Columbia Satisfaction Survey

8/3/2019 Columbia Satisfaction Survey

1/112

Final Report

725 W. Frontier Circle

Olathe, KS 66061

(913) 829- 1215

June 2011

2011 City of Columbia

DirectionFinder Survey

The City of Columbia, MO


2/112

Contents

Final Report

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ i

Section 1: Charts and Graphs with Trends......................................................................1

Section 2: Benchmarking Data......................................................................................30

Section 3: Importance-Satisfaction Analysis.................................................................41

Section 4: Tabular Data.................................................................................................56

Section 5: Survey Instrument ........................................................................................99


3/112

2011 City of Columbia DirectionFinder Survey: Final Report

ETC Institute (2011) i

EXECU

TIVESUMMAR

Y

Columbia 2011 DirectionFinder SurveyExecutive Summary

Overview and Methodology

The City of Columbia conducted its fourth DirectionFinder survey during the spring of

2011. The Citys first DirectionFindersurvey was conducted in the spring of 2003. The

purpose of this survey was to assist in the on-going effort to identify and respond to resident

concerns while also assessing citizen satisfaction with the delivery of major city services

and to help determine priorities for the community.

The seven-page survey was mailed to a random sample of 1,800 households in the City of

Columbia. Approximately 10 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. Of the 1,800 households that

received a survey, a total of 834 completed the survey.

The results for the random

sample of 834 households

have a 95% level of

confidence with a precision

of at least +/- 3.4%. There

were no statistically

significant differences in the

results of the survey based

on the method of

administration (phone vs.

mail). In order to better

understand how well

services are being deliveredby the city, ETC Institute

geocoded the home address

of respondents to the survey.

The map to the right shows the physical distribution of survey respondents based on the

location of their home.


4/112


ETC Institute (2011) ii

EXECU

TIVESUMMAR

Y

In addition to the Executive Summary, this report contains:

charts depicting the overall results of the survey (Section 1)

benchmarking data that shows how the survey results for Columbia compared toother communities (Section 2)

importance satisfaction analysis (Section 3)

tabular data for all questions on the survey (Section 4)

a copy of the survey instrument (Section 5)

GIS Maps that show the results of selected questions on maps of the City(Appendix A)

Additional comments (Appendix B)

Interpretation of Dont Know Responses. The percentage of persons who providedont know responses is important because it often reflects the level of utilization of city

services. For graphical purposes, the percentage of dont know responses has been

excluded to facilitate valid comparisons with data from previous years. The percentage ofdont know responses for each question is provided in the Tabular Data Section of this

report. When the dont 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.

Major Findings

Overall Satisfaction with Perceptions of Columbia. Eighty percent (80%) ofthose surveyed who had an opinion were satisfied (ratings of 4 or 5 on a 5-point

scale) with the overall quality of services in Columbia and 78% were also satisfied

with the overall quality of life in the City. Residents were least satisfied with how

well the City is planning for growth (37%).

Overall Satisfaction with Major City Services. Eighty-eight percent (88%) ofthose surveyed who had an opinion were satisfied (ratings of 4 or 5 on a 5-point

scale) with the quality of City parks and recreation programs/facilities; 85% weresatisfied with the solid waste services, 82% were satisfied with City utility services,

and 81% were satisfied with public safety services. Residents were least satisfied

with the condition of City streets (20%).


5/112


ETC Institute (2011) iii

EXECU

TIVESUMMAR

Y

Major City Services that residents thought should receive the most increase inemphasis over the next two years. The areas that residents thought should receive

the most increase in emphasis from the City of Columbia over the next two yearswere: (1) public safety services, (2) City utility services, and (3) the condition of

City streets.

Public Safety Services. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of those surveyed, who had anopinion, indicated that they were satisfied (ratings of 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale) with

how quickly the fire department respond to emergencies. Eighty-eight percent

(88%) indicated they were satisfied with the overall quality of the City fire

protection and 69% were satisfied with the overall quality of local police services.

Residents were least satisfied with the Citys municipal court (54%). The public

safety service that residents thought should receive the most emphasis over the next

two years was the police departments efforts to prevent crime.

Streets and Sidewalks. Sixty-five percent (65%) of those surveyed, who had anopinion, were satisfied (ratings of 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale) with the maintenance of

City street lighting. Sixty-three percent (63%) indicated that they were satisfied with

the overall maintenance of street signs/traffic signals and 60% indicated satisfactionwith the adequacy of City street lighting.

Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Services. Fifty-eight (58%) of thosesurveyed, who had an opinion, were satisfied with the maintenance of business

property; 57% were satisfied with animal regulations, and 51% were satisfied themaintenance of residential property. The clean-up of litter and debris on private

property is the code enforcement and neighborhood service that residents think is

most important for the City to provide.

City Communication. Seventy-one percent (71%) of those surveyed, who had anopinion, agreed with the statement that the City government is a trusted source of

information about programs/services; 58% of those surveyed agreed with the

statement information is communicated clearly, accurately and in a form that meets

my needs. Residents least agreed with the statement that it is easy to get information

needed from City government (54%).


6/112


ETC Institute (2011) iv

EXECU

TIVESUMMAR

Y

.

Other Findings.

Change Over Next Two Years. Respondents feel that the level of enforcement ofCity codes and ordinances should either be slightly increased (37%) or be greatly

increased (13%) over the next two years.

Use of Citys Website. Seventy-two percent (72%) of respondents indicated thatthey use the Citys website at least once a year.

Funding of Stormwater Improvements. Eighty-seven percent (87%) ofrespondents indicated that it is either important (31%), very important (29%) or

extremely important (27%) for the City of Columbia to fund stormwater

improvements that will help prevent flooding and protect the quality of water in

Usage of City Services. The percentage of residents who indicated they had usedvarious services provided by the City of Columbia is listed below:

o 94% City water serviceo 97% Residential trash collection serviceo 88% City electric service

o 87% Curbside recycling

o 47% Drop-off recycling


7/112

Section 1:

Charts and Graphs


ETC Institute (2011) 1


8/112

City of Columbia

2011 DirectionFinderSurvey Results

Overall Satisfaction with City Servicesby Major Category

by percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)

Source: ETC Institute (2011)

43%

30%

26%

26%

20%

19%

12%

11%

7%

2%

45%

55%

56%

55%

50%

48%

48%

37%

33%

18%

9%

10%

12%

13%

25%

28%

30%

31%

44%

23%

4%

6%

6%

6%

5%

6%

9%

21%

16%

57%

Parks and Rec programs/facilities

Solid waste services

City utility services

Public safety services

Public health services in the community

Quality of customer service received

Effectiveness of City communication w public

City's stormwater runoff/management system

Enforcement of City codes/ordinances for buildings

Condition of City streets

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Satisfied (5) Satisfied (4) Neutral (3) Dissatisfied (1/2)




