Pesticide Use in the Home and Garden ..... 4 3 2 1
15) Pesticide Use on Farm..... ..... .......... 4 3 2 1
16) Farm Taxes...... ...... .. ..... ............ 4 3 2 1
17) Property and Inheritance State Planning.. 4 3 2 1
l8) Raising Pleasure Horses.................. 4 3 2 1
19) Farm Business Management... .............. 4 3 2 1
20) Understanding Soil Testing....... ........ 4 3 2 1
21) Other 4 3 2 1

 

Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as high need?

Yes No Maybe

 

 

If your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible reasons
why you are unwilling to take advantage of these programs?

 

-69-

C. Los programas de agricultura y de ventas estan hechos para ayudar a los
rancheros a producir mas y mejor, asegurarse de que van a tener productos
agrfcolas de alta calidad, mantener e1 rancho bien para que tenga ganancias
y conservar la industria de agricultura de Michigan de mas de un billdh de
d6lares a un nivel que pueda compe tir con las ventas nacionales y mundiales.
El mismo conocimiento y expertos disponibles para la agricultura comercial
ayudan a los ranchos chicos, las casas y los jardines segdn sean sus necesi-

 

dades.
Importancia o necesidad
Mucha Moderada Poca Ninguna
1) Siembra de vegetales en su casa....... 4 3 2 1
2) Como cuidar los jérdines.............. 4 3 2 1
3) Siembra de frutas en su casa.......... 4 3 2 1
4) Plantas para tener adentro de la casa. 4 3 2 1
5) Jardineria orgahica ( como crecer 1as
plantas sin tener que usar sustancias
quimicas).................... ..... .... 4 3 2 1
6) Cuidado de las condiciones de la
tierra para uso agricola.............. 4 3 2 1
7) Conservacioh de suelos en general. 4 3 2 1
8) Produccidn de ganado (vacas, borregos,
puercos, y otros) ....... . ..... ....... 4 3 2 1
9) Produccion de cosechas (maiz, trigo,
frijoles y otros) ..... ................. 4 3 2 1
10) Venta de los productos del rancho a
la gente (mercado de los rancheros)... 4 3 2 1
11) Frutas, vegetales y zacates comerciales 4 3 2 1
12) Invernaderos para plantas de la casa.. 4 3 2 1
13) Venta de productos agricolas. ........ 4 3 2 1
14) Uso de pesticidas en la casa y en el
jardin................................ 4 3 2 1
15) Uso de pesticidas en el rancho........ 4 3 2 1
16) Impuestos o contribuciones (taxes)
del rancho............................ 4 3 2 1
l7) Planeo de la herencia de propiedades.. 4 3 2 1
18) Crianza de caballos para recreacidn
(diversidh).......................... 4 3 2 1
19) Manejo del negocio de la agricultura.. 4 3 2 1
20) Interpretacidn de los analisis de
suelo (tierra )....................... 4 3 2 1
21) Otro 4 3 2 1

 

die gustaria participar en los programas que usted marcd como de mucha necesidad?

Si No Quizas

 

 

 

Si su respuesta a la pregunta anterior es NO 0 QUIZAS, dpodria usted decirme 1as
posibles razones por las cuales usted no esta segura de entrar en estos programas?

 

 

 

-70-

D. Home Economics have educational programs designed to help families identify
needs and offer education for improving the quality of life at home and in
the community.

Importance

 

High Moderate Low .Ng
Need Need Need Need
(circle one number)

 

1) Coping with Inflation ................ 4 3 2 1
2) Changing Values and Life Styles ...... 4 3 2 1
3) Planning for Retirement........ ...... 3 2 1
4) Marketing Home Produced Goods and
Services............... .............. 4 3 2 1
5) Coping with Unemployment.. ........... 4 3 2 1
6) Family Financial Planning ............ 4 3 2 1
7) Self-Esteem .......................... 4 3 2 1
8) Parenting...... ......... . ............ 4 3 2 1
9) Home Energy Conservation... .......... 4 3 2 1
10) Home Maintenance and Repairs......... 4 3 2 1
11) Stress and Depression. ............... 4 3 2 1
12) Health Care....... ................... 4 3 2 1
13) Healthy Diets........................ 4 3 2 1
14) Food Preservation (frozen, drying,
canning)............................. 3 2 1
15) Cutting Food Costs....... ............ 4 3 2 1
16) Weight Control and Fitness........... 4 3 2 l
17) Leadership Development (how to be an
effective committee member).......... 4 3 2 1
18) Public Affairs (learn how government
works)............................... 4 3 2 1
19) Management of food for low-income
families ....... ...................... 4 3 2 1
20) Other 4 3 2 1

 

Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as high need?
Yes No Maybe

 

 

If your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible reasons
you are unwilling to participate?

 

 

-71-

D. Economia domestica (ahorro en la casa) tiene programas de educacidn hechos
para ayudar a las familias a conocer mejor sus necesidades, ademas de que
ofrece educaci6n para mejorar la calidad de vida en la casa y en la comu-
nidad.

Importancia o necesidad
Mucha Moderada Poca Ninguna

 

1) Que hacer con la inflacidn (precios

altos) ..... ........... ..... .......... 4 3 2 1
2) Cambio de valores morales y formas

de vida............... ..... .......... 4 3 2 1
3) Planeando para cuando se retire...... 4 3 2 1
4) Venta de cosas hechas en la casa ..... 4 3 2 1
5) Que hacer con el desempleo........... 4 3 2 1
6) Planeo de el dinero familiar......... 4 3 2 1
7) Estimacidn propia.............. ...... 4 3 2 1
8) Cuidado de los hijos................. 4 3 2 1

9) Conservacidn de energia en su casa

(luz, calor)........................ 4 3 2 1
10) Mantenimiento y reparaciones de su

casa.. ..... ............... ..... ..... 4 3 2 1
11) Tensidn y depresidn (nervios)....... 4 3 2 1
12) Cuidado de la salud................. 4 3 2 1
13) Dietas buenas para su salud......... 4 3 2 1

14) Conservacidh de la comida (congelada,
seca o enlatada).................... 4 3 2 1
15) Gastando menos en la compra de ali-

mentos.............................. 4 3 2 1

16) Control de peso y buena salud.. ..... 4 3 2 1
17) Desarrollo de liderazgo (dirigir y

organizar las juntas).............. 4 3 2 1
18) Asuntos pdblicos (aprender como

funciona el gobierno).............. 4 3 2 1
19) Como pueden comer mejor 1as familias

con poco dinero.................... 4 3 2 1
20) Otros . 4 3 2 1

 

' I
file gustaria participar en los programas que usted marco como de mucha necesidad?

Si NO Quizas

 

 

Si su respuesta a la pregunta anterior es NO 0 QUIZAS, dpodria usted decirme las
posibles razones por las cuales usted no esta segura de entrar en estos programas?

 

 

 

-72-

PART III Population Characteristics

Finally, I would like to ask you some personal questions. This information
will help me understand your responses to the above questions and it will give
some significance to the analysis of the findings.

AGAIN, ALL INFORMATION IS COMPLETELY CONFIDENTIAL.
(Please check the appropriate response.)
1) What is your present age?

Under 18
19-24

25-35

35-44

45-64

65 and Over

 

2) Your Sex: Male Female

3) Which is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?
Elementary School (6th Grade)

Junior High School (9th Grade)

Completed High School (12th Grade)

More than High School

4) Are you employed currently? Yes No

If yes, What is your occupation?

 

 

5) How many persons currently live in your household?
Number of Children (16 years and under)
Number of Adults

6) Are any of the adults in your family unemployed? Yes ____No
If yes, how many?

7) Would you select the income category which approximates your family income?
(yearly income for the adults in your household for 1984)
_____ less than $5,000
_____$5,000 - 9,999
_____$10,000 - 14,999
_____$15,000 - 19,999
_____ $20,000 - 24,999

$25,000 or more

Don't Know

-73-

PARTE III Caracteristicas de la poblacidn

Finalmente, me gustaria hacerle algunas preguntas personales. Esta informacidn
me ayudara'a’comprender su respuesta en las preguntas anteriores y dara improtan-
cia a los analisis de los resultados.

