State of the 50+ in the Capital Region of New York · 2020. 9. 17. · The 50+ population in New York State numbers 6.8 million people with 311,000 in the Capital Region (Albany,

STATE OF THE 50+ IN THE CAPITAL REGION OF NEW YORK

2014 STATE OF THE 50+ IN THE CAPITAL REGION OF NEW YORK 1

About AARP

AARP is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, with a membership of nearly 38 million, that helps people turn their goals and dreams into real possibilities, strengthens communities and fights for the issues that matter most to families such as healthcare, employment and income security, retirement planning, affordable utilities and protection from financial abuse. We advocate for individuals in the marketplace by selecting products and services of high quality and value to carry the AARP name as well as help our members obtain discounts on a wide range of products, travel, and services. A trusted source for lifestyle tips, news and educational information, AARP produces AARP The Magazine, the world's largest circulation magazine; AARP Bulletin; www.aarp.org; AARP TV & Radio; AARP Books; and AARP en Español, a Spanish-language website addressing the interests and needs of Hispanics. AARP does not endorse candidates for public office or make contributions to political campaigns or candidates. The AARP Foundation is an affiliated charity that provides security, protection, and empowerment to older persons in need with support from thousands of volunteers, donors, and sponsors. AARP has staffed offices in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Learn more at www.aarp.org.

Acknowledgements

AARP staff from the New York State Office, State Advocacy and Strategy Integration (SASI) and State Research contributed to the design, implementation and reporting of this study.

Contributors include: Beth Finkel, Bill Ferris, David McNally, David Irwin, Erin Mitchell, and Laura Palmer from the New York State office; Janee Briesemeister, Enzo Pastore, Coralette Hannon, Sarah Mysiewicz from SASI; Angela Houghton, Eowna Young Harrison, Brittne Nelson, Kate Bridges, Joanne Binette, Jennifer Sauer, Rachelle Cummins, Cassandra Cantave, Darlene Matthews, Cheryl Barnes, Wendy Pratt, Sibora Gjecovi, Ed Evans and Laura Mehegan from AARP Research; and Doris Gilliam, Office of General Counsel.

Special thanks to Universal Survey for their collaboration in the collection and tabulation of these data.

Copyright © 2014 AARP

AARP Research 601 E Street NW Washington, DC 20049

www.aarp.org/research

For more information contact: Angela Houghton, Senior Research Advisor AARP Research Tel. (202) 434-2261 [email protected]

http://research.aarp.org/

mailto:[email protected]


Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................. 4

POPULATION GROWTH & POWER OF 50+ VOTERS ...................................................................................... 6

DETAILED SURVEY FINDINGS:

Caregiving .................................................................................................................................................. 9

50+ Workers ............................................................................................................................................ 12

Retirement Security ................................................................................................................................ 14

Age Friendly Community ......................................................................................................................... 17

Utilities .................................................................................................................................................... 20

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS ............................................................................................... 22

METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................................................................... 23

ANNOTATED QUESTIONNAIRE .................................................................................................................... 27


INTRODUCTION The 50+ population in New York State numbers 6.8 million people with 311,000 in the Capital Region (Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga and Schenectady Counties). The 50+ constitutes a powerful voting demographic. The 50+ constituency is more likely to vote than their younger counterparts and in the 2010 gubernatorial election, 58 percent of all votes in New York State were cast by a 50+ voter. AARP is a leading advocate for the 50+ population and a non-partisan membership organization with 2.5 million members across New York State and 128,000 members across the Capital Region. AARP engages its members and the general public on key issues for the 50+ by providing information, holding debates and sponsoring grassroots activities. (It does not endorse candidates, have a PAC, or give money to campaigns or political parties.) In 2014, the last of the Baby Boomers will turn 50. As this baby boom ages, the number of New Yorkers coming into traditional retirement age will continue to rise over the next decade. Recognizing this demographic shift will present opportunities and challenges for New York, AARP New York commissioned a statewide survey of 50+ voters with oversamples in 6 geographic areas, including the Capital Region, to understand their experiences and ask their opinions on issues of importance. 1 Faced with age discrimination, caregiving for loved ones, affordability concerns and a lack of retirement savings, many 50+ New Yorkers see a future where they will never be able to retire. For those who can retire, a majority say they are likely to leave New York, taking their retirement incomes with them. We are pleased to present this State of the 50+ in The Capital Region of New York and hope the data herein will be used to inform the work of elected officials, policy makers and community leaders as they seek ways for the Capital Region to adapt to the needs of all its residents, regardless of age.

1 This report discusses findings from a representative sample of 50+ voters in the Capital Region of New York which includes the counties of Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga and Schenectady. The four-county sample was part of a larger survey of New York voters as described in more detail in the survey methodology section on page 23.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY All across the U.S. and in New York State, the combination of increased life expectancy and an aging baby boom generation is driving a very fast growing 65+ population. Based on an AARP analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data, over 500 New York State residents are expected to turn 65 every day in the coming years. In 2010, nearly one in seven people living in the Capital Region were aged 65 and over; by 2035 it is projected to be more than one in five. This population shift brings both opportunities and challenges, including a more experienced work force coupled with family caregiving needs, gaps in traditional retirement security, and increased demand for age-friendly community services and supports.

As people age they almost universally want to stay in their homes and communities. But, contrary to their preference, residents are often faced with the reality of securing for themselves a future where affordable, independent living is possible. For some, this results in a decision to relocate. Importantly, the extent to which New York can meet the needs of its 50+ residents now, and as they age, will help reduce the likelihood that working Boomers will leave the state in the future. Below are some of the key findings from a May 2014 survey of 50+ voters in the Capital Region of New York about their concerns:

• A large majority (89%) of currently working Capital Region voters age 50+ are at least somewhat confident they will be able to retire. Among these pre-retiree voters, more than six in ten (64%) report they are at least somewhat likely to leave New York State after retiring: 32 percent are extremely or very likely to leave the state and another 32 percent are somewhat likely.

• More than four in ten of 50+ voters in the labor force (45%) say their retirement will be delayed for financial reasons, and nearly one quarter (23%) do not have any access to a retirement savings plan through their employer.

• Nearly four in ten of all 50+ Capital Region voters (39%) are extremely or very concerned about being able to afford utility costs in the coming years. Among 50+ homeowners in the Capital Region, 44 percent of voters are concerned about affording future property taxes.

• More than half of 50+ Capital Region voters (53%) have been family caregivers in the past five years to an adult spouse or relative, a personal responsibility that impacts day-to-day work schedules, and for some, reduces earning potential.

• 50+ voters also report experiencing or witnessing age discrimination in the workplace. Four in ten (40%) Capital Region 50+ voters in the labor force believe they or someone they know has experienced some form of workplace age discrimination. Being encouraged or forced to retire (22%) and not being hired for a job (22%) are the most common forms.


• A majority of 50+ Capital Region voters say they would be more likely to stay in the state as they age if improvements were made in the areas of health (69%), transportation (66%), housing (67%) and jobs for older residents (54%).

Voter Support for Proposed Legislation and Elected Officials

• More than three quarters of Capital Region 50+ voters (78%) support establishing a state retirement plan to help New Yorkers that do not have access to a retirement savings option at work. Features considered most important to such a plan are portability (85%), accessibility (75%), and low cost to taxpayers (72%).

• When making voting decisions for elected officials, Capital Region 50+ voters are likely to vote for a candidate that ensures New Yorkers can afford to stay in their homes (77%), as well as one that helps New Yorkers have a financially secure retirement (71%).

• Capital Region 50+ voters are ready for elected officials to protect them from high and increasing utility costs. Over three-fourths (77%) do not believe the interests of residential utility customers are represented and taken into consideration when utility rate increases are proposed. Furthermore, three quarters (75%) do not believe their elected officials are doing enough to help them when home energy costs increase. Over eight in ten (84%) support creating an independent utility consumer advocate office in New York State.

• A majority of 50+ voters in the Capital Region support legislative proposals to help family caregivers, such as: o Require family caregiver names to be entered on the patient’s medical record (90%

support). o Require demonstration of medical or nursing tasks that caregivers will have to

perform (96% support). o Establish a family leave insurance plan funded by the state in addition to employee

contributions (76% support).

• About three-fourths (77%) of Capital Region 50+ voters are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate who will work on supporting New Yorkers that provide care at home for an adult loved one who is ill, frail, elderly or disabled.

• Over six in ten (65%) Capital Region 50+ voters are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate that would maintain safe and independent mobility around town.

• Seven in ten (71%) Capital Region 50+ voters support legislation that would require new homes built with county or state funds for low-income residents to use Universal Design standards so they are accessible to people of all ages and abilities, with half (50%) strongly supporting.