9/112

88%

81%

67%

70%

60%

48%

40%

20%

82%

85%

90%

84%

77%

67%

64%

55%

47%

28%

86%

87%

70%

69%

63%

54%

51%

35%

Quality of City parks and rec. programs/facilities

Quality of public safety services

Customer service received from City employees

Quality of public health services in the community

Effectiveness of City communication w/ public

City's stormwater runoff/stormwater system

Enforcement of City codes/ordinances for buildings




0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005

Overall Satisfaction with City Servicesby Major Category 2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005


by percentage of respondents who rated the item as a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale where 5 means very satisfied(excluding don't knows)

Trends

not asked in 2005 or 2007


80%

50%

45%

37%

24%

21%

10%

8%

8%

3%

Public Safety services




Public health services in community

Parks & Recreation programs & facilities

City's stormwater runoff/management system

Enforcement of codes & ordinances for buildings

Effectiveness of City communication with public

Quality of customer service from City employees

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

First Choice Second Choice

Third Choice

City Services That Residents Think are the MostImportant for the City to Provide by Major Category


by percentage of respondents who selected the item as one of their top three choices




10/112


16%

24%

15%

12%

11%

7%

64%

54%

49%

45%

40%

30%

17%

16%

22%

27%

31%

29%

3%

6%

15%

17%

18%

34%

Quality of services provided by the City

Overall quality of life in the City

Overall feeling of safety in the City

Overall value received for City tax dollars/fees

The direction the City is heading

How well City is planning for growth

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Items That InfluencePerception Residents Have of the City


Satisfaction with Items That InfluencePerception Residents Have of the City

2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005

80%

78%

64%

57%

37%

51%

84%

84%

71%

58%

35%

81%

84%

67%

54%

36%

Quality of services provided by the City


Overall feeling of safety in the City

Value received for City tax dollars and fees

How well the City is planning growth

The direction the City is heading

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005Source: ETC Institute (2011)


Trends





11/112

63%

46%

41%

28%

9%

4%

30%

45%

46%

42%

33%

18%

5%

7%

9%

15%

29%

30%

2%

3%

4%

15%

29%

48%

Walking in neighborhood during the day

In downtown Columbia during the day

In City parks during the day

Walking in neighborhood at night

In downtown Columbia at night

In City parks at night

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Safe (5) Safe (4) Neutral (3) Unsafe (1/2)

Perceptions of Safety in the Cityby Major Category




38%

33%

16%

21%

16%

12%

51%

56%

53%

48%

48%

42%

10%

11%

22%

23%

24%

39%

1%

1%

9%

9%

12%

7%

How quickly Fire Dept. respond to emergencies

Overall quality of City fire protection

Overall quality of local police services

How quickly police respond to emergencies

Police efforts to prevent crime

The City's municipal court

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Aspects ofPublic Safety Services





12/112

Satisfaction with Various Aspects ofPublic Safety Services 2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005

89%

89%

69%

69%

64%

54%

84%

84%

77%

68%

63%

50%

87%

82%

81%

68%

63%

49%

Quality of City fire protection

How quickly fire dept. respond to emergencies



Police Department's efforts to prevent crime

City's municipal court

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005



Trends


70%

62%

61%

38%

31%

14%

Police efforts to prevent crime


How quickly Fire Dept. respond to emergencies


Overall quality of City fire protection


0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

First Choice Second Choice Third Choice

Public Safety Services That Residents Think are the MostImportant Services for the City to Provide by Major Category





13/112


14%

13%

11%

14%

9%

9%

11%

7%

4%

3%

51%

50%

49%

45%

48%

41%

39%

32%

31%

19%

28%

24%

27%

18%

28%

29%

29%

23%

20%

19%

7%

13%

14%

23%

15%

22%

22%

38%

46%

58%

Maintenance of City street lighting

Maintenance of street signs/traffic signals

Adequacy of City street lighting

Snow removal on major City streets

Overall cleanliness & appearance of City streets

Condition of City sidewalks

Availability of sidewalks in the City

Maintenance of streets in YOUR neighborhood

Maintenance of major City streets

Snow removal on neighborhood streets

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Aspects ofStreets and Sidewalks


Satisfaction with Various Aspects ofStreets & Sidewalks

2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005by percentage of respondents who rated the item as a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale where 5 means very satisfied

(excluding don't knows)

63%

65%

60%

57%

59%

50%

39%

50%

35%

22%

68%

67%

63%

61%

51%

46%

44%

43%

41%

24%

65%

58%

58%

64%

49%

50%

48%

42%

38%




Cleanliness of City streets/other public areas



Maintenance of streets in your neighborhood




0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005


not asked in 2005

Trends




14/112


Streets and Sidewalk Services That Residents Think arethe Most Important for the City to Provide by

Major Category

85%

45%

30%

28%

25%

20%

18%

15%

14%

6%



Maintenance of streets in YOUR neighborhood




Overall cleanliness & appearance of City streets



Maitenance of City street lighting0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




8%

9%

7%

8%

6%

7%

50%

48%

44%

42%

41%

36%

33%

30%

35%

35%

38%

32%

9%

13%

14%

16%

16%

25%

Maintenance of business property

Animal regulations

Maintenance of residential property

Mowing & trimming of lawns on private property

Off-street parking regulations

Clean-up of litter & debris on private property

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Aspects ofCode Enforcement and Neighborhood Services





15/112


Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Services ThatResidents Think are the Most Important for the City to

Provide by Major Category

60%

52%

48%

40%

29%

24%

Clean-up of litter & debris on private property


Maitenance of business property

Animal regulations

Mowing & trimming of lawns on private property

Off-street parking regulations

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%




How Respondent Would Rate the Quality of TheirNeighborhood Compared to Five Years Ago

by percentage of respondents

Gotten much better3%

Gotten somewhat better12%

Stayed about the same51%

Gotten somewhat worse15%

Gotten much worse3%

Don't know16%




16/112


Whether Respondents Feel the City of Columbia isUsually Responsive to the Concerns Their Neighborhood


Yes

42%

No21%

Don't know37%


How Respondents Think the Level of Enforcement of CityCodes & Ordinances Should Change Over the Next Two Years


Be greatly increased13%

Be slightly increased37%

Stay about the same29%

Be slightly reduced3%

Be greatly reduced2%

Don't know16%




17/112


Have you called or visited the City with a question,problem, or complaint during the past year?


Whether Respondent Has Called or Visited the City with aQuestion, Problem or Complaint During the Past Year

19%

17%

16%

16%

11%

9%

8%

5%

2%

2%

2%

2%

1%

8%

Solid waste

Streets/sidewalks

Police

Electric service

Code enforcement

Water/Sewer

Parks & Recreation

Public health

Stormwater

City Council

Public transportation

Fire

City Manager

Other

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Yes46%

No53%

Don't know1%


Have you called or visited the City with a question,problem, or complaint during the past year?by percentage of respondents

If Contacted, Why Did You Contactthe City About this Service?

