HomeMy WebLinkAboutSS3 - 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey ResultsCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
STUDY SESSION
Agenda Item No.SS3
October 26, 2010
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: City Manager's Office
Dave Kiff, City Manager
949 - 644 -3000, dkiff @newportbeachca.gov
SUBJECT: 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results
ISSUE:
Review and discuss the results of the 2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
DISCUSSION:
In August of this year, the ETC Institute administered the City's second Citizen
Satisfaction survey. The first survey was conducted in late 2007 and the results were
presented in early 2008. The surveys are conducted to assess citizen satisfaction with
the delivery of City services. The data collected is then used to align the City's priorities
with customer expectations.
ETC Institute (ETC) has conducted hundreds of customer satisfaction surveys for cities
and counties throughout the United States. The firm uses a database of information
collected from more than 240 cities and counties - 80 percent of which are cities - and
uses that data to evaluate the performance of Newport Beach.
Survey Methodology
The survey was mailed to a random sample of 3,500 City households and calls were
made to those households that did not return the written survey. They were given the
option of completing the survey by phone. A total of 727 households completed the
survey, which results in a 95 percent level of confidence with a precision of at least +/-
2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results
October 26, 2010
Page 2
3.6 percent. Therefore, changes of four percent or more from 2007 to 2010 were
statistically significant.
Summary of Key Findings
The 2010 Newport Beach Citizen Satisfaction Survey results illustrate that Newport
Beach improved in 47 of the 76 areas originally assessed in 2007 and that there were
no significant decreases in any of the 76 areas evaluated. The survey also found that
City residents are still generally satisfied with the quality of life in Newport Beach, with
92 percent of residents surveyed - who had an opinion - indicating they were very
satisfied or satisfied with the quality of life here. In addition, among the quality of life
items measured, based upon a combined percent of "excellent" and "good" responses
among residents who had an opinion, were: ratings of the City as a place to live (98 %),
ratings of the City as a place to visit (97 %) and ratings of the City as a place to play
(95 %).
According to ETC, most cities try to show statistically significant improvement in areas
identified as high priorities. (For Newport Beach, this means the City should show
improvement of at least 3.6% in the service areas on which the City placed emphasis
since the 2007 survey.) However, the economic downturn has impacted that "standard
measure" and since 2008, most cities have experienced decreases in satisfaction due
to more negative attitudes among U.S. citizens. Newport Beach was among the rare
exceptions.
The City's composite satisfaction index increased significantly from 100 in 2007 to 105
in 2010. While Newport Beach saw marked improvement, the U.S. average declined by
five points. ETC derives the composite satisfaction index from the mean rating given for
all categories city services assessed.
Among the services assessed, the City made considerable strides and demonstrated
particularly notable improvement in some key areas:
• Satisfaction with the City website increased 17 percent.
• Satisfaction with how well the City is planning for growth increased 12 percent.
• Satisfaction with the City's enforcement of the exterior maintenance of
commercial property increased 12 percent.
• Satisfaction with City's outdoor athletic facilities increased 10 percent.
• Satisfaction with a feeling of safety in commercial business areas after dark
increased 10 percent.
• Satisfaction with the effectiveness of City communication with the public
increased 10 percent.
2010 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results
October 26, 2010
Page 3
The Executive Summary of ETC's report on the survey findings is attached here and the
complete report, with the full trend analysis, benchmarking analysis, importance
satisfaction analysis, charts, graphs, maps and tabular data is available online at
www.newportbeachca.gov/citizensurvey.
Submitted by:
Dave Kiff
City Manager
Attachment
2010 City of Newport Beach
Community Survey
Executive Summary Report
Overview and Methodology
During August of 2010, ETC Institute administered a community survey for the City of
Newport Beach, California. The purpose of the survey was to assess citizen satisfaction
with the delivery of major city services to ensure that the City's priorities are aligned
with the needs of the residents. All of this information will be used for future planning
purposes. This was the second time ETC Institute has administered a community survey
for Newport Beach; the first survey was administered in 2007.
The seven -page survey was mailed to a random sample of 3,500 households in the City
of Newport Beach. Approximately seven days after the surveys were mailed, residents
who received the survey were contacted by phone. Those who indicated that they had
not returned the survey were given the option of completing it by phone. A total of 727
households completed the survey. The results for the random sample of 727 households
have a 95% level of confidence with a precision of at least +/- 3.6 %. There were no
statistically significant differences in the results of the survey based on the method of
administration (phone vs. mail).