TODA LA INFORMACION ES COMPLETAMENTE CONFIDENCIAL.
Haga una g para marcar su respuesta.
1. CCual es su edad?

menos de 18 afios

19 - 24 afios
25 - 35 afios
35 - 44 afios
45 - 64 afios

mas de 65 afios

24 dCual es su sexo? Hombre Mujer

 

3. éCual es el mas alto nivel de educacidh que usted ha completado?
menos que elementary school
elementary school (6to grado)

junior high school (9no grado)

 

termind’la high school (12 grado)
después de high school
4. éEsta’usted trabajando? Si No

————-

' I I
dCual es su ocupacion?

 

. I r
5. dCuantas personas viven en su casa!

nifios menores de 16 anos

 

adultos

 

I
6. dHay algun desempleado en su familia? Si No

I
Si contesta que si, dcuantos?

 

7. Marque usted, por favor, e1 ingreso aproximado de su familia.
(la entrada de dinero en su casa para el afio 1984)

menos de $5,000 $20,000 - $24,999
$5,000 - $9,999 $25,000 0 mas
$10,000 - $14,999 no se

$15,000 - $19,999

-74-

8) How did you identify yourself?

Mexican—American
Puerto Rican
Cuban

Other Hispanic Heritage (please specify)

 

 

9) What is the most effective way to inform you and your family about
services provided by agencies in your community? (check one)
_____TV
_____Word of Mouth

Radio
____ Educational Talk (meetings)
Pamphlet

Local Newspaper

Other (please specify)

 

Thanks!
Use the pre-stamped and addressed envelop to return the questionnaire to:

I
Carmen Gonzalez

 

410 Agriculture Hall MSU
East Lansing, MI 48823

 

If you have any questions or problems in answering this questionnaire, please
call me at 355-5921, I will be happy to answer your questions.
(Please call after 2 o'clock in the afternoon.)

-75-

8. dCo’mo se identifica usted?
mexicano-americano
puertorriquefio
cubano

de otro origen hispano

 

' I I . .
9.($Cual seria la mejor forma de informarle a usted y a su fam1lia sobre
servicios que ofrecen las agencias en su comunidad o vecindario?

televisidh

por familiares o amigos

radio

platica educativa de informacidh 0 en juntas
panfletos

periddico local

otro

 

MUCHAS GRACIAS POR SU AYUDA

l O C I O C
Le mando un sobre con m1 d1recc1on para que me devuelva e1 cuestionar1o a la
. , I
Slguiente d1reccion: ’
Carmen Gonzalez

410 Agiculture Hall MSU ‘
East Lansinq, MI 48823

Si tiene alguna pregunta o duda de como contestar las preguntas, por favor,
llameme por teléfono a1 ndmero 355-5921, después de las 2 de la tarde y yo

I
con mucho gusto 1e atendere.

APPENDIX B

Key Informant Interview Schedule

All information is confidential, none of your responses will be associated
with your name.

PART I Awareness of Extension Services

Yes No
(circle one number)

1. Have you ever heard of the Ingham county or MSU
Cooperative Extension Service (CES)... some
people know of it as the Agricultural Extension
Service?............... ..... . ..................... Y N

2. Have ever heard of the

Agricultural or Marketing Program .......... .. Y N
4-H Youth Programs........................... Y N
Family living Education Program or Home Economics Y N
Natural Resource and Public Policy Program.... Y N
3. Do you think that CBS offers programs for you?..... Y N
4. Have you ever participated in Extension programs?.. Y N
5. a. Since the programs offered by the Extension services are mostly in

English, did you think that could be a problem for Hispanics to
participate in the programs?

Yes NO

 

 

b. Could you please, explain your answer?

 

 

-75-

.77..

PART II Programs offered by CES

Please use the following system to indicate the level of need or importance
for helping you in your daily life that you see as appropriate for each item
in the following sections.

A. Natural Resources and Public Policies assist in the wise development and
utilization of our natural resources, as well as provides public affairs

 

education.
Importance

High Moderate Low NO

Need Need Need Need
1. Development of wild life habitat ............ 4 3 2 1
2. Woodlot Management .......................... 4 3 2 1
3. Pond Management... ........ . ................. 4 3 2 1
4. Wood for energy...... ..... . ................. 4 3 2 1
5. Oil and gas development ............. . ....... 4 3 2 1
6. Maple syrup production .............. . ....... 4 3 2 1
7. Understanding local government ....... . ...... 4 3 2 1
8. Tax policies for state and local finance.... 4 3 2 1
9. Leadership training and development.... ..... 4 3 2 1
10. Land use planning and development.. ........ 4 3 2 1
11. Community development. .............. . ...... 4 3 2 1

12. Other

 

-78-

. 4-H programs are designed to provide unique experinces for the development
of young people. Programs are guided by the philosophy that Michigan's
most important resource is it's youth, and that today's young people will
tommorrow's leaders. 4-H programs are open to all youth groups and leaders.

Importance
High Moderate Low no
Need Need Need Need

\DanwLnJ-‘LDNH

N N N N H H r-o o--- r—- r—I r—n t-I v—- r—-
U.) N H O \O (I) \l O‘ U1 b L0 N 0—0 O
O O O O O

. Bicycling ...........................
. Crafts... ...........................

Careers .............................

Clowning .................. . .........

. Field crop production ....... . .......
. Dairy production ....... .... ........
. Dog care and training ...............
. Environmental education.. ...........
. Caring for kids...... ...............
. Foods and nutrition................
. Developing leadership in youth.....

. Livestock production ..... ..........

Raising goats......................

. Growing flowers, fruits and vegetables

Personal appearance ........ ........
Photography.......... ........... ...
Raising rabbits and poultry .........

.HOI'SES......... ooooo 00000 oooooooooo '-
. Entomoloty (insects)...............

. Shooting sports......... ...........

Family and group relation/stress...

. Working with handicappers ..........
. Other

 

bbbbbbbbbbbhbbbbbbbbbb

wwwuwwwwwwwwuwwwwwwwww

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

D—‘HHHD—‘HHHHHHHHHHHHHD—‘HHH

-79-

C. Agriculture and Marketing programs are designed to help growers produce
efficiently, assure adequate supplies of high-quality agrucutural pro—
ducts, maintain profitable farm operations and keep the state's billion—
dollars-plus agriculture industry competitive in national and world mark-
ets. The same knowledge and expertise available to commercial agricul—
ture is offered also to small farmers and home and yard clientele in a
context relevant to their specific needs.

 

Importance

High Moderate Low No

Need Need .EEEQ. Need
1. Home vegetable production..... ...... 4 3 2 1
2. Home fruit production ............... 4 3 2 1
3. Landscape maintenance ............... 4 3 2 1
4. Indoor plants ....................... 4 3 2 1
5. Organic gardening ................... 4 3 2 1
6. Farm land preservation ........ . ..... 4 3 2 1
7. Soil conservation ................... 4 3 2 1
8. Livestock production ................ 4 3 2 1
9. Crop production.......... ........... 4 3 2 1
10. Farmer to consumer marketing.. ..... 4 3 2 1
11. Commercial fruit, vegetable and turf 4 3 2 1
12. Greenhouse for house plants........ 4 3 2 1
13. Agriculture commodity marketing.... 4 3 2 1
14. Pesticide use in the home and garden 4 3 2 1
15. Pesticide use on farm....... ....... 4 3 2 1
16. Farm taxes .............. ........ .. 4 3 2 1
17. Property and inheritance state planning 4 3 2 1
18. Raising pleasure horses............ 4 3 2 1
19. Farm business management.... ....... 4 3 2 1
20. Understanding soil testing ......... 4 3 2 1

21. Other

 

-80-

D. Home Economics have educational programs designed to help families identi-
fy needs and offer education for improving the quality of life at home and
in the community.