40%

28%

16%

11%

7%

7%

3%

5%

Report a problem

Get information

Request service

Discuss a billing issue

Request non-emergency assistance

Request emergency assistance

Comply with City requirements

Other

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Yes46%

No53%

Don't know1%




18/112


27%

31%

26%

26%

26%

27%

21%

55%

46%

48%

42%

42%

40%

42%

10%

14%

17%

15%

14%

18%

17%

8%

8%

9%

17%

18%

16%

20%

Hours City employees were available met my needs

Employees who helped me were courteous/polite

City employees were technically competent

Satisfied w quality of customer service provided

Employees did what they said in timely manner

Employees gave prompt/accurate/complete answers

It was easy to reach the right person at the City

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Strongly Agree (5) Agree (4) Neutral (3) Disagree (1/2)

Level of Agreement with Statements About the Quality ofService Received from City Employees the Last Time

Respondents Contacted the Cityby percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)


16%

11%

15%

12%

55%

47%

43%

42%

22%

32%

31%

36%

7%

11%

12%

10%

City gov't is a trusted source of info

Info is communicated clearly/accurately/etc

City gov't is open to citizen involvement/ideas

It is easy to get info needed from City government

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Strongly Agree (5) Agree (4) Neutral (3) Disagree (1/2)

Level of Agreement with Statements About

Communicationby percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)




19/112

Level of Agreement with Various Statements AboutCommunication2011 vs 2007


71%

54%

58%

58%

63%

50%

51%

53%

City gov't is a trusted source of info

It is easy to get info needed from City government

Info is communicated clearly/accurately/etc

City gov't is open to citizen involvement/ideas

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007Source: ETC Institute (2011)

Trends


15%

13%

10%

11%

8%

7%

53%

47%

44%

42%

29%

20%

25%

28%

39%

43%

46%

60%

7%

13%

8%

5%

17%

13%

Usefulness of info available on the City's website

How easy it is to use City's website

Usefulness of info provided in City newsletter

How often the City newsletter is released

Usefulness of programming on City's cable channel

How effectively the City is using social networks

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Statements About

Communicationby percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)




20/112


Seldom or never26%

1-2 times per year15%

A few times per year30%

At least once a month22%

At least once a week5%

Don't know2%

How Often Respondents Use the Citys Websiteby percentage of respondents


Every month39%

Every so often

24%

Infrequently15%

Never19%

Don't know

3%

How Often Respondents Read the City Newsletter that isDistributed with the Citys Monthly Utility Bill





21/112


Whether Respondents Have Done Any of the FollowingDuring the Past Year

by percentage of respondents (multiple choices allowed)

82%68%

63%

24%

23%

16%

12%

12%

10%

7%

7%

4%

Read an article in the newspaper about the City

Read the City's newsletter

Visited the City website for info about the City

Watched any programs the City cable channel

Attended a neighborhood meeting

Watched a City Council or Planning/Zoning meeting

Called or written City Council member

Accessed a City Council agenda on City's website

Attended a City Council meeting

Used Facebook/Twitter/YouTube to get City info

Watched a City Council meeting on City's website

Called or written the City Manager

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Primary Sources of Information about City Issues,Services, and Events 2011 vs 2007 vs 2005

by percentage of respondents (multiple answers allowed)

72%

65%

38%

46%

40%

40%

8%

6%

2%

79%

69%

61%

48%

40%

22%

21%

3%

75%

75%

56%

56%

42%

13%

18%

5%

Local newspaper

Television news

City newsletter included w/ monthly utility bills

Radio

Friends/neighbors

City website

City cable channel

Social networking sites

Other

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005

Source: ETC Institute (2011)Trends





22/112


Problems Respondents Had In the Neighborhood WhereThey Live During the Past 24 Months

by percentage of respondents (multiple choices were allowed)

14%

14%

11%

13%

58%

Flooding in basements or other areas of home

Severe soil erosion

Flooding in streets more than 24 hrs after rain

Other

None - have not observed any problems

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Extremely important27%

Very important29%

Important31%

Not very important4%

Not important at all2%

Don't know7%

How Important Respondents Think It Is for the City of

Columbia to Fund Stormwater Improvements that Will HelpPrevent Flooding and Protect the Quality of Water in

Lakes, Rivers, and Streamsby percentage of respondents





23/112

Very likely19%

Likely18%

Somewhat likely22%

Not likely17%

Not likely at all13%

Don't know11%

How Likely Would Respondents Be to Vote in Favor of aProposal to Raise the Current Assessment to Fund

Needed Stormwater Improvements in the Cityby percentage of respondents



20%

22%

24%

16%

18%

17%

55%

51%

49%

48%

45%

46%

19%

24%

21%

29%

28%

33%

5%

3%

6%

7%

8%

4%

Guard against food poisoning

Prevent the spread of infectious disease

Encourage healthy lifestyles

Guard against exposure to environmental risks

Assure the health of women/children in community

Assess & monitor disease/injuries/potential risks

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Statements About Public Healthby percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)




24/112


Public Health Services That Residents Think are theMost Important for the City to Provide by Major Category

69%

61%

53%

31%

29%

21%

Prevent the spread of infectious disease

Guard against food poisoning

Guard against exposure to environmental risks

Assure the health of women/children in community



0% 20% 40% 60% 80%



94%

97%

88%

87%

47%

95%

94%

89%

86%

51%

95%

93%

88%

81%

45%

City water service

Residential trash collection service

City electric service

Curbside recycling (blue bags)

Drop-off recycling

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005

Do you use this Service?:

Percentage of Residents Who Indicated thatThey Have Used Various City Services

2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005by percentage of respondents who answered "YES"

Source: ETC Institute (2011)Trends




25/112


47%

39%

48%

36%

38%

43%

50%

41%

51%

46%

5%

6%

6%

9%

12%

5%

4%

5%

5%

4%




City water service

Drop-off recycling

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Services Provided by the Cityby percentage of respondents (excluding don't knows)

Satisfaction with Various Services Provided by the City2011 vs. 2007 vs. 2005

90%

89%

87%

89%

84%

94%

93%

91%

90%

78%

91%

92%

88%

88%

80%



City water service


Drop-off recycling

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2011 2007 2005



Trends




26/112


33%

31%

27%

18%

18%

13%

48%

47%

50%

46%

37%

31%

11%

13%

13%

25%

32%

33%

9%

9%

10%

11%

12%

24%

How easy it is to get from your home to downtown

How easy it is for you to get to/from work

How easy it is to get to/from home/shopping areas

Ease of walking in the City

Ease of travel by bike in the City

Availability of public transportation

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Various Statements AboutTransportation



Transportation Services That Residents Think are theMost Important for the City to Provide by Major Category

