2015
Attracting, Engaging & Retaining Young Adults:
Perspectives of Price County Natives and
Newcomers
Gail M. Huycke
Community Resource Development Educator
Price County, UW-Extension
About the Survey
Price County is a great place to live. There have always been jobs available if kids wanted to stay in the
community after high school. If kids wanted to go on to college the community encouraged it and often
supported it. So what happened? What is so different now? That is what the people of Price County are
asking themselves as they are looking at a double digit decline in population over the last decade.
As the population declines it continues to age. The number of young adults 18-39 living in Price County
is declining as well. From the 1980 census to the 2009-2013 population estimate there has been a
decline of 7.7% of the population aged 18- 34. The current total population of Price County is 14,569
with 2,054 being between age of 18 and 34. This phenomenon is not unique to Price County. The out
migration of young adults is happening across rural America. The question is what can and should the
people of Price County do to stop the trend?
In May of 2014 the Price County UW-Extension Staff convened a group of 10 young adults to serve as a
focus group to get a better perspective of what young people value and look for in a place they call
home. The group provided valuable input on how they felt the community engaged and accepted young
adults. They advised UW-Extension to seek input from other young adults both living in and out of the
county through social media.
Price County UW-Extension staff reviewed sample survey instruments from surrounding counties and
with assistance from their advisory group selected 23 factors they felt impacted people’s decision on
where to live. Participants were asked to rate how strong Price County was on each factor on a scale of
1 to 7 with seven being most positive. Participants later identified the top five most important factors
they considered when choosing a place to live. The intent of the study was to identify data to help Price
County communities engage, retain and attract young adults.
The survey was administered electronically through Qualtrics in 2014. Promotion was done at
community events and tablets were utilized to get young people to complete surveys. The intended
population was young adults 18-39, with 206 surveys completed. The survey was designed to divide the
respondents into two categories, those currently living in the county and those who are not.
The Community Capitals Framework developed by Sociologists Cornelia and Jan Flora was used to
organize and analyze the data. This approach was taken because it incorporates a broader view of the
elements necessary for a healthy community building. The Community Capitals Framework looks at
resources and assets of a community and divides them into seven categories: Built Capital, Financial
Capital, Human Capital, Social Capital, Political Capital, Natural Capital and Cultural Capital.
The information from the survey tells us about the wants and needs of the participants and the
perceptions they have about living in Price County. Often the data will be divided between those who
live here and those who do not to help people see the difference in perspectives, if any. The report will
utilize numeric figures where appropriate. The comment section of the survey identified some prevalent
1
themes. Themes based on comments will be identified to help the community better understand
participants’ responses.
This report is a summary of the data collected and is intended to serve as a snapshot of what young
adults value and perceive. It is meant to highlight Price County’s assets, look at challenges and create
opportunities for conversations on how to engage, retain and attract young people.
2
Summary of Findings
The Price County UW-Extension staff administered the Attracting & Retaining the Next Generation of
Price County Residents survey electronically utilizing Qualtrics. The survey was administered between
May and October 2014. To boost participation intercept surveys were conducted at various community
events throughout the summer utilizing tablets.
Residency in Relation to Price County
A total of 206 electronic surveys were completed. The majority or 71% of those answering the residency
question described themselves as currently living in Price County. Date and time stamps of survey
results indicate that intercept surveys likely influenced the number of local residents participating in the
survey. Six individuals taking the survey are not counted in the resident count at all; meaning they most
likely never lived in Price County but took the survey anyway. Only 6% of those that moved away from
Price County reported they would like to return to the area.
