Bridging Newcomers in The Neighbourhood Scale:

A Study on Settlement/Integration Roles & Functions of Neighbourhood Houses

in Vancouver

Miu Chung Yan, Ph.D.Sean Lauer, Ph.D.

UBC School of Social Work and Family StudiesResearch on Immigration and Integration in the Metropolis

March 25, 2006

Background

Vancouver: (2001 Census) Residents of over 10% of neighbourhoods have arrived to

Canada in the 1990s. Some even higher than 25%. Only a few neighbourhoods have residents of less than

30% visible minorities The legacy of settlement house – bridging not only

the poor and the rich but also new and old residents Neighbourhood house = multi-service, community-

based, non-profit, self-governing 9 NHs in Vancouver

The Study

Research question: How effective NHs in Vancouver is in bridging newcomers to the community?

Participatory approach: Letters of support from the the Association of Neighbourhood Houses of Greater Vancouver and three free-standing NHs

Multi-method approach to understand this issue from different stakeholders: Interview: Executive Directors (N=9) Interview: Key informants from governments and other

settlement service organizations (N=5) Focus groups: Frontline worker (N=7)and board of directors

(N=4) Survey: Service recipients (N=350)

Results of Qualitative Data Settlement/bridging/integration: a continuous process Programs to help integration: Multi-service for multi-

generation – drop-in, skills and language, classes, community kitchens, cultural events, information referral, settlement counseling, volunteer opportunities…

Strengths: Geographically convenient, flexible to meet local needs, free environment, source of referrals and information, community development/building, multilingual staff connected to the community, volunteers

Limitations: Lack of funding, over-demand on the multi-tasking staff, not well known in the community, changing demography and changing need, unmet needs beyond their capacity

Survey Results

N=350 Focus on social capitals of the service recipients

and how NHs in helping them to establish social ties Profile of respondents:

Means: 4.4 years in Canada 60% Chinese 83.8% women Mean age: 42 Most unemployed and have one or more children

Close Personal Ties

Gender Homogamy On average, networks 85% gender homogenous and

64.6% exclusive gender homogamy Ethnic Homogamy

On average, 71% ethnic homogenous and 57.5% exclusive ethnic homogamy

Newcomer Homogamy On average, 37% newcomer homogenous and 17.5%

exclusive newcomer homogamy

Extensive Social Ties

On average, 3.31 extensive ties (Hi: 13)

Overall, Non-family ties contribute more to extensivity

36% have Extensive Ties through Family 81% have Extensive Ties through Non-family

Exchange of Favors

Relatives are important social resource 48% both give and receive favors with relatives

Ethnic community important resource 45% provide help for friends and neighbours of the

same ethnic group. Slightly fewer receive help (37%)

Crossing ethnic boundaries rare Over 40% never exchange favors outside ethnic groups Just over 50% cross ethnic boundaries occasionally

Neighbourhood Houses and Social Capital

Crossing ethnic community boundaries 37% Strongly agree that houses facilitates crossing

ethnic boundaries (45% Agree) Extensive ties

57% have one Extensive Tie associated with Houses 14% have Extensive Ties exclusive to Houses 40% of all Extensive Ties linked to Houses

Exchange of favors 20% of exchanges with another associate of the houses

THANKS!

Contact: miu.yan@ubc.ca

sean.lauer@ubc.ca

Acknowledgement: This project is funded by the

Research on Immigration and Integration in the Metropolis.