10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

22%

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040

% o

f Tot

al N

Y St

ate

Popu

latio

n

50-64 65+

28%

43%

52% 60%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

2010 2012

New York State Voter Participation by Age

18-49 50+

POPULATION GROWTH & POWER OF 50+ VOTERS

New York State has 6.8 million residents that are age 50+ and more than 311,000 in the Capital Region. A larger share of the 50+ in the Capital Region is currently under age 65: 58 percent are 50 to 64; and 42 percent are 65 and over.2 With the baby boom generation (those born 1946-1964) now aging into the older half of the 50+ cohort, New York State’s 65 and over population is growing at a rate of 500 people every day.3 Over the 25-year span from 2010 to 2035, New York State’s population age 65+ will go from 1 in every 7, to 1 in every 5 residents. In the Capital Region that is an increase from 14 percent to 21 percent of the total population.4

New York State Population Projection4

The 50+ age cohort is also an engaged voter bloc. In the 2010 gubernatorial election, 52 percent of 50+ New Yorkers turned up at the polls - a rate nearly twice that of their 18 to 49 year old counterparts. In the 2012 presidential election, 50+ voters in New York State again significantly outpaced younger voters in voter participation. Sixty percent of all

2 Nielsen and AARP MUL 2014. Prepared by AARP Research. 3 U.S. Census Bureau. Analysis by AARP Research 4 Cornell University, Program on Applied Demographics. http://pad.human.cornell.edu/counties/projections.cfm

http://pad.human.cornell.edu/counties/projections.cfm


58% 52%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2010 2012

Percent of Total Votes Cast New York State by Age

18-49

50+

50+ residents voted compared to 43 percent of those under age 50. 5 Stronger voter participation among 50+ voters results in an over-representation among all votes cast compared to their share of the population. In both the 2010 gubernatorial and the 2012 presidential elections, 50+ voters accounted for more than half of all votes in New York State while representing just 43 to 44 percent of the total 18+ population.6

5 U.S. Census Bureau. Current Population Survey, 2010 and 2012 November Voter Supplement. Prepared by AARP Research. (Self-reported survey of voter behavior.) 6 U.S. Census Bureau. Current Population Survey, 2010 and 2012 November Voter Supplement. Prepared by AARP Research. (Self-reported survey of voter behavior.)


65%

67%

71%

77%

77%

82%

Maintain safe and independent mobilityaround town for all ages

Ensure work opportunities for New Yorkersas they age

Help New Yorkers have a financially secureretirement

Support family caregivers

Ensure New Yorkers can afford to stay intheir homes

Safeguard New Yorkers against consumerscams, identity theft or fraud

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Likelihood to Vote for Candidate that Will Work on the Following Issues

(% Extremely or Very Likely to Vote For) Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

With such strong 50+ voter representation at the polls, it is their interests that will largely determine the outcomes. A large majority of Capital Region voters said they will vote for a candidate who supports key issues pertinent to 50+ voters. More than eight in ten (82%) would vote for a candidate who supports protecting New Yorkers from consumer fraud. Capital Region 50+ voters are particularly worried about identity theft and credit card fraud among the types of consumer fraud.

A majority of Capital Region 50+ voters are likely to vote for a candidate who supports family caregivers (77%) and who will work to ensure New Yorkers can afford to stay in their homes (77%). Majorities of Capital Region 50+ voters also want to elect a candidate who will help New Yorkers have a financially secure retirement (71%), ensure work opportunities for New Yorkers as they age (67%), and maintain safe and independent mobility around town for all ages (65%).

In the following pages we take a closer look at the Capital Region’s 50+ voter needs and opinions on these issues.


DETAILED SURVEY FINDINGS Caregiving

A family caregiver is someone who provides unpaid care for an adult relative, friend or spouse who is ill, frail, elderly, or has a disability. Care may include assisting with medical or nursing tasks like giving medications, wound care, special diets, or communicating with doctors; as well as

helping with personal needs, household chores, transportation, or financial management. Such care may be provided to someone who lives either in the same household as the caregiver or somewhere else. As of 2009, 4.1 million family caregivers in New York State were providing unpaid care at any given time to an adult with limitations in daily activities.7 According to our survey of 50+ voters in the Capital Region, over half (53%) have been a family caregiver to an adult loved one within the past 5 years or since 2009: 23 percent is currently providing such care while 30 percent previously provided care. Nationally, the incidence of adult children – mainly Baby Boomers - providing care for a parent has more than tripled in the past 15 years8 and the demographic shift of the population indicates the trend will continue. In fact, many Capital Region 50+ voters see themselves caregiving in the near future: 57 percent say it is extremely or very likely they will need to provide care for an adult relative, friend or spouse within the next 5 years.

7 The AARP Public Policy Institute. Valuing the Invaluable: 2011 Update. The Growing Contributions and Costs of Family Caregiving. www.aarp.org/relationships/caregiving/info-07-2011/valuing-the-invaluable.html 8 MetLife Mature Market Institute. The MetLife Study of Caregiving Costs to Working Caregivers; Double Jeopardy for Baby Boomers Caring for Their Parents, 2011. www.metlife.com/mmi/research/caregiving-cost-working-caregivers.html

Seven in ten working caregivers have lost work time to provide

care for an adult loved one.

Has Provided Care to an Adult Relative, Friend, or Spouse in the Past 5 years

Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

Current Cargiver

23%

No 46%

Don’t know 1%

Former Caregiver

30%

http://www.aarp.org/relationships/caregiving/info-07-2011/valuing-the-invaluable.html

http://www.metlife.com/mmi/research/caregiving-cost-working-caregivers.html


Family caregivers help fill the gap in long term care to allow loved ones to stay at home as they age. The estimated economic value of the care provided by family caregivers in New York State is approximately $32 billion, representing a significant cost savings for the health care system.9

But, providing this care often comes at a personal cost to the caregiver. Over four in ten (42%) 50+ voters in the Capital Region with family caregiving experience report the impact of family caregiving is either “overwhelming” or places “a good deal” of strain on their quality of life including financial hardship, emotional stress and stress at work.

Nearly four in ten (39%) 50+ family caregivers in the Capital Region are in the labor force, simultaneously juggling work responsibilities and caregiving. For working caregivers, the demands of providing care can often interfere with their work schedules thereby resulting in lost wages and reduced benefits from pensions and Social Security, detrimentally impacting earnings and lifetime wealth.10

Seven in ten (70%) Capital Region 50+ working family caregivers indicate that providing care has impacted their day-to-day work hours, by going in late, leaving early or taking time off to provide care. For some, caregiving responsibilities have more obviously reduced their income from wages, with potential implications on longer-term economic security: 22 percent have had to take a leave of absence, 18 percent reduced their hours to part time, and 5 percent stopped working entirely.

9 The AARP Public Policy Institute. Valuing the Invaluable: 2011 Update. The Growing Contributions and Costs of Family Caregiving. www.aarp.org/relationships/caregiving/info-07-2011/valuing-the-invaluable.html 10 MetLife Mature Market Institute. The MetLife Study of Caregiving Costs to Working Caregivers; Double Jeopardy for Baby Boomers Caring for Their Parents, 2011. www.metlife.com/mmi/research/caregiving-cost-working-caregivers.html

5%

5%

15%

18%

22%

70%

Lose any job benefits

Give up working or early retirement

Feel treated unfairly at work

Go from working full-time to part-time

Take a leave of absence

Go in late, leave early, take time offduring the day to provide care

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Caregiving Impact on Work Schedule Capital Region Voters 50+, Caregivers in the Labor Force

(n=81)

http://www.aarp.org/relationships/caregiving/info-07-2011/valuing-the-invaluable.html

http://www.metlife.com/mmi/research/caregiving-cost-working-caregivers.html


SPOTLIGHT ON BOOMERS (50-64 year olds): CAREGIVING Caregiving among Boomers nationally has tripled in the past 15 years according to the MetLife Mature Market Institute. Among Boomer-aged voters in the Capital Region, 53% are either recent or current caregivers; and 57% see themselves caregiving in the near future. The majority of 50+ working caregivers are Baby Boomers. In the Capital Region, family caregiving has disrupted a steady day-to-day work schedule for 72% of working Boomer caregivers.

Perhaps because so many are past, present or future caregivers, a majority of all 50+ voters in the Capital Region support legislative proposals to help family caregivers. Nine in ten (90%) are in favor of requiring hospitals and care facilities to record a family caregiver’s name on the medical record of the patient upon admission in order to keep that caregiver informed of major decisions, like transferring or discharging the patient.

