Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - Benchmarks and Performance MeasuresCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 14 August 12, 2008 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: City Manager's Office Homer Bludau, City Manager 9491644 -3000 or hbludau @city.newport - beach.ca.us SUBJECT: COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF CITY STAFF BENCHMARKS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES M-1114 Does the City Council support the benchmarks and performance measures that have been selected for the specified City services? RECOMMENDATION: Make changes as appropriate and approve the thirty (30) benchmarks and numerous performance measures in order to move toward the next step of the benchmark process, which is data gathering for comparison purposes. DISCUSSION: Background: In both 2007 and 2008 the City Council met and developed priorities to accomplish each calendar year. Both years the priority to "institute an organizational performance improvement effort through data gathering and the identification of service benchmarks to measure organizational effectiveness" was an important enough goal for the City Council to include in its list of priorities. The benchmark process is to be accomplished with three steps: 1) a customer satisfaction survey, which was accomplished in January, 2008; 2) the selection and development of benchmarked services and accompanying performance measures, which is before you now for approval; and 3) the selection of several internal processes to be looked at in terms of whether greater efficiencies might be offered, based on benchmark comparisons. In order for the benchmarking effort to be successful it was realized early on that it needed to be staff driven. A four - person staff advisory committee was appointed by the City Manager to work with ICMA benchmarking consultants Craig Rapp and Brooke Myhre to Council Review and Approval of City Staff Benchmarks and Performance Measures August 12, 2008 Page 2 steer the internal process and provide communication to the rest of the organization. The four person committee is composed of Susan Warren (Library), John Kappeler (Code Enforcement), George Murdoch (Utilities) and Mike Wojciechowski (Administrative Services — Information Technology). These four staff members have been critical to guiding the process through numerous training meetings to develop the benchmarks and performance measures and by being resources to the other departments' members who worked with the process. The Council Finance Committee (Curry, Daigle, Henn) have overseen the process through meetings with the ICMA consultants in which the benchmarks and performance measures were reviewed and refined. For this initial phase of benchmark development, thirty (30) City services were selected. To reach this point has taken a sizable time commitment on the part of numerous staff members in every City department. Their time and dedication to this Council priority has been impressive throughout the benchmark and performance measure development. In order to provide the City Council with a more thorough understanding of what the benchmarks mean to staff, we will have team members review three of the benchmarks and related performance measures. Public Works Administrative Manager Jamie Pollard will review the "capital improvement plan delivery" benchmark. Public Information Manager Tara Finnigan will review the "public information /communication" benchmark and Fire Marshall Steve Bunting will review the "fire prevention /complaints" benchmark. Council should feel free to ask questions regarding any of the benchmarks and performance measures in order to be in the position of making any desired changes and approving the benchmarks and performance measures. Once the benchmarks and performance measures are approved, the respective staff members will gather information regarding the performance measures so they eventually can be used in comparisons with other cities' performance measures. The ICMA consultants will present to the City Council in the near future those cities we will seek to compare our performance measures against. Environmental Review: The City Council's approval of this Agenda Item does not require environmental review. Public Notice: This agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the Council considers the item). Submitted by OMER L. B U AU City Manager Attachment ICMA Leaders at the Core of Better Communities To: City of Newport Beach City Council From: Craig Rapp and Brooke Myhre, ICMA RE: Report on Recommended Performance Measures and Benchmarks Date: August 1, 2008 Background and Recommendation This memorandum transmits for City Council approval a set of recommended benchmarks and performance measures for 30 City services. This set of measures was presented to the Finance Committee at its July 9t" worksession. The primary focus of the worksession was to review the recommended measures and recommend any changes required prior to submitting them to the full City Council. Following the City Council's approval of the list of city services selected for the Benchmarking Project on April 22nd, ICMA conducted a series of workshops with staff to develop benchmarks and performance measures for each service area. In addition to the formal workshops, staff at all levels devoted significant time and effort to make sure that the benchmarks and performance measures were meaningful, useful, and sustainable. Finance Committee meeting of July 9: ICMA presented a status report on the project and an overview of the report containing recommended benchmarks and performance measures for 30 City services. Staff from several departments including those involved in development review and inspection, Police, Fire, Administrative Services, Public Works and Recreation and Senior Services made brief presentations on how their proposed measures were developed and how performance data would be reported and used. Impacts on work assignments and systems that would be required to collect and report performance data were also discussed. From feedback given at that meeting, staff and ICMA have incorporated the Committee's requested revisions to the proposed measures (summarized in Attachment B of this transmittal) now proposed for approval by the City Council. Proposed Performance Measures and Benchmarks This report presents performance measures and benchmarks developed by city staff with assistance from ICMA including the Finance Committee's recommended additions and changes. For each of the services presented, a one -page summary is provided. (The Finance Committee's recommended changes are listed in Attachment B of this transmittal and are shown in italics in each revised service summary.) Each service summary includes a purpose statement and a balanced set of performance measures. Evaluation criteria are also included, indicating the extent to which the proposed measures are meaningful, useful, and sustainable, and identifying available benchmarking sources. The following sections of this overview are intended to explain the information presented in each summary. O Purpose Statement Purpose Statements clarify the desired results or outcomes of delivering the service. Purpose statements should answer the following questions "Why is this service being delivered? What are we trying to accomplish? What needs /wants of customers are addressed? and, What does success look like ?" Purpose statements are intended to clarify the desired results of service delivery so that they can be measured. O Balanced Set of Performance Measures Currently, Newport Beach uses a system of "Service Load Indicators" to report on departmental service delivery in annual budget documents. These Service Load Indicators quantify and report primarily the workload demands and activities performed. One goal of the benchmarking project is to identify and recommend additional service load indicators needed for Newport Beach, based on indicators used successfully by other communities. The proposed performance measures deal with the results or outcomes of service delivery and, as such, can provide the "missing link" between strategic and policy goals and priorities and current Service Load Indicators. A balanced set of results measures (Quality, Cost, Cycle Time, Customer Satisfaction) will indicate how successfully the service is delivered over time or compared to benchmarks. Performance measures usually have a numerator and a denominator - distinct from an activity or workload indicator. The recommendations generally include a measure or measures for each of the four measurement types (Quality, Cost, Cycle Time, and Customer Satisfaction to demonstrate "how well ", "how fast ", "how efficient ", or "how satisfactory" the results are of the service. Please refer to Attachment A for a guide to the performance measures and benchmark information presented in the summaries. 