Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club...

49
Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessments and Training and Professional Support (Pilot Phase for 2 Districts) Baseline Assessment Report Wan Chai District 2016 Submitted by Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong

Transcript of Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club...

Page 1: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project

Baseline Assessments and Training and Professional Support

(Pilot Phase for 2 Districts)

Baseline Assessment Report

Wan Chai District

2016

Submitted by

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 1

Acknowledgement

Initiated and funded by The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary

2 Introduction

21 Project Background

22 District Characteristics

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

3 Methodology

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

312 Measures

313 Data Analysis

32 Focus Group Study

4 Results

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

413 Sense of Community

414 Age Group Comparison

415 Sub-district community Comparison

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

422 Physical Environment

423 Social and Cultural Environment

424 Communication Community and Health Services

5 Conclusions

References

Appendices

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-

friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai

District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to

understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age

friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)

study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in

the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan

Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted

The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged

over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse

in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired

with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The

age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would

still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves

to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the

percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the

district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but

least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of

sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community

and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their

profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community

Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the

district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)

physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space

pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance

of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small

shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues

the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time

Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a

reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district

Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing

infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific

recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health

Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4

2 INTRODUCTION

21 Project Background

The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older

population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the

current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32

or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in

multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly

population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services

Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them

to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also

facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society

The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a

donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan

Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September

2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of

the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-

friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline

assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and

key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in

their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation

proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-

friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in

becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly

community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district

stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop

implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district

age-friendliness

This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of

the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District

and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 2: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 1

Acknowledgement

Initiated and funded by The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary

2 Introduction

21 Project Background

22 District Characteristics

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

3 Methodology

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

312 Measures

313 Data Analysis

32 Focus Group Study

4 Results

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

413 Sense of Community

414 Age Group Comparison

415 Sub-district community Comparison

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

422 Physical Environment

423 Social and Cultural Environment

424 Communication Community and Health Services

5 Conclusions

References

Appendices

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-

friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai

District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to

understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age

friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)

study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in

the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan

Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted

The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged

over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse

in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired

with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The

age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would

still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves

to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the

percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the

district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but

least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of

sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community

and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their

profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community

Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the

district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)

physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space

pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance

of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small

shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues

the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time

Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a

reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district

Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing

infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific

recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health

Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4

2 INTRODUCTION

21 Project Background

The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older

population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the

current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32

or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in

multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly

population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services

Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them

to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also

facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society

The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a

donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan

Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September

2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of

the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-

friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline

assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and

key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in

their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation

proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-

friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in

becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly

community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district

stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop

implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district

age-friendliness

This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of

the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District

and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 3: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary

2 Introduction

21 Project Background

22 District Characteristics

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

3 Methodology

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

312 Measures

313 Data Analysis

32 Focus Group Study

4 Results

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

413 Sense of Community

414 Age Group Comparison

415 Sub-district community Comparison

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

422 Physical Environment

423 Social and Cultural Environment

424 Communication Community and Health Services

5 Conclusions

References

Appendices

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-

friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai

District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to

understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age

friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)

study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in

the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan

Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted

The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged

over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse

in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired

with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The

age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would

still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves

to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the

percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the

district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but

least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of

sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community

and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their

profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community

Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the

district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)

physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space

pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance

of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small

shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues

the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time

Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a

reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district

Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing

infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific

recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health

Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4

2 INTRODUCTION

21 Project Background

The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older

population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the

current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32

or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in

multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly

population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services

Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them

to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also

facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society

The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a

donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan

Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September

2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of

the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-

friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline

assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and

key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in

their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation

proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-

friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in

becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly

community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district

stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop

implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district

age-friendliness

This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of

the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District

and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 4: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 3

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project aims to move Hong Kong towards an age-

friendly city This report describes the baseline assessment work done in the Wan Chai

District as part of the project The objective of the baseline assessment was to

understand the needs of the Wan Chai District in preparing the district to become age

friendly The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey)

study and a qualitative (focus group) study A total of 502 participants were included in

the questionnaire survey from five sub-district communities of Causeway Bay Wan

Chai Happy Valley Canal Road and Tai Hang Five focus groups were conducted

The typical participant of the questionnaire survey was a married woman aged

over 65 years who has resided in the district for 30 years living alone or with spouse

in a private owned apartment using elderly centres with fair perceived health retired

with a monthly income of less than HK$6000 but still felt financially sufficient The

age of the building is usually over 30 years with elevator although residents would

still need to take the stairs to go out Majority of the participants expected themselves

to age in place in the coming 5 years however should their health deteriorate the

percentage with such expectation dropped considerably The participants perceived the

district to be age-friendly in general particularly in terms of social participation but

least in terms of housing The sense of community is strong particularly in terms of

sense of membership The older the participant the stronger the sense of community

and perceived age-friendliness The five sub-district communities differed in their

profile of perceived age-friendliness with similar overall sense of community

Focus group participants expressed a sense of pride and belonging of living in the

district They also identified areas for further improvement They drew attention to (1)

physical environment issues hygiene and crowdedness of the open public space

pavement obstruction and the challenges in and need for renovation and maintenance

of residential buildings (2) social and cultural environmental issues vanishing of small

shops that suits the need of older persons and (3) communication and services issues

the general availability of healthcare services albeit long waiting time

Results from this baseline assessment suggested existing groundwork with a

reasonably good sense of community and perceived age-friendliness in the district

Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly should build on the existing

infrastructure and network and make use of the diversity within the district Specific

recommendations were provided for each of the eight domains in the World Health

Organizationrsquos Age-friendly City framework

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4

2 INTRODUCTION

21 Project Background

The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older

population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the

current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32

or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in

multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly

population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services

Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them

to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also

facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society

The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a

donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan

Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September

2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of

the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-

friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline

assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and

key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in

their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation

proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-

friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in

becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly

community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district

stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop

implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district

age-friendliness

This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of

the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District

and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 5: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 4

2 INTRODUCTION

21 Project Background

The rapid population ageing in Hong Kong means rapidly increasing needs of the older

population The population aged 65 years or above is projected to increase from the

current 14 of the total population to 25 or every 1 in 4 people by 2029 and to 32

or every 1 in 3 people by 20411 This presents a great challenge to the society in

multiple ways including a shrinking labour force with a working age to elderly

population ratio of 181 by 2041 and increasing burden and cost for public services

Building an age-friendly city will help meet the needs of older people enabling them

to live an active independent and good-quality life An age-friendly city would also

facilitate the development of Hong Kong as a better society

The Sau Po Centre on Ageing of The University of Hong Kong (HKU) received a

donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the Central and Western District and the Wan

Chai District In both districts the study is implemented in two phases from September

2015 to February 2016 (Phase 1) and phase 2 is 3 years since March 2016 Phase 1 of

the project consists of three parts The first part is a baseline assessment of district age-

friendliness using a questionnaire interview design The second part is baseline

assessment of district friendliness using a focus group design with district residents and

key stakeholders to gain in-depth understanding of their views on age-friendliness in

their communities A report of district-based recommendations and implementation

proposals is generated based on these findings The third part is to organize an ldquoAge-

friendly City Ambassador Programmerdquo in the districts to train ambassadors in

becoming familiar with the knowledge and methods in building an age-friendly

community Second phase of the project consists of collaboration with key district

stakeholders and provision of professional support from the HKU team to develop

implement and evaluate district-based age-friendly city projects for enhancing district

age-friendliness

This report presents baseline assessment findings from Phase 1 The objective of

the baseline assessment was to understand the needs of the Central amp Western District

and the Wan Chai District in preparing to become age friendly

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 6: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 5

22 District Characteristics

Wan Chai District is a sophisticated district with a long history of development Within

the district several areas are characterized by high resident population density and high

volume of non-resident visits for work and other activities These areas such as

Southorn and Causeway Bay are packed with old residential commercial and

governmental buildings Other areas in the district such as Tai Hang and Broadwood

have a lower resident population density and are relatively less busy According to the

2015 District Council division the whole Wan Chai District consists of 13 Constituency

Areas (CA) namely (1) Hennessy (2) Oi Kwan (3) Canal Road (4) Victoria Park (5)

Tin Hau (6) Causeway Bay (7) Tai Hang (8) Jardinersquos Lookout (9) Broadwood (10)

Happy Valley (11) Stubbs Road (12) Southorn and (13) Tai Fat Hau (Appendix 1)

According to the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department2 the Wan Chai

District has a population of 150400 in 2014 The number of elderly population aged

65 years or above was around 24300 comprising 162 of the total district population

This can be compared with the 156 as reported in the 2011 Hong Kong Population

Census The district ranks the fourth among other districts in its percentage of elderly

population and is higher than the Hong Kong average of 140

Table 21 shows the domestic household characteristics of the district In 2014 the

total number of domestic households was 56100 According to the 2011 Hong Kong

Population Census the median monthly income from main employment of the working

population was HK$20000 and the median income of economically active household

was HK$45200

Table 21 Domestic household characteristics of Wan Chai District

Total number of domestic households (2014) 56100

Type of housing private permanent (2011) 995

Median monthly income (2011) HK$20000

Median domestic household mortgage payment (2011) HK$12500

Median domestic household rent (2011) HK$12000

The predominant type of housing in Wan Chai District is private permanent

housing 995 of the domestic households and 962 of the population in the district

are living in private housing estates or buildings No public rental housing or subsidized

home ownership housing is available in the district

Regarding the provision of elderly centres and health care services the district has

a total of 5 elderly centres (2 DECC13 and 3 NEC14) 7 hospitals (3 public12 and 4

private10) 2 general clinics11 and 1 elderly health centre9

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 7: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 6