Capital Region voters age 50+ are nearly universally in favor of requiring hospitals and rehabilitation facilities to explain and demonstrate any medical or nursing tasks to caregivers that they will need to perform after the patient returns home (96% support).

Over three quarters (76%) support the establishment of a family leave insurance program, to be funded by both state resources and a small employee payroll deduction that would allow family caregivers to receive a portion of their salary if they need to leave work for family caregiving duties.

When making voting decisions for New York State elections, more than three-fourths (77%) of 50+ voters in the Capital Region say they are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate who will work on supporting New Yorkers who provide care at home for an adult loved one who is ill, frail, elderly or disabled.

74% 69%

43%

22% 21%

33%

2% 4% 8%

1% 4% 12%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Require demonstrationof medical/nursing tasks

Require caregiver nameto be on record

Establish family leaveinsurance program

Support Legislative Proposals That Support Family Caregivers Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

Strongly Oppose

Somewhat Oppose

Somewhat Support

Strongly Support

Support NET= 96%

Support NET= 90%

Support NET= 76%


14%

16%

18%

22%

22%

40%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Laid off, fired, or forced out

Passed over for raise orpromotion

Unwelcome comments aboutage

Not hired

Encouraged/forced to retire

Yes to Any (Net)

Do you Believe you, a Family Member or Friend Have Ever Experienced the Following at Work Because of Age

Since Turning 50? (% Yes) Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

4%

60%

36%

Not in the labor force for otherreasons

Retired, not working at all

Labor Force Participation (NET)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Working Status Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

50+ Workers

After a period of historic lows during the 1980s, the U.S. labor force participation rate for the 65 and over population has been rising since the late 1990s and is currently around 20 percent. Within the 65 and over population, the 65 to 69 cohort has seen the largest increase, reaching a labor participation rate of 31 percent in 201011. As the Boomers now age into the 65-and-over ranks, the working share of the older population is expected to continue to rise.12

In our survey, over one-third (36%) of Capital Region 50+ voters are in the labor force. This equates to 65 percent among 50 to 64 year old Capital Region voters; and 8 percent among the 65+.

At the same time; however, age-based employment discrimination is a concern for many. Over one-third (35%) of Capital Region 50+ voters in the work force are extremely or very concerned about age discrimination and another 32 percent are somewhat concerned.

Concern or worry about age discrimination at work may be partly due to experiencing or observing acts believed to be discriminatory. Four in ten (40%) of Capital Region 50+ voters believe they or someone they know have experienced age-based discrimination at work since turning 50. The most common forms of age discrimination are forced retirement and not hiring a candidate because of age (22% each). Verbal comments, pass overs and lay-offs, firings or ousting are each experienced or observed by at least one in seven.

11 U.S. Census Bureau, Labor Force Participation and Work Status of People 65 Years and Older, issued January 2013. www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr11-09.pdf 12 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Spotlight on Older Workers, June 2008. www.bls.gov/spotlight/2008/older_workers/

http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/acsbr11-09.pdf

http://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2008/older_workers/


Increasing labor force participation among 50+ adults will require workplace dynamics to meet the needs of older workers, including protection from age discrimination and adaptations for family caregiving responsibilities. Sixty-seven percent of Capital Region voters 50+ are ready to support a candidate who works for ensuring opportunities for workers as they age.

SPOTLIGHT ON BOOMERS (50-64 year olds): WORK Nearly two- thirds (65%) of Boomer aged voters in the Capital Region report they are in the labor force. Among all Boomer voters in the Capital Region, over four in ten (46%) have experienced or witnessed work place acts believed to be discriminatory because of age and worry about age discrimination in the work place is widespread: 32% are extremely or very concerned about age discrimination at work and another 34% are somewhat concerned.


5%

7%

34%

25%

30%

55%

Not at all confident

Not too confident

Somewhat confident

Very confident

Extremely confident

Extremely/Very (NET)

0% 20% 40% 60%

Confidence in Ability to Retire

Capital Region Voters 50+, in Labor Force (n=153)

17%

18%

32%

10%

22%

32%

Not at all likely

Not very likely

Somewhat likely

Very likely

Extremely likely


0% 20% 40% 60%

Likelihood of Leaving New York State after Retiring

Capital Region Voters 50+, in Labor Force and Confident Will

Retire (n=135)

Retirement Security

Within the 36 percent of Capital Region voters 50+ who are currently in the labor force, 88 percent are age 50 to 64 and approximately 11 percent are age 65 and over.

Capital Region 50+ voters who are still in the labor force are relatively confident that they will ever be able to retire. While over half (55%) are extremely or very confident they will ever retire, one-third (34%) is just somewhat confident, and about one in eight (12%) are not confident in ever being able to retire. More than four in ten (44%) say that their retirement will be delayed for financial reasons.

Among the subset of 50+ Capital Region voters who are confident they will be able to retire, 64 percent of them report they are at least somewhat likely to leave New York State after retirement. One-third (32%) are extremely or very likely to leave and one-third (32%) is somewhat likely to leave.

50+ working Capital Region voters consider leaving the state

after retirement.

SPOTLIGHT ON BOOMERS (50-64 year olds): RETIREMENT FLIGHT In the 50 to 64 year old Boomer cohort, a majority of Capital Region workers are at least somewhat confident they will be able to retire. Of the 90% of Capital Region workers who are at least somewhat confident they will retire, 66% report some likelihood to leave New York State after retirement.


44%

39%

30%

Property Taxes

Utilities

Monthly rent or mortgage

0% 20% 40% 60%

Level of Concern about Ability to Pay in the Coming Years

(% Extremely or Vey Concerned) Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

At the same time, 50+ Americans overwhelmingly say they want to stay in their homes and communities as they age.13 Further, majorities of 50+ voters consistently support candidates and legislation that allows older New Yorkers to stay in their homes. The question then is why does such a relatively large proportion of future retirees say they are likely to leave New York? Looking at some basic affordability issues offers insight.

Capital Region 50+ voters indicate a high level of concern for their ability to afford property taxes (44%) and utilities (39%) in the coming years. In addition, three in ten (30%) is concerned about affording monthly housing payments such as a mortgage or rent.

Ongoing rises in these basic housing costs coupled with uncertain retirement income suggest motives for future retirees to leave New York and relocate in exchange for an affordable retirement.

Over the past few decades, the decrease in the percentage of all workers covered by defined benefit (“payout”) plans and increase in defined contribution (“pay in”) plans means that employees are bearing more risk in terms of steady retirement income.14

Regionally in the Capital Region, nearly one-quarter (23%) of 50+ voters in the labor force do not have any option to save for retirement through their employer. Another 21 percent have only defined contribution plans available, such as a 401k, where employers pay a specified amount into the plan but there is no assurance on the final payout to the retiree. Relatively fewer 50+ voters in the Capital Region (10%) are offered defined benefit or traditional pensions as their only retirement plan. Defined benefit or pension plans are more likely to be provided together with a defined contribution plan (47%) for current Capital Region workers age 50+.

13 The AARP Public Policy Institute. What Is Livable? Community Preferences of Older Adults, April 2014. www.aarp.org/research/ppi/liv-com2/policy/Other/articles/what-is-livable-AARP-ppi-liv-com.html 14 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Compensation Survey – Benefits. www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/

(Homeowners only)

http://www.aarp.org/research/ppi/liv-com2/policy/Other/articles/what-is-livable-AARP-ppi-liv-com.html

http://www.aarp.org/research/ppi/liv-com2/policy/Other/articles/what-is-livable-AARP-ppi-liv-com.html

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ebs/


To help close the gap in savings options, a large majority of 50+ Capital Region voters (78%) support the establishment of a state retirement plan that would grant plan access for New Yorkers who have no retirement savings option through their employer. Nearly half of 50+ voters (48%) strongly support such a proposal.

When considering a state retirement plan in New York to help all workers have access to retirement savings plans, portability is considered important by over eight in ten (85%) 50+ voters across the Capital Region, ranking first among plan features. A low cost to taxpayers and accessibility to all workers rank second in voter importance. Features that affect individual participants are important to relatively fewer but still a majority, such as professional management (64%), low cost to participants (61%), and ease of use (56%).

Ensuring financial security for New Yorkers is a key voting issue for 50+ voters. Candidates who will work on helping secure retirements and housing security for the 50+ are likely to win support from voters. When making voting decisions for New York State elections, seven in ten (71%) Capital Region 50+ voters say they are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate who will work on helping New Yorkers have a financially secure retirement. Also, over three quarters (77%) say they are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate working to ensure New Yorkers can afford to stay in their homes.