Importance
High Moderate Low No
Need Need Need Need

 

1. Coping with inflation ...................... 4 3 2 1
2. Changing values and life styles ............ 4 3 2 1
3. Planning for retirement...... .............. 4 3 2 1
4. Marketing home produced good and services.. 4 3 2 1
5. Coping with unemployment ............. . ..... 4 3 2 1
6. Family financial planning .................. 4 3 2 1
7. Self-esteem........... ..................... 4 3 2 1
8. Parenting ........... .... ................... 4 3 2 1
9. Home energy conservation.... ............... 4 3 2 1
10. Home maintenance and repaires ............. 4 3 2 1
11. Stress and depression............. ...... .. 4 3 2 1
12. Health care......... ..... .... ........ ..... 4 3 2 1
13. Healthy diets............................. 4 3 2 1
14. Food preservation (frozen, drying, canning). 4 3 2 1
15. Cutting food costs.......................... 4 3 2 1
16. Weight control and fitness ................. 4 3 2 1
17. Leadership development ....... .............. 4 3 2 1
18. Public affairs................... ..... ..... 4 3 2 1
19. Management of food for low-income families. 4 3 2 1

20. Other

 

Participation in the Extension programs is voluntary and at no cost for the
participants. The activities are held locally in the community.

Did you think that the Hispanics would like to participate in the programs
that you identify as highly needed?

 

 

Yes 1 No Maybe

 

If no, why?

-81-

PART III Characteristis of the population

Finally, I would like to ask some questions about yourself. This information
will help me understand your responses to the above questions and it will gi—
ve some significance to the analysis of the findings.

AGAIN, ALL INFORMATION IS COMPLETELY CONFIDENTIAL.

1. What is your present age?
under 18
19 -24
25-35
36 - 44
45 - 64

65 and over

 

2. Your sex? Male Female

 

3. Which is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?
Less than a high school graduate
completed high school (12th grade)
some college or post- high school training
completed college

college beyond a bachellor's degree

 

4. What is your present occupation?
semi-skilled worker or apprentice craftman
salesworker or clerical/office worker
skilled worker, craftman or foreman

*

manager or proprietor
professional or technical worker
unemployed

other

 

5. How many years have you been involved in this community?

Years

 

-82-

6. HOw did you identify yourself?
Mexican-american
Puerto Rican
Cuban

Other Hispanic heritage

 

 

7. Which is the most effective way to inform you about services provided
by agencies in the community?

TV

word of mouth

______ radio
educational talk (meetings)
pamphlet
local newspaper

other

 

In your opinion, what things inhibit Hispanic participation in CES programs?

 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX C

Sample Cover Letter for the Mail Questionnaires

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL & EXTENSION EDUCATION —

410 AGRICULTURE HALL 0 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1039
(517) 3355-6580

  
   

  

namcuuum
wwg~'hnmmwswunw

STAT
UNIV! RSIV V

March 22, 1985.

Hello!

The enclosed questionnaire is a part of my graduate program at Michigan
State University. Since I am also Hispanic, I feel it is important to help
in the gathering of useful information for planning future programs that
approaches the needs of the Hispanics. Your help is vital to the success of
the study.

The Cooperative Extension Service (CES) is an educational agency whose
purpose is to disseminate the knowledge base from the Universities to the
public in a practical manner and in a way to help people help themselves.
The main purpose of this study is to identfy the educational needs of the
Hispanics based on the programs offered by the CES. You can express your
thoughts in a county-wide research study.

You are one of 290 persons selected to receive this question-
naire. Responses from you are needed so that the overall survey findings
are representative of the Hispanic population in the Ingham county. Would
you please take a few minutes and fill it out? Please, return it to me in
the enclosed, self-addressed, stamped envelop by April 12 . All information
is confidential, none of your responses will be associated with your name.

Thank you very much for your help.

Sincerely yo rs;

/
?. 71ml: '7‘? €in I 42‘ / ”I 4,2 2 71‘) /
Father T :ma ¢Mc 09k [[27/1._,;/{r )é / X'l’fi/ZLE;

’/
Cristo Rey Church Carmen Gonzalez
, I
‘ 4%
ose A. Lop 2, Editor

 

quy‘ navides, Director "El Renacimiento" Newspaper
Cristo Rey Community Center

W?“ NZ ”’3'
astor 61 dishl

7th Day Adventist Church
r83—

MSU Is an Affirmarrve AcerEouaI Opponmrry Inst/(won

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL & EXTENSION EDUCATION —

410 AGRICULTURE HALL 0 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1039
(517) 3556580

  
   

  

AGRICULTURAL
“f???“ EXTENSION EDUCATION

A
UNIVf RS!“

22 de marzo de 1985.

Ola!

El siguiente cuestionario es parte de mis estudios graduados en Michigan
State University. Siendo yo tambiéh de origen hispano, considero que es
importante e1 obtener informacioh para el planeo de futuros programas que
sirvan las necesidades de los hispanos. Su ayuda es necesaria para el exito
del estudio.

Los Servicios de Extensidh tienen e1 proposito de hacer llegar el conoci-
miento desarrollado en las Universidades al publico en general de forma prat-
tica. El proposito principal de este estudio es el de identificar las nece-
sidades educacionales de los hispanos en base a los programas que ofrecen los
Servicios de Extensidh. Usted puede decir su opinidh en este estudio.

Usted es uno de 290 personas seleccionadas para recibir este
cuestionario. Sus contestaciones son necesarias para que los resultados
representen la opinioh de los hispanos en el condado de Ingham. ([Podria usted
llenar el cuestionario?, solo 1e tomarafunos minutos. Por favor, devuelva los
papeles en el sobre que envio para el 12 de abril. Toda la informacioh es
completamente confidencial, ninguna de sus contestaciones seran asociadas con
su nombre.

Muchas gracias por su ayuda.

Sinceramentej /

I ’ z,
5"? 10133.? mi flz/zfdilfr'( é/’c"t<i/gfl é;
Padre Tomas McCloske r c/ C)

Iglesia Cristo Rey Carmen Gonzalez

/~ I
__ I é’é“;
Jose A. ez, Editor
T y enavides, Director

Periodico El Renacimiento
Cristo Rey Community Center

‘ /
’fiz aw! an?
Pasor ul Go zal z

Iglesia Adventista del 7mo Dia
-84-

MSU :s on Affirmative Acton/Equal 0000an Insmutnon

APPENDIX D

Sample First Follow-Up/Reminder Card

 

 

Thanks for your cooperation in completing the questionnaire 1
recently sent to you. Your response will help in developing
programs specifically for Hispanics.

Singerely;

I/ ’”
(W4. 141/1 "27/2257,
" )4

'O (’3
Carmen Gonzalez L/’

 

PS .
If you have not yet completed the questionnaire, please
complete it and put it in the mail today. Thanks.

 

 

 

Gracias por su ayuda al llenar el cuestionario que recientemente
. l I . .
le env1e. Su respuesta ayudara a desarrollar programas espec1f1ca-

mente para hispanos.

.Sinceramente;
. ff.
(:jggaztc8a'éézgzz' ;
I (9
Carmen Gonza ez

. . . I
51 usted aun no ha contestado el cuestionario, le agradeceria
mucho que lo hiciera y lo enviara por correo lo antes posible.
Muchas gracias.

pd

 

 

-35-

APPENDIX E

Sample Second Follow-Up/Reminder Letter

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL 8: EXTENSION EDUCATION _

410 AGRICULTURE HALL 0 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1039
(517) 355-6580

megs," exrsusmnmucmou

S
UHVERSI T V

 

April 22, 1985.

Hello!

We have had a very satisfying response from the sampled members of the
Hispanic community. The information will be useful for helping plan programs
which people in the community say are important.

Perhaps the first questionnaire which we sent to you was lost or mis-
placed. We have enclosed another copy for your convenience in replying.
Your ideas and opinions are important. All information is confidential;
none of your responses will be associated with your name. Would you please
take a few minutes and fill it out? Then, return it to me in the enclosed,
self-addressed, stamped envelop by May 10.

Thank you very much for your help which is a way to help the Hispanic

community.

Sincerely:

/
[45452.2( :1 fiftiflfll/é
J a

I
Carmen Gonzalez

-35-

MSU Is an Am/marrve Aaron/Equal 0000an InSMUYIOn

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL 81 EXTENSION EDUCATION —

410 AGRICULTURE HALL 0 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48824-1039
(517) 3556580

  
 

  

asmcuuum
ismusnou EDUCATION

STA? '
U’NVFRSI I V

  

22 de abril de 1985.

Hola!

