News |

Metal Theft

Posted on January 9, 2012 by Clive D. Field

2011 was the worst year on record for the number of claims received by the specialist Anglican insurer Ecclesiastical (founded in 1887) arising from the theft of lead and other valuable metals from churches, according to a press release issued on 1 January 2012.

The total of such claims received by Ecclesiastical in 2011 exceeded 2,500, surpassing the previous record of 2,400 in 2008. The Diocese of Chelmsford headed the list for metal-related claims, followed by Lincoln, Lichfield, London, and Southwell.

Such thefts from churches were denounced by the general public in an online survey conducted by YouGov for Ecclesiastical on 13-15 December 2011, in which 2,058 UK adults aged 18 and over were interviewed.

In answer to an apparently somewhat leading question, 49% of adults claimed they were ‘appalled’ by the systematic destruction of places of worship through metal theft, with a further 37% ‘saddened’ by the crime.

79% supported tougher sentences for those convicted of stealing metal from churches (analogous to the 82% wanting harsher punishments for thefts from war memorials in a separate YouGov poll on 1-2 December 2011).

The full YouGov data have not been put into the public domain, but Ecclesiastical’s press release can be found at:

http://www.ecclesiastical.com/general/press-office/index.aspx

Posted in Survey news | Tagged Ecclesiastical, insurance claims, metal theft, places of worship, YouGov | Leave a comment

Citizenship Survey Topic Reports, 2009/10

Posted on December 28, 2011 by Clive D. Field

The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) released three topic reports on the Citizenship Survey on 21 December, the first such publications for fifteen months. They can be accessed at:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/communities/research/citizenshipsurvey/recentreports/

The documents relate to the Citizenship Survey undertaken between April 2009 and March 2010, by Ipsos MORI and TNS-BMRB. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 16,140 adults aged 16 and over in England and Wales, including an ethnic minority booster sample of 5,280 and a Muslim booster sample of 1,555.

Each of the three reports comprises three separate files: a PDF text file, tables (in Excel), and logistic regression models (in Excel). The sheer volume of data makes it impossible to summarize even the key statistics here, but the following list of the principal religion-related tables may be of assistance to BRIN users.

RACE, RELIGION AND EQUALITIES, ENGLAND AND WALES

A.1 – religion (time series)
A.2 – religion by ethnicity
A.2a – religion by gender
B.1 – practice of religion by religion
B.1a – practice of religion by religion (time series)
B.2 – practice of religion by gender within religion
B.3 – practice of religion by age within religion
B.3a – practice of religion by age within religion (time series)
C.1 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by practice of religion within religion (time series)
C.2 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by ethno-religious group
C.3 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by country of birth
C.4 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by gender
C.5 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by socio-economic group
C.6 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by age within religion
C.7 – extent to which religion affects day-to-day life by practice of religion within gender
D.1 – perceptions of religious prejudice (time series)
D.2 – perceptions of religious prejudice by religion
D.2a – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by religion
D.3 – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by gender
D.4 – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by age
D.5/5a – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by ethno-religious group
D.6 – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by country of birth
D.7 – proportion feeling there is more religious prejudice by socio-economic group
E.1 – religious and other groups experiencing more religious prejudice by religion
E.1a – religious and other groups experiencing more religious prejudice by religion (time series)
E.2 – religious and other groups experiencing less religious prejudice by religion
F.1 – proportion feeling they are able to practice their religion freely (time series)
F.2 – proportion feeling they are able to practice their religion freely by religion
F.3 – proportion feeling they are able to practice their religion freely by ethno-religious group
F.4 – proportion feeling they are able to practice their religion freely by age within religion
F.5 – proportion feeling they are able to practice their religion freely by country of birth
G.1 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights (time series)
G.2 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights by age
G.3 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights by socio-economic group
G.4 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights by religion
G.5 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights by ethno-religious group
G.6 – perceptions of how much Government is doing to protect religious rights by country of birth
H.1 – religious groups whose rights perceived to be protected too much/little by religion
H.1a – religious groups whose rights perceived to be protected too much/little by religion (time series)
J.6 – perceptions of racial prejudice by ethno-religious group
K.1/1a – religious and other groups experiencing more racial prejudice by ethnicity
K.1b – religious and other groups experiencing more racial prejudice (time series)
K.2 – religious and other groups experiencing less racial prejudice by ethnicity
N.1 – religious and other groups treated better by public service organizations by ethnicity
P.1 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by religion (time series)
P.2 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by practice of religion within religion
P.3 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by ethno-religious group
P.4 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by gender within religion
P.5 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by age within religion
P.6 – perceptions of religious discrimination by public service organizations by country of birth
Q.1 – organizations from which respondents experienced religious discrimination by religion
Q.2 – organizations from which respondents experienced religious discrimination by ethno-religious group
S.1 – perceptions of religious discrimination in employment
S.2 – perceptions of religious discrimination in employment by ethnicity
S.7 – perceptions of religious discrimination in employment by religion
T.3 – proportion worried about being physically attacked by ethno-religious group
T.3a – proportion worried about being physically attacked by religion
U.4 – perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is by ethno-religious group
U.4a – perceptions of how big a problem racial or religious harassment is by religion
V.2 – experience of harassment by religion
W.2 – religion as perceived cause of harassment
W.2a – religion as perceived cause of harassment by religion
W.2b – religion as perceived cause of harassment by ethnicity
X.5 – perceptions of level of respect respondents treated with by religion