6%

9%

6%

15%

30%

48%

78%

Neither/Don't know/Refused

Strongly oppose

Somewhat oppose

Total Oppose (NET)

Somewhat support

Strongly support

Total Support (NET)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Would you support or oppose establishing a state retirement plan to help New Yorkers that do not have

access to a retirement savings option at work? Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)


Age Friendly Community

In addition to affordability, improvements in supports and services for older residents offer opportunities to make staying in New York likely for more retirees. Between 54 percent and 69 percent of 50+ Capital Region voters say they would be more likely to stay in the state as they age if improvements were made in the areas of health, housing, transportation and jobs for older residents. Nearly seven in ten (69%) of 50+ voters would be more likely to stay in New York as they age if health services and community support were improved. Two-thirds (67%) say improvements in affordable and suitable housing for older residents would positively influence their likelihood to stay in New York. Two-thirds (66%) would be positively persuaded to stay with public and alternative transportation improvements for all mobility levels. And, better employment opportunities for 50+ residents would influence just over half (54%) to consider staying in New York as they age.

54%

66%

67%

69%

Employment opportunities for older residents

Public transportation and alternativetransportation services for older or ill residents,

that is affordable and accessible

Housing that is affordable and suitable for olderresidents

Health services and community support

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

If New York State Were to Make Improvements in Capital Region, Would It Make You More Likely to Stay in NY as You

Age? (% saying “yes”) Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

SPOTLIGHT ON BOOMERS (50-64 year olds): AGE FRIENDLY COMMUNITY The potential for age friendly improvements to sway the likelihood of staying in New York State is about the same among Boomers as it is for the entire 50+ cohort: 66% of Boomer voters in the Capital Region would be influenced to stay in New York with improvements in health services; 66% with improvements in housing; 63% with improved public/alternative transportation services; and 54% with more or better employment opportunities for older residents.


Concerning problematic features in the community, streets that are in need of repair are considered a problem to the large majority of 50+ Capital Region voters (80%); with nearly half (46%) saying this is a major problem. Nearly two-thirds (64%) say crime or personal safety is a problem in the area. Echoing concerns about future affordability of housing costs, 57 percent of the Capital Region’s 50+ voters categorize the lack of affordable housing as a problem in their community. Among the pedestrian-friendly features asked about, cars not yielding to pedestrians is ranked as a major problem by 50+ voters in the area: six in ten (60%) overall recognize this as a problem and over one in five (23%) say it is a major problem. Additional community features that encourage walkability and decrease reliance on driving also present opportunity to improve age friendliness of New York communities. Large portions of Capital Region residents report problems in their community with close, accessible and easy public transportation (56%), sidewalk condition (44%), and traffic light timings that are safe for pedestrian crossing (39%).

Having safe and independent mobility options within their communities is an issue that influences the voting behavior of Capital Region 50+ voters. When making voting decisions for New York State elections, over six in ten (65%) of Capital Region 50+ voters say they are extremely or very likely to vote for a candidate who will work on maintaining safe and independent mobility around town for New Yorkers of all ages.

13%

13%

25%

22%

23%

18%

46%

26%

31%

31%

35%

37%

46%

34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Traffic lights timed too fast for safe pedestriancrossing

Sidewalks too narrow, poorly lit, need repair,don't exist

Public transportation too far away, too limited,or too hard to navigate

Lack of affordable housing

Cars not yielding to pedestrians

Crime or personal safety

Streets that need repair

Is Each of the Following a Problem in Your Community? Capital Region Voters 50+ (n=401)

Major Problem Minor Problem

39%

80%

64%

57%

60%

44%

56%


Adults want to stay in their homes and communities for as long as possible as they age. This preference for residents to “age in place” is easier to realize in a community that includes housing options for varying life stages and all income levels.

“Universal Design” is a term that refers to the design of living and work spaces so that they are accessible and usable by everyone, including people of all ages and people with disabilities, without special or separate design. Examples of basic universal design features in a private home would include a no-step entrance, 36 inch doorways, a bedroom or room to convert into a bedroom on the main floor, and a full bath on the main floor.

Seven in ten (71%) of Capital Region 50+ voters area-wide support legislation that would require new homes built for low-income residents with county or state funds to use such universal design standards, with half (50%) strongly supporting this measure.


Utilities

The prospect of rising and unaffordable utility costs in the coming years is a concern for the Capital Region’s 50+ voters. Nearly four in ten (39%) of voters age 50+ say they are

extremely or very concerned about their ability to pay utility bills in the coming years.

Moreover, over three quarters (79%) of Capital Region voters age 50+ say the cost of heating their homes this past winter put a strain on their household finances, with about one-third (34%) saying it was a major financial strain.

19%

15%

27%

18%

21%

39%

Not at all concerned

Not too concerned

Somewhat concerned

Very concerned

Extremely concerned


0% 20% 40% 60%

Level of Concern about Ability to Pay Utility Bills in Coming Years


20%

45%

34%

79%

No strain at all

A minor strain

A major strain

Any Strain (NET)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Financial Impact of Cost of Heating on Household


Capital Region voters age 50+ want protection against high and increasing utility costs.


A majority of 50+ voters do not feel consumers are duly protected from ongoing rate hikes and there is a perceived lack of action from elected officials. Over three quarters (77%) of Capital Region voters age 50+ do not believe the interests of residential utility customers are represented and taken into consideration when utility rate increases are proposed for electricity and gas. A majority (75%) do not believe their elected officials are doing enough to help them when home energy costs increase. In 40 other states, a consumer advocate independently represents the interests of residential utility consumers. New York State does not currently have an independent utility consumer advocate. Over eight in ten (84%) Capital Region voters age 50 and over support legislation to establish such an office that would represent residential customers when utility companies request a rate increase before the New York State Public Service. Six in ten (62%) support it strongly.

SPOTLIGHT ON BOOMERS (50-64 year olds): UTILITIES On the issue of utility affordability, 50 to 64 year old Boomer voters in the Capital Region are just slightly more likely than 50+ voters overall to believe that consumer interests are neither represented and considered when rate increases are proposed (81% say they are not); nor that elected officials are doing enough to help them when home energy costs increase (79% say they are not).

7%

5%

13%

22%

62%

84%

Strongly oppose

Somewhat oppose

Total Oppose (NET)

Somewhat support

Strongly support

Total Support (NET)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Opinions on Creating an Independent Utility Consumer Advocate Office in New York



DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS

67%

14%

8%

10%

48%

51%

5%

31%

11%

21%

14%

5%

13%

31%

23%

27%

12%

33%

29%

18%

16%

16%

17%

16%

12%

18%

21%

Married or living with a partner

Widowed

Divorced or separated

Never married

AARP Member

AARP Non-Member

0 to 12th grade, no diploma

High school graduate or equivalent

Post high school, no degree

2 year degree

4 year degree

Post graduate study, no degree

Graduate or professional degree

Democrat

Republican

Independent

Something else

Conservative

Moderate

Liberal

None of these

<$30K

$30K-<$50K

$50K-<$75K

$75K-<$100K

$100,000+

Don't know/Refused

CIVI

L ST

ATU

SM

EMBE

RSH

IPED

UCA

TIO

NPA

RTY

AFFI

LIAT

ION

POLI

TICA

L VI

EWS

INCO

ME


METHODOLOGY SUMMARY On behalf of AARP, an independent survey firm, Universal Survey, Inc., conducted telephone interviews with a sample of 2,926 registered voters aged 50+ who reside in New York State. The sample was drawn at random from a list of registered voters in the state of New York provided by Aristotle. Respondents were screened on age, state residency, and voter registration for inclusion in the survey. Interviewing occurred from March 19 through April 18, 2014. The total number of interviews was allocated across discrete sampling areas. There is a statewide sample of 407 with oversamples in the following New York State geographies for approximately 400 in each of the following areas:

• Capital Region (4 counties of Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga and Schenectady); • Erie County; • Dutchess County; • Monroe County; • Onondaga County; • Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk counties); and • New York City (5 counties of Bronx, King, New York, Queens, Richmond).

This survey is very similar to one conducted in New York City in June 2013. Repeated survey questions were not asked this year in New York City oversample interviews. In New York City only, interviewing was conducted in English and Spanish.

On a sample size of n=400, the margin of error is ±5.0 percent at the 95% confidence interval. Data have been weighted by age, gender, education and county to reflect the 50+ voter population in each geography. SAMPLE DESIGN The sample of registered voters was drawn from a list of 5.5 million 50+ year old registered voters. The table below shows counts and distribution of sample records in the sample frame by target geographies.