Hemos recibido una buena respuesta de la seleccidn de hispanos en la
comunidad. La informacidn sera de gran ayuda para hacer programas educa-
cionales en base a lo que personas en la comunidad han dicho que es impor-
tante o necesario.

Quizas el primer cuestionario enviado se haya perdido, por lo que ad—
junto enviamos otra copia para su conveniencia. Sus ideas y opiniones son
importantes. Toda informacidh es confidencial ninguna de sus contestaciones
serah asociadas con su nombre. Por favor,<£podria usted tomar unos minutos
para llenar el cuestionario? Luego devuelva los papeles en el sobre que
envio para el 10 de mayo.

Muchas gracias por su ayuda, 1a cual es una forma de ayudar a los

hispanos en la comunidad.

Sinceramente:

/
flame/I ”469%;

I
Carmen Gonzalez

~87—

MSU Is an Afllrmarme Acum/Ewal Omorfuntry Insmuraon

APPENDIX F

Respondent's Data

Respondent's data

Part I Use and Awareness of Extension and its Programs

Question # 1

Have you ever heard of the Ingham County or MSU Cooperative Extension
Service (CES) some people know of it as the Agricultural Extension

 

Egy informants

 

Service?
Responses Mail respondents
(n=56)
Yes 27 (48.2%) 13
No 29 (51.8%) 3

Question # 2
Have you ever heard of the
A. Agricultural or Marketing Program?

Responses (n=53)

Yes 23 (43.4%) 9
NO 30 (56.6%) 6
B. 4-H YOuth Program?

Responses (n=54)

Yes 42 (77.8%) ‘ 14
No 12 (22.2%) 2
C. Family Living Education Program or Home Economics?
Responses (n=52)

Yes 25 (48.1%) 9
NO 27 (51.9%) 6
D. Natural Resources and Public Policy Program?
Responses (n=54)

Yes 20 (37.0%) 3
No 19 (45.2%) 11
Question # 3

Do you think that CES offers programs for you?
Responses (n=62)

Yes 23 (54.8%) 9
No 19 (45.2%) 3
Quesion # 4

Have you ever participated in Extension Programs?
Responses (n=55)

Yes 9 (16.4%) 6
NO 46 (83.6%) 9

The following questions were not included in the interview schedule for

the key informant.

-88-

(n=l6)
(81.3%)
(18.8%)

(n=15)
(60.0%)
(40.0%)

(n=l6)
(87.5%)
(12.5%)

(n=15)
(60.0%)
(40.0%)

(n=14)
(21.4%)
(78.6%)

(n=12)
(75.0%)
(25.0%)

(n=15)
(40.0%)
(60.0%)

—89-

Question # 5
In the past two (2) years, have you or your family
A. Visited or called the Extension Service?

 

Responses Mail respondents
(n=ll)

Yes 3 (27.3%)

No 8 (72.7%)

B. Received an Extension Bulletin or Newsletter?

Responses (n=11)

Yes 3 (27.3%)

No 8 (72.7%)

C. Listened to an Extension Radio or TV program?

Responses (n=12)

Yes 6 (50.0%)

NO 6 (50.0%)

D. Read Extension articles in the newspaper?

Responses (n=ll)

Yes 6 (54.5%)

NO 5 (45.5%)

E. Attended an Extension sponsored meeting?

Responses (hill)

Yes 3 (27.3%)

NO 8 (72.7%)

F. Served as Volunteer or Planning Committee?

Responses (n=ll)

Yes 1 ( 9.1%)

No 10 (90.9%)

G. Served as a 4-H leader?

Responses (n=ll)

Yes 0

No 11 (100%)

Question # 6
How often did you usually participate in the Extension programs?

Responses (n=30)

2 or 3 times a month 3 (10.0%)
once a month 1 ( 3.3%)
about 6 times a year 1 ( 3.3%)
less than 6 times a year 2 ( 6.7%)
not at all 23 (76.7%)

-90..

Question # 7
Opinion about some Extension programs
A. Participation

1. Master gardener program

 

Responses Mail reppondents
(n=25)
Yes 2 ( 8.0%)
No 22 (88.0%)
2. 4-H Winter program
Responses (n=25)
Yes 3 (12.0%)
No 22 (88.0%)
3. Family living news notes for the new year
Responses (n=26)
Yes 4 (15.4%)
No 22 (84.6%)
4. EFNEP Newsletter with recipes
Responses (n=25)
Yes 7 (28.0%)
NO 18 (72.0%)
B. Quality
1. Master gardener program
Responses (n=3)
Poor 0
Fair 1 (33.3%)
Good 2 (66.7%)
Excellent 0

2. 4-H winter programs
Responses (n=3)
Poor
Fair
Good
Excellent

(100%)

OWOO

3. Family Living news notes for the new year

Responses (n=3)
Poor 0

Fair 1 (33.3%)
Good 2 (66.7%)
Excellent 0

4. EFNEP Newsletter with recipes

Responses (n=6)
Poor 0

Fair 1 (16.7%)
Good 4 (66.7%)

Excellent 1 (19.7%)

-9le

Question # 8
Where will be the most convenient place for you to participate in the
Extension meetings?

 

Responses Mail respondents
(n=24)

in my home 3 (12.5%)

at Cristo Rey Community Center 9 (37.5%)

Walnut St. School 0

Mason Farm Bureau 1 ( 4.2%)

Capitol Federal Savings Bank 5 (20.8%)

Township Hall 1 ( 4.2%)

at Church facilities 3 (12.5%)

other 2 (8.3%)

Question # 9
Since the programs offered by the Extension Service are mostly in
English, does this hinder your participation?

Responses (n=27)
Yes 4 (14.8%)
No 23 (85.2%)

Question # 5 (key informant interview schedule)

a. Since the programs offered by the Extension Service are mostly in
English, did you think that could be a problem for Hispanics to
participate in the programs?

 

Responses Key informants
(n=14)

Yes 13 (92.9%)

No l ( 7.1%)

b. Could you please, explain your answer?

Responses

—not all Hispanics know English

- there is a language barrier (bilingual problems)

-many of the older Hispanic living in the community do not speak
English very well

-some are not able to speak very well English to participate in
programs (n=6)

-people are isolated because they don't understand

-Hispanics feel more comfortable in their own language

-92-

Part II Importance of Extension programs

Question # A Need for the Natural Resource and Public Policy program

topic areas

1. Development of wild life habitat

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=51) 7' (n=14)
No need 6 (11.8%) 4 (28.6%)
Low need 9 (17.6%) 4 (28.6%)
Moderate need 18 (35.3%) 3 (21.4%)
High need 18 (35.3%) 3 (21.4%)
2. Woodlot management
Responses (n=52) (n=14)
No need 6 (11.5%) 4 (28.6%)
Low need 14 (26.9%) 5 (35.7%)
Moderate need 13 (25.0%) 2 (14.3%)
High need 19 (36.5%) 3 (21.4%)
3. Pond management
Responses (n=47) (n=14)
No need 6 (12.8%) 4 (28.6%)
Low need 14 (29.8%) 5 (35.7%)
Moderate need 18 (38.3%) 3 (21.4%)
High need 9 (19.1%) 2 (14.3%)
4. Wood for energy
Responses (n=53) (n=15)
No need 5 ( 9.4%) 4 (26.7%)
Low need 6 (11.3%) 2 (l3l3%)
Moderate need 22 (41.5%) 8 (53.3%)
High need 20 (37.7%) 1 ( 6.7%)
5.011 and gas development
Responses (n=51) (n=14)
No need 5 ( 9.8%) 4 (28.6%)
Low need 6 (11.8%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 13 (25.5%) - 6 (42.9%)
High need 27 (52.9%) 3 (21.4%)
6. Maple syrup production
Responses (n=51) (n=14)
No need 6 (11.8%) 5 (35.7%)
Low need 18 (35.3%) 8 (57.1%)
Moderate need 18 (35.3%) 1 ( 7.1%)
High need 9 (17.6%)
7. Understanding local government
Responses (n=52) (n=15)
No need 2 ( 3.8%) 3 (20.0%)
Low need 2 ( 3.8%)
Moderate need 17 (32.7%) 4 (26.7%)
HIgh need 31 (59.6%) 8 (53.3%)

 

 

-93-

8. Tax policies for state and local finance

 