COMMUNITY SPIRIT IN ENGLAND

A.4b – satisfaction with local area by religion
B.4b – whether local area has got better or worse by religion
C.4b – enjoyment of living in local neighbourhood by religion
D.5 – sense of belonging to neighbourhood/local area/Britain by religion
E.4b – whether people pull together in neighbourhood by religion
F.4b – whether people in neighbourhood can be trusted by religion
G.4b – whether people feel safe walking in neighbourhood after dark by religion
H.4b – fear of crime by religion
I.4b – perceptions of community cohesion by religion
J.4b – perceived respect of ethnic differences in local area by religion
K.4b – attitude to immigration by religion
M.3b – whether have friends from different ethnic groups by religion
N.1 – proportion of friends from same religious background
N.2 – proportion of friends from same religious background by age and gender
N.3a – proportion of friends from same religious background by ethnicity
N.3b – proportion of friends from same religious background by religion
N.4 – proportion of friends from same religious background by density of ethnic minority households
O.3b – proportion of friends from same age group by religion
P.3b – proportion of friends from same income group by religion
Q.1 – places of worship as venues for social mixing (time series)
Q.2 – places of worship as venues for social mixing by age and gender
Q.3a – places of worship as venues for social mixing by ethnicity
Q.3b – places of worship as venues for social mixing by religion
Q.4 – places of worship as venues for social mixing by socio-economic group
Q.5 – places of worship as venues for social mixing by index of multiple deprivation
Q.6 – places of worship as venues for social mixing by region and type of area
Q.7 – places of worship as venues for social mixing by density of ethnic minority households
R.1 – encouragement of social mixing by visiting other places of worship by age and gender
R.2 – encouragement of social mixing by visiting other places of worship by ethnicity

COMMUNITY ACTION IN ENGLAND

A.7 – participation in civic engagement by religion
B.5b – perceived ability to influence decisions locally and nationally by religion
C.6b – perceived importance of being able to influence local decisions by religion
D.5b – desire to be more involved in local council decisions by religion
G.7 – trust in institutions by religion
H.5 – regular volunteering by religion
K.1 – formal volunteering for religious and other organizations
K.2 – formal volunteering for religious and other organizations by age, gender and disability
K.3 – formal volunteering for religious and other organizations by ethnicity
L.1 – places of worship as sources of information about volunteering opportunities
L.2 – places of worship as sources of information about volunteering opportunities by age and gender
O.5 – charitable giving by religion
Q.1 – collections at places of worship as method of charitable giving (time series)

The dataset for the study is already available at the Economic and Social Data Service as SN 6733. Some preliminary findings have featured on BRIN at:

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2010/citizenship-survey-2009-10-first-results/

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2010/violent-extremism/

We have also covered what DCLG claims will be the only formal published output from the 2010-11 Citizenship Survey, which will be the last in the series (it has been axed, as a cost-cutting measure). See:

http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2011/farewell-to-the-citizenship-survey/

Posted in Official data, Religion and Ethnicity, Religion and Social Capital, Religion in public debate, Survey news | Tagged charitable giving, Citizenship Survey, Civic Engagement, community action, community cohesion, community spirit, Department for Communities and Local Government, equalities, ethnic minorities, freedom of religion, friends, government, influence of religion, Ipsos-MORI, Muslims, physical attack, places of worship, protection of religious rights, racial prejudice, Religious Affiliation, Religious discrimination, religious harassment, Religious Practice, religious prejudice, respect, social mixing, TNS-BMRB, volunteering | Leave a comment

Farewell to the Citizenship Survey

Posted on September 23, 2011 by Clive D. Field

Headline findings from the 2010-11 Citizenship Survey for England and Wales were published by the Department for Communities and Local Government on 22 September 2011 in the form of Cohesion Research Statistical Release No. 16, comprising a textual report and Excel tables. This document is available to download from:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/corporate/statistics/citizenshipsurveyq4201011

The Citizenship Survey was initiated by the Home Office in 2001 and has subsequently been conducted in 2003, 2005, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. It has now been discontinued as a cost-saving measure. Even the traditional topic reports (one of which covers race, religion and equalities) will not be published in respect of the 2010-11 data.

Fieldwork for the April 2010 to March 2011 survey was undertaken by Ipsos MORI and TNS-BMRB. Face-to-face interviews were conducted with a representative core sample of 10,307 adults aged 16 and over living in households in England and Wales, together with an ethnic minority booster sample of 4,721 and a Muslim booster sample of 842.

Religion-related statistics in the latest set of tables comprise the following:

TABLE 2 (England): Christians (37%) and people of no religion (38%) were less likely to feel they could influence decisions affecting their local area than non-Christians (the proportion varying from 42% for Sikhs to 53% for Buddhists); a similar pattern emerged in respect of decisions affecting Britain, albeit all the figures were lower

TABLE 6 (England): Christians (58%) and people of no religion (56%) were more likely than non-Christians to have participated in some form of civic engagement or formal volunteering during the previous year, with a low of 44% for Hindus and Muslims; however, Sikhs excepted, participation rates have fallen for all faith groups since 2007-08

TABLE 9 (England): Buddhists and Sikhs (92%) were more likely than Muslims (91%), Hindus (90%), Christians (87%), and people of no religion (82%) to agree that their local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together

TABLE 11 (England): Sikhs (85%) were most likely to feel a sense of strongly belonging to the neighbourhood, more so than Christians (80%), Muslims (79%), Hindus (78%), Buddhists (70%), and people of no religion (70%); Sikhs (93%) also had the strongest sense of belonging to Britain, followed by Christians and Hindus (89%), Muslims (88%), people of no religion (87%), and Buddhists (80%)

TABLE 12 (England): Christians (78%) were the religious group reporting the lowest rate of mixing regularly (at least once a month) with persons of different ethnic or religious backgrounds, as they had been in the three previous surveys; this compared with 96% for Muslims and Sikhs, 95% for Buddhists, 92% for Hindus, 86% for people of no religion and with a national average of 82%

TABLE 13 (England): the below-average mixing rate for Christians held good for most spheres of social encounter apart from mixing at a place of worship where, at 16%, it was 1% above par; even so, non-Christians were far more likely than Christians to report mixing at a place of worship with persons of different ethnic or religious backgrounds, rising to 45% in the case of Muslims

TABLE 19 (England): Muslims (14%) were most likely to record that racial or religious harassment was a very or fairly big problem in the local area, twice the national average, albeit this has steadily fallen from 20% in 2007-08; Hindus and Sikhs followed on 11%, people of no religion on 7%, Christians on 5%, and Buddhists on 4%