COUNT % Capital Region 265,390 5% Erie County 299,232 5% Onondaga County 140,637 3% Monroe County 218,716 4% Dutchess County 88,191 2% Long Island 923,556 17% NYC 2,020,427 37% Rest of NY 1,548,955 27% TOTAL 5,505,104 100%


The study was completed in two phases. Phase one consisted of 407 random interviews across the state of New York. The distribution of the New York statewide sample is shown below. Phase Two was a stratified random sample draw in each of the targeted geographies to augment interviews that fell out of the statewide sample with a goal of achieving 400 in each area.

NY Statewide

Sample n=407

Geographic Over-

samples

Total n

Capital Region 33 368 401 Erie County 23 377 400 Onondaga County 12 388 400 Monroe County 18 386 404 Dutchess County 5 401 406 Long Island 63 338 401 New York City 139 261 400 Rest of New York State 114 - 114 TOTAL 407 2,519 2,926

QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire was developed by AARP staff. WEIGHTING The sample was weighted by education, age, gender and county to match the sampling frame of registered voters, with an additional overlay from the 2012 Current Population Survey November Voter Supplement (CPS). The weights were applied sequentially. The order of application was education, gender, and age. These weights were applied first (in sequence) based on the sample codes sourced from the list and weighted to the sample frame. Next, a second stage of weighting on education was applied based on survey responses and weighted to the population distribution according to the CPS. Last, for the New York City sample only, a county weight was applied based on the CPS. Following are the New York 50+ voter population distributions on education and county (NYC only) according to the U.S. Current Population Survey 2012, November Voter Supplement.

EDUCATION NY State

Capital Region Erie Monroe Onon-

daga Dutch-

ess Long

Island NYC

Less than 4 year degree 66% 68% 68% 68% 68% 68% 58% 68% 4 year degree or more 34% 32% 32% 32% 32% 32% 42% 32%


COUNTY NYC

Bronx 19% Kings/Brooklyn 23% New York/Manhattan 24% Queens 26%

Richmond 8% The table below contains information about the weighting result. The first table shows distributions for New York registered voters aged 50+ according to the sample frame in the column labeled “Population”. The column labeled “Sample” shows the distribution of the sample. The column labeled “Weighted Sample” shows the distribution in the sample after all the weights were applied.

Population* Sample Weighted Sample

EDUCATION NYS - No info 44.60% 31.40% 43.00% NYS - Completed High School 24.00% 25.80% 24.60% NYS - Completed College 19.70% 25.30% 20.30% NYS - Completed Graduate School 11.50% 17.00% 11.90% NYS - Attended Vocational/Technical 0.20% 0.50% 0.20% Capital Region - No info 37.80% 27.90% 38.10% Capital Region - Completed High School 27.20% 26.40% 27.20% Capital Region - Completed College 20.10% 24.70% 20.10% Capital Region - Completed Graduate School 14.60% 20.90% 14.60% Capital Region - Attended Vocational/Technical 0.20% 0% 0% GENDER NYS - Male 48% 46% 48% NYS - Female 52% 54% 52% Capital Region - Male 44% 50% 44% Capital Region - Female 56% 50% 56% AGE NYS - Age 50-64 50% 41% 49% NYS - Age 65+ 50% 59% 51% Capital Region - Age 50-64 49% 49% 49% Capital Region - Age 65+ 52% 51% 51% EDUCATION NYS - Less than 4 year degree 66% 56% 65% NYS - 4 year degree or more 34% 44% 35% Capital Region - Less than 4 year degree 68% 49% 68% Capital Region - 4 year degree or more 32% 51% 32%

* Source: Aristotle.


RESPONSE RATE/COOPERATION RATE/REFUSAL RATE The response rate for this study was measured using AAPOR’s response rate 3 method. The cooperation rate was measured using AAPOR’s cooperation rate 3 method. The refusal rate was measured using AAPOR’s refusal rate 3 method.

Response Rate

Cooperation Rate

Refusal Rate

TOTAL 7% 48% 28% Capital Region 12% 52% 32%

Source: AAPOR Outcome Rate Calculator Version 2.1 May 2003


ANNOTATED QUESTIONNAIRE 2014 New York State Telephone Survey of Registered Voters 50+

Annotation of Survey Responses English Questionnaire, Landline Sample Only

These data were collected by Universal Survey, Inc. on behalf of AARP through a telephone survey of New York State registered voters age 50 and older. There is a statewide sample of n=407 with oversamples in the following NY geographies for approximately n=400 each: the Capital Region (4 counties of Albany, Rensselaer, Saratoga and Schenectady); Erie County; Dutchess County; Monroe County; Onondaga County; Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk counties); and New York City (5 counties of Bronx, King, New York, Queens, Richmond). This survey is very similar to one conducted in NYC in June 2013. Repeated survey questions were not asked in NYC oversample interviews. Interviewing was conducted between March 19 and April 18, 2014. In New York City only, interviewing was conducted in English and Spanish. On a sample size of n=400 the margin of error is ±5.0 percent at the 95% confidence interval. Data have been weighted to reflect the 50+ voter population in each geography.

* Survey sections in blue highlight were skipped for NYC oversample only.

INTRODUCTION Hello, this is ______ calling from _________, a national opinion research firm. We are not telemarketers and are not trying to sell you anything. We are calling New Yorkers to ask about their opinions on some issues that may affect them and their families and would like to include your views in our study. We would greatly appreciate your participation and all of your responses will be kept entirely confidential.

SCREENER QS1. First, to ensure that we interview a wide variety of people, I have a few questions about you. Can you please tell me your age as of your last birthday? [CAPTURE ACTUAL AGE. DON’T READ LIST UNLESS NECESSARY. USE THE AGE GROUPS BELOW TO KEEP TRACK OF HOW MANY RESPONDENTS WE ARE GETTING IN EACH GROUP.]

New York State Capital Region

Base: Total Respondents 407 401 50-64 NET 49% 49% 65+ NET 51% 51%

QS2. And, are you registered to vote in New York?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Yes 100% 100% No - -

QS3. Which New York County do you live in? (DO NOT READ)


Base: Total Respondents 407 401



CAPITAL REGION 8% 100% Albany County 4% 36% Rensselaer County 2% 13% Saratoga County 1% 31% Schenectady County 1% 20% ERIE COUNTY 5% - DUTCHESS COUNTY 1% - MONROE COUNTY 4% - ONONDAGA COUNTY 3% - LONG ISLAND 15% - Nassau County 6% - Suffolk County 8% - NYC 36% - Bronx County 5% - Kings County 5% - New York County 11% - Queens County 11% - Richmond County 4% - REST OF NY 29% - Allegany County 0 - Broome County 0 - Cattaraugus County 1% - Cayuga County 1% - Chautauqua County 2% - Chemung County 1% - Chenango County 0 - Clinton County 0 - Columbia County 0 - Delaware County 1% - Essex County 0 - Franklin County 2% - Fulton County 0 - Genesee County 0 - Herkimer County 1% - Livingston County 1% - Madison County 0 - Montgomery County 1% - Niagara County 1% - Oneida County 1% - Ontario County 1% - Orange County 1% - Oswego County 1% - Otsego County 1% - Putnam County 1% - Rockland County 1% - St. Lawrence County 1% - Schoharie County 0 - Schuyler County 0 - Seneca County 1% -



Steuben County 1% - Sullivan County 0 - Tioga County 1% - Tompkins County 1% - Ulster County 1% - Warren County 1% - Washington County 1% - Wayne County 0 - Westchester County 3% - Wyoming County 0 - Yates County 0 -

QS4. RECORD RESPONDENT’S GENDER. ASK ONLY IF ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY: “To ensure it is recorded accurately, could you please state your gender?”


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Male 48% 44% Female 52% 56%

QS5. We want to ensure that we interview people from a wide variety of racial and ethnic groups. Can you please tell me if you are of Hispanic, Spanish, or Latino origin or descent?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Yes 10% 2% No 90% 97% Don't know 1% 0

QS6. And what is your race? [ACCEPT ONLY ONE. IF NECESSARY: WHICH ONE RACE DO YOU MOST IDENTIFY WITH?]


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 White or Caucasian 81% 90% Black or African American 8% 4% Native American or Alaskan Native 0 0 Asian 1% 0 Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 0 1% Other 7% 2% Don't know 1% 0 Refused 2% 3%


QS7. Which of the following best describes your current employment status? Are you… [READ LIST, ACCEPT ONE.]


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Labor Force Participation (NET) 39% 36% Self-employed full-time 5% 2% Self-employed part-time 3% 2% Employed full-time 19% 22% Employed part-time 7% 7% Unemployed and looking for work 5% 3% Retired and not working at all 53% 60% Not in the labor force for other reasons 7% 4% Don't know 1% - Refused 1% 0

IF LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION AT QS7, ASK QS8. OTHERWISE GO TO Q3. QS8. Have you ever retired from a previous career?