23 Previous Age-friendly City Work in the District

In the Wan Chai District age-friendly city has been a key area of interest and concern

for several non-government organizations (NGOs) the Wan Chai District Council and

governmental departments who have worked together on projects to enhance age-

friendliness of the district3

Since June 2012 the Wan Chai District has started to join a Hong Kong territory-

wide project called ldquoAge-Friendly Hong Kongrdquo led by The Hong Kong Council of

Social Service (HKCSS)3 With professional support and practical experience of

HKCSS Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Community Building Committee

of Wan Chai District Council and Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office

of Social Welfare Department have collaborated in age-friendly city projects in Wan

Chai areas For instance a project called ldquo灣仔社區友善無疆計劃rdquo (herein translated

as the ldquoWan Chai Friendly Community Without Boundary Projectrdquo)4 from 2012 to 2013

trained up some elderly ambassadors to do the community investigation published a

guidebook of age-friendliness in Wan Chai District and advocated for the importance

of age-friendly city in the district and raised public concern on development of age-

friendly city

Another important effort took place in 2014 to 2015 The project ldquo2014-2015

年灣仔長者友善社區計劃rdquo (Wan Chai Age-friendly Community Project 2014-2015)5

was funded by the Wan Chai District Council led by Wan Chai Methodist Centre for

the Seniors and several collaborators including the professional support from the City

Polytechnics University This project held a series of activities such as age-friendly

ambassador training workshops to achieve objectives including (1) promoting the

concepts of age-friendly city in the district (2) empowering elder people to express

their comments towards Wan Chai Districtrsquos environment facilities and community

services (3) increasing elderly participation to create a harmonious and age-friendly

community

Over the years elderly service centres in Wan Chai District have been the leader

or collaborating partners at times with funding support from the District Council in

age-friendly city projects Some of these centres include St James Settlement Wan Chai

District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay Elderly

Centre Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly3 and the

Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre4

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 8: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 7

3 METHODOLOGY

The baseline assessment consisted of a quantitative (questionnaire survey) study and a

qualitative (focus group) study The questionnaire survey was conducted to understand

the sense of community and perception on age-friendliness of the district among

residents of five sub-district communities in the Wan Chai District The focus group

study was conducted to capture in-depth opinions of the residents on age-friendliness

of the district with reference to the eight domains of the Age-friendly City as defined

by the World Health Organization (WHO)

31 Questionnaire Survey

311 Participants

Participants recruited for the questionnaire survey were usual residents in the Wan Chai

District aged 18 years or above Exclusion criteria were foreign domestic helpers or

individuals who are mentally incapable to participate in the study

Participants were recruited from five meaningful sub-district communities

(Table 31) The communities were derived a priori according to features and

characteristics of the district and validated by stakeholders who are familiar with the

district

Table 31 Sampling sub-district communities for Wan Chai District

Sub-district Communities Constituency Areas

Causeway Bay (CWB) Victoria Park

Tin Hau

Causeway Bay

Wan Chai (WC) Hennessy

Oi Kwan

Southorn

Tai Fat Hau

Stubbs Road

Happy Valley (HV) Jardinersquos Lookout

Broadwood

Happy Valley

Canal Road (CR) Canal Road

Tai Hang (TH) Tai Hang

Lai Tak Tsuen

The study aimed to recruit a total of 500 participants from multiple sources

including public rental housing estates elderly centres senior police call and

advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 9: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 8

312 Measures

The questionnaire survey was conducted by face-to-face interviews and self-

administration (in a small number of cases who preferred the latter mode) to cover the

following areas (Appendix 2)

(i) Sociodemographic Information

These included age gender marital status education living arrange housing type

employment and income of the participant Self-reported health was captured

using an item for assessing subjective health from the SF-12 Health Survey6

(ii) Community Care

These included caregiving engagement with elderly centres use of mobility tools

and ageing-in-place expectations

(iii) Perceived Age-friendliness

Perceived age-friendliness of the district was assessed using 61 items developed

based on a local adaptation of the WHOrsquos Age-friendly City Framework and

Guidelines Participants are asked to rate their perceived age-friendliness along

eight categories namely outdoor spaces and buildings transportation housing

social participation respect and social inclusion civic participation and

employment communication and information and community support and health

services These can be further divided into 19 subdomains

(iv) Sense of Community

Sense of community including needs fulfilment group membership influence

and shared emotional connection were measured using the 8-item Brief Sense of

Community Scale78

313 Data Analysis

Descriptive analyses by sub-district communities of the participants were performed to

identify patterns in sociodemographics community care perceived age-friendliness

and sense of community across communities Further analyses were performed to test

the difference in perceived age-friendliness and sense of community among age groups

and sub-district communities using linear regression method

32 Focus Group

This study included five focus groups conducted following the procedure based on the

WHO Age-friendly Cities Project Methodology-Vancouver Protocol6 In this study we

have adopted the Chinese version of the protocol devised by The Hong Kong Council

of Social Service A focus group discussion guide was compiled (Appendix 3) Each

focus group meeting lasted approximately 15 to 2 hours (including a 15-20-minute

break) Each focus group consisted of 6 to 8 people Focus group sessions were held in

community locations the discussions were taped recorded and transcribed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 10: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 9

4 RESULTS

41 Questionnaire Survey

411 Participant Characteristics

A total of 502 participants were recruited Participants were recruited from public rental

housing estates (n=118) elderly centres (n=183) senior police call (n=23) Kai Fong

Association (n=113) and advertisement and snowball referrals from stakeholders

(n=65) They represent residents in the sub-district communities of Causeway Bay

(CWB 153) Wan Chai (WC 386) Happy Valley (HV 90) Canal Road (CR

60) and Tai Hang (TH 311) (Table 41)

Sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table

41 Approximately half (547) of the participants had secondary education or above

and half (506) were married Majority (747) of the participants were older adults

aged 65 years or above and retired (700) About 142 were living with domestic

helper More than half of the participants were either living alone or living with their

spouse only (549) About one in five participants was a caregiver (211) Among

them 139 248 and 733 were providing care for children adults and older

persons respectively In terms of financial status only 167 reported insufficient fund

for daily expenses although majority (700) of them had either no income or having

a monthly personal income below HK$6000

Table 41 Number of survey participants in the five sub-district communities

Sub-district communities N

Causeway Bay (CWB) 77 153

Victoria Park 3 06

Tin Hau 20 40

Causeway Bay 54 108

Wan Chai (WC) 194 386

Hennessy 66 131

Oi Kwan 53 106

Southorn 29 58

Tai Fat Hau 44 88

Stubbs Road 2 04

Happy Valley (HV) 45 90

Jardinersquos Lookout 3 06

Broadwood 8 16

Happy Valley 34 68

Canal Road (CR) 30 60

Tai Hang (TH) 156 311

Tai Hang 33 66

Lai Tak Tsuen 123 245

Total 502 1000

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 11: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 10

Table 42 Sociodemographic characteristics of questionnaire survey participants

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Gender

Male 135 269 17 221 56 289 8 178 10 333 44 282

Female 367 731 60 779 138 711 37 822 20 667 112 718

Age group

18-49 years 60 120 11 143 19 98 9 200 4 133 17 109

50-64 years 67 133 16 208 22 113 8 178 4 133 17 109

65-79 years 220 438 34 442 79 407 17 378 12 400 78 500

ge80 years 155 309 16 208 74 381 11 244 10 333 44 282

Marital status

Never married 65 130 11 145 31 160 8 178 4 133 11 71

Married 254 506 43 566 83 428 22 489 13 433 93 596

Widowed 162 323 19 250 72 371 13 289 12 400 46 295

Divorced separated 20 40 3 39 8 41 2 44 1 33 6 38

Education

Nil pre-primary 81 160 8 105 33 170 1 22 9 300 29 186

Primary 147 293 14 184 65 335 9 200 7 233 52 333

Secondary (F1-5) 164 327 31 408 55 284 18 400 10 333 50 321

Secondary (F6-7) 17 34 3 39 6 31 3 67 0 0 5 32

Post-secondary 93 186 20 263 35 180 14 311 4 133 20 128

Employment status

Working 80 161 21 280 20 104 5 114 9 300 25 161

Unemployed 4 08 1 13 1 05 0 0 1 33 1 06

Retired 347 700 44 587 150 781 26 591 16 533 111 716

Homemakers 58 117 9 120 20 104 10 227 4 133 15 97

Students 7 14 0 0 1 05 3 68 0 0 3 19

Living arrangement

Living alone 158 315 21 276 80 412 13 289 8 267 36 231

With spouse only 117 234 13 171 49 253 8 178 6 200 41 263

Spouse amp other family members 101 202 26 342 20 103 12 267 4 133 39 250

With children grandchildren 83 166 10 132 26 134 6 133 9 300 32 205

With other family members 42 84 6 79 19 98 6 133 3 100 8 51

Living with domestic helper 70 142 13 181 22 114 18 429 5 161 12 77

Participant is a caregiver 104 211 17 233 39 203 13 302 3 97 32 205

For children aged lt18 yearsdagger 14 139 3 176 3 77 2 154 0 0 6 207

For adults aged 19-64 yearsdagger 25 248 1 59 9 231 4 308 0 0 11 379

For elders aged ge65 yearsdagger 74 733 13 765 28 718 9 692 3 1000 21 724

Finance

Very insufficient 9 18 1 13 2 11 0 0 1 33 5 32

Insufficient 74 149 9 120 25 132 2 44 7 233 31 199

Sufficient 322 649 52 693 123 647 27 600 19 633 101 647

More than sufficient 80 161 11 147 34 179 15 333 3 100 17 109

Abundant 11 22 2 27 6 32 1 22 0 0 2 13

Monthly personal income

No income 50 103 12 171 25 131 5 122 0 0 8 52

HK$1 to HK$5999 290 597 30 429 122 639 18 439 18 621 102 658

HK$6000 to HK$9999 47 97 5 71 13 68 4 98 4 138 21 135

HK$10000 to HK$19999 43 88 12 171 13 68 2 49 1 34 15 97

HK$20000 to HK$29999 22 45 6 86 5 26 5 122 1 34 5 32

HK$30000 to HK$59999 24 49 4 57 12 63 2 49 3 103 3 19

geHK$60000 10 21 1 14 1 05 5 122 2 69 1 06

daggerMultiple responses allowed

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 12: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 11