 

Responses Mail reppondents Key_informants
(n=52) (n=l3)

No need 3 ( 5.8%) 3 (23.1%)

Low need 5 ( 9.6%)

Moderate need 15 (28.8%) 4 (30.8%)

High need 29 (55.8%) 6 (46.2%)

9. Leadership training and development

Responses (n=50) (n=l6)

No need 3 ( 6.0%) 3 (18.8%)

Low need 5 (10.0%) 1 ( 6.3%)

Moderate need 13 (26.0%) 1 ( 6.3%)

HIgh need 29 (58.0%) 11 (68.8%)

10. Land use planning and management

Responses (n=51) (n=14)

No need 2 ( 3.9%) 4 (28.6%0

Low need 10 (19.6%) 2 (14.3%)

Moderate need 15 (29.4%) 5 (21.4%)

11. Community development

Responses (n=53) (n=l6)

No need 0 3 (18.8%)

Low need 3 ( 5.7%) 0

Moderate need 22 (41.5%) 1 ( 6.3%)

High need 28 (52.8%) 12 (75.0%)

12. Other (small business development)

Responses (n=8)

No need 1 (12.5%)

Low need 1 (12.5%)

Moderate need 0

High need 6 (75.0%)

Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as
having a high need?

Responses (n=57)

Yes 21 (36.8%)
No 15 (26.3%)
Maybe 21 (36.8%)

It your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible
reasons why you are unwilling to take adevantage of the programs?

Responses

-I got to many responsibilities from my job n=l
-too busy, don't have time n=15
-not interested at the moment, maybe in the future n=2
-would have to know more ditails of the various programs n=3
-too old to participate n=4
—work at night n=2

-94-

Question # B Need for the 4-H Youth program topic areas

1. Bycicling
Responses

No need

Low need
Moderate need
High need

2. Crafts
Responses

No need

Low need
Moderate need
High need

3. Careers
Responses

No need

Low need
Moderate need
High need

4. Clowning
Responses

No need

Low need
Moderate need
High need

5. Field crop production
Responses

No need

Low need

Moderate need

High need

6. Dairy production
Responses

No need

Low need

Moderate need

High need

7. Dog care and training
Responses

No need

Low need

Moderate need

High need

Mail respondents

 

2
13
21
15

12
20
17

26
16

23
18

15
17
12

(n=51)

( 3.9%)
(25.5%)
(41.2%)
(29.4%)

(n=49)

(24.5%)
(40.8%)
(34.7%)

(n=49)

( 2.0%)
( 6.1%)
(14.3%)
(77.6%)

(n=46)

(17.4%)
(34.8%)
(28.3%)
(19.6%)

(n=50)

( 4.0%)
(12.0%)
(52.0%)
(32.0%)

(n=50)
( 4.0%)
(14.0%)
(46.0%)
(36.0%)

(n=49)

(10.2%)
(30.2%)
(34.7%)
(24.5%)

Key

informants

 

DUDU'I

\l

13

093ml"

P‘GDP‘F‘

NU‘J—‘H

(n=12)

(41.7%)
(25.0%)
(33.3%)

(n=l3)

(15.4%)
(53.8%)
(30.8%)

(n=14)
(7.1%)

(92.9%)

(n=12)
( 8.3%)
(66.7%)
(25.0%)

(n=ll)

(72.7%)
(27.3%)

(n=11)
( 9.1%)
( 9.1%)
(72.7%)
(9.1%)

(n=12)

( 8.3%)
(33.3%)
(41.7%)
(16.7%)

-95-

8. Environmental education

 

 

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=47) (n=12)
No need 1 ( 2.1%) 1 ( 8.3%}
Low need 4 ( 8.5%) l ( 8.3%)
Moderate need 15 (31.9%) 2 (16.7%)
HIgh need 27 (57.4%) 8 (66.7%)
9.Caring for kids
Responses (n=50) (n=15)
No need 1 ( 2.0%) l ( 6.7%)
Low need 2 ( 4.0%)
Moderate need 12 (24.0%) 3 (20.0%)
High need 35 (70.0%) 11 (73.3%)
10. Foods and nutrition
Responses (n=49) (n=l6)
No need 1 ( 2.0%) l ( 6.3%)
Low need 0 0
Moderate need 10 (20.4%) 0
High need 38 (77.6%) 15 (93.8%)
11. Developing leadership in youth
Responses (n=50) (n=l6)
No need 1 ( 2.0%) 1 ( 6.3%)
Low need 2 ( 4.0%)
Moderate need 10 (20.0%)
High need 37 (74.0%) 15 (93.8%)
12. Livestock production
Responses (n=51) (n=12)
No need 5 ( 9.8%) 1 ( 8.3%)
Low need 9 (l7 . 67.0 4 (33 . 3%)
Moderate need 22 (43.1%) 6 (50.0%)
High need 15 (29.4%) 1 ( 8.3%)
13. Raising goats
Responses (n=47) (n=12)
No need 7 (14.9%) 1 ( 8.3%)
Low need 14 (29.8%) 4 (33.3%)
Moderate need 20 (42.9%) 5 (41.7%)
High need 6 (12.8%) 2 (16.7%)
14. Growing flowers, fruits and vegetables
Responses (n=52) (n=14)
No need 1 ( 7.1%)
Low need 5 ( 9.6%) l ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 24 (46.2%) 6 (37.5%)
High need 23 (44.2%) 6 (37.5%)

-96-

15. Personal appearance

 

Responses Mail respondenpg
(n=48)
No need
Low need 5 (10.4%)
Moderate need 17 (35.4%)
High need 26 (54.2%)
16. Photography
Responses (n=50)
No need 1 ( 2.0%)
Low need 13 (26.0%)
Moderate need 24 (48.0%)
High need 12 (24.0%)
17. Raising rabbits and poultry
Responses (n=49)
No need 8 (16.3%)
Low need 10 (20.4%)
Moderate need 23 (46.9%)
High need 8 (16.3%)
18. Horses
Responses (n=51)
No need 8 (15.7%)
Low need 13 (25.5%)
Moderate need 21 (41.2%)
High need 9 (17.6%)
19. Entomology (insects)
Responses (n=48)
No need 9 (18.8%)
Low need 14 (29.2%)
Moderate need 15 (31.3%)
High need 10 (20.8%)
20. Shooting sports
Responses (n=46)
No need 10 (21.7%)
Low need 12 (26.1%)
Moderate need 17 (37.0%)
High need 7 (15.2%)
21. Family and group relation/stress
Responses (n=52)
No need
Low need 3 ( 5.8%)
Moderate need 10 (19.2%)

High need 39 (75.0%)

Key informants

 

£~\Jh‘k‘

O‘b

O‘b

I—‘U‘J—‘N NU‘IUJN

I-JI-‘CDN

l

1

(n=l3)
( 7.7%)
( 7.7%)
(53.8%)
(30.8%)

(n=14)

(28.6%)
(42.9%)
(28.6%)

(n=ll)

(36.4%)
(54.5%)
( 9.1%)

(n=12)

(16.7%)
(25.0%)
(41.7%)
(16.7%)

(n=12)
(16.7%)
(33.3%)
(41.7%)
( 8.3%)

(n=12)
(16.7%)
(66.7%)
( 8.3%)
( 8.3%)

(n=15)
( 6.7%)

(6.7%)

13 (81.3%)

-97-

22. Working with handicappers

 

 

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=51) (n=14)

No need 1 ( 2.0%) l ( 7.1%)

Low need 5 ( 9.8%) l ( 7.1%)

Moderate need 20 (39.2%) 7 (50.0%)

High need 25 (49.0%) 5 (35.7%)

23. Other (moral and values; child abuse)

Responses (n=10)

No need 1 (10.0%)

Low need

Moderate need 3 (30.0%)

High need 4 (40.0%)

Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as
high need?

Responses (n=58)
Yes 19 (32.8%)
No 19 (32.8%)
Maybe 20 (34.5%)

If your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible
reasons why you are unwilling to take advantage of these programs?