This summary report contains:
• a summary of the methodology for administering the survey and all other
major findings
• charts showing the overall results for each question on the survey
• analysis of trends from 2007 to 2010
• importance- satisfaction analysis
• benchmarking data that shows how the results from Newport Beach compare
to other communities across the United States and to communities in
California
• GIS maps that show the results of selected questions on the survey
• tabular data for all questions on the survey
• a copy of the survey instrument.
ETC Institute (2010) Executive Summary-i
2010 Newport Beach Community Survey
Interpretation of "Don't Know" Responses. The percentage of persons who provide
"don't know" responses is important because it often reflects the level of utilization of
city services. For graphing purposes, the percentage of "don't know" responses has been
excluded to facilitate valid comparisons with data from previous years and other
communities. The percentage of "don't know" responses for each question is provided
in the Tabular Data Section (Section 6) of this report. When the "don't know" responses
have been excluded, the text of this report will indicate that the responses have been
excluded with the phrase "who had an opinion."
Trends
Composite Satisfaction Index. The Composite Satisfaction Index for the City of
Newport Beach increased significantly from 100 in 2007 to 105 in 2010. The
Composite Satisfaction Index is derived from the mean rating given for all major
categories of city services that are assessed on the survey. The index is calculated by
dividing the mean rating for the current year by the mean rating for the base -year (year
2007) and then multiplying the result by 100.
The chart below shows how the Composite Satisfaction Index for the City of Newport
Beach and the Index for the U.S. average have changed since 2007. While the results
for Newport Beach improved, the U.S. average declined by 5 points.
Composite Satisfaction Index - Overall City Services
2007 vs. 2010
derived from the overall satisfaction ratings provided by residents
Year 2007 =100
120
100 100 105
100 .... ,, -- --- - -- -----------I-------------
80 -- --- - --
60 --- - - - - -- ----
40 - -- ---- ---
- - -- -- -- ----
0
2007 2010
Newport Beach ®U.S. Average
Source: ETClnslttute DimctionFinder(Newport Beach, CA 2010)
ETC Institute (2010) Executive Summary -ii
2010 Newport Beach Cornfuuuity Survey
The results for the City of Newport Beach improved in 47 of the 76 areas that were
assessed in 2007 and 2010; there were no significant decreases. Some of the notable
improvements included: the quality of the City's website ( +17 %), how well the City is
planning growth ( +12 %), the enforcement of the exterior maintenance of commercial
property ( +12 %), outdoor athletic facilities ( +11 %), effectiveness of City
communication with the public ( +10 %), feeling of safety in commercial/business areas
after dark ( +10 %) and information in the City Manager's Community newsletter
( +10 %). A detailed analysis of trends from 2007 to 2010 is provided in Section 2 of this
report.
Major Findings
• Most Residents Were Satisfied With the Quality of Life in the City. Ninety-two
percent (92 %) of the residents surveyed who had an opinion were "very satisfied" or
"satisfied" with the quality of life in Newport Beach; 37 % were neutral and only 7%
were dissatisfied with the quality of life in the City. Some of the quality of life items
that residents rated highest, based upon a combined percentage of "excellent" and
"good" responses among residents who had an opinion, were: ratings of the City as a
place to live (98 %), ratings of the City as a place to visit (97 %) and ratings of the
City as a place to play (95 %).
• Residents were still ¢enerally satisfied with the quality of services provided by
the City of Newport Beach. The highest levels of satisfaction with City services,
based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and "satisfied" responses
among residents who had an opinion, were: the quality of the City's library system
(96 %), the quality of police, fire and paramedic services (92 %), and the quality of
parks and recreation programs and facilities (89 %).
• Services that residents thought should receive the most emphasis from the City.
The major categories of City services that residents thought were the most important
for City to emphasize over the next two years were: 1) the management of traffic
flow on City streets, 2) the maintenance of City streets and infrastructure and 3) the
maintenance of the City's oceans/beaches and bays.
• Perception of Safety and Security in Newport Beach. Ninety-three percent (93 %)
of the residents surveyed, who had an opinion, were "very satisfied" or "satisfied"
with the overall feeling of safety in the City, 6% were neutral and only 3% were
dissatisfied. The areas residents felt most safe in, based upon the combined
percentage of residents who felt "very safe" and "safe," were: walking in their
neighborhood during the day (98 %) and walking in their neighborhood after dark
(86 %).
• Public Safety. The public safety services with the highest levels of satisfaction,
based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and "satisfied" responses
among residents who had an opinion, were: emergency medical and paramedic
services (95 %), quality of local fire protection services (94 %), and quality of
lifeguard services (93 %).