TABLE 20 (England and Wales): the proportion of Britons believing that there was more religious prejudice than five years before fell from 52% in 2008-09 to 46% in 2009-10 to 44% in 2010-11; the decrease for ethnic minorities alone was from 44% to 33% over the three years, revealing a relatively high degree of optimism

TABLE 24 (England and Wales): 96% of Britons said that violence in the name of religion is always wrong, 2% that it is often wrong, 1% that it is sometimes right and sometimes wrong, with fewer than half a percent stating that it is always or often right; the always wrong category was 94% for violence towards ethnic groups, 87% for violent extremism generally, and 84% for violence to protect animals

Posted in Official data, Religion and Politics, Religion and Social Capital, Survey news | Tagged Belonging, Britishness, Citizenship Survey, Civic Engagement, cohesion, decisions, Department for Communities and Local Government, Home Office, Ipsos-MORI, neighbourhod, places of worship, religious harassment, religious prejudice, social mixing, TNS-BMRB, violence, volunteering | 1 Comment

Church Buildings Surveyed

Posted on April 18, 2011 by Clive D. Field

The National Churches Trust (NCT, formerly the Historic Churches Preservation Trust, established in 1953) has today published a 72-page report on its survey of the UK’s estimated 47,000 places of Christian worship.

The study was conducted between 16 April and 28 July 2010, with the assistance of McKinsey & Company (on a pro bono basis). The report, and associated press release, will be found at:

http://nationalchurchestrust.org/explore-and-discover/national-survey.php

The survey was primarily completed online. Churches were either contacted directly, by email (in 17,000 cases) or post (3,200), or indirectly through 26 denominational networks (representing an additional 13,000 places of worship).

There were 7,200 useable responses, equivalent to 15% of the whole universe (not all of which was reached) or 22% of places of worship which were actually approached, directly or indirectly.

This is a not untypical and thus quite respectable ‘response rate’ for a survey using this type of methodology. Of this total of 7,200, 77% replied to an email, 11% by post and 12% self-registered online.

The key issue, of course, is how representative these replies were, especially bearing in mind the debate about potential non-response bias which took place in the columns of the Church Times when the survey was first announced. See BRIN’s coverage of the correspondence at http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/?p=165

NCT believes that responding churches did broadly reflect the UK scene in terms of denominational and geographical spread, building age and congregational size. A sample balancing process, rather cursorily explained in Appendix 1 (p. 55), was used to calculate national totals. 5,100 returns had sufficient data to be included in this balanced dataset.

The scope of the survey was wide and often innovative, extending to the maintenance, funding and management of places of worship and their contribution to their local communities. A copy of the survey instrument (which ran to 45 questions) is reproduced in Appendix 2 (pp. 58-65) of the report.

Only a few key findings can be highlighted here:

Nine-tenths of churches were used for a religious service at least once a week, including 100% of Roman Catholic places of worship and virtually all Free Church buildings (about one in six Anglican churches had between one and three services a month)
Nearly four-fifths of churches were used for purposes other than worship, including community activities, but more so in unlisted than listed buildings and in urban than rural areas
Community activities were most likely to be found in the Free Churches, followed by Anglican and Roman Catholic premises, with private events also being most prevalent in the Free Churches but more numerous in Catholic than Anglican places of worship
Among non-worship events, young people’s activities (54%), educational services (43%), arts, music and dance (43%), and support and counselling services (42%) were most common
The lack of volunteer time (33%), of suitable space (33%) and of suitable facilities (28%) were cited as the main impediments to further community engagement by the local church
The average church building had 33 volunteering in it in any capacity, of whom 28 were from the congregation, suggesting a possible 1,600,000 individuals involved in church volunteering nationally, including 200,000 non-churchgoers
92% of churches were self-assessed as in good or fair condition, but 8% were deemed to be in a poor or very poor state, disproportionately listed buildings, with the average cost of urgent repairs estimated at £80,000 each

The report contains 42 charts, many of them including disaggregated results (for example, by church location). BRIN readers will probably feel the desire for more methodological detail and greater access to the raw data, and hopefully the NCT will be able to facilitate this in due course.

