AGENDA DATE: 9/2/2015
TITLE:
Title
2015 Citizen Survey Results
BODY
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: 2015 Citizen Survey Results
ITEM TYPE: Regular Information Item
STAFF CONTACT(S): Foley, Davis, Wyatt
PRESENTER (S): Louise Wyatt
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY: Thomas C. Foley
BACKGROUND: Since 2002, the County has contracted with survey consultants to conduct a reliable and valid County-wide citizen survey biennially. The survey results have been used by staff, elected officials and other stakeholders for community planning and resource allocation, program improvement and policy making. The timing of this survey provides results that will inform both the County’s strategic and ongoing planning processes.
STRATEGIC PLAN: The Citizen Survey results inform the County’s Strategic Plan.
DISCUSSION: At its February 4, 2015 meeting, the Board directed staff to conduct the County’s 2015 survey using the survey tool offered by the National Citizen Survey (NCS), which is conducted collaboratively between the National Research Center, Inc. (NRC) and the International City/County Management Association (ICMA). The NCS was developed by NRC to provide a statistically valid survey of resident opinions regarding the community and the services provided by local government. After the survey template selection, staff worked individually with Board members to add several customized questions to the survey template.
Participating households were selected at random and multiple mailings went out to those households to give them several opportunities to participate. Results were statistically weighted to reflect the proper demographic composition of the community. There were 375 completed surveys, which is a representative sample. The results of this survey are statistically valid within a margin of error of plus or minus 5% points.
There are six NCS reports that examine the survey data:
• Attachment A, the Community Livability Report, summarizes all results and key findings.
• Attachment B, the Dashboard Findings, provides data in a summary chart format that shows how Albemarle County results compare with national benchmarks as well as over time.
• Attachment C, the Demographic Crosstabs, analyzes the data by age, sex, and race/ethnicity.
• Attachment D, the Geographic Crosstabs, analyzes the data by geographic area. (Note: “Urban ring” = Neighborhoods 1-7, Pantops, Places 29; “Other developed areas” = Village of Rivanna, Crozet; “Rural areas” = Rural Areas (including Scottsville))
• Attachment E, Technical Appendices, provides raw data.
• Attachment F, Trends over Time, shows Albemarle County response trends between 2011, 2013, and 2015.
Two important acknowledgements about this data:
1. The survey measures what citizens think about the community. Beyond the local government, other sectors that influence community quality include businesses, non-profit agencies, service organizations, and other community groups (like neighborhood associations). Therefore, some of these questions are not necessarily a reflection on County services.
2. Much of this data is most meaningful when compared to the national benchmark. Even then, as NCS points out, less desirable ratings for some indicators should not automatically be seen as negative for a community, but instead a reflection of the community’s resources and priorities. Communities may have intentionally directed their resources to areas with a higher priority. In addition, not all indicators that show a lower level of achievement require a call to action, just as not all indicators that are strong should become a gateway to complacency. Without this framework in which to consider the data, it might be easy to misinterpret some of the data.
Looking at the 2015 survey results, citizens continue to rate overall quality of life in the County very high. Of the survey respondents, 93% rated the quality of life in the County as excellent or good, and 95% rated the County as an excellent or good place to live.
Other notable survey findings according to NCS include:
• County residents identified Safety as one of the most important focus areas for the community. Safety services such as fire, fire prevention, ambulance/EMS and police services were all rated highly by more than 80% of residents. Almost all residents said they felt safe in their neighborhood and had an overall feeling of safety in the County.
• Mobility is a potential area for improvement. Some aspects of Mobility tended to be lower than for the other facets of community. Ease of walking, travel by bicycle, travel by public transportation and public parking all received ratings that were lower than the national benchmarks.
• Education and Enrichment is important to County residents. Almost all residents thought it was essential or very important for Albemarle County Public Schools to focus on student to teacher/educator ratio and student performance over the next two years. More residents in the County than in other communities rated education and enrichment opportunities positively and approximately 80% of respondents rated cultural/arts/music activities and adult education higher than the national benchmark. Child care/preschool ratings saw an increase from 2013 to 2015 and more residents participated in religious or spiritual activities than in 2013.
• Recreation and Wellness is a priority for County residents. Almost all residents rated health and wellness in the County as excellent or good. More residents in the County positively rated preventative health services and health care than residents in other communities across the nation; these ratings increased from 2013 to 2015.
As appropriate, staff is prepared to go into a more detailed analysis of survey data relating to urban issues at the Sept 25 retreat.
BUDGET IMPACT: There is no budget impact related to this executive summary. The survey results will inform both the County’s strategic planning and ongoing budget processes.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Board members review the attached survey findings and provide any feedback or comment as desired.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A--Community Livability Report
Attachment B-Dashboard Findings
Attachment C-Demographic Crosstabs
Attachment D-Geographic Crosstabs
Attachment E-Technical Appendices
Attachment F-Trends Over Time