58%

55%

45%

41%

40%

28%

Availability of public transportation

How easy it is for you to get to/from work

How easy it is to get to/from home/shopping areas

How easy it is to get from your home to downtown



0% 20% 40% 60% 80%






27/112


61%

64%45%

31%

29%

37%

30%

21%

22%

18%

17%

19%

24%

15%

32%

27%32%

40%

41%

30%

36%

36%

32%

32%

34%

32%

26%

19%

6%

8%17%

23%

25%

21%

26%

31%

30%

35%

38%

38%

32%

27%

1%

2%6%

6%

6%

13%

8%

12%

17%

14%

12%

12%

19%

39%

Maintaining City streets and infrastructure

Protecting residents/businesses from crimePromoting economic development/job creation

Managing stormwater runoff

Minimizing congestion on City streets

Preserving greenspace

Preserving/protecting the environment

Improving sidewalks and pedestrian walkways

Ensuring that affordable housing is available

Improving the visual attractiveness of the City

Increasing resident participation in local govt

Improving cooperation between the City & County

Expanding public transportation services

Adding biking lanes/paths

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very High (5) High (4) Neutral (3) Low (1/2)

What Priority Respondents Felt Should Be Place on theFollowing Major Community Priorities



Community Priorities That Residents Think are the MostImportant Issues for the City of Columbia

58%

55%

38%

22%

21%

16%

14%

13%

13%

11%

6%

5%

5%

5%

Maintaining City streets and infrastructure

Protecting residents/businesses in City from crime

Promoting economic development/job creation

Minimizing congestion on City streets

Ensuring that affordable housing is available

Preserving greenspace

Managing stormwater runoff

Expanding public transportation services

Preserving/protecting the environment

Improving sidewalks and pedestrian walkways

Adding biking lanes/paths

Improving the visual attractiveness of the City

Increasing resident participation in local govt

Improving cooperation between the City & County

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%






28/112

Yes87%

No

10%

Don't know3%

Whether Respondents Think It Is Important for the City ofColumbia to Support Sustainability Programs That Help Reduce

Pollution, Conserve Energy, and Protect Water Resourcesby percentage of respondents


Doing too much7%

Doing the right amount46%

Not doing enough28%

Don't know19%

How Would You Describe the Citys Efforts to Promote Water,Energy and Natural Resource Conservation?






29/112


30%

29%

23%

22%

23%

36%

34%

36%

37%

33%

24%

27%

29%

29%

30%

11%

10%

12%

12%

14%

Services for children, youth, & families

Services to meet basic needs & emergencies

Services to support economic opportunity

Services to support independent living

Mental health services

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Very Willing (5) Willing (4) Somewhat Willing (3) Not Will ing (1/2)

How Willing Respondent Is to Have City Taxes Used toSupport Various Social Services


Yes31%

No68%

Don't know

1%

Have You Used Public Transportation Services in Columbia?by percentage of respondents





30/112

Yes

46%

No53%

Don't know1%

Have You Used the City Airport?by percentage of respondents



Demographics




31/112


5 years or less20%

6 to 10 years18%

11 to 15 years14%

16 to 20 years12%

21 to 30 years18%

31+ years18%

Years Lived in Columbiaby percentage of respondents


Before 19509%

1950-196920%

1970-198920%

1990 or later47%

Don't know4%

When Was Your Home Built?by percentage of respondents




32/112


Yes10%

No90%

Are You a Student In a College or University?by percentage of respondents


Own78%

Rent22%

Do You Own or Rent Your Current Residence?by percentage of respondents




33/112


Ages of Household Occupantsby percentage of respondents

under 1018%

10-19 years

14%

20-44 years37%

45-64 years24%

65+ years7%


Age of Respondentby percentage of respondents

18-3430%

35-4427%

45-5419%

55-6415%

65+9%




34/112


Do You Subscribe to Any of the FollowingTelevision Services?

by percentage of respondents (multiple choices were allowed)

41%

28%

24%

3%

11%

Mediacom

Century Link

Satellite TV

Charter Cable

None

0% 20% 40% 60%


Total Annual Household Incomeby percentage of respondents

Under $15,0007%

$15,000-$29,99911%$30,000-$59,999

23%

$60,000-$99,99928%

$100,000 or more26%

Not provided5%




35/112


Respondents Race/Ethnicityby percentage of respondents

Hispanic4%

White/Caucasian81%

African American/Black9%

Asian/Pacific Islander4%

Native American/Eskimo1%

Mixed Race2%


Male48%

Female52%

Respondents Genderby percentage of respondents




36/112

Section 2:

Benchmarking Data




37/112

DirectionFinder Survey

Year 2011 Benchmarking Summary Report

Overview

ETC Institute's DirectionFinder program was originally developed in 1999 to help

community leaders in Kansas and Missouri use statistically valid community survey data

as a tool for making better decisions.

Since November 1999, the survey has been administered in more than 210 cities and

counties in 43 states. This report contains benchmarking data from three sources: (1) a

national survey that was administered by ETC Institute in the Spring of 2010 to a randomsample of more than 4,300 residents in the continental United States (2) a regional survey

that was administered by ETC Institute in the Spring of 2010 to a random sample of 437

residents in Kansas and Missouri communities and (3) surveys that have been

administered by ETC Institute in 33 communities in the Kansas City metro area between

January 2008 and May 2011. The Kansas and Missouri communities represented in this

report include:

Ballwin, Missouri Blue Springs, Missouri Bonner Springs, Kansas Butler, Missouri Columbia, Missouri Clayton, Missouri Excelsior Springs, Missouri Gardner, Kansas Grandview, Missouri Harrisonville, Missouri Independence, Missouri Johnson County, Kansas Kansas City, Missouri Lawrence, Kansas

Leawood, Kansas Lee's Summit, Missouri Lenexa, Kansas

Liberty, Missouri Merriam, Kansas Mission, Kansas OFallon, Missouri Olathe, Kansas Overland Park, Kansas Platte City, Missouri Pleasant Hill, Missouri Raymore, Missouri Riverside, Missouri Roeland Park, Kansas Rolla, Missouri Shawnee, Kansas Spring Hill, Kansas

Unified Government of KansasCity and Wyandotte County

National Benchmarks. The first set of charts on the following pages show how the

overall results for Columbia compare to the national average and the Kansas/Missouri

average. These are based on the results of the survey that was administered by ETC

Institute to a random sample of 4,377 U.S. residents and to 437 residents in Kansas and

Missouri communities.




38/112

Kansas/Missouri Benchmarks. The second set of charts show the highest, lowest, and

average (mean) levels of satisfaction in the 33 communities, listed above, for more than

40 areas of service delivery. The mean rating is shown as a vertical line, which indicates

the average level of satisfaction in the Kansas and Missouri communities. The actual

ratings for Columbia are listed to the right of each chart. The dot on each bar shows how

the results for Columbia compare to the other communities in the states of Kansas and

Missouri where the DirectionFinder survey has been administered.