Posted in News from religious organisations, Survey news | Tagged churches, local communities, McKinsey, National Churches Trust, places of worship | Leave a comment

Civil Partnerships

Posted on February 21, 2011 by Clive D. Field

According to a new YouGov poll, public opinion is divided about the Coalition Government’s plans, announced by the Equalities Office on 17 February, to permit civil partnerships in England and Wales to be celebrated in religious buildings, even though ‘no religious group will be forced to host a civil partnership registration’.

Government’s goal would be achieved through implementation of Section 202 of the Equality Act 2010, which revokes the explicit ban on holding civil partnership registrations in religious premises that stems from the Approved Premises (Marriage and Civil Partnership) Regulations 2005. The Section is not yet in force.

The YouGov survey was undertaken online for The Sunday Times on 17 and 18 February 2011, among a representative sample of 2,464 adult Britons aged 18 and over. The results of the study will be found on page 10 of the tables at:

http://today.yougov.co.uk/sites/today.yougov.co.uk/files/YG-Archives-Pol-ST-results-18-200211.pdf

Asked whether it should be legal for same-sex couples to hold their civil partnership ceremonies in places of worship, 42% agreed (similar to the 41% approving of same-sex marriage, in a different question), 43% disagreed, and 16% expressed no opinion.

Support for the Government’s proposal was notably strong among Liberal Democrat voters (50%) and those aged 25-39 (53%), presumably the age group most likely to be directly affected.

Opposition peaked at 60% among the over-60s and at 54% among Conservative voters, despite the Conservative Party being the major partner in the Coalition Government which is putting forward the idea.

Men were also 10 points more hostile to the plan than women, and manual workers less in favour than non-manuals. Regional differences were not marked. In Scotland, which is not affected (since this is a devolved matter), the split was 42% versus 41%.

Posted in Survey news | Tagged civil partnerships, Equality Act, places of worship, Sunday Times, YouGov | 2 Comments

Caring for Places of Worship

Posted on July 1, 2010 by Clive D. Field

Churchgoing may be declining, but, according to an omnibus survey conducted for the Church of England, 85% of the adult population visited places of worship for some reason in 2009, whether for an event, personal interest or to attend a service. Many visitors will naturally have been drawn to them for their historical importance.

You certainly do not need to be religious to appreciate the significance of places of worship to the country’s architectural heritage. England alone has 14,500 listed places of worship (4,000 Grade I, 4,500 Grade II* and 6,000 Grade II). In fact, 45% of all Grade I listed buildings are places of worship.

Although the overwhelming majority of these listed church buildings are Anglican parish churches, many of them pre-dating the Reformation, a significant minority are Free Church. There is also a relatively small number of listed non-Christian places of worship, approximately one-half of which are synagogues and one-quarter mosques.

But what state are these religious premises in? In an attempt to improve its evidence base, English Heritage (the official champion of England’s historic buildings) has undertaken the first ever physical condition survey of a 15% representative sample of England’s listed places of worship.

Headline findings from the survey appear in Caring for Places of Worship, 2010, which was published by English Heritage on 30 June. The document is available to download from:

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/caring-for-places-of-worship-report/caring-places-of-worship-2010-report.pdf/

In the aggregate, 11% of listed places of worship were found to be in a poor or very bad physical state and thus potentially at risk. The figure stood at 14% for Grade I buildings and 13% for Grade II*, compared with 8% for Grade II. Thus, the most important places of worship are relatively in greatest danger.

Rural places of worship are also at more risk than urban ones (13% against 9%), although inner-city buildings are an exception to the rule in London and Birmingham. An above-average incidence of listed places of worship in poor or very bad condition was reported in the West Midlands, South-East and East, and a lower than average number in Yorkshire and the Humber and the North-East.

Of the 89% of listed places of worship not deemed to be at risk, approximately two-fifths were judged to be in good condition and the remainder in fair condition. Dr Simon Thurley, English Heritage’s CEO, described this finding as ‘a huge testament to the hard work and altruism of their congregations. They take on responsibility for their building in addition to their commitment to worship and community service, finding almost all the necessary funding from their own pockets.’