Residence characteristics of participants are summarized in Table 43 The

average years of residence in the district was 342 years (SD 192 years) Majority

(747) of the participants lived in private housing and 832 resided in a building

aged more than 30 years In terms of building environment the average number of

floors of the building in which our participants resided was 200 most (902) of these

buildings had an elevator However a considerable proportion (432) of the

participants were living in a building that requires the use of the stairs to go out

Table 43 Residence characteristics

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Residence years (mean SD) 342 192 299 169 395 219 273 175 388 206 306 145

Housing N ()

Public rental 126 251 2 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 124 795

Private rental 71 142 11 143 41 212 5 111 4 133 10 64

Private owned 298 595 62 805 151 782 37 822 26 867 22 141

Private unknown 5 10 2 26 1 05 2 44 0 0 0 0

Others 1 02 0 0 0 0 1 22 0 0 0 0

Age of building

10 years 14 28 1 13 8 42 1 22 0 0 4 26

11-20 years 24 48 1 13 17 89 2 44 1 34 3 19

21-30 years 45 91 4 52 21 111 7 156 1 34 12 78

31 years 412 832 71 922 144 758 35 778 27 931 135 877

Building environment

No of floors (mean SD) 200 87 175 76 179 89 171 99 176 63 250 68

With elevator 448 902 73 961 164 859 38 844 25 833 148 955

Need to take stairs 214 432 25 333 88 463 22 489 8 267 71 458

The self-reported health status of the participants is presented in Table 44

Nearly half of the participants (470) rated their health as good or above (mean=34

SD=10) One-fourth of the participants (246) had to walk with assistive devices such

as cane walker or wheelchair Less than half (392) of the participants had

volunteered in servicesactivities organized by elderly centres in the past 3 months

Among those aged 60 years or above most had used services provided by elderly

centres (745)

In terms of ageing-in-place intention of the participants (Table 45) when asked

if their health remains the same whether they expect themselves to move into a

residential care unit in the next 5 years majority (746) answered with a definite

negative response only a small proportion (127) of the participants expected at least

50 chance of moving When asked about the same if their health worsens in the next

5 years the proportion of participants who expected absolutely no chance dropped to

313 and half (504) of the participants expected at least 50 chance of moving

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 13: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 12

Table 44 Health social participation and use of community service

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

Self-rated health

Excellent 31 62 2 26 12 63 1 22 3 100 13 83

Very good 72 145 12 158 25 131 5 111 7 233 23 147

Good 131 263 26 342 50 262 11 244 9 300 35 224

Fair 217 436 31 408 82 429 25 556 8 267 71 455

Poor 47 94 5 66 22 115 3 67 3 100 14 90

Mean score 34 10 33 09 34 11 35 09 30 12 33 11

Walk with assistive device 118 246 11 153 52 278 10 233 7 233 38 257

Volunteer in elderly centres 194 392 21 280 97 505 19 422 11 379 46 297

User of elderly centresdagger 306 745 35 583 139 837 31 969 17 739 84 646

Cane walker or wheelchair

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Table 45 Residential care service use expectation in 5 yearsdagger

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

n n n n n n

If health remains the same

0 306 746 46 780 119 721 27 844 17 708 97 746

10 19 46 2 34 6 36 1 31 4 167 6 46

20 18 44 3 51 8 48 1 31 1 42 5 38

30 14 34 1 17 5 30 1 31 1 42 6 46

40 1 02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 08

50 30 73 3 51 14 85 0 0 1 42 12 92

60 2 05 2 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

70 6 15 0 0 4 24 1 31 0 0 1 08

80 8 20 1 17 5 30 1 31 0 0 1 08

90 1 02 0 0 1 06 0 0 0 0 0 00

100 5 12 1 17 3 18 0 0 0 0 1 08

If health worsens

0 125 313 23 411 47 296 8 250 7 304 40 308

10 22 55 3 54 6 38 1 31 0 0 12 92

20 19 48 1 18 7 44 1 31 2 87 8 62

30 26 65 0 0 14 88 2 63 2 87 8 62

40 7 18 1 18 1 06 0 0 2 87 3 23

50 104 260 15 268 42 264 11 344 6 261 30 231

60 6 15 2 36 3 19 0 0 1 43 0 0

70 22 55 3 54 4 25 1 31 1 43 13 100

80 23 58 3 54 12 75 1 31 2 87 5 38

90 13 33 0 0 6 38 3 94 0 0 4 31

100 33 83 5 89 17 107 4 125 0 0 7 54

daggerApplicable only to participants aged 60 years or above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 14: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 13

412 Perceived Age-friendliness

Table 46 shows the perceived age-friendliness across the eight domains and 19

subdomains in the WHO Age-friendly City Framework Among the eight domains the

highest score was observed in the social participation domain (mean 43) followed by

transportation (42) respect and social inclusion (41) and communication and

information (40) The domain with the lowest score was housing (36)

Perceived age-friendliness appeared to vary within certain domains

ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo was rated the highest among all subdomains in

transportation (44) whereas that for ldquoavailability of specialized servicesrdquo seems to be

lower (39) The rating of the ldquoaffordability and accessibilityrdquo of housing particularly

in HV and CR tended to be low (34) while that for ldquoenvironmentrdquo appeared higher

(38) Both subdomains of social participations namely ldquofacilities and settingsrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo were of high satisfaction (44 and

42 respectively) Within the domain respect and social inclusion rating in general

appeared higher in the ldquoattituderdquo subdomain (42) than that in the ldquosocial inclusion

opportunitiesrdquo subdomain (38) Participants in all communities showed a tendency to

rate ldquocivic participationrdquo (43) higher than ldquoemploymentrdquo (38) In terms of community

support and health services participants perceived the subdomains of ldquoburial servicerdquo

and ldquoemergency supportrdquo of relatively low age friendliness (24 and 34 respectively)

while they rated ldquoavailability and affordability of medicalsocial servicesrdquo of higher

level of age friendliness (41)

413 Sense of Community

Sense of community in Wan Chai District is shown in Table 47 The mean sense of

community score of the whole district was 297 (SD=42) ranging from 283 (HV) to

304 (CR) across the five sub-district communities Overall the sense of membership

was highest (81) followed by emotional connectedness (78) needs fulfilment (70)

and sense of influence in their community (68)

Among the five sub-district communities sense of community was highest in

CR followed by WC TH CWB and lowest in HV Sense of membership was strongest

in CR and TH (both 82) while emotional connectedness was highest in TH (80) HV

scored the lowest on both sense of influence in their community (62) and emotion

connectedness (73) Needs fulfilment was lowest in TH (64)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 15: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 14

Figure 47 Perceived age-friendliness by sub-district communities

Table 46 Perceived age-friendliness

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 39 (08) 39 (09) 40 (07) 38 (07) 41 (08) 39 (08)

Outdoor spaces 39 (08) 38 (10) 39 (08) 37 (07) 38 (10) 40 (08)

Buildings 39 (10) 39 (10) 41 (08) 37 (09) 43 (08) 36 (10)

Transportation 42 (07) 42 (09) 44 (07) 40 (06) 46 (06) 41 (08)

Road safety amp maintenance 44 (09) 42 (10) 44 (09) 43 (09) 45 (09) 44 (09)

Specialized services availability 39 (10) 39 (11) 40 (09) 35 (09) 43 (09) 37 (12)

Public transport comfort to use 42 (08) 40 (10) 43 (08) 40 (07) 44 (08) 42 (08)

Public transport accessibility 44 (09) 44 (09) 46 (07) 42 (07) 50 (06) 41 (09)

Housing 36 (10) 35 (11) 36 (10) 33 (07) 33 (09) 37 (10)

Affordability amp accessibility 34 (11) 33 (12) 33 (12) 29 (09) 32 (10) 37 (11)

Environment 38 (11) 37 (12) 38 (11) 38 (08) 35 (10) 38 (11)

Social participation 43 (08) 42 (09) 44 (07) 41 (07) 45 (06) 42 (08)

Facilities and settings 44 (08) 42 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09) 45 (07) 43 (09)

Social activities 42 (08) 41 (09) 43 (07) 39 (07) 45 (07) 42 (09)

Respect amp Social Inclusion 41 (08) 40 (09) 42 (07) 38 (09) 42 (09) 40 (08)

Attitude 42 (08) 40 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08) 45 (07) 43 (08)

Social inclusion opportunities 38 (10) 38 (11) 40 (09) 35 (11) 37 (13) 36 (10)

Civic participation amp employment 39 (09) 39 (10) 40 (09) 38 (10) 44 (07) 39 (09)

Civic participation 43 (10) 41 (12) 44 (10) 42 (10) 48 (06) 42 (11)

Employment 38 (10) 38 (10) 39 (09) 36 (11) 42 (08) 38 (10)

Communication amp information 40 (08) 40 (09) 40 (08) 37 (08) 43 (07) 40 (08)

Information 40 (09) 40 (09) 41 (08) 36 (09) 44 (07) 40 (09)

Communication amp digital devices 40 (10) 40 (11) 40 (10) 39 (10) 44 (10) 40 (11)

Community support amp health

services 37 (08) 36 (10) 39 (08) 33 (07) 38 (08) 35 (08)

