TABLE 2:  CREATE A HOA OMBUDSMAN'S OFFICE LIKE THE ONE FOR CONDOMINIUMS
KEY FINDINGS:	1	Overall 93.5% of respondents want an ombudsman's office to protect HOA residents' rights.
	2	Boldfaced values in the row of column YESes differ significantly from the overall average as they are at least 3 standard deviations away from the overall average value.
	3	The percentage YES and NO responses of non-owner interest groups differ significantly from the corresponding ones of Owners and Overall.  They also differ significantly from those of
		CCFJ members, the West Coast Region, and those providing a priority and/or comment.
	4	Some percentage Yeses or Noes in the Gender, Region, & Additional Remarks sections differed significantly from other responses in the same section and the Overall responses.
	5	The YES and NO percentage responses of CCFJ members differed significantly from both those of Non-members and Overall.  But Non-members responses were not statistically
		significantly different from the Overall figures.
	6	There may be a causal relationship between the respondents' trait of membership or non-membershipship in the CyberCitizens for Justice, Inc. and their answers to this question.
				* * * * * * * * * * * *	* * * * * * * *  INTEREST * * * * * * * *			* * * * * * * * *			* * * *	GENDER	* * * *					* * * * * * *  REGION [8]  * * * * * * *						* * ADDITIONAL REMARKS MADE * *
					BOARD						* * * GENDER [5] * * *				* CCFJ MEMBER *					WEST	EAST			PRIORITY	COMMENT
OVERALL TOTALS		OVERALL		OWNER	MEMBER [1]	LAWYER	C.A.M. [2]	OTHER [3]	N.A. [4]		MALE	FEMALE	D.K. [6]		YES	NO		NORTH	CENTRAL	COAST	COAST	SOUTH		ONLY	ONLY	BOTH	NEITHER
% WITHIN CATEGORY		1033		740	130	7	13	8	135		584	389	60		196	837		35	202	156	137	503		176	131	418	308
		100.0%		71.6%	12.6%	0.7%	1.3%	0.8%	13.1%		56.5%	37.7%	5.8%		19.0%	81.0%		3.4%	19.6%	15.1%	13.3%	48.7%		17.0%	12.7%	40.5%	29.8%
ADJUSTED # [9]		1030		740	130	7	11	8	134		592	385	53		196	834		35	202	155	136	502		175	131	418	306
# OF YESes		963		690	116	6	10	7	134		550	366	47		192	771		32	192	149	128	462		168	117	398	280
# OF NOs		67		50	14	1	1	1	0		42	19	6		4	63		3	10	6	8	40		7	14	20	26
COLUMN % YES [10]		93.5%		93.2%	89.2%	85.7%	90.9%	87.5%	100.0%		92.9%	95.1%	88.7%		98.0%	92.4%		91.4%	95.0%	96.1%	94.1%	92.0%		96.0%	89.3%	95.2%	91.5%
t-Test on % YESes [11]				-0.3	-5.6	-10.1	-3.4	-7.8	8.5		-0.8	2.0	-6.3		5.8	-1.4		-2.7	2.0	3.4	0.8	-1.9		3.3	-5.4	2.2	-2.6
COLUMN % NO [10]		6.5%		6.8%	10.8%	14.3%	9.1%	12.5%	0.0%		7.1%	4.9%	11.3%		2.0%	7.6%		8.6%	5.0%	3.9%	5.9%	8.0%		4.0%	10.7%	4.8%	8.5%
t-Test on % NOes [11]				0.3	5.6	10.1	3.4	7.8	-8.5		0.8	-2.0	6.3		-5.8	1.4		2.7	-2.0	-3.4	-0.8	1.9		-3.3	5.4	-2.2	2.6
1 STD. DEVIATION [12]		0.8%
% YESes Row [10]		100.0%		71.7%	12.0%	0.6%	1.0%	0.7%	13.9%		57.1%	38.0%	4.9%		19.9%	80.1%		3.3%	19.9%	15.5%	13.3%	48.0%		17.4%	12.1%	41.3%	29.1%
% NOs Row [10]		100.0%		74.6%	20.9%	1.5%	1.5%	1.5%	0.0%		62.7%	28.4%	9.0%		6.0%	94.0%		4.5%	14.9%	9.0%	11.9%	59.7%		10.4%	20.9%	29.9%	38.8%
Calculated Chi-Squared Value [13]:				0.1700							0.1409				"0.0049"			0.2831						0.0223
Implication of Chi-Squared Test				INDEPENDENT							INDEPENDENT				RELATIONSHIP?			INDEPENDENT						INDEPENDENT
													© 2008 Cyber Citizens for Justice, Inc.   Deland, FL