39/112

National and RegionalBenchmarks

Note: The benchmarking data contained in this report isprotected intellectual property. Any reproduction of

the benchmarking information in this report by personsor organizations not directly affiliated with the City of

Columbia is not authorized without written

consent from ETC Institute.

88%

85%

82%

81%

67%

60%

48%

44%

40%

75%

76%

76%

81%

50%

50%

65%

31%

47%

72%

77%

74%

80%

56%

46%

63%

43%

51%

Parks/recreation programs & facilities



Public safety services

Customer service

City communication with the public

Stormwater runoff/management

Availability of public transportation services

Enforcement of codes & ordinances

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Columbia Kansas/Missouri Average U.S. Average

by percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scalewhere 5 was "very satisfied" and 1 was "very dissatisfied" (excluding don't knows)

Source: 2011 ETC Institute

Overall Satisfaction with Various City ServicesColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.S




40/112

80%

78%

57%

51%

37%

56%

77%

43%

61%

49%

57%

80%

45%

57%

44%

Overall quality of City services provided


Value received for City tax dollars/fees

Direction the City is headed

How well the City is planning growth

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




Satisfaction with Issues that InfluencePerceptions of the City

Columbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.S

93%

70%

96%

75%

92%

68%

In your neighborhood during the day

In your neighborhood at night

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


How Safe Residents Feel in Their CommunityColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.Sby percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scalewhere 5 was "very safe" and 1 was "very unsafe" (excluding don't knows)





41/112

89%

89%

69%

69%

64%

90%

88%

75%

77%

60%

90%

87%

73%

71%

61%

Local fire protection

Fire Depart response time to emergencies

Local police protection

Police response time to emergencies

Crime prevention

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with Public Safety ServicesColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.S



63%

60%

59%

57%

50%

39%

35%

22%

77%

68%

71%

67%

51%

56%

62%

49%

77%

63%

64%

65%

53%

57%

59%

49%

Condition of street signs & traffic signals


Snow removal on City streets

Cleanliness/appearance of City streets

Condition of sidewalks

Maintenance of neighborhood streets



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with Streets and SidewalksColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.Sby percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale

where 5 was "very satisfied" and 1 was "very dissatisfied" (excluding don't knows)





42/112

57%

51%

50%

43%

58%

48%

50%

49%

58%

48%

49%

47%

Animal regulations


Enforcing mowing/trimming on private property

Clean-up of litter/debris on private property

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with Code Enforcementand Neighborhood Services

Columbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.Sby percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale



77%

68%

68%

67%

63%

69%

56%

54%

57%

69%

69%

56%

55%

61%

71%

Employees were courteous/polite

Employees did what they said in a timely manner

Overall satisfaction

Employees gave promt/accurate/complete answers

It was easy to reach the City employee needed

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with Customer ServiceColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.Sby percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale where 5

was a positive response and 1 was a negative response (excluding don't knows)





43/112

68%

37%

56%

65%

59%

60%

Usefulness of info on the City's website

Usefulness of programming on City cable tv channel

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with CommunicationColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.S



90%

87%

82%

77%

82%

78%

Residential trash collection services

Water service

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Overall Satisfaction with Utility ServicesColumbia vs. Kansas/Missouri vs. the U.Sby percentage of respondents who rated the item 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale






44/112

Source: ETC Institute DirectionFinder (2011)

Kansas and MissouriPerformance Ranges

96%

97%

86%

83%

72%

77%

57%

31%

30%

25%

28%

32%

Public safety

Parks and recreation programs & facilities

Overall quality of customer service

Effectiveness of communication with the public

Enforcement of City codes/ordinances

City stormwater runoff/management system

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

by percentage of respondents who rated the item as a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale

Columbia, MO

81%

88%

60%

67%

40%

48%

Overall Satisfaction With Various City Services - 2011




45/112

97%

81%

29%

24%


Overall value received for your tax dollars

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%LOW---------MEAN--------HIGH

Perceptions that Residents Haveof the City in Which They Live - 2011


Columbia, MO

78%

57%

97%

94%

88%

71%

52%

33%

Overall quality of local fire protection

Overall quality of local police protection

The City's overall efforts to prevent crime

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%LOW---------MEAN--------HIGH


Satisfaction with Public Safety Services - 2011

Columbia, MO

89%

69%

64%




46/112

93%

93%

93%

92%

88%

86%

41%

33%

22%

48%

21%

42%


Cleanliness/appearance of City streets

Maintenance of major City Streets

Condition of streets signs/traffic signals



0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


Satisfaction with Streets and Sidewalks - 2011

Columbia, MO

59%

50%

63%

60%

57%

35%

81%

77%

74%

72%

68%

36%

24%

19%

21%

24%

Animal regulations

Maintenance of business property

Enforcing mowing and trimming of lawns

Clean-up of debris on private property


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%LOW---------MEAN--------HIGH


Satisfaction with the Code Enforcementand Neighborhood Services - 2011

Columbia, MO

57%

50%

43%

51%

58%




47/112

Section 3:

Importance-Satisfaction

Analysis




48/112

Importance-Satisfaction AnalysisColumbia, Missouri

Overview

Today, city officials have limited resources which need to be targeted to activities that are of the

most benefit to their citizens. Two of the most important criteria for decision making are (1) to

target resources toward services of the highest importance to citizens; and (2) to target resourcestoward those services where citizens are the least satisfied.

The Importance-Satisfaction (IS) rating is a unique tool that allows public officials to betterunderstand both of these highly important decision making criteria for each of the services they

are providing. The Importance-Satisfaction rating is based on the concept that cities will

maximize overall citizen satisfaction by emphasizing improvements in those service categorieswhere the level of satisfaction is relatively low and the perceived importance of the service is

relatively high.

Methodology

The rating is calculated by summing the percentage of responses for items selected as the first,

second, and third most important services for the City to emphasize over the next two years.

This sum is then multiplied by 1 minus the percentage of respondents that indicated they werepositively satisfied with the City's performance in the related area (the sum of the ratings of 4

and 5 on a 5-point scale excluding >don't knows=). Don't know responses are excluded fromthe calculation to ensure that the satisfaction ratings among service categories are comparable.

[IS=Importance x (1-Satisfaction)].

Example of the Calculation. Respondents were asked to identify the major categories of city

services they thought should receive the most emphasis over the next two years. Nineteenpercent (19%) selectedparks and recreation as one of the most important service to emphasize

over the next two years.

With regard to satisfaction, 90% of the residents survey rated the citys overall performance in

parks and recreation as a 4 or a 5 on a 5-point scale (where 5 means very satisfied)

excluding Don't know responses. The I-S rating for parks and recreation was calculated bymultiplying the sum of the most important percentages by 1 minus the sum of the satisfactionpercentages. In this example, 19% was multiplied by 10% (1-0.90). This calculation yielded an

I-S rating of 0.0190, which was ranked ninth out of nine major service categories.