ETC Institute (2010) Executive Summary -iii
2010 Newport Beach Community Survey
The two public safety services that resident felt should receive the most emphasis
from City leaders over the next two years were: 1) City efforts to prevent crime and
2) the frequency that police officers patrol neighborhoods.
Facility and Recreation. The facility and recreation services with the highest levels
of satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and
"satisfied" responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the maintenance of
City parks (92 %), the quality of programs for seniors (83 %) and the quality of
programs for youth (83 %). Residents were least satisfied with walking and biking
trails in the City (74 %). The two facility and recreation services that resident felt
should receive the most emphasis over the next two years were: 1) the maintenance
of City parks and 2) walking and biking trails in the City.
• Utility and General Services. The City utility and general services with the highest
levels of satisfaction based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and
"satisfied" responses, among residents who had an opinion, were: residential trash
collection services (92 %), and street sweeping services (91 %).
• Codes Enforcement. The code enforcement services with the highest levels of
satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and "satisfied"
responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the enforcement of water
quality regulations (71 %), the enforcement of the exterior maintenance of
commercial property (70 %) and the enforcement of animal control regulations
(70 %). The code enforcement services that residents felt were most important for
City leaders to emphasize over the next two years were: 1) the enforcement of water
quality regulations and 2) the enforcement of the clean up of debris on private
property.
• City Communication. The communication services with the highest levels of
satisfaction, based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and "satisfied"
responses among residents who had an opinion, were: the information in the City
Manager's Community Newsletter (72 %) and the quality of the City's website
(69 %). The main sources where residents received information about the City were:
local newspapers (66 %), the City Manager's newsletter (47 %) and the City's website
(36 %).
• City Maintenance. The maintenance services with the highest levels of satisfaction,
based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and "satisfied" responses
among residents who had an opinion, were: the condition of street signs and traffic
signals (89 %), the cleanliness of City streets and public areas (87 %), the
attractiveness of streetscapes and medians (86 %) and the condition of neighborhood
streets (85 %). Residents felt the cleanliness of City beaches should receive the most
emphasis from City leaders over the next two years.
ETC Institute (2010) Executive Summary -iv
2010 Newport Beach Community Survey
• City Customer Service. The highest levels of satisfaction with services related to
City customer service, based upon the combined percentage of "very satisfied" and
"satisfied" responses among residents who had an opinion, were: how easy City
employees were to contact (84 %) and the way residents were treated (83 %).
• Water Taxi and Bus Services. Residents were asked several questions related to
the potential use of water taxi and water bus services. The results from these
questions are provided below:
Residents were generally split about whether or not they would utilize a
water taxi or water bus services if they were available: forty-two percent
(42 %) of residents indicated they would use a water taxi instead of their car if
it were available, 57% would not and 1% did not know. Forty -five percent
(45 %) of residents would use a water bus instead of their car if it existed and
55% would not.
o Of those residents who indicated they would use water taxi/bus services,
residents were generally more willing to spend more for a one -way ticket on
a water taxi versus a water bus: sixty -four percent (64 %) of residents were
willing to spend $5 or more on a one -way ticket for a water taxi compared to
36% of residents who were willing to spend $5 or more on a one -way ticket
on a water bus.
Of those residents who indicated they would use water taxi and bus services;
most indicated they would use it occasionally. Seventy percent (70 %) of
residents indicated they would use a water taxi "a few times a month" or a
"few times a year" and 77% of residents would use a water bus a "few times
a month" or "a few times a year."
ETC Institute (2010) Executive Summary -v
�Z3 - )0- 2&-10
ANALYSIS: Newport Beach versus Benchmark, 2008
2007 -8
Criterion: 10 or more pct points
Newport
Other
NB
Beach
Cities
B /( -W)
%
%
%Pts.
The City's overall efforts to prevent crime
87
59
28
Overall quality of services provided by the City
87
61
26
Walking in the neighborhood after dark -- safely
84
63
21
Effectiveness of City communication with public
69
49
20
Overall satisfaction with walking and biking trails
73
54
19
Quality of customer service from City employees
75
57
18r
Overall quality of life in the City
88
71
17
How quickly police respond to emergencies
85
69 .