Residency in Relation to Price County
20%
28%
Never Moved
Moved/Returned
Moved/No Plans to Return
Moved/Would Like to Return
6%
23%
24%
(Figure1)
3
Moved From Outside
Educational Attainment
Only the survey participants currently residing in Price County answered the question about educational
attainment. The majority of the participants (72%) had invested in higher education. Technical Degrees
and Bachelor’s Degrees are almost dead even at 35% and 34%. These numbers are remarkably high
when compared to educational attainment numbers gathered in census data, where BS attainment or
higher is listed at 15.3%. This could be the difference in the age breakdown or the fact that those with
higher educational attainment are more apt to complete electronic surveys. Continual growth and
expansion of the local technical college and access to online learning may also have contributed to the
increase of educational attainment in this age cohort. It was interesting to note that all participants
leaving Price County reporting a maximum of high school diploma attainment returned to the county to
live. Those moving in from outside of the county tended to be those with higher educational
attainments coming for employment purposes.
Educational Attainment
1%
3%
27%
<High School
34%
High School Diploma
Tech/Assoc Degree
Bachelor's Degree
Advanced Degree
35%
(Figure 2)
4
Educational Attainment of Those Moving to
the Community from Outside
Advanced Degree
Bachelor's Degree
Technical/Associates
HighSchool Diploma
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
(Figure 3)
Future Educational Plans
Participants were asked if they planned on pursuing any additional formal education. Respondents’
future educational plans were split across the board. There is evidence that this group recognizes
learning is a continual process no matter what their educational attainment. Survey comments found
some respondents currently in school; others identified a need for continuing education credits, some
looking for advancement degrees and others a desire or need to retool for other employment
opportunities.
Future Educational Plans
38%
29%
33%
(Figure 4)
5
Yes
NO
Maybe
Employment Status
The employment status of those living in Price County varies greatly in this age cohort. The survey
results reported here represent those people living in the county at the time they participated in the
survey. Overall 8% reported themselves unemployed at the time they took the survey. At that same
time period unemployment for the county averaged 5.4%. An additional 9% reported being under
employed.
Employment Status
Employed Full Time
48%
Employed Part Time, and Wanting Something Full Time
9%
Employed Part Time and Satisfied
8%
Unemployed
8%
Self Employed
9%
Student
9%
Choose not to be Employed Outside
9%
(Figure 5)
Education is definitely a contributing factor in the employment success of the respondents. The less
education the participant has the more likely they were to find themselves unemployed or
underemployed. Thirty one percent of the respondents with only a high school diploma found
themselves unemployed or underemployed compared to the 17% of the large group. This number drops
to 20% with those with a Technical or Associate Degree and 4% with Bachelor’s.
Unemployed and Underemployed
Advanced Deg
Bachelor's
Tech/Assoc
High School
0%
5%
10%
15%
(Figure 6)
6
20%
25%
30%
35%
Career Choice and Job Satisfaction
During the period of the Great Recession (December 2007-2009) we heard a lot of talk of people being
unemployed, underemployed or possibly employed in fields not ideal. Some of that same dialogue is still
heard in the community today. To get a better understanding of the workforce in this age category
participants were asked if they were currently working in their career or occupation of choice. Only
those respondents currently living in Price County reported their career or occupation choice. These fell
within many different categories, with the greatest number of responses in the medical fields. Overall,
only 58% of the respondents reported that they were currently working in the career or occupation of
their choice. Educational attainment clearly played a role in helping respondents obtain employment in
their desired career or occupation choice. Overall, when we asked these same participants to rank their
satisfaction with their employment on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being not satisfied at all and 5 being totally
satisfied, the group had a mean of 3.78 satisfactions.
Currently in Career/Occupation of Choice
YES
NO
TOTAL
58%
42%
High School
31%
69%
Tech/Assoc.
57%
43%
Bachelor’s
78%
22%
Advanced
75%
25%
(Figure7)
Qualitative data was also gathered to give a richer view of respondent’s perspective. Respondents
commented on the difficulty of finding jobs locally. They said they were unaware of professional
positions available because they weren’t generally advertised locally. On the flip side some not native to
the area felt like they were at a disadvantage because they weren’t related to the locals. They perceived
they would never get hired because they were considered as an outsider. Comments gathered suggest
that improvements could be made on employers’ part to understand the workforce and employees to
understand the job market. The young adults suggested pulling key factor from the report emphasizing
economics and employment and creating a fact sheet for the business community. This could be
followed up with at chamber sponsored events with young adults participating in the conversations.
