Summary of Findings January, 2009

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Citizen Survey and Neighborhood Feedback City of Wichita District IV Spring/Summer 2013.
Advertisements

Citizens provide values and elect representatives City council provides policy Staff provides service to citizens.
February 6, 2008 Phase 2: Achieving our Visions of 2050 In cooperation with:
Survey Results September Survey Information There is an error margin of ±3.6 on this survey. South Ogden City sent out 5,300 surveys and received.
BOWLING GREEN CITIZEN CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY Fall 2010 – National Citizen Survey.
THE COSTS OF SUBURBAN SPRAWL AND URBAN DECAY. What is Suburban Sprawl? Sprawl is unsustainable development that wastes tax dollars, destroys farmland.
Customer Satisfaction Surveys 2005/06 7 th August 2006.
THE VITAL TILLAMOOK INDICATOR PROJECT Tillamook County: 2020 Strategic Vision 2009 Indicator Assessment.
Hays City Services Survey 2002 By Brett Zollinger, Ph.D. University Center for Survey Research Fort Hays State University Hays, Kansas
2008 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Results May 29, 2009.
2012 Citizen Survey results Background Implementing Our Vision Action Chart Key Drivers Areas of Significant Change Trends over Time What’s Next?
1 ACCESS to QUALITY CULTURAL, RECREATIONAL, EDUCATIONAL and LEISURE OPPORTUNITIES Collaboratively encourages and supports opportunities to focus on the.
CITY OF FLUSHING Citizen Survey April 22, Flushing Residents Respond.
2014 National Citizen Survey Results Citizen Survey results Implementing Our Vision Background Areas of Significant Change Trends over Time Special.
Albemarle County 2004 Citizen Survey October 6, 2004.
Village of Villa Park Comprehensive Plan Update Public Forum November 5 th, 2008.
Southern Apache County Community Health Survey Spring 2003.
CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions July 2013 Results of the 2013 Survey.
Survey conducted by: National Research Center, Inc th St. Boulder, CO (303) The National Citizen Survey™ LOWER PROVIDENCE.
2012 CITY OF MIDDLETON SATISFACTION SURVEY WORKING DRAFT - PROPOSAL.
City of Sarasota 2008 National Citizen Survey Conducted by the National Research Center (NRC) for the City of Sarasota.
2009 Lane County Community Survey Demographic Breakdown.
September 2015 Town of the Blue Mountains Citizen Satisfaction Survey.
Survey conducted: November 6th, 8th – 10th,
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP – FEBRUARY 23, National Citizen Survey Results.
Discussion Materials Prepared for City of Williamsburg, Virginia August 9, 2010 Refunding Opportunities Prepared By Davenport & Company LLC Member NYSE.
1. 2 Why Plan? Because of good planning Cranberry residents enjoy… 2 Long-Term Sustainability High Quality of Life Good Personal Health Easy Livability.
2012 Citizen Survey Results Presentation City of Twin Falls, Idaho.
City of Indio Community Survey SUMMARY PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL June 16, 2010 Presented by: Rick Sklarz, Senior Researcher.
National Citizen Survey 2010 Results. City of Decatur Citizen Survey Results Contracted with the National Research Center, Inc. for third time Survey.
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP – APRIL 12, Strategic Action Plan Evaluation Results.
The National Citizen Survey™ Orland Park, IL Summary of Findings May 7, 2012 ©2012 Survey conducted by: National Research Center, Inc Valmont Road,
CITY AND COUNTY OF BROOMFIELD 2015 CITIZEN SURVEY PRESENTATION OF RESULTS.
Citizen Survey Hampton City Council July 8, 2009.
Budget Week Results Public Forum Data March 10, 2010.
Ashland, VA Key Findings January 6, 2015 The NCS is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA.
Orland Park, IL Key Findings 2016 The NCS is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA.
City of Decatur National Citizen Survey 2012 Results City Commission Work Session July 16, 2012.
City of Decatur Citizen Survey Results  Contracted with the National Research Center, Inc. for second time  Survey conducted by mail  1200 randomly.
The National Citizen Survey™ Ashland, VA Summary of Findings November 29, 2011 ©2011 Survey conducted by: National Research Center, Inc th St.
Banister Research and Consulting Inc Citizen Satisfaction Survey February 13, 2014.
Developing a Plan for Accessibility The City of Brandon Accessibility Plan 2016.
1 City of Virginia Beach 2007 Citizens’ Survey Objective: To learn how residents feel about their community and the services provided by the City of Virginia.
STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE Vision, Values and Objectives.
Arapahoe County, CO 2017 Citizen Survey Prepared by: Andrea Rasizer
2017 Community Survey City of Mountain Brook, Alabama
McKinney, TX Key Findings 2017
City of Huber Heights Public Opinion Survey
Tomahawk School District Community Survey Results
City of Tucson: Financial Sustainability Plan
City of Washougal 2016 Community Survey Findings
City of Palo Alto Healthy Cities Performance Measures June 22, 2017
DirectionFinder® Survey
City of Palo Alto Healthy Cities Performance Measures August 24, 2017
Indiana Community Health Needs Assessment
Key Findings – Special Topics 2018
Fall Community Survey Summary Conducted for the City of Port Hueneme
2014 National Citizen Survey Results
Creating Livable Communities for All Ages
Community Conversation on Essential City Service Needs
The NCS is presented by NRC in collaboration with ICMA
Summary of Findings May 26, 2009
The Eight Domains of WHO/AARP Livable Community for All Ages
Listening to the Voices Of Residents Can you really hear them?
Listening to the Voices Of Residents Can you really hear them?
2010 DirectionFinder® Survey City of Blue Springs, Missouri
SURVEY RESULTS AND FISCAL UPDATE (February 10, 2010)
Customer Satisfaction Survey Report For City of El Segundo – Residents
1. Waterfront development
Focused General Plan Update Status Report & Visioning Overview
Presentation transcript:

Summary of Findings January, 2009 Novi, Michigan Summary of Findings January, 2009 ©2009 Survey conducted by: National Research Center, Inc. • 3005 30th St. • Boulder, CO 80301 • (303) 444-7863 • www.n-r-c.com

The National Citizen Survey™ (The NCS) Background ICMA/NRC initiative Turnkey omnibus citizen survey service Benchmark comparisons Over 200 participants in The NCS in over 40 states Over 500 jurisdictions in full database ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Uses of Survey Results Results can be used to: Monitor trends in resident opinion Results can be used to: Measure government performance Inform budget, land use, strategic planning decisions Benchmark service ratings Assessment Goals Immediate Provide useful information for: Planning Resource allocation Performance measurement Program and policy evaluation Long-term Improved services More civic engagement Better community quality of life Stronger public trust ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Study Background and Methods 2006 - The National Citizen Survey™ 2007 - Community Assessment Survey of Older Adults (CASOA)™ 2008 Survey: Multi-contact mailed survey Representative sample of 1,200 residents and households 367 surveys returned; 33% response rate 5% margin of error Data statistically weighted to reflect population ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Community Perception Ratings

Overall Quality of Community Novi as a place to live 97% Overall Quality of life in Novi 92% Neighborhood as a place to live 86% All above the national and custom benchmarks All were similar to 2006 Percent “excellent” or “good” Would recommend living in Novi to someone who asks 92% Above Remain in Novi for the next five years 86% Similar = national benchmark comparison = Custom benchmark comparison ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Community Design

Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark Transportation National Benchmark Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark Ease of car travel 64% Above Ease of walking 50% Below Availability of paths and walking trails 46% Below Traffic Flow on major streets 44% Similar Above Ease of bicycle travel 39% Below Percent “excellent” or “good” = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Transportation Services Amount of public parking 68% All above the national and custom benchmarks Sidewalk maintenance 61% Traffic signal timing 54% All Similar to the benchmarks Street lighting 59% Street cleaning 64% Street repair 50% Snow removal 60% Percent “excellent” or “good” = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

All above the national and custom benchmarks Land Use and Zoning All above the national and custom benchmarks = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Economic Sustainability Employment opportunities 44% Overall Quality of businesses and service establishments 85% Shopping opportunities 94% Novi as a place to work 77% All above the national and custom benchmarks Percent “excellent” or “good” = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Public Safety

All above the national and custom benchmarks Public Safety All above the national and custom benchmarks Neighborhood 94% Downtown 83% 84% 93% After dark During the day From Environmental Hazards From Property Crime 78% From Violent Crime 89% All were similar to 2006 Felt “very” or “somewhat” safe ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