9 Another goal of the benchmarking project is to develop measures for all components of "complete" service results to customers even if some components are delivered by other parts of the organization. This is the case with Development Services. Although elements of this service are delivered by up to four separate departments, customers are concerned with how the overall development review process affects their individual project. Therefore, performance measures for all four departments have been aligned to enable a comprehensive picture of development service delivery performance. Evaluation Criteria for Recommended Measures Each of the summaries includes a brief evaluation of the proposed measures and the extent they are meaningful, useful, and sustainable as well as "benchmark - able". ❑ Meaningful - Does the measure provide information people want or need to know about the effectiveness, cost, responsiveness, or overall satisfaction with the service delivered? Will measuring these service results help us improve? ❑ Useful - Can this information be used to communicate success or support decision- making? What specific communications or decisions are envisioned? ❑ Sustainable - Is the information available? What additional work or resources are needed to implement the measurement and collection of the data? Is the information worth the investment of time and resources necessary to collect, analyze and report it? ❑ Benchmarking Sources - Notes other jurisdictions, professional organizations, or other sources are available to provide comparisons of performance, best practices, innovations or problem solving. Other Recommendations As noted in many of the proposed performance measure summaries, ongoing feedback on customer satisfaction is a key element of the balanced set of measures. Therefore, it is recommended that the City of Newport Beach consider the continuation, on a biannual basis, of the resident, development Services, and business surveys initiated in 2007. In addition, it is recommended that the City consider implementing a biannual employee survey in alternate years to obtain feedback from employees on changing needs and satisfaction with internally provided services. 3 Attachment A Key to Measurement Types There are four major categories of customer requirements critical for service delivery success and four measurement types are recommended to be applied citywide as a consistent way to understand, analyze and report performance data. These include Cost, Quality, Cycle Time, and Customer Satisfaction. Definitions are provided below along with symbols which will be used to indicate the type of each measure when used in reports. Quality Quality is the umbrella term designed to capture the effectiveness of the service. Quality measures examine what the service is trying to achieve and tell us if we are doing the right thing. Sample Quality Measure: % of streets in very good or excellent pavement condition Cost At its simplest, cost is the amount of resources required to produce a �I definable per unit result. Cost usually includes labor, materials, overhead, II facilities and utilities. This measure may also reflect other financial aspects such as revenue, savings, or investments. Sample Cost Measure: Operating and maintenance expenditures per system mile for drinking water distribution Cycle Time The time from when a customer requests the service to when the service is delivered. This measure should include waiting time, and look at the whole service. Cycle time is usually measured against some standard of response time. Sample Cycle Time Measure: % of requested maintenance completed within time standards Customer Satisfaction How customers feel about a service they received and the results of that service. It can include a broad range of measures examining customers' feelings about timeliness, quality, professionalism of service delivery, and courtesy. This key measurement type is based entirely on perception, where as the other three are usually measures of objective condition. It is important to remember that both are needed to provide a balanced picture. Sample Customer Satisfaction Measure: % of customers rating library customer service as "good" or better. (e.g. 4 or 5, on a 5 point scale) 2 Attachment A (cont'd) Additionally, performance measures may be designated for special uses such as head -to -head comparisons, assessment of community condition, or as part of a "critical few" measurements to allow decision- makers to easily monitor vital aspects of conditions and performance. These are detailed below with the symbols used to flag proposed measures that may be used for these special purposes. Benchmark A measurement that permits valid comparison of service delivery B performance across jurisdictions or organizations, over previous performance levels, or against recognized "best practices" or professional standards for a service. Benchmarks must be selected and analyzed with care to ensure a meaningful "apples to apples" relationship exists between compared operations and reported data. Examples of benchmarks include: resources expended for various services per capita /account, etc.; pavement (or other infrastructure) condition ratings using professional standards; or response times for various services compared against similar jurisdictions or against accepted standards Community Indicator A broad measurement of physical, environmental, economic, social, or other I conditions. Community Indicators relate information about the state of the policy and service delivery environment which assists in determining needs and assessing progress toward longer -term outcomes. Examples of relevant Community Indicators include crime rates, commute transportation usage by mode, or the travel time of major commute routes at peak /non -peak hours, or the number of days water quality standards are not met per year. "Critical Few" Measures A set of measurements recommended to facilitate the monitoring and C communication of important aspects of community condition, service delivery performance, or fiscal and organizational health. Sometimes referred to as a "dashboard" these selected measures help sustain the meaningful use of performance information without overwhelming the organization with data collection, analysis and reporting. Examples of critical measures may include drinking water safety and system integrity; residents' perception of safety; public safety emergency response; as well as measures of fiscal condition, workforce turnover, or major infrastructure condition. 5 Attachment B Finance Committee Recommendations on Proposed Benchmarks and Performance Measures At its July 9, 2008 meeting, the Newport Beach City Council Finance Committee accepted the benchmarks and associated performance measures as proposed by staff and ICMA, with the following recommended additions and changes: Development Services Plan Check 1. Add to the Quality measures: Average number of review cycles per project by valuation /type. 2. Designate the Plan Check Quality measure as one of the "Critical Few" measures. Building Inspections 1. Add measure for inspection failures that must go back through the Plan Check process for review of plan revisions: "% of revisions after permit issuance for which reviews are completed within 5 days." This measure will be added as a Cycle Time measure in the Plan Check service. Capital Improvement Project Delivery 1. Recommend raising the minimum target average for the Pavement Condition Index citywide from 78 (very good) to 80, with a minimum individual street rating of 60. 2. Track progress against revised estimated completion dates for all projects as well as original estimated completion dates. 3. Report performance on a quarterly basis. 4. Public Works staff to define the phases of capital project from inception to completion. Traffic and Transportation Management 1. Designate the Quality measure as a Community Indicator (Percent Change of Corridor Travel Times). Police Investigations 1. Add information on caseloads per Investigator. Employment Services 1. Consider adding information on cost per hire. 2. Cost information should include City staff as well as all other costs. R Attachment B (cont'd) Refuse Collection 1. Separately report costs for residential refuse collection accounts by City - provided and contractor provided. Street Sweeping 1. Add information on street sweeping schedule to the Quality measure Community Code Enforcement 1. Add Cycle Time measure(s) for case resolution. 