16
City's efforts to keep residents informed
65
49
16
Quality of programs for seniors
74
60
14''
Walking in the neighborhood during day -- safely
99
86 ,
>, 13
Quality of programs for youth
76
64
12
Management of traffic flows within the City
61
49
12
Quality of City parks /rec. programs and facilities
87
76
11
Overall satisfaction with maintenance of City parks
90
80
10
How safe residents feel in City parks
73
63
10'
Sewer /wastewater service
88
79
9
Water service
89
82
7
Enforcement of traffic laws
74
68
6
Overall satisfaction with number of City parks
75
70
5
Residential trash collection service
92
88
4
Overall satisfaction with outdoor athletic facilities
68
66
2
The City's web page
52
62 LL
How well the City is planning for growth
49
52
-3
Enforcement of City codes /ordinances
63
66
-3
Frequency of police patrols in neighborhood
58
63
-5
Quality of City's cable TV channel
46
59 �— .
Maintenance Details (average of 5, 6))
79
63 -
16'
See Sheets 2 and 3
ANALYSIS: Newport Beach versus Benchmark, 2010
Criterion: 10 or more pct points
The City's overall efforts to prevent crime
Overall quality of services provided by the City
Walking in the neighborhood after dark -- safely
Effectiveness of City communication with public
Overall satisfaction with walking and biking trails
Quality of customer service from City employees
Overall quality of life in the City
How quickly police respond to emergencies
City's efforts to keep residents informed
Quality of programs for seniors
Walking in the neighborhood during day -- safely
Quality of programs for youth
Management of traffic flows within the City
Quality of City parks /rec. programs and facilities
Overall satisfaction with maintenance of City parks
How safe residents feel in City parks
Sewer /wastewater service
Water service
Enforcement of traffic laws
Overall satisfaction with number of City parks
Residential trash collection service
Overall satisfaction with outdoor athletic facilities
The City's web page
How well the City is planning for growth
Enforcement of City codes /ordinances
Frequency of police patrols in neighborhood
Quality of City's cable TV channel
Maintenance Details (average of 5, 6))
New in 2010
Streets and infrastructure
Fire education /prevention programs
Quality of Life details (average of 6)
Police, fire, and paramedic services
Management of traffic flow and congestion
Keepng residents informed on local issues
Parking regulation enforcement
Customer sery ice details (average of 5)
Local fire protection services
Fore personnel emergency response time
Code Enforcement details (average of 3)
2010
Npt
Other
NB
Beach
Cities
B /( -W) (Possible word change ...)
%
%
%Pts.
88
59
` 29 crime prevention
88
56
32
86
63
23
79
44
35` Not "effectiveness"
74
56
18
81
56
25 Just "customer service"
92
78
! 14`
86
67
19' police response time to emergence
65
51
14 on local issues
80
49
I'" 31 for adults
98
87
11'
83
57'
26
67
52
15 and congestion
89
77
12
92
79'
13
79
62
': 17
88
79
9
87
81
6
78
64''r'>
'14 local traffic laws
81
72
9
92
85
7
79
75
4
69
62
7 web site
61
50
11
68
59
9
61
60
1
51
60
-9 ..programming
84
65
! 19`
81
47
34'
78
57
21
91
70-
21
92
77
15"
67
52
15
65
51
14;
74
62
1, 12'
80
70
10
94
86
8
92
85
7
66
67
-1
ANALYSIS: Changes, 2008 to 2010
Criterion: At least 5 Pct. Pts.
both absdute and
The City's overall efforts to prevent crime
Overall quality of services provided by the City
Walking in the neighborhood after dark -- safely
Effectiveness of City communication with public
Overall satisfaction with walking and biking trails
Quality of customer service from City employees
Overall quality of life in the City
How quickly police respond to emergencies
City's efforts to keep residents informed
Quality of programs for seniors
Walking in the neighborhood during day -- safely
Quality of programs for youth
Management of traffic flows within the City
Quality of City parks /recreation programs and facilities
Overall satisfaction with maintenance of City parks
How safe residents feel in City parks
Sewer /wastewater service
Water service
Enforcement of traffic laws
Overall satisfaction with number of City parks
Residential trash collection service
Overall satisfaction with outdoor athletic facilities
The City's web page
How well the City is planning for growth
Enforcement of City codes /ordinances
Frequency of police patrols in neighborhood
Quality of City's cable N channel
B /( -W) than
Other Cities
2008 2010
%Pts. %Pts.
28 29
26 32
21 23
20
19
18
17
16
16
14
13
12
12
11
10
10
9
7
6
5
4
2
-10
-3
-3
-5
-13
35
18
25
14
19
14
31
11
26
15
12
13
17
9
6
14
9
7
4
7
11
9
1
-9
Maintenance Details (average of 5, 6)) 16 19
(NB consistently superior to other California cities)
Newport Beach
change
Abs.