Medicalsocial services 41 (09) 39 (10) 43 (08) 37 (08) 43 (09) 39 (09)

Emergency support 34 (13) 33 (12) 36 (13) 27 (10) 34 (14) 36 (12)

Burial service 24 (13) 27 (14) 26 (14) 22 (09) 25 (12) 22 (12)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 16: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 15

Table 47 Sense of community

Total CWB WC HV CR TH

Need fulfillment 68 (16) 70 (13) 72 (15) 70 (14) 68 (21) 64 (18)

Membership 81 (14) 79 (17) 81 (13) 78 (14) 82 (13) 82 (13)

Influence 70 (14) 69 (15) 71 (14) 62 (12) 72 (13) 71 (15)

Emotional connection 78 (13) 76 (15) 78 (12) 73 (12) 78 (16) 80 (12)

Total score 297 (42) 293 (50) 301 (39) 283 (40) 304 (44) 298 (42)

All reported numbers are mean (SD)

414 Age Group Comparison

Table 48 shows the linear regression analysis to test the effect of age group on

perceived age-friendliness and sense of community after adjusting for sub-district

communities Older participants had significantly higher perceived age-friendliness

each level of increase in age group predicted an increase by 013 to 031 scores in the

eight domains In terms of sense of community each level of increase in age group

predicted a 118-point increase

415 Sub-district Community Comparison

Table 49 shows the linear regression analysis comparing sub-district communities

after adjusting for age groups The five communities had comparable overall ratings in

the following perceived age-friendliness domains outdoor spaces amp buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion Compared with participants living in TH

people living in WC had higher perceived age-friendliness in transportation and

community support and health services residents in HV had lower perceived age-

friendliness in terms of housing and CR residents had higher perceived age-

friendliness in transportation civic participation and employment and communication

and information

Subdomain analysis showed that compared with residents in TH participants

living in CWB had higher perceived age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo and ldquoaccessibility

of public transportrdquo but lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and

accessibility of housingrdquo and ldquoburial servicerdquo

Residents in WC perceived higher age-friendliness in ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability

of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public transportrdquo ldquoopportunities for

social inclusionrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of burial servicerdquo although they perceived lower age-

friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of housingrdquo

HV had lower perceived age-friendliness in ldquoaffordability and accessibility of

housingrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo and ldquoaffordability and accessibility of emergency supportrdquo

CR residents had higher perceived age-friendliness in a range of subdomains

ldquobuildingsrdquo ldquoavailability of specialized transport servicerdquo ldquoaccessibility of public

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 17: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 16

transportrdquo ldquoavailability and accessibility of social activitiesrdquo ldquocivic participationrdquo

ldquoemploymentrdquo ldquoinformationrdquo ldquouse of communication digital devicesrdquo and

ldquoavailability and accessibility of medical and social servicesrdquo

All five communities had similar levels of sense of community although CWB

WC and HV showed higher need fulfilment while HV had lower sense of influence

and showed less emotional connectedness compared with TH

Table 48 Age-group comparison using linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 019

Outdoor spaces 022

Buildings 016

Transportation 025

Road safety amp maintenance 028

Specialized services availability 022

Public transport comfort to use 026

Public transport accessibility 022

Housing 031

Affordability amp accessibility 026

Environment 038

Social participation 023

Facilities and settings 023

Social activities 023

Respect amp Social Inclusion 027

Attitude 029

Social inclusion opportunities 024

Civic participation amp employment 024

Civic participation 027

Employment 022

Communication amp information 016

Information 017

Communication amp digital devices 019

Community support amp health services 013

Medicalsocial services 018

Emergency support 004

Burial service 004

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 005

Membership 040

Influence 029

Emotional connection 040

Total score 118

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of sub-district communities

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 18: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 17

Table 49 Sub-district cluster comparison by linear regression analysis

Coefficientdagger

CWB WC HV CR

Perceived Age-friendliness

Outdoor spaces amp buildings 005 011 -0002 027

Outdoor spaces -015 -007 -016 -012

Buildings 032 047 020 071

Transportation 018 026 003 060

Road safety amp maintenance -014 -004 -003 010

Specialized services availability 019 027 -018 059

Public transport comfort to use -003 010 -003 034

Public transport accessibility 042 054 017 093

Housing -016 -019 -035 -037

Affordability amp accessibility -034 -035 -074 -045

Environment 002 -002 006 -027

Social participation 001 015 -004 028

Facilities and settings -001 017 012 029

Social activities -0002 014 -019 034

Respect amp Social Inclusion -002 012 -011 018

Attitude -016 -001 -018 026

Social inclusion opportunities 026 039 -003 013

Civic participation amp employment 009 010 -004 052

Civic participation -0002 015 006 062

Employment 008 007 -008 046

Communication amp information 004 001 -026 034

Information 0002 005 -039 038

Communication amp digital devices 011 001 001 044

Community support amp health services 011 037 -020 032

Medicalsocial services 010 043 -009 046

Emergency support -025 001 -081 -011

Burial service 055 040 002 033

Sense of Community

Need fulfilment 061 081 060 039

Membership -022 -019 -029 002

Influence -017 -006 -080 015

Emotional connection -030 -025 -054 -022

Total score -017 023 -109 079

daggerTH as the reference group

Significance levels at plt005 and plt001

Comparisons are adjusted for the effect of age groups

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 19: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 18

42 Focus Group Study

421 Participant Characteristics

Five focus groups were conducted to collect residentsrsquo opinions on the age-friendliness

of the Wan Chai district A total of 35 participants were recruited Among them 5

(143) resided in CWB 17 (486) in WC 2 (56) in HV 1 (29) in CR and 10

(286) in TH Majority (829) of the participants were aged 65 years or above and

have been living in the district for 374 years on average Sociodemographic

characteristics of the focus group participants are shown in Table 410

Table 410 Sociodemographic characteristics of focus group participants

Characteristics N

Gender

Male 2 57

Female 33 943

Age group

18-49 years 0 0

50-64 years 6 171

65-79 years 14 400

80 years 15 429

Education

Nil pre-primary 6 176

Primary 15 441

Secondary (F1-5) 9 265

Secondary (F6-7) 0 0

Post-secondary 4 114

Housing

Public rental 10 286

Private rental 3 86

Private owned 22 629

Residence years (mean SD) 374 184

Living arrangement

Living alone 10 286

With spouse only 6 171

Spouse and other family members 5 143

With children grandchildren 14 400

With other family members 0 0

Monthly personal income

No income 3 88

HK$1 to HK$5999 24 706

HK$6000 to HK$9999 5 147

HK$10000 to HK$19999 1 29

HK$20000 to HK$29999 1 29

HK$30000 to HK$59999 0 0

geHK$60000 0 0

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 20: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 19

Findings from thematic analyses of the focus groups are presented for the eight

WHO Age-Friendly City framework domains which are further grouped into three

areas namely (1) physical environment (2) social and cultural environment and (3)

communication community and health services Most participants expressed a sense of

pride and belonging of living in the Wan Chai District and offered many comments to

identify areas for further improvement

422 Physical Environment

WHO Domain 1 Outdoor Spaces and Buildings

(i) Hygiene Participants expressed concerns over hygiene in outdoor spaces that

affects older residentsrsquo satisfaction of the community Some examples were pet

excreta near Oi Kwan Road trash and cigarette buds near Windsor House and

Causeway Bay Plaza big trash bags from tenement house near Lockhart Road

and rat and foul water near Jaffe Road

(ii) Crowdedness Except HV crowdedness in many public spaces in the district was

reported to be unpleasant and accident-prone for older people In Causeway Bay

for example tourists pulling their suitcases or moving around with little regard to

other pedestrians were reported to have rolled over pedestriansrsquo feet and caused

injuries During the weekends large groups of foreign domestic helpers were

reported to be occupying the public areas and some were using portable gas

cooker in alleys or along pedestrian paths causing safety concerns

(iii) Parks Participants acknowledged the availability of parks in the district but made

a number of suggestions for improvement For example the Wan Chai Park was

regarded as spacious and comfortable Participants however reckoned that there

are too few parks that are clean and pleasant of good size with sufficient fitness

equipment Parklets in the district were reported to be often occupied by drug

addicts making it unsafe and uncomfortable for older people to use them The

Southern Playground offers space for ball games only and has no fitness

equipment for older people The Victoria Park has limited covered areasshelters

or seats making it unfriendly for older people to relax or exercise with protection

from the sun or rain Residents in Lai Tak Tsuen also found the Park less

accessible by public transport

WHO Domain 2 Transportation

(i) Public Transport Accessibility Transportation in CWB was considered good and

convenient for older people offering good accessibility to many places This was

described as a unique advantage of the district Within the district however

public transportation in Lai Tak Tsuen was considered less convenient for older

people with bus and minibus lines running infrequently and requiring a long wait

Minibuses and taxis are already fully occupied when they arrive at the estate The

relative geographical isolation of Lai Tak Tsuen with limited availability of vacant

taxis was considered a problem in cases of emergencies

(ii) Pavement Obstructions and Traffic Congestions Participants expressed concerns

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 21: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 20

over obstructions on pavements in certain areas in the district making it

inconvenient and unsafe for older pedestrians Some examples were areas near

the Wan Chai market and Canal Road where pavements and roads were reported

to be obstructed by shop merchandise and trucks leaving little space for

pedestrians This was perceived as a hazard for older people especially for those

who use walking aids Traffic congestion was reported in several areas including

some roads near Tin Lok Lane and Wan Chai Road making it difficult to use for

both pedestrians and drivers

(iii) Road Safety Pedestrian jaywalking and cars running through the red light were

reported to be a problem in CWB and cause danger for older persons with

insufficient law enforcement by the police Participants expressed a wish for

stricter law enforcement by the police on pedestrians and drivers who violate

traffic regulations

(iv) Waiting Areas for Public Transportation Participants noted that waiting areas

with shelter and seats for public transportation were either unavailable or too

small in size which is difficult for frail elders to wait in the sun or rain Several

tram stops (west-bound toward Central) do not have an elevated island these

were noted as creating challenges for older people to get on the tram

(v) Public Transport Comfort to Use Participants had mixed comments depending

on the type of transportation Tram was liked and often used by older people in

the district because of its low fares ease of getting on and off and frequent stops