Base: Labor Force Participation 148 153 Yes 14% 23% No 86% 77% Don't know 0 - Refused - -


MAIN QUESTIONNAIRE

Q1. & Q2. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY

[*NYC OVERSAMPLE SKIP Q3, GO TO CAREGIVING SECTION, QC-A.]

Q3. When making your voting decisions for New York State elections, how likely are you to vote for a candidate who will work on [INSERT B-H]? Are you extremely likely, very likely, somewhat likely, not very likely or not at all likely to vote for someone who will work on it? [RANDOMIZE ORDER. RECORD ONE ANSWER FOR EACH. REPEAT RESPONSE SCALE FOR FIRST FEW ONLY.]

NOTE: ITEMS A & G IN LIST BELOW NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY

b. Supporting New Yorkers who provide care at home for an adult loved one who is ill, frail, elderly or disabled


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 75% 77% Extremely likely 34% 32% Very likely 42% 45% Somewhat likely 20% 19% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 2% 3% Not very likely 2% 1% Not at all likely 1% 2% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 0 0

c. Safeguarding New Yorkers against consumer scams, identify theft or fraud


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 76% 82% Extremely likely 37% 40% Very likely 39% 42% Somewhat likely 18% 13% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 5% 2% Not very likely 4% 2% Not at all likely 1% 1% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 0 1%


d. Helping New Yorkers have enough money for a financially secure retirement


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 72% 71% Extremely likely 33% 32% Very likely 38% 39% Somewhat likely 17% 18% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 6% 8% Not very likely 3% 4% Not at all likely 3% 4% Don't know 4% 2% Refused 1% 0

e. Ensuring work opportunities for New Yorkers as they age


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 70% 67% Extremely likely 27% 25% Very likely 43% 42% Somewhat likely 20% 23% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 7% 7% Not very likely 5% 4% Not at all likely 2% 3% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 1% 1%

f. Maintaining safe and independent mobility around town for New Yorkers of all ages


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 67% 65% Extremely likely 29% 22% Very likely 38% 43% Somewhat likely 22% 25% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 6% 5% Not very likely 5% 3% Not at all likely 2% 2% Don't know 4% 4% Refused 0 1%


h. Ensuring New Yorkers can afford to stay in their homes


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 79% 77% Extremely likely 39% 37% Very likely 40% 40% Somewhat likely 14% 15% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 6% 6% Not very likely 3% 4% Not at all likely 2% 3% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 1% 0

Caregiving QC-A. The next few questions are about caregiving. A family caregiver is someone who provides care for an

adult relative, friend or spouse who is ill, frail, elderly, or has a disability. Care may include assisting with medical or nursing tasks like giving medications, wound care, special diets, or communicating with doctors; also helping with personal needs, household chores, transportation, financial management or a variety of other tasks. Such care may be provided to someone who lives either in the same household or somewhere else.

How likely is it that you will provide this sort care to an adult relative, friend or spouse (18 years or older) to help them take care of themselves in the next five years?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 53% 57% Extremely likely 25% 28% Very likely 28% 29% Somewhat likely 14% 14% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 29% 28% Not very likely 16% 16% Not at all likely 13% 12% Don't know 4% 1% Refused 0 -


QC-1. In the past 5 years, since 2009, have you yourself provided this sort of care to an adult relative, friend or spouse 18 years or older who is ill, frail, elderly or has a disability? [IF RESPONDENT SAYS “YES” CLARIFY IF THEY ARE STILL CURRENTLY PROVIDING CARE OR PREVIOUSLY BUT NOT CURRENTLY.]


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Caregiver (NET) 50% 53% Yes, I am currently providing care 20% 23% Yes, I previously provided care but not currently 30% 30% No 49% 46% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 1% 1%

QC-2. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY [*NYC OVERSAMPLE SKIP QC-3. GO TO INSTRUCTION BEFORE QC-4.1]

QC-3. To what extent [INSERT “does” IF CURRENTLY AT QC-1. INSERT “did” IF PREVIOUSLY AT QC-1 AND NOT CURRENTLY] your caregiving put a strain on the quality of life for you and your family, including financial hardship, emotional stress and stress at work? Would you say … READ LIST. ACCEPT ONE


Base: Current and previous caregivers (excluding NYC oversample) 201 208 Overwhelming strain 14% 8% A good deal of strain 41% 34% Minor strain 30% 46% No strain at all 14% 12% Don't know 0 1% Refused 0 -

ASK QC-4.1 IF Q.S7=1-4 OR 6 “LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION” OR QS8=YES “RETIRED FROM A PREVIOUS CAREER”. OTHERWISE SKIP TO QC-6.] QC-4. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY

QC-4.1. In your experience as both a worker and a caregiver, did you ever…… [INSERT FROM BELOW. RANDOMIZE LIST]

a) Feel treated unfairly at work


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 14% 15% No 85% 85% Was not working at the time I was caregiving - - Don't know - - Refused 1% -


b) Have to go in late, leave early, or take time off during the day to provide care


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 74% 70% No 25% 29% Was not working at the time I was caregiving - - Don't know - 1% Refused 1% -

c) Have to take a leave of absence


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 27% 22% No 71% 78% Was not working at the time I was caregiving - - Don't know - - Refused 1% -

d) Have to go from working full-time to part-time


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 17% 18% No 81% 82% Was not working at the time I was caregiving 1% - Don't know - - Refused 1% -

e) Lose any of your job benefits


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 11% 5% No 85% 95% Was not working at the time I was caregiving - - Don't know 3% - Refused 2% -


f) Have to give up working entirely or choose early retirement


Base: Caregivers and Labor Force Participation 82 81 Yes 13% 5% No 85% 95% Was not working at the time I was caregiving - - Don't know 1% - Refused 1% -

QC-5. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY

QC-6. There are currently a number of legislative proposals to help provide support for family caregivers. For each of the following proposals that I read, please tell me if you would support or oppose it: [INSERT ITEM A-C FROM LIST BELOW AND RANDOMIZE ORDER OF ITEMS]

a) Require hospitals and care facilities to record the name of a patient’s caregiver in the patient’s medical record upon admission and keep that caregiver informed of major decisions, like transferring or discharging the patient.


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 87% 90% Strongly support 65% 69% Somewhat support 22% 21% Neither support nor oppose 2% 0 Oppose (NET) 7% 8% Somewhat oppose 4% 4% Strongly oppose 3% 4% Don't know 4% 2% Refused 1% 0

b) Require hospitals and rehab facilities to explain and demonstrate any medical or nursing tasks

caregivers will need to perform after the patient returns home.


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 93% 96% Strongly support 69% 74% Somewhat support 23% 22% Neither support nor oppose 2% - Oppose (NET) 3% 2% Somewhat oppose 2% 2% Strongly oppose 1% 1% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 0 1%


c) Establish a family leave insurance program that provides workers with a portion of their pay if they need to leave work for family caregiving duties. This program would be funded by both state resources and a very small employee payroll deduction.


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 72% 76% Strongly support 45% 43% Somewhat support 28% 33% Neither support nor oppose 2% 1% Oppose (NET) 20% 20% Somewhat oppose 10% 8% Strongly oppose 10% 12% Don't know 5% 3% Refused 1% 0

Older Worker [*NYC OVERSAMPLE, SKIP QW-1 THROUGH QR-3. GO TO INSTRUCTION BEFORE QR-4.] QW-1. Next, I have some questions related to work and age. Do you believe you yourself, a family member or

a friend have ever….[INSERT ITEM A-E FROM LIST BELOW AND RANDOMIZE ORDER OF ITEMS]

a. Not been hired for a job because of age since turning 50?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes 23% 22% No 72% 77% Don't know 5% 1% Refused - -

b. Been passed over for a raise or promotion because of age since turning 50?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes 18% 16% No 77% 82% Don't know 4% 2% Refused 1% 1%


c. Been laid off, fired, or forced out of a job because of age since turning 50?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes 19% 14% No 79% 85% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 1% -

d. Been encouraged or forced to retire before you or they preferred to retire?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes 26% 22% No 71% 77% Don't know 3% 1% Refused - -

e. Received or been exposed to unwelcome comments about age in the workplace?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes 16% 18% No 83% 82% Don't know 1% - Refused - -

[ASK QW-2 IF CODES 1-4 OR 6 AT Q.S7. OTHERWISE SKIP TO INSTRUCTION BEFORE QR-1. ] QW-2. How concerned are you about age discrimination in the workplace? [READ LIST.]


