The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutETC Institute Westlake PresentationETC Institute State-of-the-art Market Research Facilities Offices in Kansas City and Phoenix More than 1,000,000 Persons Surveyed for more than 425 cities in 46 States A National Leader in Market Research for Local Governmental Organizations …helping city and county governments gather and use survey data to enhance organizational performance for 25 years Qualifications of Key Personnel Managed citizen survey research for more than 300 cities/counties •including more than 250 citizen surveys Degrees from Princeton University in economics and politics •Emphasis on local governmental issues Helped communities across the U.S. secure nearly $2 billion in new funding National expertise in the development of performance measures and comparative benchmarks •created DirectionFinder survey benchmarks, which are now used by more than 145 communities to assess performance •featured speaker at national and regional conferences Chris Tatham, Project Manager Leadership, Survey Analysis, Communication <----------------------------Quality Control --------------------------> Administer Surveys Survey Design/Determine Sample Size Basic Survey Process Data Processing and Analysis Final Report and Recommendations Pre-Test Review Prior Work Distribution of Respondents to the 2006 Citizen Survey Based on the Location of the Respondent’s Home Satisfaction with Neighborhood Street Maintenance Ratings 1=Very Dissatisfied 5=Very Satisfied Potential Areas of Concern Benchmarking Data Without Good Benchmarks - What Does This Mean? 77% 74% 65% 60% 55% 52% 52% Quality City water/sewer/electric utilities Overall quality of police/fire/ambulance services Quality of City parks programs/facilities Quality of customer service from City employees Effectiveness of City communication with public Maintenance of City streets/buildings/facilities Quality of City's stormwater/runoff management 0%20%40%60%80%100% Very Satisfied (5)Satisfied (4) Overall Satisfaction With City Services by Major Category by percentage of respondents who rated the item as a 1 to 5 on a 5-point scale (excluding don't knows) Source: ETC Institute DirectionFinder (Fall 2002 - Independence, MO) 95% 90% 86% 80% 80% 79% 78% 62% 37% 42% 46% 25% 19% 32% Police, Fire, and Ambulance Services Parks and recreation Overall quality of customer service City water & sewer utilities* Effectiveness of communication with the public Maintenance of City streets/buildings/facilities City stormwater runoff system 0%20%40%60%80%100% Overall Satisfaction With City Services 2002 by percentage of respondents who rated the item as a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale (excluding don't knows) Source: 2002 ETC Institute DirectionFinder LOW---------MEAN--------HIGH Independence 74% 65% 55% 77% 52% 60% 52% * the data shown for water/sewer is the average of the two individual ratings; the two services are generally rated together in other DirectionFinder communities. With Benchmarking Data Assessment of Priorities Importance Ratings - COMMUNITY SURVEY 58% 43% 38% 31% 27% 24% 20% 20% 13% Maintenance of County streets/buildings/facilities Quality of police/fire/ambulance Quality of County water/sewer/sanitation services Enforcement of County codes/ordinances Effectiveness of County communication with public Quality of County parks programs/facilities Quality/effectiveness County Health Dept. programs Quality of customer service from County employees Quality of public library services 0%10%20%30%40%50%60% 1st Choice 2nd Choice 3rd Choice Services That Should Receive the Most Emphasis From the County Over the Next Two Years by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices Source: ETC Institute DirectionFinder ( DeKalb County, Georgia) Analysis Importance - Satisfaction/Agreement Analysis City of Fort Worth - 2003 PARKS and RECREATION Category of Service Most Important % Most Important Rank Satisfaction % Satisfaction Rank Importance- Satisfaction Rating 2003 I-S Rating Rank 2002 I-S Rating Rank High Priority (IS .10-.20) Outdoor Swimming pools 20%5 27%14 0.1460 1 2 Number of walking/biking trails 24%2 49%9 0.1224 2 3 Quality of Facilities at City Parks 24%2 54%4 0.1104 3 not asked The City's youth athletic programs 19%6 45%10 0.1045 4 1 Medium Priority (IS <.10) Indoor Swimming Pools 13%9 25%15 0.0975 5 not asked Maintenance of City parks 27%1 67%2 0.0891 6 5 Summer Recreation Programs 14%8 44%11 0.0784 7 not asked The number of City parks 17%7 54%4 0.0782 8 6 Maintenance of Community Centers 11%10 56%3 0.0484 9 7 City libraries 21%4 79%1 0.0441 10 9 The City's adult athletic programs 7%13 39%13 0.0427 11 8 Availability of Meeting Space 8%11 51%8 0.0392 12 not asked Outdoor athletic fields 8%11 52%6 0.0384 13 10 Ease of registering for programs 5%14 42%12 0.0290 14 11 City Golf Courses 5%14 52%6 0.0240 15 12 Sa t i s f a c t i o n R a t i n g ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! me a n s a t i s f a c t i o n Opportunities for Improvement mean importance Importance RatingLower Importance Higher Importance lower importance/higher satisfaction higher importance/higher satisfaction lower importance/lower satisfaction higher importance/lower satisfaction Exceeded Expectations Less Important Continued Emphasis Source: ETC Institute (April 2007) 2007 City of Lawrence DirectionFinder Importance-Satisfaction Assessment Matrix -Parks and Recreation- (points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by respondents to the survey) Cleanliness of public areas in the City Number of walking and biking trails Beautification of Downtown Lawrence Appearance/cleanliness of City parks Number of City parks City recreation facilities Mowing and trimming along City streets Condition of equipment at City parks Availability of youth sports field in Lawrence Availability of info about parks and rec. programs City's outdoor aquatic facilities Availability of adult sports field in Lawrence Quality of Eagle Bend Golf Course City's indoor aquatic facilities Analysis Performance Indices – Citizen Survey 100 111 107 111 114 115 117 100 102 98 97 99 97 98 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 80 90 100 110 120 130 Olathe KC Metro Overall Satisfaction Index 2000 thru 2006 Source: ETC Institute DirectionFinder (2006 - Olathe, KS) derived from the mean overall satisfaction rating provided by residents (Year 2000=100) ETC Institute Advantages Unsurpassed Understanding of Issues Facing Municipalities •Seek a long-term strategic relationships •Unmatched ability to interpret survey results and provide actionable recommendations Our Objectivity Facilitates Your Success •National benchmarks provide objective assessments •Survey results are credible Unmatched Commitment of Senior Personnel •More then 100 years of combined experience •Locally responsive to your needs We Will Help You Use The Survey Data to Set Priorities and Get Results Questions ????