English Heritage simultaneously released results from evaluations of the impact of two major schemes to provide financial support for listed places of worship. These are the Repair Grant for Places of Worship Scheme (RGPoWS), jointly funded by English Heritage and the Heritage Lottery Fund, and which has benefited 11% of listed places of worship since 2002; and the Government-financed Listed Places of Worship Scheme (LPoWS).

The evaluations were carried out by BDRC Continental through interviews in April-May 2010 with 100 recipients of RGPoWS grants and 300 recipients of LPoWS grants made since 2005. Summaries of the evaluations are published at:

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/imported-docs/k-o/key-findings-rgpow.pdf

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/imported-docs/k-o/lpows-key-findings.pdf

For over three-fifths of grant recipients the repair and maintenance of their place of worship is a constant major concern. Grants helped them plan a more certain future for their building, avoiding more costly repairs later on, and also to increase the number of visitors and broaden community use. Grants further benefited the local economy since 90% of grant recipients exclusively used local businesses to undertake repairs.

In the case of recipients of RGPoWS grants, which are invariably for more than half the cost of the scheme, 76% claimed that they could not have completed the restoration work without help from the RGPoWS, and 30% that they would have had to close their building but for the RGPoWS.

Even for recipients of LPoWS grants, which are limited to 17.5% of the cost, 20% would not have been able to complete the repair and maintenance work at all without the LPoWS and 18% would only have been able to complete some of the work.

A parallel investigation by the National Churches Trust, which covers the whole of the UK and includes non-listed as well as listed buildings, is expected to report later in the year.

NOTE: In conjunction with the main survey, Jewish Heritage UK was funded by English Heritage to survey the state of 37 listed synagogues in England between March and June 2009. A separate report on this study, Synagogues at Risk, is available at:

http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/synagogues-at-risk/synagogues-at-risk.pdf/

This contains detail additional to an assessment of the physical condition of the building, including information about frequency of services, average attendance at services, and membership size and trends.

Posted in Official data, Survey news | Tagged BDRC Continental, English Heritage, listed buildings, Listed Places of Worship Scheme, places of worship, Repair Grant for Places of Worship Scheme, synagogues | Leave a comment

Citizenship and Faith

Posted on May 2, 2010 by Clive D. Field

On 29 April the Department for Communities and Local Government released two further topic reports from the 2008-09 Citizenship Survey, relating respectively to empowered communities and to volunteering and charitable giving. They are available to download from:

http://www.communities.gov.uk/corporate/researchandstatistics/statistics/

The Citizenship Survey is conducted by face-to-face interview among a representative sample of adults aged 16 and over in England and Wales, including an ethnic minority booster sample. 14,917 interviews were conducted by NatCen between April 2008 and March 2009.

The empowered communities report includes a breakdown by religion of participation in civic engagement and formal volunteering. Of the major faith groups, Buddhists are revealed as being most active (69%), followed by Christians (64%), those of no religion (58%), Muslims (48%), Sikhs (47%) and Hindus (46%). Jews are not separately returned. Figures are also provided for three categories of civic engagement by religion.

In terms of influencing decisions in their local area, a somewhat different pattern emerges. Sikhs are most hopeful (61%), with Muslims on 49%, Hindus on 48%, Buddhists on 47%, Christians on 39% and those of no religion on 37%. All groups feel they have much less say over decision-making at national level, the high being 49% for Sikhs and the low 20% for those identifying with no religion.

The volunteering and charitable giving topic report includes no breaks by religious profession, but the links between faith and formal volunteering are otherwise explored. For example, of those who have engaged in formal volunteering during the past twelve months, 33% have helped religious organizations. The proportion rises progressively with age, from 22% among the 16-25s to 50% for the 75+ cohort. It stands at 56% for ethnic minorities as a whole, compared with 31% for whites, and at 65% for Afro-Caribbeans.