49/112

The maximum rating is 1.00 and would be achieved when 100% of the respondents select an

item as one of their top three choices to emphasize over the next two years and 0% indicate thatthey are positively satisfied with the delivery of the service.

The lowest rating is 0.00 and could be achieved under either one of the following two situations:

! if 100% of the respondents were positively satisfied with the delivery of the service

! if none (0%) of the respondents selected the service as one of the three most importantareas for the City to emphasize over the next two years.

Interpreting the Ratings

Ratings that are greater than or equal to 0.20 identify areas that should receive significantly moreemphasis over the next two years. Ratings from .10 to .20 identify service areas that should

receive increased emphasis. Ratings less than .10 should continue to receive the current level ofemphasis.

! Definitely Increase Emphasis (IS>=0.20)

! Increase Current Emphasis (0.10


50/112

Importance-Satisfaction RatingCity of Columbia

OVERALL

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank Satisfaction %

Satisfaction

Rank

Importanc

Satisfactio

Rating

Very High Priority (IS >.20)

Condition of City streets 45% 3 20% 10 0.3600

High Priority (IS .10-.20)

Public safety services 80% 1 81% 4 0.1520

Medium Priority (IS


51/112


Public Safety

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank Satisfaction %

Satisfaction

Rank

Importance-

Satisfaction

Rating

I-S Rating

Rank


Police efforts to prevent crime 70% 1 64% 5 0.2520 1


How quickly police respond to emergencies 62% 2 69% 3 0.1922 2

Overall quality of local police services 38% 4 69% 4 0.1178 3

Medium Priority (IS


52/112


Streets and Sidewalks

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank Satisfaction %

Satisfaction

Rank

Importance-

Satisfaction

Rating I-S Rating Rank


Maintenance of major City streets 85% 1 34% 9 0.5610 1

Snow removal on neighborhood streets 28% 4 23% 10 0.2156 2


Snow removal on major City streets 45% 2 59% 4 0.1845 3

Maintenance of streets in YOUR neighborhood 30% 3 39% 8 0.1830 4

Medium Priority (IS


53/112


Code Enforcement and Neighborhood Services

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank

Satisfaction

%

Satisfaction

Rank

Importance-

Satisfaction



Clean-up of litter & debris on private property 60% 1 43% 6 0.3420 1

Maintenance of residential property 47% 3 51% 3 0.2303 2

Maintenance of business property 52% 2 58% 1 0.2184 3


Animal regulations 40% 4 57% 2 0.1720 4

Mowing & trimming of lawns on private property 29% 5 49% 4 0.1479 5

Off-street parking regulations 24% 6 46% 5 0.1296 6

Note: The I-S Rating is calculated by multiplying the "Most Important" % by (1-'Satisfaction' %)

Most Important %: The "Most Important" percentage represents the sum of the first and second

most important responses for each item. Respondents were asked to identify

the items they thought should receive the most emphasis over the next two years.

Satisfaction %: The "Satisfaction" percentage represents the sum of the ratings "4" and "5" excluding 'don't knows.'

Respondents ranked their level of satisfaction with the each of the items on a scaleof 1 to 5 with "5" being very satisfied and "1" being very dissatisfied.

2011 DirectionFinder by ETC Institute

2011 City of Columbia Dire

ETC Institute (2011)


54/112


Public Health

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank

Satisfaction

%

Satisfaction

Rank

Importa

Satisfa

Rati


Guard against exposure to environmental risks 53% 3 64% 4 0.19

Prevent the spread of infectious disease 69% 1 73% 2 0.18

Guard against food poisoning 61% 2 76% 1 0.14

Assure the health of women/children in community 31% 4 63% 5 0.11

Medium Priority (IS


55/112


Transportation

Category of Service

Most

Important

%

Most

Important

Rank Satisfaction %

Satisfaction

Rank

Importance-

Satisfaction



Availability of public transportation 58% 1 43% 6 0.3306 1


Ease of walking in the City 40% 5 65% 4 0.1400 2

Ease of travel by bike in the City 28% 6 55% 5 0.1260 3

How easy it is for you to get to/from work 55% 2 79% 2 0.1155 4

How easy it is to get to/from home/shopping areas 45% 3 77% 3 0.1035 5

Medium Priority (IS


56/112

Satisfactio

nRating

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

Opportunities

2011 City of Columbia DirectionFindImportance-Satisfaction Assessment M

-Overall-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r

mean importance

Importance Rating

Lower Importance

lower importance/higher satisfaction highe

lower importance/lower satisfaction highe

Exceeded Expectations

Less Important

Co

Source: ETC Institute (May 2011)

City utility service

City's stormwaterrunoff/management system

Condition of City stree

Effectiveness of Citycommunication w public

Enforcement of Citycodes/ordinances for buildings

Parks and Recreationprograms/facilities

Public healthservices in the

community

Public

Quality of customer

service received





57/112

Satisfactio

nRating

!

!

!

!

!

Opportunitie

mean importance

Importance RatingLower Importance


lower importance/lower satisfaction high


Less Important

Co



-Public Safety-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r

How qrespon

Howresp

Overall quality ofCity fire protection


Police efforts to prevent





58/112

Satisfactio

nRating

!

!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

Opportunitie

mean importance


lower importance/higher satisfaction higher



Less Important

Co



-Streets & Sidewalks-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r





Maintenance


Maintenance of streets in YO

Overall cleanliness &appearance of City streets

Snow removal

Snow removal on neighb




59/112

Satisfactio

nRating

!

!

!

!

!

Opportunities

mean importance


lower importance/higher satisfaction higher



Less Important

Co



-Code Enforcement-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r

Animal regulations

Clean-up of litter & debris o

Maintenance of

business property

Maintenance of r

Mowing & trimming of lawnson private property

Off-street parkingregulations




60/112

Satisfactio

nRating

! !

!

!

Opportunities

mean importance





Less Important

Co



-Public Health-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r


Assure the health of womenand children in community


Guard against exposure

to environmental risks

Guard against food

Prevent the spread




61/112

Satisfactio

nRating

!

!

!

!