2. Work with City Attorney to address impact of any legal /procedural aspects. Information and Technology Services 1. Staff to clarify definition of IT costs to be reported. Recreation and Senior Services 1. Questions and comments on why only After School Programming and Senior Transportation were proposed to be benchmarked. 2. Finance Committee requested to see the overall information currently being reported to the Recreation Commission, including information on participants served, and information on the growth of the OASIS program. 3. Staff clarified that "Undetermined pick -up times" is related to return trips - trips home after completion of appointments, etc. General Direction In addition to the above specific direction, the Committee asked that the report to the City Council meeting of August 12, 2008 include examples of the uses of the performance information to be collected and examples of how the information may be reported. 7 City of Newport Beach Benchmorking Project Department / Service Administrative Services Budgeting Information Technology Services Purchase Requisitioning /Purchase Ordering City Attorney's Office Contracts Approval Enforcement of City's Municipal Code City Clerk Records Management City Managers Office Community Code Compliance Public Information / Communication Development Services Plan Check Building Inspection Fire Fire Emergency Response Fire Prevention /Complaints General Services Maintenance of City Beaches and Bays Park Maintenance Refuse Collection Street Sweeping Table of Contents Page 3 4 5 r, x 9 10 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 Department / Service Human Resources Employment Services Employee Relations Library Library Customer Service Police Crime Prevention Police Emergency Response Police Investigations Public Works Capital Improvement Plan Delivery Traffic and Transportation Management Recreation and Senior Services After School Programming - Active Kidz Program Senior Transportation Services Utilities Drinking Water Supply Electrical Services Wastewater Collection Water Quolity /Environmental Protection Page 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 * Development Services measures will be aligned into two major phases of the development review, plan check and build- ing inspection, and include the services delivered by the Planning, Building, Public Works, and Fire Departments towards the process. The individual services are detailed below by partner department. Department / Service Building Plan Check Building Inspection Planning Discretionary Land Use and Development Approv- als Plan Check Processing Department / Service Fire Fire Department Plan Review Public Works Development Review Process City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Proiect To develop and administer a financial operating plan that balances short -term priorities along with long -term stability, flexibility and sustainability while addressing the operating needs of our departments. Proposed Measures Uses Contingency Reserves and other relevant Council reserve policies are fully funded. C • The City is making progress in funding unfunded liabilities. • The City has maintained or improved its credit ratings. • The minimum contributions to insure the sustainability of the facilities financing plan are being met (as defined by the last approved facilities financing plan). !, • Total budget unit cost as a percent of the total operating budget B • Budget Adopted prior to June 30 Annual Survey of Department Directors Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures will provide information that can be used to monitor and communicate the extent of compliance with budget and fi- nancial policies and goals Useful These measures will monitor the quality of service we provide in addition to internal customer awareness and satisfaction. Benchmark- ing Sources: City of Austin, ICMA CPM, California Municipal Finance Officers Association (CSMFO) Sustainable These measures can be tracked easily by staff. An annual survey will be developed to elicit input from our internal customers regard- ing their satisfaction and awareness of our services. Reporting Frequency: each Fiscal Year Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project IsADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY SERVICES Provide enterprise access to City information and services in support of our customers Proposed Measures Uses Quality 0 Percentage of time the City's network and major subsystems such as email, voicemail, Pentomation B Financial package, etc. are available for use • Cost of central network support per hour the network is available (for each major sub - system) B • Cost of network support per workstation • Ratio of network support cost to Total City O&M $ r timely resolution of IT issues (by priority): B • Priority 1 — A problem impacting a significant group of users or any mission critical IT service af- fecting a single user or group of users. (30 minutes) • Priority 2 — Non - critical, but significant issue; or an issue that is degrading performance and reli- ability; however the services are still operational. Support issues that could escalate if not ad- dressed quickly. (60 minutes) • Priority 3 — Routine support requests that impact a single user or non - critical software or hard- ware error. (8 hours) • Biannual survey of internal customers (City Staff) rating their satisfaction with quality and timeli- ness of IT services provided. • Tracking of web page usage statistics Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Information and technology services are critical to the successful delivery of most City services. Data on the availability of major IT systems and the timely resolution of any issues are increasingly important to evaluate not only the IT function, but the service delivery of an entire organization. Useful These measures will monitor the quality, cost, and timeliness of our technology services and obtain user request trends to identify areas of improvement needed. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin, ICMA CPM. Sustainable Other than city -wide surveys, these measures can be tracked easily by in -house methods. Reporting Frequency:each Fiscal Year. It is recommended that a biannual city -wide employee survey be developed to elicit input from our internal customers regarding their satisfaction with our services. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project DMINISTRATIVE SECES' URCHASE REQUISITION /OR' IRDERING Purchasing enables City Departments to meet their needs with quality goods and other resources at competitive prices while complying with State law, Council policy, City Charter, and Municipal Code requirements. Proposed Measures Uses Quality Percent of supplier bids awarded without delay due to re -bid or protest. • Dollars saved on purchase orders compared to total cost submitted on requisitions Cost • Administrative cost of purchasing /warehouse vs. total purchases made ($) B Cycle Time r eAverage number of calendar days from receipt of requisition to Purchase Order Issuance for bids B between $10,000 and $25,000 Customer Satisfaction ik• Biannual survey of internal customers (City Staff) rating their satisfaction with centralized pur- chase order processing • Annual survey of suppliers upon registration renewals Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures will monitor the quality, timeliness, and efficiency of services that we provide in addition to the information on quantity outputs now reported. Useful Measurement results will be used to refine our purchasing methods as needed. These measures will provide information that is easily compared with other organizations and provides a management tool to monitor our annual workloads and production. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin ICMA CPM, California Association of Public Purchasing Officers (CAPPO) Sustainable These measures are already tracked by staff. Supplier survey can be included as part of current registration renewals. Recommend biannual employee satisfaction survey be developed to elicit input from our internal customers. Reporting Frequency: each Fiscal Year Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Ensure legally enforceable and sound contracts in accordance with Council Policy F -14 entered into between City and contractors for outsourced projects or services in conjunction with timely review, comment and /or approval. Proposed Measures Uses & * % of time final documents accurately reflect the approved City action B • Average Cost per Contract B • Cost of advice and documentation by inside City Attorney's Office compared to outside firm. (Orange County billable rate averages vs. hourly breakdown of salary of City Attorneys). Cvcle Time r i Routine Contracts: % of time document approved in 2 business day time frame. (Review, comment B and /or approve and forward routine contracts within 2 business days of receipt) Complex Contracts: % of time document approved within mutually acceptable time frame. • % of Customers (city staff & City Council) rating service as satisfactory or above based on qual- ity, cycle time, and professional service. (Survey) Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measuring the number of routine and complex contracts reviewed can give the City Council an indicator of the City's workload. Bench- marking Sources: San Jose City Attorney's Office Useful Supports decision making in staffing levels for the City. Reporting Frequency: As needed, at least annually, or as requested by Coun- cil Sustainable Case Tracking/ Project Management Software system must be implemented to accurately track time spent on contracts, number of contracts reviewed, number of contracts that needed revisions, departments serviced most, etc. Software would also assist administra- tive assistants provide review status to staff (the Client) about specific contracts more efficiently. New Software would also allow for tracking of other projects, litigation matters and workload. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Ensure the consistent enforcement of the City's municipal codes. Proposed Measures Uses 00 % of time the final result of a case is settled in favor of the City and /or within settlement range B • Cost per case litigated. 0 1 • % of time customers are satisfied with being timely informed of significant developments in case B e (survey of staff, council, commission, citizens). V% of time customers are satisfied with charges being brought in a timely manner against code violators (survey of staff, council, commission, citizens). • % of customers satisfied with efforts taken by City to prosecute municipal code offenders. Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Increased communication with the customers (staff, council, commission, citizens). Useful Increased awareness of enforcement process by the customers, increased compliance by citizens. Benchmarking Sources: San lose City Attorney's Office. Reporting Frequency: Annually or as required by City Council Sustainable Requires the implementation of Case Tracking/ Project Management software system to accurately track number of new cases and type, number of cases settled before litigation, settled after initiating litigation, number of cases criminal or civil charges filed on, amount spent on outside council for criminal or civil prosecution, time spent on cases/ projects, number of cases handled in Administra- tive proceedings, etc. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project RECORDS CITY CLERK To manage City records so they are accessible and maintained efficiently and cost - effectively, and so the City retains records it is required to keep, identifies and preserves records with permanent value, and disposes of those with no further value in a secure and timely manner Proposed Measures Quality Note: Availability and timely access to required records are the principal measures of quality for this service. The proposed Cycle Time measures (see below) will cover this aspect of service deliv- ery performance. Uses Cost • Cost of records management per record processed B • Overall expenditures to manage records • Cost to store required documents (by type) Cycle Time r • Internal Customers: Inventory, prepare, and scan permanent documents (ordinances, resolutions, B minutes, agenda packets, etc,) into Alchemy within six business days. All Customers: Provide requested paper or electronic documents within time targets (TBD based on type, accessibility and complexity of request) Customer Satisfaction Customer satisfaction relative to record availability, timeliness, courtesy as well as convenience us- ing: • Biannual survey of internal customers (City Staff) • Online customer feedback questions for web -based requests. Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Maintaining public records is an essential job function of the City Clerk's office. The records provide information relative to Newport Beach's history, regulations, and policies. These measures provide information that the City Clerk's office can use in order to monitor efficiency in staff time and resources. Useful Customers may become more aware of the information that the City Clerk's office provides. City Clerk staff will become more aware of customer satisfaction and expectations. City Clerk staff will also be able to determine improvements that can be made to the docu- ment scanning system or web -based access. Storage cost information can support efforts to purge unneeded records to achieve cost and space savings in new City Hall. Sustainable The information is already available and accessible to the public and City staff. However, the City Clerk's office will work with IT to implement a tracking system for online documents, tracking system for Alchemy documents, and online feedback to coincide with the benchmarking process. The City Clerk's office will develop a database to determine what type of information is being requested by staff or the public, and the turnaround time to produce the information. Reporting Frequency: each Fiscal Year. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin, City of San Jose, CCAC ListServe. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Ar CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY CODE COMPLIANCE Preserve community character, protect the environment, protect property rights and promote compliance with land use regulations. Proposed Measures Uses Rates of complaint resolution /compliance obtained through: B phone call, meeting, letter • Notice of Violation (NOV) • Administrative Citation • Expenditures per capita. Code enforcement expenditures will be tracked on a per capita basis B (based on population of area served). This will allow the data to be compared against jurisdictions of different sizes. Cvcle Time r i • Number of calendar days from the time a complaint is first reported to the first non - inspection B response. (A non - inspection response is defined as a response to a complainant that does not in- clude an on -site inspection, i.e. phone calls, letters, emails, drive -by /visual inspection and other simi- lar type responses) • Number of calendar days from first inspection to voluntary compliance. • Percent of complainants satisfied with City's handling of their complaint • Percent of residents satisfied with code enforcement /compliance services Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures provide information relative to how effectively we do our job given the tools and resources available to us. Useful These measures can monitor the efficiency of our time and resources. In addition, the cost measure will be a useful tool providing City management with comparable cost data for this division. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin, City of San Jose, ICMA CPM database. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable Staff is working to develop a system to better track information needed to document these measures. Additional staff time will be needed to track and report on these measures. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project CITY MANAGER (,N PIItl .,If4 INFORMATION The purpose is to ensure that residents, businesses and City staff are well- informed about City issues, projects and policies. Proposed Measures Quality 0 Percentage of customers that were able to find the information desired on the City Web site • Number of customers signed up for e- select alert service Uses 0 Cost • Cost per 30- minute NBTV program produced B • Cost per capita for City's communication program Cycle Time • Frequency of postings / edits to City Web site • • Number of NBTV programs produced per year Customer Satisfaction • Percent of customer satisfaction with City efforts to keep residents informed about local issues • Percent of customer satisfaction with the quality NBTV programming • Percent of customer satisfaction with the quality of the City Web site • Percent of customer satisfaction with effectiveness of City communication with the public Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Effective communication is a City Council priority and essential to serving the Newport Beach community. 0 Useful The customer satisfaction survey, web surveys and focus groups will enable us to evaluate the effectiveness of our communication tools and processes and focus funding and resources on those most - valued by our community.. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin. Re- porting Frequency: Annually Sustainable The customer satisfaction measures can be tracked with future community surveys or through focus groups. The majority of the commu- nication measures can be evaluated using data currently collected by the department. Web -based surveys could also be created to measure customer satisfaction with finding information on the City website. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project drlwes PLANNING, BUILDING, FIRE, PUBLIC WORKS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PLAN CHECK To implement State and City policies and regulations, protect the value of real property and improvements, and ensure the safety of building occupants Proposed Measures Uses Qualify • % of projects approved over the counter C • % of projects approved after first review, after being taken in for review (by dept) • % of corrections (by dept) required due to: — Incomplete submittal — Lack of code compliance — Staff error � Project changes • Average number of review cycles per project by valuation /type Cost • Application fees . B • Budgeted expenditures per $1,000 valuation of permits issued Cycle Time • r % of plan reviews (by dept) completed within target dates: B — 90% of 1 st reviews within 30 days —+ 90% of rechecks within 14 days Number of days with City; number of days with applicant • % of revisions after permit issuance for which reviews are completed within 5 days. Customer Satisfaction • Regular meetings with development review community B • Customer comment cards • Annual, statistically valid customer survey Evaluative Criteria Quality Meaningful: Show number of projects approved quickly and reasons for corrections; correction %s will not add to 100% because pro- jects are not approved for more than one reason; measures quality of applicant submittals as well as City staff work; does not meas- ure staff flexibility in administering regulations; cannot be compared with other cities. Useful: Inform applicants and Council why pro- jects take longer than expected; highlight staff training needs. Sustainable: Tracking reasons for corrections will require customized programming, report formatting /preparation, and staff training /time to make proper entries in Permits Plus for every plan review. Cost Meaningful: Cost of service can be compared to other cities as a measure of efficiency, but fee structures, valuation tables, and com- plexity of projects may not be comparable. Useful: Can help with annual fee adjustments. Sustainable: Readily available information. Cycle Time Meaningful: Show whether City is meeting targets, and whether City or applicant is taking more time for projects with long duration. Useful: Help balance staff resources and workload; highlight staff training needs. Sustainable: Require customized programming, report formatting and preparation, and staff training and time to make proper entries in Permits Plus for every action. Customer Satisfaction Meaningful: Meetings provide ongoing feedback; comment cards provide point of service reactions; and survey provides reliable data. Useful: Comment card responses should be tabulated to increase usefulness. Survey is most useful, if it includes a statistically significant sample of everyone who has used plan check services during the year. Sustainable: Tabulating comment card responses requires staff time; survey requires annual appropriation for specialized consultant. 10 Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project The purpose of inspections is to implement State and City policies and regulations, protect the value of real property and improvements, and ensure the safety of building occupants. Proposed Measures 0 None Proposed Application fees . Budgeted expenditures per $1,000 valuation of permits issued Uses r% of inspections provided on the next business day after the inspection request is received B (Target: 100 %) % of construction related complaints investigated on the next business day after the complaint is received (Target; 100 %) • Regular meetings with development review community • Customer comment cards • Annual, statistically valid customer survey Evaluative Criteria Quality None Proposed Cost Meaningful: Cost of service can be compared to other cities as a measure of efficiency, but fee structures, valuation tables, and com- plexity of projects may not be comparable. Useful: Can help with annual fee adjustments. Sustainable: Readily available information. Cycle Time Show Department's responsiveness to customer needs. Useful: Help determine if staffing level is adequate. Sustainable: Require significant programming enhancements and staff training and time to make entries and compile reports. Customer Satisfaction Meaningful: Meetings provide ongoing feedback; comment cards provide point of service reactions; and survey provides reliable data. Useful: Comment card responses should be tabulated to increase usefulness. Survey is most useful, if it includes a statistically significant sample of everyone who has used plan check services during the year. Sustainable: Tabulating comment card responses requires staff time; survey requires annual appropriation for specialized consultant. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE To respond as quickly as possible, with appropriate resources necessary, to stop and minimize the loss of life and property. Proposed Measures Uses 50% of structure fires will be limited to the room of origin. B C �( 100% of structures will be contained to the building of origin. • ISO Public Protection Classification Cost • Total Fire operating and vehicle expenditures per capital B • Fire and EMS staffing per 1000 population. r • Arrival of the closest fire engine to any emergency within 4 minutes of local station notification. B C • Arrival of the closest paramedic unit to a medical aid call within 8 minutes of local station notifi- cation • Arrival of the closest fire truck within 8 minutes of local station notification. (NFPA 1710) Customer satisfaction among those having contact with Fire department in last 12 months. (Elements B include timeliness, capability, courtesy /respectful, does not exacerbate damage) Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Will show city customers that the fire department responds to emergencies in an appropriate time frame in accordance with accepted national standards. Insurance Services Office (ISO) provides national benchmark standards for fire suppression capabilities used in determining fire insurance rates for communities. Useful Provides a tool to ascertain whether we are maintaining the proper time standards required for providing appropriate medical care to patients and providing appropriate firefighting intervention in regards to structure fires. It can be a tool to observe if we are maintaining adequate emergency response times to all areas of the city in an equitable manner. Benchmarking Sources: ISO, ICMA, National Fire Protection Standards Guideline 1710; International Association of Fire Chiefs; Cali- fornia Fire Chiefs; Orange County Fire Chiefs Association; Other fire departments in our area. Sustainable Response time data available from CAD records. ISO data available free or at nominal charge. Reporting Frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C+ Critical I Community Indicator 12 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project To respond as quickly as possible to customer concerns and resolve the hazard with safety, service and professionalism. Proposed Measures Uses Complaints involving immediate life safety issues will be investigated immediately and resolved as indicated by the hazard. • Other complaints will be investigated within 2 business days. Response back to the complainant within 2 days of the initial visit and more often if required. • 50% of the complaints will be resolved within 10 business days; 90% within 20 business days Cost per complaint investigated r s • Percent of investigations /resolutions in accordance with the Cycle Time targets (see quality meas- ure above) Customer satisfaction among those having contact with Fire department in last 12 months. B Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Complaints from our customers are an Important method by which the Fire Department learns of hazards in our community. Investiga- tion of these complaints is a priority for the Fire Department's Fire Prevention Division. Useful The performance measures will allow the Fire Prevention Division to track the amount of time it takes to investigate complaints and reduce any hazards identified. The measures will also allow the Fire Prevention Division to maintain a record of the number and type of hazards identified through the complaint process and make changes to the Fire Code if necessary. Benchmarking Sources: None identified Sustainable The Fire Prevention staff will develop a system by which complaints can be fully tracked. Reporting Frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator 13 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Maintain status as world -class destination by keeping ocean & bay beaches and adjacent shorelines clean for patrons. Proposed Measures Uses # of complaints by type & area - Type: Infrastructure (restrooms, fire rings), Appearance (natural debris on sand, foreign debris on sand) Area: Beach Areas 1 -6, Little Corona, Balboa Island, Bayside /Mist. • Total annual cost B - per beach -mile per acre • Staff- hours /month None proposed I♦ � I♦ • Customer rating Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measures help to quantify some of the unique aspects of beach and bay maintenance. Useful Provide information to assist with self - evaluation and comparison considering unique conditions and services Sustainable The data is currently collected daily. Reporting Frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator 14 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project MLRK NERA•.