Places of worship are a source of information about potential opportunities for formal volunteering for 21% of the sample, but especially for those aged 65 and over (35%). Religious motivations for regular formal volunteering are cited by 17% of all adults and by twice this number among the elderly and ethnic minorities.

With regard to charitable giving, 74% of adults give to charity of whom one-fifth (15%) give through a collection at a place of worship. This figure stands at 20% for the 65-74s and 23% of the 75+ group, reflecting the elderly profile of most congregations. By ethnicity it is 13% for whites and 31% for ethnic minorities, underlining the greater religious practice of the latter. During the four weeks prior to interview the average amount given in a collection at a place of worship was £31.

Anybody interested in running fuller analyses from the Citizenship Survey, 2008-09 can access the dataset at the Economic and Social Data Service as SN 6388. A topic report on race, religion and equalities will be published in due course.

Posted in Official data, Survey news | Tagged charitable giving, Citizenship Survey, Civic Engagement, Department for Communities and Local Government, empowered communities, NatCen, places of worship, volunteering | Leave a comment

National Churches Trust Survey [Updated]

Posted on April 9, 2010 by Clive D. Field

The National Churches Trust (NCT) has recently issued a press release to announce the imminent launch, on 15 April, of a questionnaire-based survey of all 47,000 Christian places of worship in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. This is intended to provide ‘a national picture of the current status of these buildings, including how they are maintained, funded and managed and how they interact with their communities’.

Each place of worship will be contacted by email in the first instance, wherever possible, and encouraged to complete the survey questionnaire online at http://survey.nationalchurchestrust.org For those who cannot be reached in this way, a paper version of the questionnaire will be sent by post. The questionnaire was piloted with 125 places of worship late in 2009.

The survey, NCT explains, has been designed in close co-operation with heritage organizations and Christian denominations. It is being guided by an advisory working group. The project officer for the survey is Charlotte Walshe, who can be contacted at nationalchurchestrust@surveylab.co.uk

The provisional timetable is for the responses to be collated in July and a report prepared by the end of September.

A news article about the survey in the Church Times for 26 March prompted Revd Ian Hill, statistician turned Anglican clergyman, to write a long letter to the newspaper’s editor. This was published in its issue of 1 April under the heading ‘National Churches Trust survey has flawed basis’. In particular, Mr Hill expressed concerns about non-response bias, with the potential result that the survey ‘may be less helpful than hoped’. Instead of the NCT’s census-style approach, he advocated ‘a properly sampled and stratified statistical survey’.

Andrew Edwards, NCT’s CEO, wrote in reply to Mr Hill, and his letter was published in today’s (9 April) issue of the Church Times under the heading ‘Churches survey: methodology defended’. Mr Edwards argued that the NCT had factored potential non-response bias into its planning from the outset. Having consulted with statisticians and heritage experts, he was confident that the NCT’s approach was robust and that it would ensure that the results will be representative. This will partly be achieved through the application of ‘sample balancing’ to ensure proper weighting of particular groupings of churches. Meanwhile, Mr Edwards urged places of worship to participate in the survey as fully as possible.

NCT, formerly the Historic Churches Preservation Trust (established in 1953), was relaunched in 2007. It is the only national, non-profit organization dedicated to preserving and supporting places of worship used by Christian denominations throughout the UK. It promotes the use of these buildings both by their congregations and the wider community.

In a parallel initiative, as part of its Heritage at Risk programme, English Heritage is surveying a representative one-tenth of the 14,500 listed places of worship in England (85% of which are Anglican) to find out how many are at serious risk of decay. It will announce its findings on 30 June.

[Note: this post updates and replaces our original post on the same subject, dated 31 March 2010]

Posted in Survey news | Tagged Andrew Edwards, Church Times, English Heritage, Ian Hill, National Churches Trust, places of worship, preservation | 1 Comment

Metal Theft

Church Buildings Surveyed

Civil Partnerships

Caring for Places of Worship

Citizenship and Faith

National Churches Trust Survey [Updated]

Recent News

Recent Sources

Archives

Recent Comments

One response to “National Churches Trust Survey [Updated]”

British Religion in Numbers is funded as a British Academy Research Project