Additional suggestions including sharing the entire report with economic development organizations,
employment agencies elected officials who work with the business community. These would be
enhanced by presentations by led by community influentials from this age cohort and UW-Extension.
7
Decision Process for Selecting Price County
We wanted to get a better understanding about the key factors that led some young people to choose
to live in Price County. Those represented in figure 8 were currently residing in the county at the time of
the survey. It is clear the number one reason for young people to reside in Price County is the proximity
to family at 50%, followed by employment of themselves or a spouse/partner at 34%.
Reason for Living in Price County
3%
3%
11%
Family
Employment
50%
Amenities
School
Other
34%
(Figure 8)
We are not naïve to think in this mobile society that just because these young adults are living here now,
they will always want to make Price County their home. It was surprising however to find that 56% of
them are committed to staying indefinitely in the county. These are the people who will lay deep roots
in a community and can become a long term asset.
Time Intended to Reside in Price County
Indefinitely
56%
At least a Few More Years
13%
I Would Leave When a Better Opportunity Comes
19%
I Would Leave If I Lost My Job
6%
I Will Leave As Soon As Possible
5%
(Figure 9)
8
Most Important Qualities to Consider When Choosing a Place to Live
What qualities do young adults look for in a place they want to call home? Over the past several
decades much has been written about this new generation of workers. Rebecca Ryan in her book, Live
First, Work Second Getting inside the Head of the Next Generation talks about this group’s tendency to
select a place to live before finding employment. If that be the case, what are the qualities young
people are searching for and is there a difference in preferences between those who reside in Price
County and those who do not?
All 206 survey participants were given a list of 23 attributes and asked to select the top 5 factors
important to them when choosing a place to live. Quality of Life, A Great Place to Raise a Family and
Employment were 3 factors that all groups ranked among their top priorities.
Top 5 Qualities to Consider in Choosing a Place to Live - All Participants
Quality of Life
1St
Employment
2nd
Great Place to Raise a Family
3rd
Natural Scenic Beauty
4th
Cost of Living
5th
(Figure 10)
Top 5 Qualities to Consider in Choosing a Place to Live – Those Currently Living
In Price County
Great Place to Raise a Family
1st
Quality of Life
2nd
Natural Scenic Beauty
3rd
Employment
4th
Rural Atmosphere
5 th
(Figure 11)
Top 5 Qualities to Consider in Choosing a Place to Live – Those Currently Not
Living in Price County
Employment
1st
Quality of Life
2nd
Cost of Living
3rd
Education Opportunities
4th
Great Place to Raise a Family
5th
(Figure 12)
9
We asked ourselves if the top considerations in selecting a location to live were so similar in ranking,
where were the greatest differences? To determine this, we looked at the spread in rankings between
the 2 groups.
Greatest Difference Considered in Choosing a Place to Live
Price Co Residents Non-Residents
3rd
11th
th
6
15th
15th
7th
th
19
9th
20th
11th
Rural Atmosphere
Natural Scenic Beauty
Cultural Opportunities
Lots of Interesting People
Diversity
(Figure 13)
It is easy to see that the people who call Price County home value its natural assets and the social
culture that comes with rural living. Qualitative data reveals local residents identify and value the social
aspects of family, knowing their neighbors and community.
Quantitative and qualitative data show low population density, lack of diversity (ethnic, racial, religious,
sexual preference etc.) and perceived intolerance of differences has some none-residents searching for
larger urban areas to reside. This group also looks for cultural and social activities beyond the family
that aren’t available in the rural community.
Community Capitals
Every community no matter what its size or where it is located has resources or assets. If a community
is going to survive and thrive it will need to build on those assets. When a community is able to invest
these resources and assets to create new resources it becomes capital.
Sociologists Cornelia Butler Flora and Jan L. Flora have
developed a Community Capitals Framework in an
effort to better understand how communities function.
They have divided community resources and assets into
seven categories for analysis through a holistic
approach. According to Flora, “Sustainable
Communities are those with economic security for all, a
heathy ecosystem, and social inclusion for all
residents”. They believe if one capital is emphasized
over the others, the remaining will be compromised.