However older style trams were reported to have some unfriendly features for

elders First the turnstiles in the entrance of older trams were reported to be a

safety hazard Specifically many older people using a cane and carrying shopping

bags can easily get tangled in the turnstile The participants remarked that the

newer style trams have better designed push-open doors to solve the problem

However the new-style doors were reported to be too hard for older people to

push open Second the bench seats on the lower deck were reported to be too low

for older people to sit down and get up comfortably increasing risks for injuries

Again this problem was reported to be solved in some but not all new trams The

tram fare of HK$11 for senior citizens was considered affordable However

some participants (especially the economically disadvantaged who have

difficulties affording an Octopus card) expressed the wish for fare reduction to

HK$1 so that they do not have to deal with the inconvenience of finding 10-cent

coins Thefts were noted on the often overcrowded trams Buses were liked and

considered friendly by older people However since the expansion of the MTR

to Kennedy Town the bus line number 10 that travels along Queenrsquos Road East

which was used a lot by older people was reported to have significantly reduced

or uneven frequency This line was important for older people as it connects

Happy Valley through Wan Chai to the Sunbeam Theatre in North Point (where

Chinese opera performances are held) MTR was considered less friendly for

older people very long walks from the train platform to the street-level exits in

some stations confusing or inadequate signage for older people and challenges

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 22: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 21

in transferring within MTR Some participants nevertheless commented on the

advantages of MTR which allows travelling further outside of the district and

being less affected by traffic jams or road blockage

WHO Domain 3 Housing

(i) Renovation amp Maintenance Most residential buildings in the district are

privately-owned tenement houses requiring renovation and maintenance which

were challenging for older people Renovation is costly and create financial

burden for older people with little savings when it involves coordination among

owners in the building (eg through Ownersrsquo Corporation) older participants

sometimes find the voting and decision making process difficult In some

buildings Ownersrsquo Corporations were not in place and the older people may have

difficulty establishing one Some participants from Lai Tak Tsuen reported that

this 40-year-old estate is not well-maintained (eg cracks falling paints) and the

time-to-repair was usually very long

(ii) Elderly Housing Participants noted that there are currently no housing units that

specifically address the needs of older people They expressed that such units are

needed and desired by older residents many of whom live in tenement houses

(iii) High Property Price Some participants were concerned about the high property

price in the district making it difficult for older residents to own a home or rent

an apartment Some of the rented apartments were subdivided into four to five

smaller units for which landlords charge very high rent and electricity fees

Government benefits (eg reduced electricity bills) enjoyed by owners were

often not passed on to the renters

423 Social and Cultural Environment

WHO Domain 4 Social Participation

(i) Lack of Indoor Gathering Places There is a reported lack of suitable and

accessible venues for social participation in CWB such as a civic centre for

holding events and activities (eg Chinese operas) Residents in CWB need to

go to other districts for these activities (eg Sai Wan Ho Civic Centre or Sheung

Wan Civic Centre) Although the Queen Elizabeth Stadium is an option it was

considered inaccessible for older people with mobility problems because of the

stairs and cramped seating

(ii) Outreach Services Participants noted availability of outreach service for socially

isolated older adults in WC but not HV The two District Elderly Community

Centres (DECCs) located in WC were reported to offer outreach and home visits

to older people Residents in HV were concerned that there are frail elders living

with their domestic helpers only in their sub-district community who need

emotional and other care (eg dementia) support that are currently not available

to them

(iii) Geographical Isolation The inadequate accessibility of Lai Tak Tsuen to TH and

CWB was noted as a barrier to social participation and exercise (eg in Victoria

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 23: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 22

Park) among older estate residents Participants suggested improving the

frequency of public transportation and building an escalator from Lai Tak Tsuen

to TH via Wun Sha Street to enhance older residentsrsquo access to social participation

opportunities

WHO Domain 5 Respect and Social Inclusion

(i) Respect The general atmosphere was reported to be friendly and respectful

toward older people Participants felt that bus and tram drivers in the district are

courteous and helpful who would wait for them to sit down properly before

starting the vehicle and would ask other passengers to give way or give up seats

for older people with difficulty walking Passengers would also give up seats

whenever they see someone using a cane On the other hand some incidents of

priority seats being occupied were noted sometimes by younger people who

focused only on their phones and failed to give up seats for those in need

(ii) Vanishing of Small Shops Participants lamented the disappearance of older-style

mom-and-pop stores which were being replaced by chain supermarkets and

jewellery shops Such change in the district was undesirable for the older

residents who rely on small convenience stores that sell Chinese medicine herbs

(藥材鋪) Chinese dried grocery (雜貨鋪) and Hong Kong style cafes (茶餐廳)

to suit their daily needs Older people also prefer wet markets over supermarkets

for high quality fresh meat and live fish but the remaining wet markets in the

district were reported as less accessible to some older residents (eg needing to

travel from Lai Tak Tsuen to Canal Road) Stores in the Tang Lung Chau Market

(燈籠洲街市) are now left mostly vacant and used for ball playing and rental

storage Some participants suggested revitalizing the market and redeveloping the

building using the upper floors as activity venues similar to the Sheung Wan

Market and Municipal Services Building

WHO Domain 6 Civic Participation amp Employment

(i) While data suggested that the two DECCs provided volunteer opportunities for

older people in the district very few participants commented on civic

participation and employment None of the participants mentioned the

availability of paid job opportunities for older people

424 Communication Community and Health Services

WHO Domain 7 Communication amp Information

(i) Few participants commented on the age-friendliness of communication and

information in the district Elderly centres were reported as an important source

of information (except for HV) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents estate bulletin boards

were also mentioned to be an important source of information

WHO Domain 8 Community Support amp Health Services

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 24: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 23

(i) Community Care Services Services such as home help and meal delivery were

reported to be available from the two DECCs although participants from HV

were not aware of these Some participants were dissatisfied with the quality of

the home help service others found the eligibility criteria for applying free home

help service too stringent For older adults in HV their housekeeping meal social

and emotional needs were usually supported by their foreign domestic helpers

only who may have language barriers and difficulty in communicating problems

or seeking help from others

(ii) Health Services Participants considered the health and medical care services in

the district generally satisfactory For example medical appointments and

preventive health checks and services (eg flu shots) are affordable and available

in Ruttonjee Hospital Tung Wah Hospital Violet Peel General Outpatient Clinic

and Wan Chai Elderly Health Centres Private Doctors and hospitals (eg Hong

Kong Sanatorium amp Hospital) are also available The Health Care Voucher was

commended as a good governmental support for older people However some

participants reported the problem of long waiting time (eg 1-2 hours) to see a

healthcare provider even with an appointment Some participants highlighted the

importance of keeping the emergency room in Ruttonjee Hospital in operation

so that older people can receive timely and life-saving care and treatment in the

events of accidents or acute conditions

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 25: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 24

5 CONCLUSIONS

The Wan Chai District is a relatively old district in Hong Kong with 162 residents

aged 65 years or older Despite the within-district variation in resident population

density and crowdedness due to visits by non-residents the district as a whole has made

some accomplishments toward building an age-friendly community Specifically since

2012 there have been some project-based collaborations by the Hong Kong Council of

Social Service the Wan Chai District Council the Eastern and Wan Chai District Social

Welfare Office of the Social Welfare Department and elderly service centres in the

district including the Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors St James Settlement

Wan Chai District Elderly Community Centre Yan Oi Tong Tin Ka Ping Causeway Bay

Elderly Centre and Lok Sin Tong Chan Lai Jeong Kiu Social Centre for the Elderly

and the Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbourhood Elderly Centre There have been

Ambassador Training publication of guidebook and age-friendly city activities such

as community audits conducted by district residents in particular areas in the district

Through these activities they have developed a good foundation for making the district

age friendly

Our survey found that the district scored high in the domain of social

participation (mean=43) transportation (42) and respect and social inclusion (41)

but lower in housing (36) When looking into subdomains the district scored high in

accessibility of public transportation (44) in the transportation domain facilities and

settings (44) and availability and accessibility of social activities (42) in the social

participation domain attitude (42) in the respect and social inclusion domain and civic

participation (43) in the civic participation and employment domain However the

district scored lowest in burial service (24) and emergency support (34) in the

community support and health services domain and affordability and accessibility (34)

in the housing domain When looking into sub-district communities the five

communities had comparable ratings in outdoor spaces and buildings social

participation and respect and social inclusion On other domains of age-friendliness

these five districts showed variations

The high scores in the social participation domain and the respect and social

inclusion domain likely reflect the cumulative efforts district stakeholders have put into

the district to make it age friendly in the past years The high score in the transportation

domain likely reflects the superior location of the district with access to all kinds of

public transportation Future efforts toward making the district more age-friendly

should build on the existing infrastructure and network The low scores in burial service

is not district specific and is not amendable in the district level

To improve the age friendliness in the outdoor spaces and buildings domain the

district can focus on improving the outdoor spaces Focus group participants made some

suggestions which can be used as reference for improvement work These include (1)

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 26: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 25

improving street hygiene (2) increasing public education and law enforcement to

manage street crowdedness and reduce illegal safety hazards on the streets (3)

improving the parks such as making them cleaner and more pleasant adding more

fitness equipment for older people adding more sheltered areas in parks and making

them more accessible by public transportation

To improve the age friendliness in the transportation domain the district can

focus on improving existing transportation services and infrastructure as well as

providing more specialized services Suggested improvement work includes (1)

improving the frequency and availability of public transportation for residents in Lai