- `ERVICE• MAINTENANC Ensure active and passive enjoyment of open spaces and stewardship of valued City resource Proposed Measures Quality # of complaints by type & facility: - Type: Infrastructure (restrooms, irrigation) Appearance (natural debris in landscaping, foreign debris in landscaping, natural debris on turf, foreign debris on turf, foreign debris in native /sensitive areas) Uses • Maintenance cost /contract acre, Maintenance cost /in -house acre B • Maintenance cost /developed acre, Maintenance cost /undeveloped acre • Capital improvement expenditures None proposed • Citizen rating Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measures can be used to evaluate service delivery based on customer satisfaction and cost per acre. Useful Allows for maintenance cost of new park facilities to be estimated and existing park facilities service levels to be evaluated. Bench- marking Sources: City of Austin, ICMA CPM. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable The data is currently collected daily and reported monthly and annually. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 15 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project ,ENE ERVICE` REFUSE COLLECTION Mandated collection and disposal of residential refuse and the diversion of recyclable materials Proposed Measures Uses Quality Recyclables as % of all tons of residential refuse collected B V • Number of non - routine issues /requests for service Cost • Operating and maintenance expenditures for refuse collection per refuse collection account (Costs B per residential accounts to be shown for city provided and contractor - provided service) .� • Daily actual staffing and vehicle usage Cycle Time • % of non - routine issues /requests for service resolved by the next business day Customer Satisfaction • Resident survey rating • Number of complaints Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measures provide information about how much service delivery costs and how the customers perceive the quality of the service. Useful The measures can be used to determine if the service delivery mandates are being met. Benchmarking sources: ICMA CPM Sustainable Most data is currently collected on an ongoing basis. Non - routine issue /request data can be collected without additional resources. Recommend continuation of biannual Resident Survey. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator 16 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Keep debris out of roadways, alleys, beaches, and bays Proposed Measures Quality V • Percent of streets swept on schedule f Cost • Operating and maintenance expenditures per curb -mile swept Cycle Time • Time between sweepings Customer Satisfaction • Resident survey rating • Number of complaints Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measures can be used to evaluate potential service delivery cycle changes. Useful Provides information on efficiency of service delivery at given cost. Benchmarking sources: ICMA CPM Uses 0 Sustainable The data is currently collected daily and reported monthly and annually. Recommend continuation of biannual Resident Survey. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator 17 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project N Pn4 The purpose of Employment Services is to deliver capable, quality employees and to minimize departmental workflow disruption due to turnover. Proposed Measures Uses Citywide Turnover Rate B C • Citywide Vacancy Rate % of Employee Performance Evaluations rated as "Meets or Exceeds Expectations" at the end of the first year of employment • Total Cost of Human Resources per 100 City employees • Cost per hire 3 r • % of time Hiring Timeline goals are met (Outside Recruitments and Internal Promotions) B Average days to hire (Outside Recruitments and Internal Promotions) • Biannual Survey of hiring managers using the hiring process • Biannual City Employee Survey on HR services (recruitment, training, open enrollment process, etc.) Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Recruitments are an essential function and often a number one priority of Human Resources. It's important for departments to know what is entailed and how long the recruitment process typically lasts so that arrangements can be made for a smooth transition. Useful These measures can monitor efficiency of time and resources. Customers may become more aware of the volume and complexity of projects being produced each year. Staff can become more aware of customer expectations. Benchmarking Sources:ICMA GPM, City of Austin, City of San Jose Sustainable Reporting Frequency: Annually except for the two biannual surveys. Would require recommended implementation of a biannual Em- ployee Survey to measure satisfaction with internal services delivered to Newport Beach employees. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator 18 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project - �1utr5 The purpose of Human Resources is to guide and counsel City employees and supervisors in adhering to City policies and procedures, fostering a fair and consistent work environment. Proposed Measures Uses Quality Average Length of Employment B / \/�•�•��'j` • Number of PIP's per 100 employees V • Number of Disciplines per 100 employees • % of Grievances resolved before passing from management con - Cost None recommended Cycle Time • % of timely responses to grievances filed B • • Oi Customer Satisfaction ?* None recommended Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Proposed measures for Employee Relations focus on the processes of counseling, formal discipline, and grievance resolution as well as overall indicators of workforce tenure. Useful These measures can monitor and benchmark the extent of use of counseling and disciplinary processes as well as the responsiveness and prompt resolution of employee grievances. Benchmarking Sources: ICMA CPM, City of Austin. Sustainable Reporting Frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator Z City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project (,P'YIIgJ _ d Z � f� The purpose is to provide the community with information and materials through personal service by staff and self- service through accessible technology. Proposed Measures Quality Percentage of customers who received complete answers • Percentage of customers who were able to successfully use the Library web -site to obtain the in- formation that they needed Number of questions answered per reference staff Uses Cost • Costs of item checkouts in relation to the operating budget for public services B • Amount spent on materials per capita • Cost of Reference question in relation to the reference staffing costs Cycle Time • Amount of time it takes for a new item to go from the initial receipt to the shelf B 1 � • Customer satisfaction • On -line surveys results demonstrating customers success in using the Library website & resources • High ratings from Secret Shoppers indicating that accurate answers were received quickly • Results from computer training sessions indicating that customers have become adept at using the ik Library resources Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Customer service is the main component of library service. It is important to know that we are filling our customer's needs and balanc- ing our personal service with our technology and self- service. Useful The customer surveys and secret shopper reports will give us insight into how we are fulfilling the needs of the community. The ongoing look at statistics will help us to ensure that we are putting our resources in the right services. Benchmarking Sources: California State Library Annual Survey, ICMA CPM, HAPLR Index, City of Austin. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable The evaluation of service and resources will always be necessary. The methods we use to count our successes may change as library service evolves. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator 20 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project POLICE CRIME PREVENTIOA' y. To educate key customers in crime prevention methods that will enable them to protect themselves from loss of life and property and to reduce the likelihood of becoming victimized. Proposed Measures Quality Uses 0 Percentage of residents who participate in some form of neighborhood watch as sponsored by B the Police Department. Cost • Crime prevention resources (costs) per 1000 population. Cycle Time None proposed Customer satisfaction As measured by Resident Survey, % of residents who feel safe: • in their neighborhood during the day /at night • in commercial /business areas after dark Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Shows extent of the police department's effort in crime prevention relative to those of other cities. Customers will also realize the po- lice department's focus and commitment to crime prevention. Useful Justifies investment value. Allows the police department to ascertain how their crime prevention efforts affect the crime rate. Bench- marking Sources: ICMA CPM Sustainable Recommend continuation of biannual resident and business surveys. Reporting Frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project ICE POLICE EMERGENCY RESPONS The purpose is to respond to emergency calls as quickly as possible with the goal of reducing the loss of lives and property Proposed Measures Quality As measured by Resident Survey, % of residents who feel safe: in their neighborhood during the day /at night • in commercial /business areas after dark Cost 00 Cost of emergency responses per 1 000 population Cycle Time Uses B C I r • At least 85% of emergency calls (present and imminent threat to life or property) will be an- B C swered by dispatchers within 5 seconds. At least 90% of emergency calls (police response with lights and sirens) will be responded to by field officers within 5 minutes. Customer Satisfaction • % reporting parties satisfied based on effective response, timeliness, courtesy, ability to control emergency. • Resident and business surveys Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Will show relative speed of police department dispatching and response to emergency calls and that response is according to ac- cepted protocols and policies. Useful Perception of safety benchmark can be a good marketing tool for the city and assist in justifying investment /showing value. Cycle time data can support analysis of resource deployment. Benchmarking Sources: ICMA, FBI, International. Assoc. of Chief's of Police, Cal. Police Officers Assoc., Police Executive Research Forum, Other cities in our area. Sustainable Most information is available from Computer -Aided Dispatch (CAD) system records. Recommend continuation of biannual resident sur- vey to capture perception of safety data. Reporting Frequency: Annually. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 22 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project v The purpose is to investigate crimes in order to bring the case to resolution. To restore property in some cases, and to make customers feel safer in that they will not be victimized again. Proposed Measures Quality Uses • FBI Part I (Crimes against persons) and Part II (Property Crimes) Crime rates. B C I • Percentage of reported crimes (including Police- initiated cases) that received criminal investiga- tions. • Percentage of investigated crimes cleared (includes crimes cleared by Patrol Officers). • Average caseload per investigator Cost • Total resource cost per investigation cleared. (Determined by Total Investigations costs divided by B the number of investigations cleared). Cycle Time • Percentage of crimes investigated within time targets (TBD) B Customer Satisfaction • Crime victims satisfaction with investigative process, including: timeliness, courtesy, competence, minimal damage to property during CSI. Based on initial contact and exit interviews with crime vic- tims. Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Crime rates are primarily an indicator of community conditions while percentage of crimes investigated and cleared provide measures of the Police Departments performance in addressing crime in the community. This data can show that the Police Department investigates /clears a higher number of crimes than other cities Will tell customers how quickly they can expect service and illustrate a department that is focused on more personal service. Useful Justifies level of investment value. Enables the Police Department to understand better how it allocates its time and resources. The results of this benchmark will be a good marketing tool for the city and address customers' need to feel safe. Benchmorking Sources: ICMA, FBi, International. Assoc. of Chief's of Police, Cal. Police Officers Assoc., Police Executive Research Forum, Other cities in our area. Sustainable Most case information is currently collected. Initial and exit interviews with victims are currently performed and results can be tracked. Recommend continuation of a biannual resident survey to receive feedback on overall perception of safety in the community- survey. Reporting Frequency: Monthly (except Resident Survey). Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 23 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project .,,, �, The purpose of the CIP Delivery program is to protect and provide public infrastructure and assets so that programs and services can be delivered to the people of Newport Beach. Proposed Measures Uses years. Maintain a citywide minimum average Pavement Condition Index of 80 and a minimum individual B treet rating of 60. Slurry Seal all local and residential streets as well as city parking lots at a minimum of every 8 • Deliver 90 percent of CIP projects (by category) scheduled for completion within a Fiscal Year B C within the original construction contract cost plus 7 %. • Deliver 95 percent of CIP projects (by category) scheduled for completion within a Fiscal Year within the original construction contract cost plus 10%. r i • Substantially complete 85% of all CIP projects (by category) scheduled for completion within a B C Fiscal Year within two months of the approved baseline completion date or revised estimated com- pletion date. • % of Operating Departments rating new or rehabilitated capital facilities as being functional and sustainable after first year of use • % of customer satisfaction with CIP projects Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures provide information people want to know. The customer satisfaction measures can provide staff with feedback useful for future projects. Useful These measures can monitor efficiency of time and resources. Customers may become more aware of the volume and complexity of projects being produced each year. Staff can become more aware of customer expectations. Resource allocation and processes can be questioned and modified with the information provided by these measures. Sustainable Staff is working to develop a database system to better track information needed to document these measures. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Cv Critical I Community Indicator 24 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT The purpose is to provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods through Newport Beach through the installation and maintenance of engineered controls and measures. Proposed Measures Uses Quality 0" Monitor corridor travel times (travel time /volume) for percent change. 1 Cost • Deliver 90 percent of CIP projects (by category) scheduled for completion within a Fiscal Year B within the original construction contract cost plus 7 %. • Deliver 95 percent of CIP projects (by category) scheduled for completion within a Fiscal Year within the original construction contract cost plus 10 %. Cycle Time • Respond to and correct nonemergency signal maintenance requests within 5 days 90% of the time B Customer Satisfaction • Percent of customer satisfaction on improved controls or measures. Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures provide information people want to know. The customer satisfaction measures can provide staff with feedback useful for future projects. Useful These measures can monitor efficiency of time and resources. Customers may become more aware of the volume and complexity of projects being produced each year. Staff can become more aware of customer expectations. Resource allocation and processes can be questioned and modified with the information provided by these measures. Benchmarking Sources: APWA, City of San Jose, City of Austin Sustainable Reporting frequency: Annually Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 25 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Kids in a safe, enriching and educational environment having fun Proposed Measures Quality 00 % of total capacity filled with registered participants Cost • Cost per participant hour in Active Kids ti Cycle Time • % customers waiting x weeks or more to participate Customer Satisfaction • Annual Survey of Parents and Kids. Elements include participant learning, fun, enrichment; safe and clean facilities; parents who "would refer the program to others" Evaluative Criteria Uses L Meaningful These measures provide information to help staff with feedback to ensure safe, fun, enriching, and cost - effective operation of the Ac- tive Kidz program. Useful Information can be used to evaluate the program, make changes, improve quality to meet expectations, monitor and improve enroll- ment. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable Data is sustainable; attendance is kept on a daily basis. Survey can be administered annually. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator IVI City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project The purpose of this Senior Services Activity is to provide supportive social services to older adults so that they can maintain an active, independent lifestyle. Proposed Measures Uses Quality 0 TBD. Primary elements of service quality can be measured by cycle time and customer satisfac- tion. Cost - • Cost of program per client trip B Cycle Time r • % of Transportation requests scheduled within 1 business day of request • % of Scheduled pickups within 10 minutes of scheduled time % of Return trips picked up within 45 minutes of the call in request • % of Trips client gets to destination /appointment on time Customer Satisfaction • Customer survey mailed out to transportation clients annually. Elements include: vehicle safety and comfort, driver safety and courtesy, timeliness, other needs. • Focus groups with Relatives, Caregivers, Health Care Providers on service delivery needs, satis- faction Evaluative Criteria Meaningful These measures provide information that people want to know. The customer satisfaction measures can provide staff with feedback for the future operation of the transportation program. Useful These measures can monitor efficiency of time and resources in the delivery of transportation services. Information could be used to improve the transportation services. Benchmarking Sources: City of Austin. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable Most of the data is collected on an ongoing basis and is sustainable. The survey data will be collected and collated annually. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C. Critical I Community Indicator 27 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Provide residents, businesses and visitors with safe, dependable and good tasting potable water by supplying water from ground water and import sources. Proposed Measures Uses Quality Water Distribution System Integrity — total annual number of leaks and pipeline breaks B C per 100 miles of distribution piping. v V Drinking Water Compliance Rate ( All Regulatory Agencies) I% Days in full compliance) Unplanned disruption per /1,000 customers Cost • Operations & Maintenance Cost Ratios: B $ - - O &M cost per account O&M cost per MG distributed Cycle Time • Percentage of customer service requests B responded to within 24 hours. Disruption of water service reeei - Unplanned Customer Satisfaction • Customer Service complaints per 1,000 B Customers • Bi- annual customer satisfaction survey sent to customers Evaluative Criteria Meaningful City currently provides annually a "Water Quality Report" to the community. Information collected will give opportunity to measure cost effectiveness of service delivery. Enhancing the service request system will log the number of service inquires and workload. In- formation collected will give opportunity to measure cost effectiveness of service delivery. Enhancing the service request system will log the number of service inquires and workload. Useful Communicating the cost effectiveness of water service compared to other agencies. Improving response time, monitor compliance with State and Federal standards. Sustainable Continuation of City Resident Survey. New bi- annual customer service satisfaction would be developed & implemented New service request system will track service requests /complaints Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 28 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Proiect Operate and maintain the City's street lights. Provide electrical services for City facilities, parks, community buildings, pump stations, oil well, and emergency generators. Proposed Measures Uses Quality 0 • Percentage of Planned vs. Unplanned Maintenance (hours) B Cost • Operations & Maintenance Cost Ratios: B - O &M cost per account Cycle Time Percentage of customer service requests responded to within 24 hours B Customer Satisfaction • Customer Service complaints per 1,000 customers B • Annual customer service satisfaction survey Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Measuring tools to track improvements. Enhanced service request system will log the number of service inquires and workload. Useful Measures can identify opportunities to be more energy efficient. Developing capital improvement projects to ensure system integrity and reliability. Sustainable New bi- annual customer service satisfaction survey would be developed & implemented. Enhancing existing service request system to capture data Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 29 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Proiect WASTEWATER COLLECT[oc�), Operate and maintain the City's wastewater collection system that transports wastewater from the residents and businesses in order to minimize wastewater overflows and safely deliver wastewater to the Orange County Sanitation District. Proposed Measures Uses Quality • Collection System Integrity — number of collection system failures each year per 100 B C miles of collection system piping. • Quantifying the number of sewer overflows per 100 miles of collection piping. Cost • Operations & Maintenance Cost Ratios: B - O &M cost per account - O &M cost per mile Cycle Time Percentage of customer service requests responded to within 24 hours. B • Customer satisfaction • Customer Service complaints per 1,000 customers B * • Bi- annual customer satisfaction survey sent to customers Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Compliance with all state, local and federal laws. Comparing to other agencies. Measuring tools to track improvements for better customer service and a better healthy environment. Useful Measure of collection system piping condition and the cost effectiveness of routine maintenance to ensure a sound deliver system. Customer service satisfaction survey to continue high level of customer service. Sustainable New Bi- annual customer service satisfaction survey would be developed and implemented. Enhancing existing service request system to capture data. Developing capital improvement projects to ensure system integrity & reliability. Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark Ci Critical I Community Indicator 30 City of Newport Beach Benchmarking Project Preserve the safety and quality of Newport Beach's bay and ocean waters through compliance with applicable regulations and required monitoring. Proposed Measures Quality • Annual # days beaches are swimmable B Annual # days waterways are fishable • Maintain compliance with the City's NPDES Permit, municipal code and policies • Maintain winter and summer water quality standards (Required for State Permit compli- ance) Cost • Costs for compliance with regulations B Cycle Time • Report sewer spills within required timefromes B • Customer Satisfaction i* * Percent of residents satisfied with beach and bay water quality B Evaluative Criteria Meaningful Safety of and access to beaches and waterways directly impacts human and aquatic health, and the local economy. Uses Useful Quality measures are already required by federal, state and local laws and regulations. In addition, the cost measure will be a useful tool providing City management with comparable cost data for this division. Reporting Frequency: Annually Sustainable Recommend continuation of biannual City Resident Survey to sustain customer satisfaction information. Water quality monitoring data is currently collected and available and is routinely reported to regulatory agencies Key to Measurement Uses: B Benchmark C Critical I Community Indicator 31