Opportunities

mean importance





Less Important

Co



-Transportation-(points on the graph show deviations from the mean importance and satisfaction ratings given by r

Availability of public transpo



How easy it is to get fromyour home to downtown How easy it is to

get to/from home/shopping areas




62/112

Section 4:

Tabular Data




63/112

Q1. Major categories of services provided by the City of Columbia are listed below. Please rate each itemon a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

(N=834)

Very VerySatisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't Know

Q1a. Public safety services 25.1% 53.1% 12.8% 4.2% 1.2% 3.6%

Q1b. Parks & recreation programs & facilities 41.6% 43.3% 8.6% 2.6% 1.0% 2.9%

Q1c. Condition of City streets 1.7% 18.2% 22.7% 40.0% 16.4% 1.0%

Q1d. Enforcement of City codes & ordinancesfor building & housing 5.6% 27.2% 35.9% 10.6% 3.0% 17.7%

Q1e. Quality of customer service from Cityemployees 16.9% 43.7% 25.7% 4.6% 0.7% 8.4%

Q1f. Effectiveness of City communicationwith public 11.4% 45.9% 29.0% 7.6% 1.4% 4.7%

Q1g. City's stormwater runoff/stormwatermanagement system 9.7% 32.6% 27.2% 14.0% 4.4% 12.0%

Q1h. Public health services in community 17.3% 43.6% 21.9% 3.7% 0.7% 12.7%

Q1i. Solid waste services 29.4% 54.1% 9.5% 5.2% 1.1% 0.7%

Q1j. City utility services 25.8% 55.2% 11.8% 4.3% 1.2% 1.7%




64/112

Q1. Major categories of services provided by the City of Columbia are listed below. Please rate each itemon a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don'tknow")

(N=834)

VeryVery Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied

Q1a. Public safety services 26.0% 55.1% 13.3% 4.4% 1.2%

Q1b. Parks & recreation programs & facilities 42.8% 44.6% 8.9% 2.7% 1.0%

Q1c. Condition of City streets 1.7% 18.4% 22.9% 40.4% 16.6%

Q1d. Enforcement of City codes & ordinancesfor building & housing 6.9% 33.1% 43.6% 12.8% 3.6%

Q1e. Quality of customer service from Cityemployees 18.5% 47.7% 28.0% 5.0% 0.8%

Q1f. Effectiveness of City communicationwith public 11.9% 48.2% 30.4% 7.9% 1.5%

Q1g. City's stormwater runoff/stormwatermanagement system 11.0% 37.1% 30.9% 15.9% 5.0%

Q1h. Public health services in community 19.8% 50.0% 25.1% 4.3% 0.8%

Q1i. Solid waste services 29.6% 54.5% 9.6% 5.2% 1.1%

Q1j. City utility services 26.3% 56.2% 12.0% 4.4% 1.2%




65/112

Q2. Which THREE of the major City services listed above do you think are the most important servicesfor the City to provide?

Q2. Top choice Number Percent

Public safety services 512 61.4 %Parks & recreation programs & facilities 27 3.2 %Condition of City streets 71 8.5 %Enforcement of City codes & ordinances for building & housing 8 1.0 %Quality of customer service from City employees 7 0.8 %Effectiveness of City communication with public 11 1.3 %Stormwater runoff/stormwater management system 5 0.6 %Public health services in community 32 3.8 %Solid waste services 25 3.0 %City utility services 108 12.9 %None chosen 28 3.4 %Total 834 100.0 %


Q2. 2nd choice Number PercentPublic safety services 79 9.5 %Parks & recreation programs & facilities 70 8.4 %Condition of City streets 179 21.5 %Enforcement of City codes & ordinances for building & housing 31 3.7 %Quality of customer service from City employees 6 0.7 %

Effectiveness of City communication with public 18 2.2 %Stormwater runoff/stormwater management system 23 2.8 %Public health services in community 89 10.7 %Solid waste services 133 15.9 %City utility services 169 20.3 %None chosen 37 4.4 %Total 834 100.0 %




66/112


Q2. 3rd choice Number PercentPublic safety services 74 8.9 %

Parks & recreation programs & facilities 79 9.5 %Condition of City streets 128 15.3 %Enforcement of City codes & ordinances for building & housing 31 3.7 %Quality of customer service from City employees 15 1.8 %Effectiveness of City communication with public 33 4.0 %Stormwater runoff/stormwater management system 55 6.6 %Public health services in community 80 9.6 %Solid waste services 148 17.7 %City utility services 137 16.4 %None chosen 54 6.5 %Total 834 100.0 %

Q2. Which THREE of the major City services listed above do you think are the most important servicesfor the City to provide? (top 3)

Q2. Sum of the top three choices Number PercentPublic safety services 665 79.7 %Parks & recreation programs & facilities 176 21.1 %Condition of City streets 378 45.3 %Enforcement of City codes & ordinances for building & housing 70 8.4 %Quality of customer service from City employees 28 3.4 %Effectiveness of City communication with public 62 7.4 %Stormwater runoff/stormwater management system 83 10.0 %

Public health services in community 201 24.1 %Solid waste services 306 36.7 %City utility services 414 49.6 %None chosen 28 3.4 %Total 2411




67/112

Q3. Several items that may influence your perception of the City of Columbia are listed below. Pleaserate each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

(N=834)

Very VerySatisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't KnowQ3a. Overall quality of services provided by

City 15.8% 62.7% 16.4% 2.4% 0.7% 1.9%

Q3b. Overall value received for City tax & fees 11.2% 42.9% 25.8% 12.2% 4.0% 4.0%

Q3c. How well City is planning for growth 6.8% 27.3% 27.0% 22.2% 9.0% 7.7%

Q3d. Overall quality of life in City 23.8% 53.1% 15.7% 4.6% 1.4% 1.4%

Q3e. Overall feeling of safety in City 15.0% 47.9% 21.2% 10.2% 4.1% 1.6%

Q3f. Direction City is heading 10.1% 37.7% 29.5% 13.4% 4.0% 5.3%

Q3. Several items that may influence your perception of the City of Columbia are listed below. Pleaserate each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."(without "don't know")

(N=834)

Very

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied DissatisfiedQ3a. Overall quality of services provided by

City 16.2% 63.9% 16.8% 2.4% 0.7%

Q3b. Overall value received for City tax & fees 11.6% 44.6% 26.9% 12.8% 4.1%

Q3c. How well City is planning for growth 7.4% 29.5% 29.3% 24.1% 9.8%

Q3d. Overall quality of life in City 24.1% 53.8% 16.0% 4.6% 1.5%

Q3e. Overall feeling of safety in City 15.2% 48.7% 21.6% 10.4% 4.1%

Q3f. Direction City is heading 10.6% 39.8% 31.2% 14.2% 4.2%




68/112

Q4. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Safe" and 1 means "Very Unsafe," please rate yourfeeling of safety in the following situations in the City.