Tak Tsuen which is more geographically isolated (2) removing obstructions on

pavements and reducing traffic congestion in the district (3) increasing law

enforcement to reduce pedestrians and drivers who violate traffic laws (4) improving

or adding features of public transportation waiting areas such as shelters and seats for

bus and minibus stops and adding elevated islands for trams and (5) improving

particular design features of trams reducing its fare to $1 for senior citizens and fighting

theft on trams increasing the frequency of certain bus and minibus routes and

improving designs of MTR stations platform and signage

To improve the age friendliness in the housing domain the district can focus on

increasing support to older tenants of tenement houses Specific suggestions made by

focus group participants included (1) increasing support for renovating and maintaining

tenement houses and old units (2) developing housing units that specifically target the

needs of older people in the district and (3) mechanisms to control high property prices

to ensure affordability of owning or renting a housing unit in the district by older adults

To improve the age friendliness in the social participation domain the district

can focus on (1) developing more suitable and accessible venues in the district for

holding events and activities (2) increasing outreach services to socially isolated older

people in the district (3) for Lai Tak Tsuen residents increasing the frequency of public

transportations and building an escalator from the estate to Tai Hang to overcome its

geographic isolation and enhance resident social participation

To improve the age friendliness in the respect and social inclusion domain the

district can focus on (1) promoting actions of respect particularly targeting behaviours

on public transportations (2) increasing efforts to preserve older-style small shops and

revitalizing the Tang Lung Chau Market to be a market and multi-purpose service

building

To improve the age friendliness in the civic participation domain the district

can focus on elderly employment which was not mentioned to be available by focus

group participants Creating flexible and meaningful job opportunities to older people

would be an important area for improvement

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 27: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 26

To improve the age friendliness in the communication and information domain

the district can focus on exploring the use of digital devices to enhance exchange of

information

To improve the age friendliness in the community support and health services

domain suggestions included (1) improving the accessibility promotion and quality of

community care services to older people residing in different communities in the district

(2) reducing wait time of health services and (3) ensuring the emergency room in

Ruttonjee Hospital will continue to remain in operation in the future

To conclude there is a good general sense of community and perceived age-

friendliness in the Wan Chai District as found in this baseline assessment Future work

to move the district to become more age-friendly should leverage on the sense of

membership and emotional connectedness in the district strengthen the sense of

influence and need fulfilment to include older adults in implementing age-friendly

work in the specific areas of improvements as outlined above

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 28: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 27

References

1 Census and Statistics Department Projected mid-year population by age group and sex 2013

httpwwwcenstatdgovhkhkstatsubsp190jspproductCode=D5320182 Accessed 28

September 2013

2 Census and Statistics Department Population and Household Statistics Analysed by District

Council District 2014

3 The Hong Kong Council of Social Service 起動全城香港長者友善社區 2012

4 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department

Eastern and Wan Chai District Social Welfare Office Hospital Authority Hong Kong East

Cluster Wan Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors Buddhist Cheung Miu Yuen Neighbour

Elderly Centre 灣仔區長者友善社區指南 2013

5 Wan Chai District Council Community Building Committee Social Welfare Department Wan

Chai Methodist Centre for the Seniors 灣仔長者友善社區大使計劃培訓手冊 2015

6 Ware J E Kosinski M amp Keller S D (1996) A 12-item short-form health survey -

Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity Medical Care 34(3)

220-233 doi 10109700005650-199603000-00003

7 Huang YN Wong H Impacts of Sense of Community and Satisfaction with Governmental

Recovery on Psychological Status of the Wenchuan Earthquake Survivors Social Indicators

Research 2014117(2)421-436

8 Peterson NA Speer PW McMillan DW Validation of a Brief Sense of Community Scale

Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community Journal of Community

Psychology 200836(1)61-73

9 Department of Health List of clinics and health centres - elderly health centres 2014

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishteletele_chctele_chc_ehchtml Accessed 7 November 2014

10 Department of Health List of registered private hospitals 2015

httpwwwdhgovhkenglishmainmain_orhilist_phhtml Accessed 14 December 2015

11 Hospital Authority All general out patient clinics in wan chai 2016

httpwwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=200250ampLang=ENGampDimen

sion=100ampParent_ID=10052ampVer=HTML

12 Hospital Authority Clusters hospitals amp institutions - hong kong east cluster 2016

httpswwwhaorghkvisitorha_visitor_indexaspContent_ID=10175ampLang=ENGampDimens

ion=100ampParent_ID=10084ampVer=HTML

13 Social Welfare Department List of district elderly community centres 2015

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20DECC202920Oct202015pdf

Accessed 29 October 2015

14 Social Welfare Department List of neighbourhood elderly centres 2016

httpwwwswdgovhkdocelderlyList20of20NEC202220Mar202016pdf

Accessed 22 March 2016

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 29: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project Baseline Assessment Report (Wan Chai District)

Sau Po Centre on Ageing The University of Hong Kong 2F The Hong Kong Jockey Club Building for Interdisciplinary Research 5 Sassoon Road Pokfulam Hong Kong Tel (852) 2831 5210 Website ageinghkuhk Email ageinghkuhk 28

Appendix 1 District Map

Appendix 2 Questionnaire Survey

Appendix 2 Focus Group Discussion Guide

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 30: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

1

Appendix 1 District Map

Legend

The border of each cluster is

marked by a particular colour

---- Wan Chai (Blue)

---- Canal Road (Black)

---- Causeway Bay (Orange)

---- Tai Hang (Green)

---- Happy Valley (Yellow)

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 31: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

1

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

共建長者友善社區(中西區及灣仔區)

問卷調查

A 受訪者資料 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 您嘅性別係 (1)男 (2)女

2 a 年齡 (根據身份證上的出生日期)

b 或揀選幾下屬於你的年齡組別

(1) 18-19 (2) 20-24 (3) 25-29 (4) 30-34 (5) 35-39

(6) 40-44 (7) 45-49 (8) 50-54 (9) 55-59 (10) 60-64

(11) 65-69 (12) 70-74 (13) 75-79 (14) 80-84 (15) 85+

3 您居住的社區[以下 1 至 28 個社區請只選擇一個或請在此處註明你居住大廈屋苑的名

稱以便職員確實你居住的社區 ]

中西區 ndash 堅尼地城

(1)堅尼地城及摩星嶺 (2)觀龍

ndash 西環石塘咀及西營盤

(3)西環 (4)石塘咀 (5)西營盤 (6)正街 (7)水街

ndash 半山

(8)半山東 (9)衛城 (10)大學 (11)寶翠

ndash 中環及上環

(12)中環 (13)上環 (14)東華

灣仔區 ndash 銅鑼灣

(15)維園 (16)天后 (17)銅鑼灣

ndash 灣仔

(18)軒尼詩 (19)愛群 (20)修頓 (21)大佛口 (22)司徒拔道

ndash 跑馬地

(23)渣甸山 (24)樂活 (25)跑馬地

ndash 鵝頸

(26)鵝頸

ndash 大坑

(27)大坑 (28)勵德

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 32: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

2

4 您於所屬社區已居住多久 年 月

5 您嘅婚姻狀況係(一定要讀出所有選擇)

(1)從未結婚

(2)已婚

(3)喪偶

(4)離婚

(5)分

(6)其他(請註明)

6 已完成的最高教育程度

(1)未受教育學前教育(幼稚園)

(2)小學

(3)初中(中一至中三)

(4)高中(中四至中五)

(5)預科(中六至中七)

(6)專上教育文憑證書課程

(7)專上教育副學位課程

(8)專上教育學位課程或以上

7 以下的問題是有關你居住的地方

(A) 你是否在公屋居住

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8a)

(B) 你是否住私人住宅單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8b)

(C) 你是否住非住宅用屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 8c)

(D) 你是否住臨時屋宇單位

(0)否 (1)是(如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

(E) 如以上皆不是你居住的房屋類型那麼你居住的地方是什麼類型的屋宇

(請註明)(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 33: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

3

8 a 你住的屋邨是(回答後直接跳至問題 9)

(1)西環邨 (2)觀龍樓 (3)勵德邨

b 你住的私人住宅單位是買還是租的

(1)買 (如答「買」直接跳至問題 8bi(I))

(2)租 (如答「租」直接跳至問題 8bii(I))

8bi)(I) 你買的自置私人住宅單位有沒有做過按揭供款或借貸還款

(0)沒有 (如答「沒有」直接跳至問題 9)

(1)有

8bi)(II) 你的按揭供款或借貸還款現時是否已結束(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)已結束 (2)未結束

8bii)(I) 你租的單位是否大學學生宿舍

(0)否 (1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8bii)(II) 你租的私人住宅單位是全租合租免租還是劏房板間房

(1)全租 (2)合租 (3)免租 (4)劏房板間房

8bii)(III) 你租的私人住宅單位的業主是

(1)屬牟利公司單位或相關人士 (如選(1)跳至問題 9)

(2)非牟利機構或單位 (如東華三院大學警務處等等)

8bii)(IV) 你租的單位是否大學宿舍

(0)否 (如答「否」直接跳至問題 9) (1)是

8bii)(V) 你租住的大學宿舍單位是哪一類型(回答後跳至問題 9)

(1)教職員住所

(2)其他 (請註明)

c 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位是否工廠大廈

(0)否

(1)是 (如答「是」直接跳至問題 9)

8ci) 你住的非住宅用屋宇單位屬於什麼類型的大廈

(請註明)

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 34: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