(Figure 14)
10
Defining the capitals helps to ensure that all properties are accounted for in a community. Natural
Capital is probably the easiest for people to identify, as it is air, water, soil, weather and biodiversity that
surround communities. Cultural Capital is determined by the way a group sees the world and how they
define their values and beliefs. Cultural norms allow groups to impose expectations on other groups.
Human Capital is composed of the skills and abilities of individuals as determined by nature and
nurture. Human capital includes education, skills, health and self-esteem. Social Capital includes the
relationships and networks formed within the community. Social capital takes time and trust to develop.
It begins at the individual level and extends outward to families, neighborhoods, groups, organizations
and communities. Political Capital is a community’s ability to turn its norms into standards and then
ensure those standards are protected by rules and regulations. A community with strong political
capital controls its inner circle as well as its ability to influence a larger political circle. Financial Capital
is often the most talked about in a community because it is easy to measure and often wheels influence.
It includes savings, incomes generation, taxes, loans, credit, gifts and philanthropy. Built Capital refers
to the human constructed infrastructure in a community. These are the bricks and mortar of our
community, our streets, schools, bridges our factories.
The seven Community Capitals defined by Flora were utilized to analyze the Price County survey data.
Each desirable attribute was divided among the seven community capitals. Note that the survey design
emphasized five of the 7 capitals; Natural, Cultural, Social, Financial and Built. Although Political and
Human Capital factors were given as selections the number of options given, was less, so may require
further study. During survey development, the focus group identified fewer desirable factors in these
categories. That is not to say that participants don’t value those factors but may view the same from a
different perspective.
View of Price County
When we use the community of capital framework as a lens to review the data from the survey we
begin to see commonalities among factors. Participants were asked to rate Price County on a scale of 17 on important factors when choosing a place to live.
Qualities that survey participants perceived as strong or very strong characteristics of Price County
included: Natural Scenic Beauty, Safe and Stable Communities, Outdoor Recreation, Rural Atmosphere,
Friends and Family, Affordable Place to Live and a Great Place to Raise a Family.
It is not surprising that participants see and appreciate Price County’s many natural resources. Two of
the seven most desirable ranked characteristics, Natural Scenic Beauty and Outdoor Recreation fell in
the Natural Capital category. Price County has an opportunity to capitalize on these assets.
Price County was also perceived to have a great deal of valuable social capital. Survey participants
identified Safe and Stable Communities, Rural Atmosphere and a Great Place to Raise a Family in the
Social Capital category. Social Capital is also perceived differently by some. Although, those currently
living in Price County identified it to be rich in Social Capital those from outside perceive it lacking social
opportunities. This message was evident in the written comments. Many young people were searching
for social activities with people their own age. Focus group participants commented on the need to
11
create a welcoming program for new comers to help introduce them to community resources and
possible social networks. It was suggested that the community capitalize on the assets present,
abundant outdoor recreational opportunities and community events. The business community already
sponsoring events could be approached to host and advertise to this age cohort. Utilizing social media to
advertise such events and activities was identified as a key for success.
Few qualities were identified in the Cultural Capital Category. One however, Family & Friends was
among the most desirable characteristics. This was also listed as the number one reason young adults
listed for living in Price County. It is interesting to note that next to economic deficiencies cultural
deficiencies were identified most frequently in the qualitative data. Survey participants not only
commented on the lack cultural opportunities but viewed the community as closed minded to diversity
and outsiders.
The only economic capital identified as strong or very strong was an Affordable Place to Live. Seventy
five percent of all the qualitative data collected centered on economic weaknesses and deficiencies.
Lack of jobs, lack of professional positions, low salaries, high costs of living, lack of diversity in
employment and few opportunities to advance economically were mentioned most often. Price County
has always prided itself in being an entrepreneurial community. It was disappointing to see that the
young adults don’t perceive Price County as a place to start a business. Sharing the survey results with
economic organizations and agencies working to cultivate new business is essential. Having young
entrepreneurs dialogue with the economic and business community to share concerns will be the first
step to overcoming obstacles.
