Controller’s Annual Report

February 21, 2013

Controller’s Annual ReportPARKS MAINTENANCE STANDARDSANNUAL REPORT FY 2011-12

“Scores remain consistentwith a slight improvement over last year.”

Annual Report Issued by City Services Auditorhttp://co.sfgov.org/webreports/details.aspx?id=1203

Ratings to Date

a score above 85 percent indicates that

parks are generally well maintained and in good condition

FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

High/Medium/Low Score Distribution

FY06 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

Scores Across the City

District Results

FY06 FY08

narrowing

PSA Districts FY 2011-12 FY 2010-11 Change

Number of parks higher

than 80%

Number of parks lower than 80%

1 1, 2, 3 90.3% 91.5% -1.23% 39 2

2 3, 5, 6, 10 88.5% 87.1% 1.35% 32 1

3 9, 10, 11 84.3% 84.6% -0.31% 18 4

4 4, 7, 11 86.6% 86.1% 0.30% 16 5

5 7, 8, 11 91.8% 89.1% 2.67% 21 0

6 6, 8, 9, 10 88.3% 89.6% -1.36% 17 3

GGP 1, 5 84.5% 84.8% -0.28%

PSA Results

Feature FY 2011-12Change fromFY 2010-11

Change fromFY 2005-06

Amenities & Structures 90.2% -0.4% 7.2%

Benches, Tables & Grills 90.2% -0.8% 6.6%

Children's Play Areas 88.9% 1.0% 5.5%

Dog Play Areas 86.6% -1.5% 6.1%

Hardscapes & Trails 85.1% -1.4% 7.5%

Lawns 86.9% -2.9% 9.6%

Open Space 79.7% -5.8% -1.4%

Ornamental Gardens, Shrubs & Ground Covers 88.3% 0.5% 14.3%

Outdoor Athletic Courts 90.4% -1.1% 3.7%

Parking Lots & Roads 85.2% -1.4% 4.3%

Restrooms 93.2% -0.2% 10.8%

Trees 94.1% 1.0% 5.6%

Turf Athletic Fields 89.8% 0.8% 10.6%

Waste & Recycling Receptacles 93.6% -0.9% 3.1%

Feature Ratings

Cleanliness ratings show an oscillating trend since FY 2009-10.

Cleanliness Ratings

High maintenance

threshold

FY06

2011-12 Process Improvements

1. Evaluation form customization.

2. Suggested evaluation target times.

3. Features lists augmented with notes.

4. Monitoring of submitted evaluations.

5. Dual evaluations.

6. Regular reporting of responsive action plans.

2011-12 Report Recommendations

• Continuously assess RPD’s use of park evaluation data to improve park maintenance activities.

• Continue to evaluate the consistency of park scores for the larger parks and determine whether these

parks should be subdivided for the purposes of more accurate evaluations.

• As RPD develops new standards during the next fiscal year, it should plan to retrain evaluators on the new standards.

Retraining staff on the new standards would also be an opportune time to clarify existing misperceptions about the standards.

• Adjust the baseline of schedule compliance standards in order to account for excused absences from work (for example,

sick leave).

• Use evaluation data to strategically plan for improvement to low-performing parks, Park Services Areas, or certain

facilities or features.

New 2013 Maintenance Schedule Display

FISCAL YEAR/Quarter BASE COMPLIANCE RATE ADJUSTED COMPLIANCE RATE

11-12 Q4 73% 89%

The Department Responds-- accounting for excused absences

The Department Responds-- adjusting evaluations to large

park size

Controller’s Annual ReportPARKS MAINTENANCE STANDARDSANNUAL REPORT FY 2011-12

“Scores remain consistentwith a slight improvement over last year.”

Annual Report Issued by City Services Auditorhttp://co.sfgov.org/webreports/details.aspx?id=1203