Relative
%Pts.
%Pts.
1
1
1
6
2
2
10
15
1
-1
6
7
4
-3
1
3
0
-2
6
17'
-1
_2
7
14'
6
3
2
1
2
3
6
7
0
0
-2
-1
4
8
6
4
0
3
11
2
17
_ _ _ 17i'
12_
14'
5
12
3
6
5
4
5 3
Memo:
Other
Cities
Change
%Pts.
0
-5
0
-5
2
-1
7
-2
2
-11
1
-7
3
1
-1
-1
0
-1
-4
2
-3
9
0
-2
-7
-3
1
2
2010 City of Newport Beach Community Survey
FINDINGS
High approvals from 2008 carried over to 2010 (at least 10 Pct. Pts. in
both surveys relative to respective year's benchmark):
• The City's overall efforts to prevent crime
• Overall quality of services provided by the City
• Walking in the neighborhood after dark -- safely
• Effectiveness of City communications with the public
• Overall satisfaction with walking and biking rails
• Quality of customer service from City employees
• Overall quality of life in the City
• How quickly police respond to emergencies
• City' \s efforts to keep residents informed
• Quality of programs for seniors
• Walking in the neighborhood during the day -- safely
• Quality of programs for youth
• Management of traffic flows within the City
• Quality of City parks /recreations programs and facilities
• Overall satisfaction with maintenance of City parks
• How safe residents feel in City parks
New strengths (at least 10 Pc. Pts. relative to benchmark)
• Enforcement of traffic laws
• How well the City is planning for growth
Improvements (at least 5 Pct. Pts. both absolute and relative to
benchmark)
• Effectiveness of City communications with the public
• Quality of service from City employees
• Quality of programs for seniors /adults
• Quality of programs for youth
• The city's web page (a weakness in 2008)
• How well the City is planning for growth
• Enforcement of City codes and ordinances
TJM 10/25/2010
2010 City of Newport Beach Community Survey
The Newport Beach residents survey conducted in 2007 -8 has been repeated
in 2010, and residents have again given the City high marks all round. It
ranks top [or third, or fifth; can we say?] in overall quality of life out of 37
California cities included in these surveys to serve as a collective
benchmark.
Newport Beach's feature advantages over the benchmark average of other
California cities are numerous, with no shortfalls. As in 2008 they include
crime prevention; quality of services; perceived safety when walking in the
neighborhood, by day or night; City communications with the public and
customer service from City employees; walking and biking trails; quality,
safety, and maintenance of City parks; how quickly police respond in an
emergency; and traffic flow management. New advantages relative to the
benchmark cites are in perceived enforcement of traffic laws and planning
for growth.
Comparatively low residents' evaluations in 2008 of the City's web page and
TV channel have been overcome.
Tim 10/25/2010
2010 City of Newport Beach Community Survey
ISSUES
Interpretation of "Don't Knows"
The satisfaction ratings in this survey exclude "don't knows," the text
indicating this applies to those "who had an opinion."
Excluding "don't knows" is common practice when responses are converted
to a rating score (each level of satisfaction being given a weight and the
whole summed up in one weighted number, such as 7.5 out of 10) since it
doesn't distort the rating. In this study, however, percentages are used
instead of ratings. Consider: the tables show 86% of Newport Beach
residents satisfied or very satisfied with "How quickly police respond to
emergences." But this is false because only 68% actually gave such an
answer. As many as 21% did not give an answer at all ( "didn't know "), so
excluding them from the base deflates the denominator and inflates the
percentage by over a quarter.
Excluding "don't knows" is not a problem if the intention is to interpret
satisfaction data on a comparative basis only, and ETC has provided the
comparative data for this, because doing so cancels out such distortions, e.g.
so many Pct. Pts. more or less from one city (or company, brand, etc.) to
another.
Comparatives instead of absolutes
The distortions caused by excluding "don't knows" is only one reason why
absolute responses for scaled attitude measurements, such as "70%
satisfaction," should never be quoted. A more important reason is that one
cannot measure emotions in isolation at all, as one can demographics or
voting preferences, since neither God nor Newton has given us the unit of
measurement.
Contact method
Which raises the question: Were the data similarly obtained? Reponses by
mail and telephone (as well as in- person and internet) are not comparable
(interviewer bias, wrong respondent, multiple respondents, different
completion rates, etc.). I note that there was a mix of phone and mail in
some instances; was the mix uniform for all cities and in both surveys?
TJM 10/25/2010