PowerPoint Presentation · Child abduction / kidnapping / child safety 1% 2% Quicker response time 1% 1% Other 3% 5% Don't Know 16% 16% G1. What do you think the Calgary Police should

2016

Annual Citizen Satisfaction Survey Report

Calgary Police Commission

CONTENTS

In t roduct ion

C i t i zen Percept ions o f Cr ime & Sa fe ty

C i t i zen Percept ions o f the CPS

Conf idence in the CPS

Contact w i th the CPS and V ic t imizat ion

Neighbourhood T ra f f ic Sa fe ty

Unders tanding the Communi ty

3

6

10

13

33

2

Appendices 36

24

30

Introduction

3

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

4

To provide good governance, the Calgary Police Commission must be in touch with the needs, experiences and concerns of Calgary citizens.

Research Goals

To understand and monitor:

• How citizens perceive the safety of Calgary communities

• The community concerns that are at the forefront

• The expectations citizens have from the police service

• How citizens perceive the quality of services they receive

RESEARCH OVERVIEW

5

17 minute telephone survey conducted with a randomly selected sample of City of Calgary residents.

Method

June 28 to August 18, 2016.

Extended interview process over eight weeks designed to minimize the impact of point-in-time events.

Field Dates

1,000 City of Calgary residents 18 years of age or older.

Data collected proportionate to gender and the population of CPS district locations.

Included both land-line (n=580) and cell phone (n=420).

Sample Size & Distribution*

Field supervisors were present at all times to ensure accurate interviewing and recording of responses.

A minimum of 10 percent of each interviewer’s work was unobtrusively monitored for quality control in accordance with the standards set by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA).

Telephone Interviewing & Quality Control

This report contains the results of the 2016 Citizen Survey conducted by Illumina Research Partners on behalf of the Calgary Police Commission.

Where possible, results from the 2009 (n=1,006), 2010 (n=1,004), 2011 (n=1,005), 2012 (n=1,002), 2013 (n=1,003), 2014 (n=1,000), and 2015 (n=1,002) Calgary Police Commission Citizen Surveys have been incorporated. Unless otherwise stated, all results presented are on the total sample of Calgary residents.

Indicates that tracking is not available due to changes in wording/coding

Indicates that tracking is not available because the question is new for 2016

Reporting of Results

Differences in results that are statistically significant (95% confidence) are denoted by the following symbols:

Indicates significantly higher than 2015

Indicates significantly lower than 2015

Indicates a notable positive trend over time (not a signifier of significance)

Indicates a notable negative trend over time (not a signifier of significance)

Indicates that base sizes are small and caution should be exercised when drawing conclusions

Interpreting Results

Some graphs will not show results equal to 100%. In those cases, this is due to the reported numbers being rounded or to the remainder of the sample having responded “Don’t Know/Refused”.

Rounding Errors

See Appendix A for more detailed information on methodology.

Top Box Results

Top box scores are the percentage of 9 and 10 ratings on a 10 point scale. They are the best-in-class standard in performance tracking; the most relevant measure for tracking true satisfaction. They indicate very strong, positive opinions and those who are the most satisfied.

6

Citizen Perceptions of Crime & Safety

95% of citizens continue to agree that Calgary is a safe place to live. The percentage of citizens who “strongly agree” has been trending down since 2014.

% Agreement – Calgary is a Safe City to Live in Figure 1

To begin, would you say you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or strongly disagree with the statement that “Calgary is a safe city to live in”? B1.