Base: Labor Force Participation (excluding NYC oversample) 148 153 Top 2 Box (NET) 34% 35% Extremely concerned 18% 15% Very concerned 15% 19% Somewhat concerned 30% 32% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 36% 33% Not too concerned 17% 14% Not at all concerned 19% 18% Don't know - - Refused - -

QW-3 & QW-4 MOVED. QW-5 & QW-6 OMITTED


Retirement Security [TRANSITION TEXT READ TO ALL] Thinking now about retirement security … [IF QS7=1-4 OR 6 “LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION” CONTINUE. OTHERWISE, GO TO QR-4] QR-1 (OLD QW-3.) Overall how confident are you that you will be able to retire at some point? Are you… [READ LIST. ACCEPT ONE]


Base: Labor Force Participation (excluding NYC oversample) 148 153 Top 2 Box (NET) 39% 55% Extremely confident 22% 30% Very confident 18% 25% Somewhat confident 33% 34% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 27% 11% Not too confident 13% 7% Not at all confident 14% 5% Don't know 0 - Refused - -

QR-2 (OLD QW-4.) Will your retirement be delayed for financial reasons?


Base: Labor Force Participation (excluding NYC oversample) 148 153 Yes 56% 45% No 40% 51% Don't know 3% 2% Refused - 2%


[IF QS7=1-4 OR 6 “LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION” AND EXTREMELY, VERY OR SOMEWHAT CONFIDENT TO RETIRE AT QR-1 ASK QR-3. ALL OTHERS GO TO INSTRUCTION BEFORE QR-4] QR-3 (OLD QLV-5.1) How likely are you to leave New York State and live somewhere else once you retire? Are you … READ LIST?


Base: Labor Force Participation and Extremely, Very or Somewhat Confident will be able to retire (excluding NYC oversample) 106 135 Top 2 Box (NET) 27% 32% Extremely likely 13% 22% Very likely 14% 10% Somewhat likely 33% 32% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 39% 35% Not very likely 17% 18% Not at all likely 22% 17% Don't know 1% 1% Refused - -

[ASK QR-4 IF QS7=1-4 OR 6 “LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION”. ALL OTHERS GO TO QR-5] QR-4. [IF CODE 1-4 AT S7 “Does your employer” IF CODE 6, “Did your most recent employer”] provide any of the

following ways to save for retirement? Do they provide …. [INSERT A-B. ROTATE.]

a. A traditional pension plan or defined benefit plan? (IF ASKED, MAY CLARIFY: a traditional pension or defined benefit plan supplies retirees with a monthly income, typically based on a formula of salary and years of service. It is not a 401(k) plan.)


Base: Labor Force Participation 148 153 Yes 51% 57% No 41% 40% My employer doesn’t/didn’t offer a way to save for retirement. 2% - Don't know/Not Sure 3% 2% Refused 3% 1%

b. An IRA, 401k or 403b defined contribution plan (IF ASKED, MAY CLARIFY: a defined contribution plan

allows you to make contributions from your salary to an individual account set up in your name.)


Base: Labor Force Participation 148 153 Yes 58% 67% No 31% 29% My employer doesn’t/didn’t offer a way to save for retirement. 2% 0 Don't know/Not Sure 6% 1% Refused 3% 1%


[ASK ALL] QR-5. One way to help New York workers without access to a retirement savings option at work would be for

the State to set up its own retirement savings plan. The plan would work very similar to a state college savings plan, where people contribute into a retirement account that is professionally managed. It would be voluntary and open to any worker choosing to enroll in the plan. The plan would be self-funded, and would not cost taxpayer dollars. Would you support or oppose this type of plan?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 77% 78% Strongly support 52% 48% Somewhat support 25% 30% Neither support nor oppose 2% 2% Oppose (NET) 16% 15% Somewhat oppose 6% 6% Strongly oppose 10% 9% Don't know 4% 4% Refused 1% 0

[IF “Don’t Know” OR “Refused” AT QR-5, SKIP TO QU-1.] QR-6. If New York State were to institute such a plan, how important would each of the following features be to

you? Would you say extremely important, very important, somewhat important, not very important or not at all important? How important is… [INSERT A-F, RANDOMIZE]

a) Portability, so you can take the money and account with you from one job to the next


Base: Total Answering 392 387 Top 2 Box (NET) 83% 85% Extremely important 47% 46% Very important 37% 40% Somewhat important 9% 7% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 5% 6% Not very important 2% 2% Not at all important 4% 5% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 1% 1%


b) A low cost to taxpayers



c) A low cost to participants


Base: Total Answering 392 387 Top 2 Box (NET) 63% 61% Extremely important 32% 30% Very important 31% 31% Somewhat important 22% 24% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 10% 12% Not very important 4% 5% Not at all important 5% 7% Don't know 5% 2% Refused 1% 0

d) Professional money management




e) Accessibility so it is open to all workers in the state


Base: Total Answering 392 387 Top 2 Box (NET) 70% 75% Extremely important 38% 37% Very important 32% 38% Somewhat important 20% 15% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 8% 9% Not very important 3% 3% Not at all important 5% 6% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 1% 0

f) Ease of use so contributions are taken directly from employee paychecks



Utilities [TRANSITION TEXT READ TO ALL] I’d like to ask you a few questions now about home utility services. [*NYC OVERSAMPLE SKIP QU-1 AND QU-2. GO TO QU-2.1] QU-1. (OLD QLV-1.) Thinking about where you live, do you rent or own your residence?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Rent 28% 16% Own 70% 82% Other 2% 1% Don't know - - Refused 0 1%


QU-2. (OLD QLV-4.) For some people, having affordable housing as they age is a concern. How concerned are you about your [INSERT A-C]? Would you say you are extremely concerned, very concerned, somewhat concerned, not very concerned or not at all concerned? [RANDOMIZE AND ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE FOR EACH.]

a. Ability to pay monthly rent or mortgage payments in the coming years


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 35% 30% Extremely concerned 19% 16% Very concerned 16% 13% Somewhat concerned 19% 18% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 45% 52% Not too concerned 18% 14% Not at all concerned 27% 38% Don't know 1% - Refused 1% -

b. Ability to pay property taxes in the coming years (IF OWN IN Q.U-1)


Base: Own Residence (excluding NYC oversample) 301 345 Top 2 Box (NET) 52% 44% Extremely concerned 31% 24% Very concerned 21% 20% Somewhat concerned 24% 28% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 23% 28% Not too concerned 9% 11% Not at all concerned 13% 17% Don't know 1% - Refused - -


c. Ability to pay utility bills in the coming years

New York State Capital Region Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 49% 39% Extremely concerned 26% 21% Very concerned 23% 18% Somewhat concerned 20% 27% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 30% 35% Not too concerned 14% 15% Not at all concerned 17% 19% Don't know 0 - Refused 0 -

QU-2.1 How much of a financial strain would you say the cost of heating has put on your household this winter? Would you say… [READ LIST. ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE.]


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 A major strain 38% 34% A minor strain 36% 45% No strain at all 23% 20% Don't know 1% 0 Refused 1% 1%

QU-3. When rate increases are proposed for electricity and gas, do you believe the interests of residential

utility customers are sufficiently represented and taken into consideration?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Yes 17% 18% No 72% 77% Don't know 10% 5% Refused 1% 1%


QU-4 In 40 other states, a consumer advocate independently represents the interests of residential utility consumers. New York State does not currently have an independent utility consumer advocate. Would you support or oppose legislation to establish such an office that would represent residential customers when utility companies request a rate increase before the New York State Public Service Commission in Albany?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 79% 84% Strongly support 59% 62% Somewhat support 20% 22% Neither support nor oppose 2% 0 Oppose (NET) 15% 13% Somewhat oppose 8% 5% Strongly oppose 6% 7% Don't know 2% 3% Refused 2% 0

QU-5. Do you believe your elected officials are doing enough to help people when home energy costs

increase?



Consumer Fraud/Protections

[*NYC OVERSAMPLE, SKIP QF-1 THROUGH QLV-6. GO TO QLV-9.]

QF-1. Thinking now about all of the experiences you have had as a consumer, has there been a time in the past five years, since 2009, where you or someone you know encountered a fraud or “scam” that intentionally tried to mislead or defraud you or the person you know?