Responses
-not interested n=2
-"I offer services a number of years ago in our area and

I was "turned—off" as I was not an "old" 4-H person." n=1
-"1 am a shy introverted person and feel unconfortable

meeting people." n=l
-depends of schedule available n=l
—need more information n=1
-no time available, too busy (limited off-work time) n=5
—kids too young n=2
—would participate if my children get involved n=2

-98-

Question # C Need for the Agriculture and Marketing program topic areas

1. Home vegetable production

 

 

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=55) (n=14)
No need 2 ( 3.6%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Low need 3 ( 5.5%) 2 (14.3%)
Moderate need 20 (36.4%) 2 (14.3%)
High need 30 (54.5%) 9 (64.3%)
2. Home fruit production
Responses (n=55) (n=l3)
No need 1 ( 1.8%) 1 ( 7.7%)
Low need 4 ( 7.3%) 2 (15.4%)
Moderate need 21 (38.2%) 2 (15.4%)
High need 29 (52.7%) 8 (61.5%)
3. Landscape maintenance
Responses (n=54) (n=14)
No need 3 ( 5.6%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Low need 7 (13.0%) 4 (28.6%)
Moderate need 26 (48.1%) 6 (42.9%)
High need 18 (33.3%) 3 (21.4%)
4. Indoor plants
Responses (n=52) (n=14)
No need 1 ( 1.9%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Low need 17 (32.7%) 5 (35.7%)
Moderate need 20 (38.5%) 6 (42.9%)
High need 14 (26.9%) 2 (14.3%)
5. Organic gardening
Responses (n=51) (n=l3)
No need 2 ( 3.9%) 1 ( 7.7%)
Low need 7 (13.7%) 3 (23.1%)
Moderate need 17 (33.3%) 2 (15.4%)
High need 25 (49.0%) 7 (53.8%)
6. Farm land preservation
Responses (n=49) (n=l3)
No need 4 ( 8.2%) 3 (23.1%)
Low need 2 ( 4.1%) 1 ( 7.7%)
Moderate need 17 (34.7%) 3 (23.1%)
High need 26 (53.1%) 6 (46.2%)
7. Soil conservation
Responses (n=52) (n=l3)
No need 4 ( 7.7%) 2 (15.4%)
Low need 3 ( 5.8%) 4 (30.8%)
Moderate need 14 (26.9%) 1 ( 7.7%)
High need 31 (59.6%) 6 (46.2%)

-99-

8. Livestock production

 

Responses Mail respondents
(n=50)
No need 4 ( 8.0%)
Low need 5 (10.0%)
Moderate need 23 (46.0%)
High need 18 (36.0%)
9. Crop production
Responses (n=50)
No need 3 ( 6.0%)
Low need 5 (10.0%)
Moderate need 17 (34.0%)
High need 25 (50.0%)
10. Farmer to consumer marketing
Responses (n=51)
No need 3 ( 5.9%)
Low need 4 ( 7.8%)
Moderate need 19 (37.3%)
High need 25 (49.0%)
11. Commercial fruit, vegetables and turf
Responses (n=50)
No need 4 ( 8.0%)
Low need 5 (10.0%)
Moderate need 23 (46.0%)
High need 18 (36.0%)
12. Greenhouse for house plants
REsponses (n=52)
No need 3 ( 5.8%)
Low need 13 (25.0%)
Moderate need 22 (42.3%)
High need 14 (26.9%)
13. Agriculture commodity market
Responses (n=50)
No need 4 ( 8.0%)
Low need 4 ( 8.0%)
Moderate need 19 (38.0%)
High need 23 (46.0%)
14. Pesticide use on the farm
Responses (n=51)
No need 3 ( 5.9%)
Low need 3 ( 5.9%)
Moderate need 23 (45.1%)
High need 22 (43.1%)

Kev informants

 

WNNN bJ-‘L‘H DUIUOI-J O‘UJNLIO LIJU'I-I-‘I—I NU‘leU-I

MWUI—I

(n=l3)

(23.1%)
(23.1%)
(38.5%)
(15.4%)

(n=l3)

( 7.7%)

(30.8%)
(38.5%)
(23.1%)

(n=14)

(21.4%)
(14.3%)
(21.4%)
(42.9%)

(n=l3)
( 7.7%)
(23.1%)
(38.5%)
(30.8%)

(n=l3)

( 7.7%)
(30.8%)
(30.8%)
(30.8%)

(n=14)

(14.3%)
(14.3%)
(50.0%)
(21.4%)

(n=12)
( 8.3%)
(25.0%)
(25.0%)
(41.7%)

-100-

15. Pesticide use in the house and garden

 

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=53) (n=l3)
No need 3 ( 5.7%) l ( 7.7%)
Low need 5 ( 9.4%) 2 (15.4%)
Moderate need 23 (43.4%) 4 (30.8%)
High need 22 (41.5%) 6 (46.2%)
16. Farm taxes
Responses (n=47) (n=14)
No need 2 ( 4.3%) 3 (21.4%)
Low need 8 ( 7.0%) 2 (14.3%)
Moderate need 18 (38.3%) 4 (28.6%)
High need 19 (40.4%) 5 (35.7%)
17. Property and inheritance state planning
Responses (n=51) (n=l3)
No need 4 ( 7.8%) 2 (15.4%)
Low need 5 ( 9.8%) 4 (30.8%)
Moderate need 21 (41.2%) 3 (23.1%)
High need 21 (41.2%) 4 (23.1%)
18. Raising pleasure horses
Responses (n=50) (n=l3)
No need 8 (16.0%) 5 (38.5%)
Low need 18 (36.0%) 3 (23.1%)
Moderate need 19 (38.0%) 3 (23.1%)
High need 5 (10.0%) 2 (15.4%)
19. Farm business management
Responses (n=48) (n=14)
No need 4 ( 8.3%) 2 (14.3%)
Low need 5 (10.4%) 3 (21.4%)
Moderate need 16 (33.3%) 5 (35.7%)
High need 23 (47.9%) 4 (28.6%)
20. Understanding soil testing
Responses (n=52) (n=14)
No need 5 ( 9.6%) 2 (14.3%)
Low need 6 (11.5%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 20 (38.5%) 5 (35.7%)
High need 21 (40.4%) 6 (42.9%)
Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as
high need?
Responses (n=53)
Yes 14 (26.4%)
No 20 (37.7%)
Maybe 19 (35.8%)

-101-

If your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible
reasons why you are unwilling to take advantage of these programs?

Responses

-1 can't get involved because of time constraints n=2
-not a farmer n=1
-not interested in growing things n=1
-too many farmers are in financial trouble n=1

Question # D Need for the Home economic program topic areas

l.Coping with inflation

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=54) (n=14)
No need 0' 2 (14.3%)
Low need 2 ( 3.7%) 0
Moderate need 17 (31.5%) 2 (14.3%)
High need 35 (64.8%) 1 (71.4%)
2. Changing values and life styles
Responses (n=53) (n=14)
No need 0 l ( 7.1%)
Low need 3 ( 5.7%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 20 (37.7%) 3 (21.4%)
High need 30 (56.6%) 9 (64.3%)
3. Planning for retirement
Responses (n=54) (n=15)
No need 1 ( 1.9%) 2 (13.3%)
Low need 3 ( 5.6%) 1 ( 6.7%)
Moderate need 16 (29.6%) 1 ( 6.7%)
High need 34 (63.0%) 1 (73.3%)
4. Marketing home produced goods and services
Responses (n=51) (n=ll)
No need 2 ( 3.9%) 0
Low need 7 (13.7%) 2 (18.2%)
Moderate need 28 (54.9%) 3 (27.3%)
High need 14 (27.5%) 6 (54.5%)
5. Coping with unemployment
Responses (n=50) (n=14)
No need 2 ( 4.0%) 2 (14.3%)
Low need 5 (10.0%) 1 ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 11 (22.0%) 1 ( 7.1%)
High need 32 (64.0%) 0 (71.4%)
6. Family financial planning ( )
Responses (n=52) n=15
No need 2 ( 3.8%) 1 ( 6.7%)
Low need 4 ( 7.7%) 0
Moderate need 10 (19.2%) 1 ( 6.7%)
High need 36 (69.2%) 13 (86.7%)

 

7. Self-esteem

 

-102-

Mail respondents

 

Responses

No need 2
Low need 3
Moderate need 11
High need 37
8. Parenting

Responses

No need 2
Low need 5
Moderate need 6
High need 39
9. Home energy conservation
Responses