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016

PERCEPTIONS OF SAFETY

7

1% 4%

53%

42%

<1% 1% 3%

43%

52%

<1% 1% 3%

41%

55%

<1% <1% 3%

41%

56%

<1% 1% 4%

40%

55%

<1% 1% 3%

42%

53%

<1%

Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Don't Know

2016: 95% Agree

PERCEIVED CHANGE IN CRIME RATE

Perceived Change in Calgary Crime Rate Figure 2

Perceived Crime Safety Issues Total Mentions*

Table 1

Note: Please see Appendix D for tracking

Safety or Crime of Greatest Concern 2015 2016

House break-ins / break and enter 27% 34%

Illegal drug activities 16% 19%

None / no issue of great concern 18% 16%

Illegal gang activities 18% 16%

Theft other than vehicles 11% 13%

Traffic violations (speeding, unsafe driving) 13% 11%

Theft of vehicles 9% 10%

Assault causing injury 9% 8%

Murder 6% 6%

Gun crime / shootings 8% 5%

Maintaining safety in the neighbourhood 1% 4%

Damage to property 2% 3%

Domestic abuse 2% 3%

Sexual assault 2% 3%

Violent crimes (general) 2% 3%

Organized crime 1% 2%

LRT safety 2% 2%

Drinking / alcohol-related crime 1% 2%

Kidnapping / abductions 1% 2%

Don’t know 5% 8%

Other 3% 5% Thinking about the last 12 months, in your opinion are crime rates in Calgary increasing, decreasing, or staying the same?

Considering the City of Calgary as a whole, what would you say is the safety or crime issue of greatest concern to you, if any?

What other safety or crime issues come to mind?

B2.

B3a.

B3b.

8

Almost one-half of Calgarians feel that crime rates are increasing, and concerns around house break and enters have increased.

*Responses 2% or greater based on 2016 total mentions

21%

50%

25%

3%

22%

53%

21%

4%

19%

55%

22%

5%

35%

52%

11%

2%

37%

50%

10% 2%

49%

42%

6% 3%

Increased Stayed the Same Decreased Don't Know

Denotes statistically higher than 2015

Denotes statistically lower than 2015

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016

PRIORITY SETTING

9

Priority Setting* Table 2

Priority Setting First

Mention Total

Mentions

Crime / crime prevention (general) 13% 16%


Better officers / well-trained / competent / attitude 8% 12%


Traffic violations (other than driving under the influence) 7% 10%

No suggestions (keep up the good work / general positive comment) 9% 9%

More visible presence 5% 8%

Better communication with the public / more transparency / more accountability

5% 7%

Hire more officers / more funding 5% 6%

House break-ins / break and enter 2% 4%

Safety in public places (downtown, streets) 2% 3%

Violent crimes (general) 1% 3%

Theft other than vehicles 1% 3%

Gun crime / shootings 1% 3%

More efforts to reduce crime 2% 2%

Not preoccupied with minor crimes / issuing traffic tickets 1% 2%

Child abduction / kidnapping / child safety 1% 2%

Quicker response time 1% 1%

Other 3% 5%

Don't Know 16% 16%

What do you think the Calgary Police should focus on going forward? [OPEN END] G1.

Calgarians believe that, going forward, CPS should focus on addressing general crime prevention and illegal drug activities.

*Responses 1% or greater based on first mention

Note: Please see Appendix D for tracking

Confidence in the CPS

10

95% of citizens are confident the CPS can deliver the services needed to make Calgary a safe place to live. Citizens who are “very confident” has been trending down since 2014.

Confidence in the CPS Figure 3

How confident are you that the Calgary Police Service can deliver the services needed to make sure Calgary is a safe place to live? C5.

CONFIDENCE

11

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016

1% 4%

56%

39%

<1% 1% 5%

51%

43%

<1% <1% 2%

48% 49%

<1% <1% 3%

44%

52%

<1% 1% 2%

50% 47%

0% 1% 4%

50%

45%

<1%

Not at all confident Not very confident Somewhat confident Very confident Don't Know

2016: 95% Confident

REASONS FOR CONFIDENCE

12

Reason for Confidence Rating* Table 3

First Mention Total Mentions

NET: Positive Sentiment 81% 81%

Trust them / they do a good job / the best they can 37% 47%

Well-trained / well-managed 11% 14%

Positive experiences with police 10% 13%

Always available when needed 7% 11%

Quick to respond 5% 8%

Strong visible presence 4% 6%

Hardworking / dedicated 3% 6%

Efficient/ competent / helpful / reliable 2% 6%

Professional / fair 1% 3%

Honest / friendly / courteous 1% 3%

NET: Negative Sentiment 12% 14%

Overworked / understaffed / underfunded 7% 8%

Some officers are not courteous 3% 3%

Slow response time 1% 2%

Inexperienced / under-trained recruits 1% 1%

Not enough visible presence 1% 1%

Other 3% 6%

DK 5% 5%

Why are/aren’t you confident the Calgary Police can deliver the services needed? [OPEN END] C5a.

On an unaided basis, almost one-half of citizens mention they trust the Calgary police and believe CPS is doing a good job.