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Yes (NET) 43% 43% Yes, myself 25% 28% Yes, someone I know 18% 15% No 55% 57% Don't know 2% 0 Refused - 0

QF-2. & QF-3. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY


QF-4. How worried are you about potentially fraudulent, unfair or deceptive practices around [INSERT ITEM A-H]? Are you extremely worried, very worried, somewhat worried, not very worried or not at all worried? [RANDOMIZE AND ACCEPT ONE RESPONSE FOR EACH.]

a. Check-cashing outlets


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 21% 24% Extremely worried 10% 15% Very worried 11% 10% Somewhat worried 21% 22% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 50% 47% Not too worried 15% 15% Not at all worried 35% 33% Don't know 7% 6% Refused 1% 1%

b. Internet loans;




c. Home financing and home equity loans;



d. Home repairs and home repair financing;


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 26% 29% Extremely worried 10% 13% Very worried 16% 15% Somewhat worried 31% 31% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 40% 38% Not too worried 15% 13% Not at all worried 25% 25% Don't know 2% 2% Refused 0 0

e. Sweepstakes;


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 17% 18% Extremely worried 8% 9% Very worried 9% 9% Somewhat worried 22% 22% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 55% 57% Not too worried 17% 20% Not at all worried 39% 38% Don't know 5% 2% Refused 0 1%


f. Identity theft;


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 56% 59% Extremely worried 29% 33% Very worried 27% 25% Somewhat worried 27% 30% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 17% 11% Not too worried 7% 7% Not at all worried 10% 4% Don't know 1% - Refused 0 1%

g. Debt collection


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample)) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 31% 24% Extremely worried 13% 11% Very worried 18% 13% Somewhat worried 22% 28% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 44% 46% Not too worried 17% 17% Not at all worried 27% 29% Don't know 4% 2% Refused 0 0

h. Credit cards


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 39% 44% Extremely worried 18% 24% Very worried 21% 20% Somewhat worried 27% 26% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 33% 27% Not too worried 12% 10% Not at all worried 20% 17% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 0 1%

QF-5. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY


Age Friendly Community [TRANSITION TEXT READ TO ALL] Next I have just a couple of questions to ask about the community where you live. QLV-1, QLV-4 & QLV-5 MOVED. QLV-2. & QLV-3. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY [*NYC OVERSAMPLE SKIP QLV-6. GO TO QLV-9] QLV-6. For each of the following items, please tell me if you think it is a major problem, minor problem or not a

problem at all in your community. [INSERT A-H, RECORD RESPONSE FOR EACH. RANDOMIZE ORDER] Is it a … READ LIST?

a. Lack of affordable housing New York State Capital Region Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 27% 38% Minor problem 28% 35% Major problem 40% 22% Don't know 5% 4% Refused 1% 0

b. OMITTED

c. Streets that need repair


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 19% 20% Minor problem 34% 34% Major problem 46% 46% Don't know 1% 0 Refused 0 1%

d. Sidewalks that are too narrow, poorly lit, need repair or don’t exist


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 36% 46% Minor problem 35% 31% Major problem 27% 21% Don't know 2% 1% Refused 1% 1%


e. Public transportation that is too far away, too limited, or too hard to navigate


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 44% 41% Minor problem 29% 31% Major problem 23% 25% Don't know 3% 1% Refused 0 1%

f. Crime or personal safety


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 33% 34% Minor problem 44% 46% Major problem 21% 18% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 1% 1%

g. Traffic lights that are timed too fast for safe pedestrian crossing


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 50% 59% Minor problem 25% 26% Major problem 22% 13% Don't know 2% 2% Refused 1% 0

h. Cars not yielding to pedestrians


Base: Total Respondents (excluding NYC oversample) 407 401 Not a problem 33% 38% Minor problem 36% 37% Major problem 31% 23% Don't know 0 1% Refused 0 1%


QLV-6.1. There are several things that cities and states can do in the communities where we live to enhance the health and quality of life of older residents. If the State were to make improvements in [INSERT, RANDOMIZE], would it make you more likely to stay in New York as you age?

How about improvements in [INSERT]…?

a. Public transportation and alternative transportation services for older or ill residents, that is affordable and accessible?



b. Housing that is affordable and suitable for older residents?



c. Employment opportunities for older residents?



d. Health services and community support?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Yes 76% 69% No 22% 29% Don't know 1% 2% Refused 1% 0

QLV-7 & QLV-8. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY QLV-9. “Universal Design” is a term that refers to the design of living and work spaces so that they are

accessible and usable by everyone, including people of all ages and people with disabilities, without special or separate design.


Basic Universal Design features in a private home would include a no step entrance, 36 inch doorways, a bedroom or room to convert into a bedroom on the main floor, and a full bath on the main floor.

Would you support or oppose legislation requiring that new homes built with county or state funds for low-income residents use Universal Design standards?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Support (NET) 77% 71% Strongly support 52% 50% Somewhat support 24% 21% Neither support nor oppose 2% 2% Oppose (NET) 18% 24% Somewhat oppose 9% 10% Strongly oppose 9% 15% Don't know 4% 2% Refused 0 1%

Technology Adoption QT-1. Turning to our final topic, how confident are you about being able to keep up with changes in technology

[INSERT A-B. ROTATE, IF APPLIES]. Are you extremely confident, very confident, somewhat confident, not very confident, or not at all confident?

a) To stay in touch with friends and family?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Top 2 Box (NET) 57% 60% Extremely confident 28% 26% Very confident 30% 34% Somewhat confident 28% 29% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 14% 11% Not too confident 8% 6% Not at all confident 6% 4% Does not apply 0 0 Don't know 0 0 Refused 0 -


b) [ASK IF QS7=1-4 OR 6 “LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION”] To stay current at work, in your job or for new employment opportunities?


Base: Labor Force Participation 148 153 Top 2 Box (NET) 53% 56% Extremely confident 21% 26% Very confident 32% 31% Somewhat confident 26% 32% Bottom 2 Box (NET) 19% 10% Not too confident 12% 7% Not at all confident 7% 2% Does not apply 2% 1% Don't know 0 0 Refused - -

Demographics & Classification Our last questions are used for grouping purposes and will be kept entirely confidential.

DA. What is your current marital status? (READ IF NEEDED)


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Married or living with a partner 57% 67% Widowed 14% 14% Divorced or separated 13% 8% Never married 14% 10% Don't know 1% 0 Refused 1% 0

D1. Are you [IF MARRIED: or your spouse or partner] currently a member of A-A-R-P?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Yes 51% 48% No 48% 51% Don't know 1% 1% Refused - 1%


D2. What is the highest level of education that you completed? [ONLY READ LIST IF NEEDED]

New York State Capital Region Base: Total Respondents 407 401 High School or Less (NET) 34% 35% 0 to 12th grade, but with no diploma 7% 5% High school graduate or equivalent 27% 31% Some College or More (NET) 65% 65% Post high school education, but with no degree 12% 11% 2 year degree 19% 21% 4 year degree 12% 14% Post graduate study, but with no degree 8% 5% Graduate or professional degree 15% 13% Don't know 0 - Refused 0 -

D3-D5. NOT ASKED IN THIS SURVEY

D6. Do you consider yourself to be a(n) ….….[INSERT A-C, ROTATE ORDER]..or something else?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Democrat 42% 31% Republican 21% 23% Independent 26% 27% Something else 8% 12% None of above 2% 1% Don't know 1% 1% Refused 1% 6%

D7. How would you characterize your political views? Would you say you are….[INSERT A-C, ROTATE ORDER]…or

none of these?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 Conservative 29% 33% Moderate 32% 29% Liberal 22% 18% None of these 14% 16% Don't know 2% 2% Refused 1% 2%


D8. NEW Which of the following best describes your total annual household income before taxes in 2013? First, is your household income below or above $50,000?


Base: Total Respondents 407 401 <$50K (NET) 38% 33% <$30K (SUB-NET) 22% 16% Less than $10,000 5% 2% At least $10,000 and < $20,000 7% 6% At least $20,000 and < $30,000 10% 8% $30K-<$50K (SUB-NET) 16% 17% At least $30,000 and < $40,000 9% 8% At least $40,000 and < $50,000 7% 9% $50K+ (NET) 36% 46% $50K-<$100K (SUB-NET) 25% 28% $50,000 but < $75,000 13% 16% $75,000 but < $100,000 11% 12% $100,000 or more 12% 18% Don't know/Refused 26% 21%

That was our last question for tonight. Thank you very much for taking the time to help us out. Have a great day/night!


AARP New York

780 Third Ave., 33rd Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (866) 227-7442 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.aarp.org/ny

AARP Research 601 E Street NW

Washington, DC 20049 www.aarp.org/research

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.aarp.org/ny

Documents

State of the 50+ in the Capital Region of New York · 2020. 9. 17. · The 50+ population in New York State numbers 6.8 million people with 311,000 in the Capital Region (Albany,