Citizenship information: a national survey of the citizenship information needs of the general public.

A relatively rare example of research originating from the LIS sector which ranges more widely than libraries. The survey examines the kinds of information that a sample of citizens have sought – and might in future seek – from public institutions. There are questions on citizens’ satisfaction with information provided, information which is difficult to obtain, reasons for seeking information, and preferred media/formats for using information. Readers should go to the original report for many additional data which had to be omitted from the summary – notably, some of the demographic data on the respondents

A national survey of the citizenship information needs of the general public.

This paper reports the results of a survey of information needs and information seeking behaviour of a national sample of the UK population. The survey was the first stage of the Citizenship Information project, funded by the British Library Research and Innovation Centre. In total, 1294 responses were received giving a valid and demographically representative response rate of 45.7%. Major findings include: that the majority of respondents had sought information in the past (59.4%) and that an even greater number predicted a future need for information (78.4%). Over three quarters of respondents said that they would use public libraries and between half and three quarters would approach Citizens Advice Bureaux, post offices, government departments or family and friends. Face to face communications and reading a book were the most popular means of accessing information, but a wide variety of other preferred options were cited. Only a small proportion expressed a preference for using a computer to seek information, and there was a clear emphasis on public libraries as an appropriate location for accessing electronic information. A highly significant majority (79.2%) believed that access to information was very important for exercising their rights as a citizen

Citizenship information, electronic government.

This paper summarises the results of the Citizenship Information national survey of information needs and information seeking behaviour of the UK general public. The project was funded by the BLR&IC and comprised a survey by questionnaire covering all regions of the United Kingdom. 1294 responses were received giving a valid and demographically representative response rate of 45.7%. A highly significant majority (79.2%) believed that access to information was very important for exercising their rights as a citizen. The paper goes on to review the issues arising from the project and from government policy in relation to the provision of information to the public and considers the likely trends emerging from policy as it is formulated presently

Citizenship information needs in the UK: results of a national survey of the general public by personal doorstep interview.

This paper reports the results of the second stage of the Citizenship Information research project funded by the BLR&IC: a national survey, by personal doorstep interview, of the citizenship information needs of 898 members of the UK public. Major findings include: that the public obtain most of their information on current issues via the media, and that they generally feel well informed on these issues. The public believe, however, that government is not doing enough to inform them about the Single European Currency and local council cutbacks. Small proportions of the sample had encountered problems in relation to employment, education, housing or welfare benefits and had consulted a range of information sources in order to solve these problems. Over a quarter of respondents had experienced disadvantage through a lack of access to information. Significant proportions of respondents were poorly informed about legal rights, welfare benefits and local politics. A highly significant majority (91.7%) believed that freedom of information was important for exercising their rights as citizens. Although access to computers in the home is presently limited, the majority of respondents indicated a willingness to use computers to vote and interact with government. Public libraries were the preferred source of government information and were seen as appropriate locations for a range of other types of citizenship information

CIVIC LIFE: Evidence Base for the Triennial Review

This document forms part of the Equality and Human Rights Commission triennial review and covers equalities in civic life. It examines equality in political participation, freedom of language and freedom of worship. The primary aim is to map the various dimensions of equality and inequality in participation in civic and political life. We explore and review equalities, good relations and human rights in relation to civic life, and where possible we examine some of the driving forces behind the differences that we observe

A More Perfect Union: A National Citizenship Plan

A More Perfect Union: A National Citizenship Plan sets forth the resources, activities, and partnerships that would be required to naturalize as many eligible immigrants as possible. It calls for a national mobilization in support of citizenship, identifying the roles of government, immigrant service agencies, and other sectors of society in a coordinated plan. It describes a program that could serve as a linchpin of an emerging U.S. immigrant integration strategy.Access the complete report via the download link below. An executive summary and individual chapters may be downloaded at http://www.cliniclegal.org/DNP/citzplan.html

New Hampshire civic health index

The Carsey Institute is participating in a study to examine America\u27s civic health. Led by the Conference on Citizenship (NCoC), America\u27s Civic Health Index is an annual study that measures a wide variety of civic indicators, such as community involvement and helping others. New Hampshire is one of six states partnering with NCoC to produce a state-specific report that examines the civic health in the Granite State

For the Benefit of All: Strategic Recommendations to Enhance the State's Role in the Integration of Immigrants in Illinois (Report of the New Americans Policy Council, Year One)

On November 19, 2005, Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich signed the New Americans Executive Order, a first-in-the-nation attempt to adopt a coherent, strategic, and proactive state government approach to integrate the rapidly growing immigrant population of Illinois. For this purpose, the Executive Order created a New Americans Policy Council comprised of 24 prominent Illinois business, faith, labor, community, philanthropic, and governmental leaders with experience in this field. While Illinois has undertaken several efforts to advance immigrant integration, neither it nor any other state has developed a comprehensive and strategic integration policy. Given the rapidly evolving demographics; the fast paced changes of an increasingly global economy; and the growing demand for both high-skilled and low-skilled workers; immigrant integration is one of the most overlooked issues of governance. The Policy Council's strategic approach emphasizes strategies that allow immigrants to be empowered to participate to the fullest extent possible in our economic and civic life, while fostering social cohesion with their new neighbors.This is the report of the New Americans Policy Council for the first year of the New Americans Executive Order project, published in 2006

Unauthorized Aliens’ Access to Federal Benefits: Policy and Issues

[Excerpt] Federal law bars aliens residing without authorization in the United States from most federal benefits; however, there is a widely held perception that many unauthorized aliens obtain such benefits. The degree to which unauthorized resident aliens should be accorded certain rights and privileges as a result of their residence in the United States, along with the duties owed by such aliens given their presence, remains the subject of intense debate in Congress. This report focuses on the policy and legislative debate surrounding unauthorized aliens’ access to federal benefits. Except for a narrow set of specified emergency services and programs, unauthorized aliens are not eligible for federal public benefits. The law (§401(c) of P.L. 104-193) defines federal public benefit as any grant, contract, loan, professional license, or commercial license provided by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States; and any retirement, welfare, health, disability, public or assisted housing, postsecondary education, food assistance, unemployment benefit, or any other similar benefit for which payments or assistance are provided to an individual, household, or family eligibility unit by an agency of the United States or by appropriated funds of the United States . The actual number of unauthorized aliens in the United States is unknown. According to demographer Jeffrey Passel’s calculations based on the 2005 March Current Population Survey (CPS), there were approximately 11.1 million unauthorized aliens residing in the United States (the most recent analysis with detailed statistical breakdowns). Passel further estimated the number of persons living in families in which the head of the household or the spouse was an unauthorized alien was 14.6 million. There were 6.6 million unauthorized families, which he defines as a family unit or solo individual in which the head or spouse is unauthorized. A noteworthy portion of the households headed by unauthorized aliens are likely to have U.S. citizen children, as well as spouses who may be legal permanent residents (LPRs). These “mixed status” families represent about one-third of all unauthorized families and five out of six unauthorized families with children as of March 2005. Policy researcher Steven Camarota concludes (based on his estimates drawn from the 2002 CPS) that the U.S. citizen children of unauthorized aliens account for much of the costs associated with illegal migration. Although the law appears straightforward, the policy on unauthorized aliens’ access to federal benefits is peppered with ongoing controversies and debates. Some center on demographic issues (e.g., how to treat mixed-immigration status families). Others explore unintended consequences, most notably when tightening up the identification requirements results in denying benefits to U.S. citizens. Still others are debates about how broadly the clause “federal public benefit” should be implemented. This report will be updated if policy changes warrant