4

9 以下的問題是關於您居住的樓宇

I 您居住的樓宇的樓齡有幾多年

(1) 0-5 年 (2) 6-10 年 (3) 11-20 年

(4) 21-30 年 (5) 30 年以上

II 您居住的大廈總共幾多層 層

III 您居住的大廈有沒有電梯 (0)沒有 (1)有

IV 您從您居住的單位外出時需要行樓梯嗎

(0)不需要(如答「不需要」直接跳至問題 10) (1)需要

V 如果需要總共要行多少級樓梯

(1) 1-5 級 (2) 6-10 級 (3) 11-15 級

(4) 16-20 級 (5) 21 級或以上

10 a) 您現與誰同住(傭人不計算在內)(可選多於一項)

(1)獨居 (6)父母

(2)配偶 (7)祖父母

(3)子女 (8)兄弟姐妹

(4)女婿 媳婦 (9)其他(請註明)_______________

(5)孫

b) 有傭人與您同住嗎

(1)沒有 (2)有

11 您現時有無返工

(1) 有 您現時嘅職位工作係以下哪項

(1)經理及行政級人員(請註明)

(2)專業人員(請註明)

(3)輔助專業人員(請註明)

(4)文書支援人員(請註明)

(5)服務工作及銷售人員(請註明)

(6)工藝及有關人員(請註明)

(7)機台及機器操作員及裝配員(請註明)

(8)非技術工人(請註明)

(9)漁農業熟練工人及不能分類的職業(請註明)

(0) 無 您現在是(讀出所有選擇)

(1)失業人士

(2)退休人士

(3)料理家務者

(4)學生

(5)其他(請註明)

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 35: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

5

12 a) 你是否一個照顧者

(0)否 (1)是

b) 被你照顧的人的年齡(可選多於一項)

(0) 18歲或以下 (1) 19 - 64歲 (2) 65歲或以上

13 a) 過去三個月內您有否於長者中心參與過任何義工服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)

過去三個月內您有否使用參加過長者中心所提供的服務活動

(0)否 (1)有

14 您有無足夠嘅金錢應付日常開支

(1)非常不足夠 (2)不足夠 (3)剛足夠 (4)足夠有餘

(5)非常充裕

15 您現在的每月收入是多少港幣

(1) 0 (8) 15000 - 19999

(2) 1 - 1999 (9) 20000 - 24999

(3) 2000 - 3999 (10) 25000 - 29999

(4) 4000 - 5999 (11) 30000 - 39999

(5) 6000 - 7999 (12) 40000 - 59999

(6) 8000 - 9999 (13) ge 60000

(7) 10000 - 14999

16 您或與您同住的家人有使用以下任何輔助工具嗎

您本人 同住的家人

a) 手杖 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

b) 助行器 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

c) 輪椅 (0)沒有 (1)有 (0)沒有 (1)有

17 a) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況與現時一樣你覺得你入住老

人院的機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

b) (只適用於60歲或以上人士)在未來五年內假如你的健康狀況變差你覺得你入住老人院的

機會有多大(0=一定不會100=一定會)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 36: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

6

B 社區的友善程度 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 6 分代表

1 分為非常不同意2 分為不同意3 分為有點不同意4 分為有點同意5 分為

同意6 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5 6

非常不同意 不同意 有點不同意 有點同意 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分有 號題目可就全港情況評分

有些題目中會列出一些長者友善社區的條件如各項條件並不一致請以使用

該設施環境的整體情況評分

您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

A

室外空間及建築 非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 公共地方乾淨同舒適

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 戶外座位同綠化空間充足而且保養得妥善同安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 司機喺路口同行人過路處俾行人行先

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 單車徑同行人路分開

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 街道有充足嘅照明而且有警察巡邏令戶外地方安全

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 商業服務 (好似購物中心超巿銀行) 嘅地點集中同方

便使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有安排特別客戶服務俾有需要人士例如長者專用櫃枱

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 建築物內外都有清晰嘅指示足夠嘅座位無障礙升降

機斜路扶手同樓梯同埋防滑地板 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 室外和室內地方嘅公共洗手間數量充足乾淨同埋保養得

妥善 俾唔同行動能力嘅人士使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 整體來說這區提供適合長者使用的室外空間和建築

1 2 3 4 5 6

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 37: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

7

B

交通

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 路面交通有秩序

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 交通網絡良好透過公共交通可以去到市內所有地區同埋

服務地點 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 公共交通嘅費用係可以負擔嘅而且價錢清晰無論喺惡

劣天氣繁忙時間或假日收費都係一致嘅 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 喺所有時間包括喺夜晚週末和假日公共交通服務都

係可靠同埋班次頻密

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 公共交通服務嘅路線同班次資料完整又列出可以俾傷殘

人士使用嘅班次 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 公共交通工具嘅車廂乾淨保養良好容易上落唔迫

又有優先使用座位而乘客亦會讓呢啲位俾有需要人士 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 有專為殘疾人士而設嘅交通服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

8 車站嘅位置方便容易到達安全乾淨光線充足有

清晰嘅標誌仲有蓋同埋有充足嘅座位 1 2 3 4 5 6

9 司機會喺指定嘅車站同緊貼住行人路停車方便乘客上

落又會等埋乘客坐低先開車 1 2 3 4 5 6

10 喺公共交通唔夠嘅地方有其他接載服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

11 的士可以擺放輪椅同助行器費用負擔得起司機有禮

貌並且樂於助人 1 2 3 4 5 6

12 馬路保養妥善照明充足 1 2 3 4 5 6

13 整體來說這區為長者提供合適的交通工具和服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 38: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

8

C

住所

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 房屋嘅數量足夠價錢可負擔而且地點安全又近其他

社區服務同地方 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 住所嘅所有房間同通道都有足夠嘅室內空間同平地可以自

由活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有可負擔嘅家居改裝選擇同物料供應而且供應商了解長

者嘅需要 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 區內有充足同可負擔嘅房屋提供俾體弱同殘疾嘅長者亦

有適合佢地嘅服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的房屋和居住環境

1 2 3 4 5 6

D

社會參與

1 活動可以俾一個人或者同朋友一齊參加

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 活動同參觀景點嘅費用都可以負擔亦都冇隱藏或附加嘅

收費 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 有完善咁提供有關活動嘅資料包括無障礙設施同埋交通

選擇 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 提供多元化嘅活動去吸引唔同喜好嘅長者參與

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 喺區內唔同場地 (好似文娛中心學校圖書館社區中

心同公園)內舉行可以俾長者參與嘅聚會 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 對少接觸外界嘅人士提供可靠嘅外展支援服務

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的悠閒及文化活動

1 2 3 4 5 6

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 39: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

9

E

尊重及社會包融

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 各種服務會定期諮詢長者為求服務得佢地更好 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 提供唔同服務同產品去滿足唔同人士嘅需求同喜好 1 2 3 4 5 6

3 服務人員有禮貌樂於助人

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 學校提供機會去學習有關長者同埋年老嘅知識並有機會

俾長者參與學校活動 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社會認同長者喺過去同埋目前所作出嘅貢獻

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 傳媒對長者嘅描述正面同埋冇成見

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說這區對長者有足夠的尊重和包容的

1 2 3 4 5 6

F

社區參與及就業

1 長者有彈性嘅義務工作選擇而且得到訓練表揚指導

同埋補償開支 1 2 3 4 5 6

2 長者員工嘅特質得到廣泛推崇

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 提倡各種具彈性並有合理報酬嘅工作機會俾長者

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 禁止喺僱用留用晉升同培訓僱員呢幾方面年齡歧視

1 2 3 4 5 6

5 整體來說這區為長者提供適合的義工和就業機會

1 2 3 4 5 6

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 40: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

10

G

訊息交流

非常不同意

不同意

有點不同意

有點同意

同意

非常同意

1 資訊發佈嘅方式簡單有效唔同年齡嘅人士都接收到

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 定期提供長者有興趣嘅訊息同廣播

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 少接觸外界嘅人士可以喺佢地信任嘅人士身上得到同佢

本人有關嘅資訊 1 2 3 4 5 6

4 電子設備好似手提電話收音機電視機銀行自動櫃

員機同自動售票機嘅掣夠大同埋上面嘅字體都夠大 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 電話應答系統嘅指示緩慢同清楚又會話俾打去嘅人聽點

樣可以隨時重複內容 1 2 3 4 5 6

6 係公眾場所好似政府辦事處社區中心同圖書館已廣

泛設有平嘅或者係免費嘅電腦同上網服務俾人使用 1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到他們需要的資訊

1 2 3 4 5 6

H

社區支持與健康服務

1 醫療同社區支援服務足夠

1 2 3 4 5 6

2 有提供家居護理服務包括健康丶個人照顧同家務

1 2 3 4 5 6

3 院舍服務設施同長者的居所都鄰近其他社區服務同地方

1 2 3 4 5 6

4 市民唔會因為經濟困難而得唔到醫療同社區嘅支援服

務 1 2 3 4 5 6

5 社區應變計劃(好似走火警)有考慮到長者嘅能力同限制

1 2 3 4 5 6

6 墓地(包括土葬同骨灰龕) 嘅數量足夠同埋容易獲得

1 2 3 4 5 6

7 整體來說長者在這區容易得到適當的醫療健康及支援

服務 1 2 3 4 5 6

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 41: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

11

10 總體來說你感到自己目前的生活有多幸福

(1)非常幸福 (2)幸福 (3)一半

(4)不幸福 (5)非常不幸福

60 歲或以上人士請直接跳至 E 部份

C 社群意識指數 (請圈起你所選擇的分數)