No need 0
Low need 2
Moderate need 17
High need 34
10. Home maintenance and repairs
Responses

No need 1
Low need 3
Moderate need 23
High need 26
11. Stress and depression
Responses

No need 2
Low need 2
Moderate need 13
High need 37
12. Health care

Responses

No need 0
Low need 1
Moderate need 14
High need 38
13. Healthy diets

Responses

No need 2
Low need 2
Moderate need 17
High need 33

(n=53)
( 3.8%)
( 5.7%)
(20.8%)
(69.8%)

(n=52)

( 3.8%)
( 9.6%)
(11.5%)
(75.0%)

(n=53)

( 3.8%)
(32.1%)
(64.2%)

(n=54)
( 3.7%)
( 3.7%)
(24.1%)

(68. 5%)

(n=53)

( 1.9%)
(26.4%)
(71.7%)

(n=54)

( 3.7%)
( 3.7%)
(31.5%)
(61.1%)

Key informants

 

OWON \OI—‘NO (DWI-IO NI—‘ON NI—‘ON

CID-DON

I—‘I—‘ON

(n=15)
(13.3%)

(n=15)
(13.3%)

(n=12)

( 8.3%)
(25.0%)
(66.7%)

(n=12)
(16.7%)

(8.3%)
(75.0%)

(n=15)

(13.3%)
(20.0%)
(66.7%)
(n=14)

(14.3%)
(28.6%)
(57.1%)

(n=14)
(14.3%)

14. Food preservation

Responses

 

-103-

Mail respondents

 

Key informants

 

\IUION I-‘I—‘I-‘N MOON OJ-‘OH \OI-‘NH

\OOJON

(n=13)

( 7.7%)
(15.4%)
( 7.7%)
(69.2%)

(n=15)
( 6.7%)

(26.7%)
(66.7%)

(n=13)
(15.4%)

(46.2%)
(38.5%)

(n=15)

(13.3%)
( 6.7%)
( 6.7%)
(73.3%)

(n=14)
(14.3%)
(35.7%)
(50.0%)
(n=14)
(14.3%)

(21.4%)
(64.3%)

(n=53)
No need 0
Low need 3 ( 5.7%)
Moderate need 22 (41.5%)
High need 28 (52.8%)
15. Cutting food costs
Responses (n=52)
No need 0
Low need 5 ( 9.6%)
Moderate need 16 (30.8%)
High need 31 (59.6%)
16. Weight control and fitness
Responses (n=56)
No need 0
Low need 4 ( 7.1%)
Moderate need 15 (26.8%)
High need 37 (66.1%)
17. Leadership development
Responses (n=51)
No need 2 ( 3.9%)
Low need 2 ( 3.9%)
Moderate need 21 (41.2%)
High need 26 (51.0%)
18. Public affairs
Responses (n=52)
No need 1 ( 1.9%)
Low need 2 ( 3.8%)
Moderate need 19 (36.5%)
High need 30 (57.7%)
19. Management of food for low-income families
Responses (n=54)
No need 2 ( 3.7%)
Low need 2 ( 3.7%)
Moderate need 13 (24.1%)
High need 37 (68.5%)
Would you like to participate in the programs that you selected as
high need?
Responses (n=51)
Yes 20 (39.2%)
No 11 (21.6%)
Maybe 20 (39.2%)

-104-

If your answer is NO or MAYBE, could you share with me the possible
reasons why you are unwilling to take advantage of these programs?

Responses

-too old to participate n=2
-only if they are short term programs n=1
-more information about the organization because

I have never hear about it n=1
-its difficult to organize the Hispanics n=1

From the key informants interview schedule
Did you think that the Hispanics would like to participate in the
programs that you identify as highly needed?

Responses (n=15)

Yes 10 (66.7%)
No l ( 6.7%)
Maybe 4 (26.7%)
If no, why?

Responses

-It will depend on family income level (low income families generally
do not get involved in activities in the community)

-unemployment is very high in the Hispanic community, they need to
learn how to cope with the situation

—there is a great need for the CES programs among Hispanics

-if you make the programs interesting and appeal to their needs, then
they will participate

-if presented by a Hispanic there will be better participation

-if the meetings are held in places near to their homes and to their
interest

-they don't participate in community life (don't get involved because
they are too busy earning a living)

-105-

Part III Population Characteristics

Question # 1
What is your present age?

 

Responses Mail respondents
(n=59)77

Under 18 0

19-24 4 ( 6.8%)

25-34 20 (33.9%)

35-44 15 (25.4%)

45-64 16 (27.1%)

65 and over 4 ( 6.8%)

Question # 2

Your sex

Responses (n=59)

Male 35 (59.3%)

Female 23 (39.0%)

Question # 3

Which is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?

Responses

less than elementary 4
elementary 8
junior high 11
high school 25
more than” high school 10

completed college
college beyond bachellor's degree

Question # 4
Are you currently employed?

REsponses
Yes 43
No 16

What is your present occupation? (key

Responses

(n=58)

( 6.9%)
(13.8%)
(19.0%)
(43.1%)
(17.2%)

(n=59)
(72.9%)
(27.1%)

semi-skilled worker or apprentice craftman

salesworker or clerical/office worker
skilled worker, craftman or foreman
manager or proprietor

professional or technical worker
unemployed

other (retired)

Question # 5

Question # 6

(not coded for computer analysis)

Are any of the adult in your family unemployed?

Responses (n=57)
Yes 20 (35.1%)

No 37 (64.9%)

Keypinformants

 

OLfiCDNI-‘O

0‘0

(”NJ-‘1‘

informants only)

NOOI—‘I—‘NO

(n=l6)

( 6.3%)
(12.5%)
(50.0%)
(31.3%)

(n=l6)
(56.3%)
(37.5%)

(n=15)

( 6.7%)
(26.7%)
(13.3%)
(53.3%)

-106-

Question # 7
Would you select the income category which approximates your family
income?

 

 

Responses Mail respondents Key informants
(n=55)

less than $5,000 2 ( 3.6%)

$5,000 - $9,999 8 (14.5%)

$10,000 - $14,999 6 (10.9%)

$15,000 - $19,999 2 ( 3.6%)

$20,000 - $24,999 6 (10.9%)

$25,000 or more 27 (49.1%)

unknown 4 ( 7.3%)

Question # 8 (Question # 6 for key informants)
How did you identify yourself?

Responses (n=60) (n=l3)
Mexican-American 42 (70.0%) 8 (61.5%)
Puerto Rican 2 ( 3.3%) 2 (15.4%)
Cuban 7 (11.7%) 1 ( 7.7%)
Other Hispanic Heritage 9 (15.0%) 1 ( 7.7%)

Question # 9 )Question # 7 for key informants)
What is the most effective way to inform you and your family about
services provided in your community?

Responses (n=60) (n=15)
TV 26 (43.3%) 7 (46.7%)
word of mouth 3 ( 5.0%) 2 (13.3%)
radio 4 ( 6.7%) 2 (13.3%)
educational talk (meetings) 5 ( 8.3%) 1 ( 6.7%)
pamphlet 12 (20.0%) 2 (13.3%)
local newspaper 8 (13.3%) 1 ( 6.7%)
other 2 ( 3.3%) 0

Key informants only
In your opinion, what things inhibit Hispanic participation in CES
programs?