All above the national and custom benchmarks Safety Services Highest rated for the City of Novi Fire services 92% All above the national and custom benchmarks Ambulance/ EMS services 91% Police services 88% Fire prevention and education 88% Municipal courts 77% Above Emergency preparedness 64% Above Lowest rated Above Similar Percent “excellent” or “good” = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Environmental Sustainability National Benchmark Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark 88% Cleanliness of Novi Above 71% Quality of overall natural environment Above Similar 56% Preservation of natural areas such as open space, farmlands and greenbelts Similar Above 78% Recycled used paper, cans or bottles from home Similar to the benchmarks ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Recreation and Wellness

Above the national and custom benchmarks Parks and Recreation 70% rated Recreation opportunities as “excellent” or “good” Above the national and custom benchmarks City parks 80% Similar Above Recreation programs or classes 75% Above Similar Recreation centers or facilities 75% Above All were similar to 2006 Percent “excellent” or “good” = national benchmark comparison = Custom benchmark comparison ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Culture, Arts and Education National Benchmark Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark Educational opportunities 79% Similar Similar Cultural and Educational Opportunities Opportunities to attend cultural activities 55% Above Above Percent “excellent” or “good” All were similar to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Community and Civic Engagement

Community Inclusiveness Compared to Benchmarks Above 95% Novi as a place to raise children 83% Above Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 74% Above Sense of community 59% Similar Novi as a place to retire 57% Above Availability of affordable quality child care Percent “excellent” or “good” = Compared to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Similar to the benchmarks Civic Activity 70% of respondents felt that opportunities to volunteer were “excellent” or “good” Similar to the benchmarks 68% of respondents felt that opportunities to participate in community matters were “excellent” or “good” Above the benchmarks Percent “excellent” or “good” ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

City of Novi Government

All above the national and custom benchmarks City of Novi Employees Knowledge 89% All above the national and custom benchmarks Courtesy 86% Responsiveness 84% Overall impression 84% All were similar to 2006 Percent “excellent” or “good” ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark Public Trust National Benchmark Population 35,000 to 70,000 Benchmark 88% Overall image or reputation of Novi Above 67% The overall direction that Novi is taking Above 56% Job Novi government does at welcoming citizen involvement Similar 51% Job Novi government does at listening to citizens Above Similar 51% Value of services for the taxes paid to Novi Below All were similar to 2006 ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

From Data to Action

National Benchmark Comparisons Resident priorities Key Driver Analysis (KDA) Cornerstone of customer satisfaction research in the private sector Tells what service evaluations best predict how well you do overall Focuses managers and staff on activities that could “get the most bang for the buck” Trendline data National Benchmark Comparisons “Key Drivers” ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Novi Action Chart™ Overall Quality of City of Novi Services Public Safety Traffic enforcement Police services Community Design Street repair Economic development Code enforcement Planning and zoning Snow removal Sidewalk Maintenance Street lighting Street cleaning Traffic signal timing Environmental Sustainability Preservation of natural areas Sewer services Drinking water Storm drainage Recycling Civic Engagement Cable television Recreation and Wellness City parks Library Legend Above Benchmark Similar to Benchmark Below Benchmark Rating decrease Rating increase Key Driver ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Policy Questions

Policy questions Highest Rated Responses: Please rate how important you think each of the following priorities should be to the City of Novi over the next five years: Highest Rated Responses: Please rate the following statements by circling the number that most clearly represents your opinion: 85% I would recommend Novi to friends as a place to live 85% Make annual investments in municipal infrastructure (i.e. roads, water and sewer) 81% I can envision living in Novi five years from now 84% Promote and maintain an attractive community 48% If I were looking to purchase/rent a new home I would look exclusively in Novi 84% Make annual investments in facilities and equipment for police and fire Percent “essential” or “very important” Percent “strongly” or “somewhat” agree ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

Conclusions Highlights Opportunities Strong employees Strong services Safe desirable community Code enforcement Service value Alternate modes of travel Economic future Highlights Opportunities ©2009 National Research Center, Inc.

National Research Center, Inc. 303-444-7863 www.n-r-c.com Thank you! National Research Center, Inc. 303-444-7863 www.n-r-c.com