以下有些句子請回答您對這些句子的同意程度以 1 至 5 分代表1 分為非常不

同意2 分為不同意3 分為普通4 分為同意5 分為非常同意

1 2 3 4 5

非常不同意 不同意 普通 同意 非常同意

請就你居住的地區評分您有幾同意而家helliphelliphellip

社群意識指數

1 喺呢個社區我可以得到我需要嘅東西 1 2 3 4 5

2 這個社區幫助我滿足我嘅需求 1 2 3 4 5

3 我覺得自己係這個社區嘅一份子 1 2 3 4 5

4 我屬於這呢個社區 1 2 3 4 5

5 我可以參與討論喺呢社區發生嘅事情 1 2 3 4 5

6 這個社區嘅人們善於互相影響 1 2 3 4 5

7 我覺得同呢個社區息息相關 1 2 3 4 5

8 我同呢個社區嘅其他人有良好嘅關係 1 2 3 4 5

9 我熟悉我正在居住的地區(中西區灣仔區) 1 2 3 4 5

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 42: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

12

D 對老年人的印象和評價 (只問 59 歲或以下人士60 歲或以上人士不用回答)

以下問題是關於對老年人的印象及評價請您根據在過去兩個星期的實際情

況在六個選項(非常不同意不同意少少不同意同意非常同意)中選

擇適合的答案在適當的方框內加上剔號

例如您對於ldquo老年人在社會上是個負擔rdquo這個觀點有ldquo少少不同意rdquo就請在

ldquo少少不同意rdquo下面的方框內加上剔號

例題老年人在社會上是個負擔

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

1 老年人應該居住在安老院舍

2 老年人常常犯錯容易惹人生氣

3 老年人容易讓人感覺不舒服

4 老年人總愛說起他們的陳年往事這讓人很

反感

5 老年人脾氣不好愛抱怨對人也不友善

6 老年人總看年輕人不順眼

7 老年人總是多管別人的閒事

8 老年人的家一般是殘破不堪的

9 老年人不修邊幅很邋遢

10 與其他人比老年人不需要更多的關愛

59 歲或以下人士請直接跳至 F 部份

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 43: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

13

E 步行的難易程度 (只問 60 歲或以上人士59 歲或以下人士不用回答)

(請在選擇的格內填 )

以下是一些您在日常生活中可能需要經常去的地方請問

從您居住的地方出發您是不是可以不太費力地步行抵

達[請根據受訪者的回答在 20 以及 21 填入下列分類的

編號如受訪者回答的地點不適合下述任何一種類別請

填入具體名稱]

是(1) 否(0)

1 便利店或者報刊亭

2 教堂或者其他宗教場所

3 公園或者其他公共休憩場所(戶外健身點)

4 長者地區中心鄰舍中心活動中心社會服務中心

家庭服務中心

5 社區會堂以及其他康樂中心(運動設施劇院等)

6 診所(中西醫以及牙科)

7 藥房

8 酒樓

9 茶餐廳或者快餐店

10 雜貨店

11 街市超級市場

12 圖書館

13 銀行

14 郵局

15 子女的家 不適用

16 朋友的家 不適用

17 政府機構(社會保障部房屋署民政署地區辦事處

勞工署職業輔導課等)

18 醫院(急診專科日間照顧中心康復中心等)

19 理髮店

20 在過去 1 個月你每天走路去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

21 在過去 1 個月你經常坐車去的三個地方是 1)

2) 3)

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 44: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

14

F 體能活動水平 (請在選擇的格內填 )

1 以一週 (7 天)作計算單位你在過去一個月平均做了以下運動多少

回答下列問題時請

只計算運動時間持續 10 分鐘或以上的運動

只計算在餘暇時間的運動 (即不計算工作時的運動及家務)

注意這三個類別的主要區別是運動的強度

平均頻率

(每週次數)

平均持續時間

(分鐘)

a 劇烈運動

(心跳加速流汗) (如跑步緩步跑健康舞班 高強度游泳高強度單車)

次數週 分鐘

b 中等強度運動

(不疲累輕度排汗) (如快步走打網球騎單車 游泳跳民族或流行舞蹈)

次數週 分鐘

c 輕度運動

(輕鬆無汗) (如步行輕度瑜伽草地保齡球河邊釣魚)

次數週 分鐘

d 阻力運動

(增強肌力)

(例如重複舉啞鈴舉重

機或阻力帶仰臥起坐

深蹲)

次數週 分鐘

2 在平均一週(7 天)裡你有定期在餘暇時間做中等或以上強度的運動(即會排

汗心跳加速)嗎

(1)經常 (2)有時 (3)從不很少

3 總體來說你有幾滿意你目前的生活

(1)非常滿意 (2)滿意 (3)一半

(4)不滿意 (5)非常不滿意

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 45: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

15

G 標準十二題簡明健康狀況調查表 (SF-12) (請在選擇的格內填 )

說明這項調查是詢問你對自己健康狀況的了解此項資料記錄你的自我感覺

和日常生活的情況

如果你不肯定怎樣回答請按照你的理解選擇最合適的答案

1) 總括來說您認為您現時的健康狀況是

(1)非常好 (2)很好 (3)好

(4)一般(不過不失) (5)差

以下各項是您日常生活中可能進行的活動以您目前的健康狀況您在進行這

些活動時有沒有受到限制如果有的話程度如何

2) 中等強度的活動例如搬桌子用吸塵機吸塵或清潔地板打保齡球

或打太極拳

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

3) 上幾層樓梯

(1)有好大限制 (2)有一點限制 (3)沒有任何限制

以下問題是關於您身體健康狀況和日常活動的關係

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會因為身體健康的原因而

遇到下列的問題

4) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

5) 工作或其他活動的種類受到限制

(1)會 (2)不會

在過去四星期裏你在工作或其他日常活動中會不會由於情緒方面的原因(例

如感到沮喪或焦慮)而遇到下列的問題

6) 實際做完完成的比想做的少

(1)會 (2)不會

7) 工作時或從事活動時不如往常細心了

(1)會 (2)不會

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 46: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

16

8) 在過去四個星期裡您身體上的疼痛對您的日常工作 (包括上班和家務)

有多大影響

(1)完全沒有影響 (2)有很少影響 (3)有一些影響

(4)有較大影響 (5)有非常大的影響

以下問題是有關您在過去四個星期裡您的感覺怎樣和您其他的情況針對每一

個問題請選擇一個最接近您的感覺的答案

9) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到心平氣和

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

10) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間感到精力充足

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

11) 在過去四個星期裡您有多少時間覺得心情不好悶悶不樂或沮喪

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

12) 在過去四個星期裡有多少時間由於您身體健康或情緒問題而妨礙了您的

社交活動 (比如探親訪友等)

(1)常常 (2)大部份時間 (3)很多時間

(4)間中 (5)偶然一次半次 (6)從來沒有

問卷完成日期

( 日 月 年 )

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 47: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

1

Appendix 3 Focus Group Discussion Guide

Sau Po Centre on Ageing

The University of Hong Kong

香港大學秀圃老年研究中心

「共建長者友善社區」計劃 (中西區及灣仔區)

聚焦小組

小組簡介

『長者友善』是世界衛生組織在 2002 年提出的概念它建基於積極

老齡化的理論框架認為長者是社會的資源和財富每一位長者都

有權利參與到社會及從身體健康社會參與或人生安全保障等各

方面去獲得最大限度的生活質素而營造一個「長者友善」的城市

更是社會上每一個人的責任香港現時的人口老化迅速為了推動

香港邁向『長者友善』城市之路來迎接老齡化和城市化的挑戰是

次研究會根據世界衛生組織所定下的『長者友善』城市的八個指標

來探討中西區 灣仔區的情況

是次聚焦小組旨在了解你對中西區 灣仔區居住環境的意見及

有關長者的意見

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 48: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

2

Part Alceil長者友善rceil總體指標體系的討論

世界衛生組織提倡的『長者友善』城市主要由八個重要指標所以組

成它們涵蓋了包括城市建設環境服務與政策等三大範疇反

映一個城市是否能夠達致『積極老齡化』具體有八個方面包括戶

外空間和房屋建築交通房屋社會參與尊重和社會融合公

民參與與就業溝通和資訊社區支援和健康服務

『長者友善』城市的八個重要指標

1 戶外空間和房屋建築這個指標的目的是希望透過建設一個令

人舒適的戶外空間和適合長者居住的房屋設施以增加長者在

家安老的可能性

2 交通交通的便利性會影響長者的活動範圍一個方便使用和

適合長者支付能力的交通安排對長者能否參與社區和公民活

動至關重要

3 房屋由於隨著長者年紀的增加身體活動能力的減退長者能

否居住在擁有合適設施的房屋對長者是否能獨立生活及他們的

生活品質有很大的影響

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016
Page 49: Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project · 2018-07-20 · donation from The Hong Kong Jockey Club Charities Trust in 2015 to conduct the Jockey Club Age-friendly City Project in the

3

4 社會參與透過參與在正式或非正的社會活動可以保持令長者

受到支持與關懷因此參與社會與家人和朋友交往是長者獲

得生理和心理健康的有效保障

5 尊重和社會融合尊重長者讓他們能夠成為社會的一分子是每

一個社會的基本責任因此這一目標是讓每一個位長者在不同

的社會環境下都受到尊重包括在社會社區和家庭

6 公民參與就業透過社會參與和就業可以令長者繼續對社會發

揮貢獻這可以是用義務工作的形式也可以是用參與勞動力

市場的形式來達致

7 溝通和資訊社會上有不同種類的服務與支援給予長者然而

要長者瞭解取得所需服務與支援需要透過社會要加強資訊的

透明度和流通性讓長者在最有需要的時候能及時得到可靠的

資訊

8 社區支援和健康服務這一目標是希望透過提升長者的健康與

生活品質以滿足長者在熟悉的社區與在家安老的理想為

此適切的社區支援和健康服務必不可少

Q1就以上『長者友善』城市的八個指標以中西區灣仔區目前的

情況而言哪三個指標是你最想改善的為什麼

Q2哪三個指標是最實際可以改善的為什麼

  • Att 11 - Baseline Assessment Report_WanChai_2016
  • Att 12 - Baseline Assessment Report Appendix_WanChai_2016