Responses

-easy accessible programs are needed (n=3)
-programs offered do not necessarily meet the cultural
aspect of Hispanics (n=2)

-better CES planning is necessary

-take the programs to the community

—speak to group about programs in Spanish

-get to know the people

-contact the Spanish Churches

-1ack of knowledge of services provided

-1ack of motivation

—better propaganda, so they know what is available

-letting the Hispanic community know that bilingual personnel will
be there to help those individuals who need help

-lack of bilingual information about CES programs

-lack of tradition on the part of CES to offer programs to Hispanics

-107-

-need of information or lack of awareness (n=4)
-something new, Hispanics not aware of benefits
-low number of Hispanics participating (n=2)

-explain what CES is all about in local meetings

-public service anouncement program in Spanish

—1anguage may be a problem

—prefer to learn from another Hispanic

-lack of education

-self—concept, filling comfortable with people in the community
—no efforts by the CES to recruit Hispanics

APPENDIX G

T-test Results: Comparison of Mail Questionnaire
Respondents Versus Nonrespondents
(Interviewed by Telephone)

TABLE 11

T—test Results: Comparison of Mail Questionnaire Respondents vs

Nonrespondents (interviewed by telephone)

 

 

 

Mean Values T-test Level of
Hail Nonresp significance
AWARENESS
Ever heard about CES 1.51 1.53 .847 .870
Ag programs 1.56 1.73 .737 .228
4-H youth programs 1.23 1.13 .460 .439
Home economics 1.51 1.53 .853 .875
NRPP Programs 1. 2 1.53 .738 .540
CES offers programs
for you 1.44 1.69 .916 .116
PARTICIPATION
Have participated 1.83 1.64 .167 .141
Visited or called CES 1.73 1.75 .755 .936
Received information 1.73 1.50 .534 .446
Listened to a program 1.50 1.25 1.00 .471
Read articles 1.45 1.50 .704 .887
Attend meetings 1.73 1.50 .534 .446
Served as vounteer 1.91 1.75 .197 .459
Served as 4-H leader 2.00 1.25 1.00 .000*
Usually participates 4.37 4.20 .384 .789
Participate in Master G. 2.04 1.75 .691 .421
in 4-H Winter program 1.88 1.25 .212 .003*
in fam. living news 1.85 1.33 .211 .039
in EFNEP newsletter 1.72 1.33 .450 .188
Qual. of Master Gardener 2.67 3.00 1.00 .667
of Fam. Living 2.67 2.50 .691 .789
of EFNEP 3.00 3.50 .629 .379
of 4-H 3.00 3.33 1.00 .374
Convenient place 3.88 2.80 .249 .341
English hinder 1.85 1.80 .448 .778

Natural Resources and Pubic Policy (NRPP) Program

 

Wild life habitat 2.94 2.64 .252 .365
Woodlot mgt. 2.86 2.36 .854 .120
Pond management 2.64 2.08 .740 .077
Wood for energy 3.08 2.50 .671 .051
Oil & gas develop. 3.20 2.36 .159 .013*
Maple syrup 2.58 1.92 .555 .030*
Understanding local gov. 3.47 3.14 .007 .378

-108-

-109-

 

 

 

 

Mean Values T-test Level of

Mail Honresp significance
Tax policies 3.35 2.86 .102 .095
Leadership training 3.35 3.07 .380 .338
Land use 3.18 2.50 .315 .020*
Community develop. 3.48 3.14 .025 .224
like to participate 1.98 2.07 .713 .733
4-H Youth Programs
Bicycling 2.96 2.54 .525 .129
Crafts 3.10 2.62 .561 .055
Careers 3.67 3.46 .018 .541
Clowning 2.49 2.00 .723 .124
Fiel crops 3.12 2.38 .304 .005*
Dairy 3.14 1.92 .431 .000*
Dog care 2.73 2.30 1.00 .165
Environmental ed. 3.46 2.92 .486 .033*
Caring for kids 3.63 3.31 .087 .160
Food and nutrition 3.75 3.62 .473 .463
Youth leadership 3.65 3.38 .183 .230
Livestock 2.92 1.67 .499 .000*
Goats 2.52 1.58 .638 .002*
Flowers, fruis & veg. 3.33 3.17 .236 .454
Personal appearance 3.45 3.23 .338 .341
Photography 2.94 2.92 .075 .953
Rabbits & poultry 2.63 2.15 .851 .117
Horses 2.60 2.08 1.00 .087
Insects 2.53 2.00 .648 .100
Shooting sports 2.44 1.92 1.00 .113
Stress 3.71 3.54 .481 .367
Handicappers 3.36 3.33 .794 .913
Like to participate 2.00 1.69 .793 .232
Agriculture and Marketing (Ag ng) Program
Home veg. 3.41 2.93 .776 .039*
Home fruit 3.41 3.07 .851 .123
Landscaping 3.09 2.57 .872 .042*
Indoor plants 2.90 2.79 .508 .634
Organic gardening 3.26 2.79 .852 .067
Farm land preserv. 3.31 2.79 .664 .064
Soil conservation 3.37 2.64 .880 .011*
Livestock production 3.10 2.29 .138 .007*
Crop production 3.29 2.36 .321 .002*
Farmer to consumer 3.30 2.50 .393 .005*
Commercial fruit & veg. 3.10 2.29 .860 .004*
Greenhouse 2.88 2.14 .222 .010*

-llO-

 

 

 

 

Mean Values T-test Level of

Mail Nonresp significance
Ag commodities 3.22 2.21 .312 .001*
Pesticide use-home 3.21 2.77 .625 .104
Pesticide use-farm 3.26 2.14 .155 .000*
Farm taxes 3.15 2.00 .589 .000*
Property & inheritance 3.16 2.57 .559 .041*
Raising horses 2.41 2.29 .211 .671
Farm Business mgt. 3.21 2.43 .491 .011*
Soil testing 3.10 2.23 .758 .006*
Like to participate 2.08 1.87 .730 .372
Home Economics Program
Inflation 3.62 3.67 .575 .784
Values 3.52 3.33 .368 .323
Retirement 3.55 3.13 .067 .070
Home mkg. 3.06 2.67 .401 .099
Unemployment 3.45 3.27 .174 .499
Financial planning 3.53 3.53 .339 .986
Self-esteem 3.58 3.13 .674 .059
Parenting 3.59 3.36 .542 .371
Home energy 3.60 3.47 .167 .472
Home repairs 3.40 3.27 .209 .528
Stress 3.58 3.14 .811 .054
Health care 3.71 3.57 .188 .385
Diets 3.51 3.47 .526 .841
Food preservation 3.48 3.20 .216 .145
Cutting food costs 3.51 3.40 .242 .562
Weight control 3.60 3.53 .855 .717
Leadership develop. 3.40 3.47 .120 .751
Public affairs 3.51 3.40 .619 .589
Food for low-income 3.58 3.53 1.00 .814
Like to participate 1.98 1.87 .841 .669
Demographic Characteristics
Age 3.95 3.80 .052 .669
Sex 1.43 1.20 .296 .124
Education 3.49 3.20 .457 .401
Employed 1.28 1.29 .786 .942
Unemployed 1.67 1.53 .650 .370
Income 4.80 3.80 .952 .060
Heritage 1.73 1.53 .497 .555
Way to inform 3.14 2.00 .801 .064

 

* Statistically significant differences between means.

APPENDIX H

Comparison of Demographic Information from Sample
(Mail Questionnaire Respondents).
Census Data and Nonrespondents

TABLE 12

Comparison of Demographic Information from Sample (mail questionnaire

respondents), Census Data and Nonrespondents

 

 

 

Characteristics Sample Census Nonresp
Age
less than 18 years 50.0% 7.1%
19 - 24 6.8% 12.6% 7.1%
25 - 34 33.9% 17.0% 42.9%
35 - 44 25.4% 8.6%
45 - 64 27.1% 9.2% 21.4%
65 and over 6.8% 2.6% 21.4%
Sex ‘
Femenine 39.0% 49.2% 21.4%
Masculine 59.3% 50.8% 78.6%
Education
less than elemtary 6.9% 11.9% 14.3%
elementary 13.8% 31.9% 21.4%
junior high 19.0% 17.1% 14.3%
high school 43.1% 20.6% 35.7%
post high school 17.2% 18.5% 14.3%
Income
less than $5,000 3.6% 16.5% 14.3%
$5 - 9,999 14.5% 17.2% 7.1%
$10 - 14,999 10.9% 17.6% 35.7%
$15 - 19,999 3.6% 14.4%
$20 - 24,999 10.9% 11.9% 21.4%
$25,000 and over 49.1% 22.4% 21.4%
unknown 7.3%
Heritage
Mexican 70.0% 78.3% 71.4%
Puerto Rican 3.3% 3.6% 7.1%
Cuban 11.7% 2.9% '14.3%
Other Spanish 15.0% 15.2% 7.1%
Source:

Census of Population and Housing, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Bureau of the Census, Standard Metropolitan Area, Lansing -
East Lansing; Michigan, August 1983.

-111-