American Congregational Giving Study, Congregational Profiles, 1993

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


CSLKEY2 (Weighted by WEIGHT)

Did your congregation sponsor a before- or after-school "latchkey" program? If YES: Was the latchkey program 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.

Category Frequency Percentage Cumulative Percentage
It was self-supporting. 37 71.2% 71.2%
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 4 7.7% 78.9%
It required a subsidy. 11 21.2% 100.1%
Missing 573 % %

Variable Comparisons

Religious preference (I-DENOM)

Assemblies of God Southern Baptist Catholic ELCA Presbyterian (U.S.A.) TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 83.3%
5
75.0%
3
80.0%
20
42.9%
3
54.5%
6
69.8%
37
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 16.7%
1
0.0%
0
12.0%
3
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
7.5%
4
It required a subsidy. 0.0%
0
25.0%
1
8.0%
2
57.1%
4
45.5%
5
22.6%
12
Missing 119 121 101 118 114 573
TOTAL 100.0%
6
100.0%
4
100.0%
25
100.0%
7
100.0%
11

53


Region (I-REGION)

Northeast Midwest South West TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 58.3%
7
50.0%
5
86.7%
13
78.6%
11
70.6%
36
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 0.0%
0
20.0%
2
0.0%
0
14.3%
2
7.8%
4
It required a subsidy. 41.7%
5
30.0%
3
13.3%
2
7.1%
1
21.6%
11
Missing 92 177 233 69 571
TOTAL 100.0%
12
100.0%
10
100.0%
15
100.0%
14

51


Year founded (I-YEAREST)

1770-1865 1866-1918 1919-1945 1946-1965 1966 & later TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 33.3%
3
75.0%
15
87.5%
7
78.6%
11
100.0%
2
71.7%
38
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 0.0%
0
5.0%
1
12.5%
1
14.3%
2
0.0%
0
7.5%
4
It required a subsidy. 66.7%
6
20.0%
4
0.0%
0
7.1%
1
0.0%
0
20.8%
11
Missing 101 146 82 122 120 571
TOTAL 100.0%
9
100.0%
20
100.0%
8
100.0%
14
100.0%
2

53


Church membership (I-#MEMBERS)

100 & less 101-200 201-500 501-1000 Over 1000 TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 100.0%
1
33.3%
3
50.0%
4
83.3%
5
82.8%
24
69.8%
37
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 0.0%
0
11.1%
1
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
10.3%
3
7.5%
4
It required a subsidy. 0.0%
0
55.6%
5
50.0%
4
16.7%
1
6.9%
2
22.6%
12
Missing 116 145 164 64 77 566
TOTAL 100.0%
1
100.0%
9
100.0%
8
100.0%
6
100.0%
29

53


(I-#ATTEND)

100 & less 101-200 201-350 Over 350 Missing TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 33.3%
3
57.1%
4
83.3%
5
80.0%
24

2
69.2%
36
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 0.0%
0
14.3%
1
0.0%
0
10.0%
3

0
7.7%
4
It required a subsidy. 66.7%
6
28.6%
2
16.7%
1
10.0%
3

0
23.1%
12
Missing 249 138 68 106 0 561
TOTAL 100.0%
9
100.0%
7
100.0%
6
100.0%
30

2

52


Place of residence (I-LOCATION)

LgCty/Sub MdCty/Sub Small city Town Rural Missing TOTAL
It was self-supporting. 77.8%
21
100.0%
10
42.9%
3
42.9%
3
0.0%
0

0
72.5%
37
It provided a surplus to the congregation. Amount: 7.4%
2
0.0%
0
14.3%
1
0.0%
0
0.0%
0

1
5.9%
3
It required a subsidy. 14.8%
4
0.0%
0
42.9%
3
57.1%
4
0.0%
0

0
21.6%
11
Missing 155 80 94 154 90 0 573
TOTAL 100.0%
27
100.0%
10
100.0%
7
100.0%
7
100.0%
0

1

51