American Congregational Giving Study, Congregational Profiles, 1993

Data Archive > U.S. Surveys > Religious Groups > Congregations/Other Organizations > Others > Analysis


CSDCARE2 (Weighted by WEIGHT)

Did your congregation sponsor a day-care center or preschool? If YES: Was the day-care center self-supporting, or did it require a subsidy?
  1) It was self-supporting.
  2) It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount:
  3) It required a subsidy. Amount:

Category Frequency Percentage Cumulative Percentage
It was self-supporting. 88 72.7% 72.7%
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 18 14.9% 87.6%
It required a subsidy. Amount: 15 12.4% 100%
Missing 503 % %

Variable Comparisons

Religious preference (I-DENOM)

Assemblies of God Southern Baptist Catholic ELCA Presbyterian (U.S.A.) TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 30.0%
3
83.3%
10
71.4%
30
81.8%
18
77.1%
27
72.7%
88
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 70.0%
7
8.3%
1
7.1%
3
9.1%
2
14.3%
5
14.9%
18
It required a subsidy. Amount: 0.0%
0
8.3%
1
21.4%
9
9.1%
2
8.6%
3
12.4%
15
Missing 114 113 82 103 90 502
TOTAL 100.0%
10
100.0%
12
100.0%
42
100.0%
22
100.0%
35

121


Region (I-REGION)

Northeast Midwest South West TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 66.7%
22
85.7%
24
71.8%
28
63.6%
14
72.1%
88
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 18.2%
6
10.7%
3
15.4%
6
13.6%
3
14.8%
18
It required a subsidy. Amount: 15.2%
5
3.6%
1
12.8%
5
22.7%
5
13.1%
16
Missing 71 161 209 61 502
TOTAL 100.0%
33
100.0%
28
100.0%
39
100.0%
22

122


Year founded (I-YEAREST)

1770-1865 1866-1918 1919-1945 1946-1965 1966 & later TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 78.9%
15
79.4%
27
62.5%
10
74.3%
26
58.8%
10
72.7%
88
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 10.5%
2
5.9%
2
25.0%
4
11.4%
4
35.3%
6
14.9%
18
It required a subsidy. Amount: 10.5%
2
14.7%
5
12.5%
2
14.3%
5
5.9%
1
12.4%
15
Missing 90 132 73 100 105 500
TOTAL 100.0%
19
100.0%
34
100.0%
16
100.0%
35
100.0%
17

121


Church membership (I-#MEMBERS)

100 & less 101-200 201-500 501-1000 Over 1000 TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 66.7%
6
68.8%
11
76.7%
23
70.6%
12
72.0%
36
72.1%
88
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 33.3%
3
25.0%
4
16.7%
5
11.8%
2
10.0%
5
15.6%
19
It required a subsidy. Amount: 0.0%
0
6.3%
1
6.7%
2
17.6%
3
18.0%
9
12.3%
15
Missing 109 138 142 53 55 497
TOTAL 100.0%
9
100.0%
16
100.0%
30
100.0%
17
100.0%
50

122


(I-#ATTEND)

100 & less 101-200 201-350 Over 350 Missing TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 71.4%
15
73.1%
19
76.5%
13
68.4%
39

3
71.1%
86
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 19.0%
4
19.2%
5
17.6%
3
12.3%
7

0
15.7%
19
It required a subsidy. Amount: 9.5%
2
7.7%
2
5.9%
1
19.3%
11

1
13.2%
16
Missing 237 120 57 79 0 493
TOTAL 100.0%
21
100.0%
26
100.0%
17
100.0%
57

4

121


Place of residence (I-LOCATION)

LgCty/Sub MdCty/Sub Small city Town Rural TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 63.6%
35
76.2%
16
84.2%
16
86.4%
19
50.0%
2
72.7%
88
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 20.0%
11
14.3%
3
5.3%
1
4.5%
1
50.0%
2
14.9%
18
It required a subsidy. Amount: 16.4%
9
9.5%
2
10.5%
2
9.1%
2
0.0%
0
12.4%
15
Missing 127 68 81 140 85 501
TOTAL 100.0%
55
100.0%
21
100.0%
19
100.0%
22
100.0%
4

121