(N=834)

VeryVery Safe Safe Neutral Unsafe Unsafe Don't Know

Q4a. Walking in your neighborhood duringthe day 62.9% 29.5% 4.9% 1.4% 0.7% 0.5%

Q4b. Walking in your neighborhood at night 27.8% 41.4% 14.6% 10.9% 4.2% 1.1%

Q4c. In downtown Columbia during the day 44.8% 44.0% 6.6% 2.4% 0.6% 1.6%

Q4d. In downtown Columbia at night 8.8% 31.5% 28.2% 21.5% 6.5% 3.6%

Q4e. In City parks during the day 40.3% 45.0% 8.5% 3.5% 0.5% 2.3%

Q4f. In City parks at night 3.7% 15.6% 26.7% 31.7% 11.5% 10.8%

Q4. Using a scale of 1 to 5, where 5 means "Very Safe" and 1 means "Very Unsafe," please rate yourfeeling of safety in the following situations in the City. (without "don't know")

(N=834)

Very Safe Safe Neutral Unsafe Very Unsafe

Q4a. Walking in your neighborhood duringthe day 63.3% 29.6% 4.9% 1.4% 0.7%

Q4b. Walking in your neighborhood at night 28.1% 41.8% 14.8% 11.0% 4.2%

Q4c. In downtown Columbia during the day 45.6% 44.7% 6.7% 2.4% 0.6%

Q4d. In downtown Columbia at night 9.1% 32.7% 29.2% 22.3% 6.7%

Q4e. In City parks during the day 41.2% 46.0% 8.7% 3.6% 0.5%

Q4f. In City parks at night 4.2% 17.5% 30.0% 35.5% 12.9%




69/112

Q5. For each of the following, please rate your satisfaction with each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

(N=834)

Very VerySatisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't Know

Q5a. Police efforts to prevent crime 15.0% 45.8% 22.8% 8.4% 2.6% 5.4%

Q5b. How quickly police respond toemergencies 16.3% 38.6% 18.0% 5.3% 1.7% 20.1%

Q5c. Overall quality of local police services 15.0% 49.7% 20.6% 5.9% 2.5% 6.2%

Q5d. How quickly Fire Department personnelrespond to emergencies 29.4% 40.0% 7.9% 0.6% 0.4% 21.7%

Q5e. Overall quality of City fire protection 28.5% 48.4% 9.6% 0.2% 0.5% 12.8%

Q5f. City's municipal court 7.9% 27.8% 25.8% 3.2% 1.7% 33.6%

Q5. For each of the following, please rate your satisfaction with each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know")

(N=834)

Very

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied DissatisfiedQ5a. Police efforts to prevent crime 15.8% 48.4% 24.1% 8.9% 2.8%

Q5b. How quickly police respond toemergencies 20.5% 48.3% 22.6% 6.6% 2.1%

Q5c. Overall quality of local police services 16.0% 53.0% 22.0% 6.3% 2.7%

Q5d. How quickly Fire Department personnelrespond to emergencies 37.5% 51.1% 10.1% 0.8% 0.5%

Q5e. Overall quality of City fire protection 32.6% 55.5% 11.0% 0.3% 0.6%

Q5f. City's municipal court 11.9% 41.9% 38.8% 4.9% 2.5%




70/112

Q6. Which THREE of the public safety services listed above do you think are the most important servicesfor the City to provide?


Police efforts to prevent crime 349 41.8 %How quickly police respond to emergencies 210 25.2 %Quality of local police services 98 11.8 %How quickly Fire Department personnel respond to

emergencies 86 10.3 %Quality of City fire protection 35 4.2 %City's municipal court 6 0.7 %None chosen 50 6.0 %Total 834 100.0 %


Q6. 2nd choice Number PercentPolice efforts to prevent crime 59 7.1 %How quickly police respond to emergencies 221 26.5 %Quality of local police services 104 12.5 %How quickly Fire Department personnel respond to





71/112


Q6. 3rd choice Number Percent

Police efforts to prevent crime 175 21.0 %How quickly police respond to emergencies 89 10.7 %Quality of local police services 115 13.8 %How quickly Fire Department personnel respond to


Q6. Which THREE of the public safety services listed above do you think are the most important servicesfor the City to provide? (top 3)

Q6. Sum of the top three choices Number PercentPolice efforts to prevent crime 583 69.9 %How quickly police respond to emergencies 520 62.4 %Quality of local police services 317 38.0 %How quickly Fire Department personnel respond to

emergencies 508 60.9 %Quality of City fire protection 257 30.8 %City's municipal court 120 14.4 %None chosen 50 6.0 %Total 2355




72/112

Q7. For each of the following, please rate your satisfaction with each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied."

(N=834)

Very VerySatisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Don't KnowQ7a. Maintenance of major City streets 3.6% 30.2% 19.4% 33.1% 12.8% 0.8%

Q7b. Maintenance of streets in yourneighborhood 6.6% 31.8% 22.8% 24.3% 13.7% 0.8%

Q7c. Maintenance of street signs & trafficsignals 12.9% 49.4% 23.7% 8.4% 4.2% 1.3%

Q7d. Snow removal on major City streets 13.9% 44.7% 17.8% 14.6% 8.3% 0.7%

Q7e. Snow removal on neighborhood streets 3.2% 19.1% 19.1% 29.5% 28.3% 0.8%

Q7f. Cleanliness & appearance of City streets 8.9% 47.7% 27.2% 10.3% 4.6% 1.3%

Q7g. Adequacy of City street lighting 11.2% 47.7% 26.3% 10.7% 2.5% 1.7%

Q7h. Maintenance of City street lighting 12.8% 48.7% 27.0% 4.9% 1.9% 4.7%

Q7i. Condition of City sidewalks 8.3% 39.6% 28.6% 16.0% 5.3% 2.3%

Q7j. Availability of sidewalks in City 10.2% 37.5% 28.5% 15.0% 6.1% 2.6%




73/112

Q7. For each of the following, please rate your satisfaction with each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where 5means "Very Satisfied" and 1 means "Very Dissatisfied." (without "don't know")

(N=834)

VeryVery Satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Dissatisfied

Q7a. Maintenance of major City streets 3.6% 30.5% 19.6% 33.4% 12.9%

Q7b. Maintenance of streets in yourneighborhood 6.7% 32.0% 23.0% 24.5% 13.8%

Q7c. Maintenance of street signs & trafficsignals 13.1% 50.1% 24.1% 8.5% 4.3%

Q7d. Snow removal on major City streets 14.0% 45.0% 17.9% 14.8% 8.3%

Q7e. Snow removal on neighborhood streets 3.3% 19.2% 19.2% 29.7% 28.5%

Q7f. Cleanliness & appearance of City streets 9.0% 48.4% 27.6% 10.4% 4.6%

Q7g. Adequacy of City street lighting 11.4% 48.5% 26.7% 10.9% 2.6%

Q7h. Maintenance of City street lighting 13.5% 51.1% 28.3% 5.2% 2.0%

Q7i. Condition of City sidewalks 8.5% 40.5% 29.2% 16.3% 5.4%

Q7j. Availability of sidewalks in City 10.5% 38.5% 29.3% 15.4% 6.3%




74/112

Q8. Which THREE of the street and sidewalk services listed above do you think are the most importantservices for the City to provide?


Maintenance of major City streets 587 70.4 %Maintenance of streets in your neighborhood 31 3.7 %Maintenance of street s

Columbia Satisfaction Survey

Documents

Transcript of Columbia Satisfaction Survey