When we examine the qualities that people identified as strong and read the written comments we get
a picture of the people or Human Capital that make it possible. Those that help create the rural
atmosphere, the safe community, the great place to raise the family; contribute to Price County’s
Human Capital. The results reveal that educational attainment has a major impact on the satisfaction
and success of employment. Participants with limited human capital reported struggling on their own
often returning to family and friends for support. Survey participants expressed concern over a
perceived increase in substance abuse in the community. This can seriously impact human health and
diminish human capital
In the area of Political Capital there is room for improvement. Overall participants felt the community to
be a safe place to live. How a city governs and protects its citizens is an important part of political
capital. Unfortunately, there are some perceptions that government isn’t open to new ideas, they aren’t
planning for the future and there is no diversity in representation. Participants felt that governing bodies
deliberately set up barriers that presented their age cohort from participating. Written comments
revealed concern that communities weren’t doing enough to protect citizens from an increasing drug
traffic.
Built Capital is always an area of concern for small communities. The costs of maintaining infrastructure
is a constant challenge. The infrastructure of greatest concern to survey participants was broadband.
12
Participants wanted to be able to telecommute to higher paying professional jobs that weren’t available
in Price County.
Capital Strengths
Mixed Responses
Capital Weaknesses
Natural Capital
Social Capital
Cultural Capital
Financial Weaknesses
Built Capital
Human Capital
Human Capital
Political Capital
Cultural Capital
(Figure 15)
Identifying its Capital Strengths will give Price County a foundation to build upon as they work to
strengthen their community. Identifying its capital weaknesses is the first step to understanding what
others maybe perceiving.
How Does Price County Compare?
If Price County is serious about attracting, engaging and retaining more young people in the community
it is important to understand if it is meeting the needs of that audience. To do this we will compare the
qualities participants ranked as most important when determining a place to live with those ranked the
most desirable characteristics in Price County.
Price County’s Strongest Perceived Characteristics
Desirable Characteristics
Natural Scenic Beauty
Safe Community Neighborhood
Outdoor Recreation
Rural Atmosphere
Family and Friends
Quality of Life
Employment
Great Place to Raise a Family
Natural Scenic Beauty
Cost of Living
(Figure16)
When comparing the two lists the first thing to note is they share Natural Scenic Beauty. This can be a
terrific advantage to build upon if you have the type of scenic beauty people are looking for. Marketing
the scenic beauty and the areas outdoor recreation opportunities will play to the community’s
strengths. These can add to people’s quality of life.
The greatest challenge will be to deal with will be the economic issues identified. As described
previously this means matching professionals and skilled workers with higher paying jobs. Employment
opportunities could also be enhanced by improving the infrastructure or built capital so workers could
13
telecommute or participate in e-commerce ventures. Providing more assistance to young entrepreneurs
looking to start a business would also help build economic capital.
Price County has an opportunity to draw on its strong Natural and Social Capital to offer a quality of life
and a great place to raise a family as it works to attract, engage and retain young adults.
14
Resources:
Butler Flora, C. and Flora, J.L. (2013). Rural Communities: Legacy + Change. Boulder Colorado: Westview
Press.
Ryan, R. (2007). Live First, Work Second: Getting Inside the Head of the Next Generation. Madison
Wisconsin: Next Generation Consulting.
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Ashland County (September 27, 2011). Community Empowerment
Survey. University of Wisconsin Extension-Ashland County.
Document Reviewers:
Matt Calvert, University of Wisconsin Extension, 4-H Youth Development Specialist, Madison Wisconsin.
Barbara Haynes, University of Wisconsin Extension, Family living Educator, Price County Wisconsin.
Seth Carlson, Price County Review, Editor, Phillips Wisconsin.
Travis Nez, Price County Board of Supervisors, Supervisor, Phillips, Wisconsin.
Special Thanks:
A special thank you to the young adults that have participated in focus groups directing this project.
15