Citizen Perceptions of the CPS

13

CALGARY POLICE PERCEPTION INDEX (CPPI)

14

The Calgary Police Perception Index represents an overall measure of the service’s reputation using three key measures.

CPPI

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Calgary Police Service officers are competent in their duties?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Calgary Police Service provides an adequate amount or level of service to the public?

Taking into consideration all of the different aspects of the Police and the services provided, how would you rate the Calgary Police overall?

See Appendix C for an Explanation of the CPPI Calculation

The Calgary Police Perception Index (CPPI)

(See Appendix C for an Explanation of the CPPI Calculation)

Figure 4

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Calgary Police Service officers are competent in their duties?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the Calgary Police Service provides an adequate amount or level of service to the public?

Taking into consideration all of the different aspects of the Police and the services provided, how would you rate the Calgary Police overall, using a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is “poor” and 10 is “excellent”?

D1j.

D1b.

D3.


15

The Calgary Police Perception Index (CPPI) remains strong in 2016.

2013 n=923 2012 n=950 2010 n=937 2011 n=941 2014 n=947 2015 n=938 2016 n=942

10%

47% 43%

9%

44% 48%

7%

45% 47%

7%

44%

49%

8%

42%

50%

7%

41%

53%

8%

42%

50%

Low CPPI (1-6) Middle CPPI (7-8) High CPPI (9-10)

Citizen perceptions have declined for two of the three measures comprising the Calgary Police Perception Index (CPPI).

How would you rate the Calgary Police overall?

Figure 5

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the CPS provides an adequate amount or level

of service to the public?*

Figure 6

To what extent do you agree or disagree that the CPS officers are competent in

their duties?*

Figure 7

Top Box Scores (9-10)

Top Box Scores (9-10)

*Excludes don’t know


16

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016 2010

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

n=981 n=970

n=971

n=981

n=971

n=969

n=976

n=960 n=970

n=946

n=969

n=961

n=961

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016 n=958

13% 11% 8% 7% 10% 10% 9%

Poor (Bottom Box 1-6)

56% 53% 55% 55% 51% 50% 54%

(Middle Box 7-8)

31% 35% 37% 37% 39% 41% 36%

Excellent (Top Box 9-10)

28% 32% 31% 34% 35% 38% 36%

38% 42% 43% 43% 45% 48%

43%



Overall satisfaction (very satisfied + satisfied) with the CPS continues to be strong. Calgarians who are “very satisfied” has been declining since 2013.

Overall Satisfaction Rating Figure 8

Overall Satisfaction (Very Satisfied + Satisfied)

Table 4

Overall, how satisfied are you with the services provided by the Calgary Police? C2a

Year Overall Satisfaction

(Very Satisfied/Satisfied)

2016 94%*

2015 95%*

2014 96%

2013 97%*

2012 96%

2011 95%

2010 93%

2009 92%

2008 89%

2007 90%

2005 92%

2003 91%

2000 96%

1997 95%

*NOTE: Percent does not match sum of satisfied and very satisfied due to rounding

OVERALL SATISFACTION

17

1%

4%

55%

39%

2%

1% 3%

53%

42%

1% 1% 2%

50% 46%

1% <1% 2%

52%

46%

<1% 1%

3%

52%

44%

<1% 1%

4%

53%

41%

1% 1%

4%

56%

39%

1%

Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied Don't Know

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016 2010

2016: 94% Satisfied

REASONS FOR OVERALL SATISFACTION

18

Reasons for Overall Satisfaction Table 5

First Mention Total Mentions


They do a good / excellent job / they do the best they can 33% 41%

Positive experiences with the police 6% 8%

Good public relations and communication 2% 3%




Professional 2% 6%

Efficient / competent / helpful / reliable 2% 7%


They have room for improvement 17% 30%


Some officers not courteous 2% 3%

Other 7% 8%

Don't Know 7% 7%

Why did you give that rating for the Calgary Police overall? [OPEN END] D5.

While many citizens believe CPS does an excellent job, some feel there is room for improvement.


Top Box Scores (9-10) – Officer Characteristics Performance*

Perception that “officers are ethical” has declined.

Figure 9

(See Appendix D for full distribution of scores)

41% 44%

33% 35%

44% 46%

37% 40%

47% 47% 40% 40%

44% 48%

40% 40% 46%

49% 43% 43%

49% 50% 45% 43% 46% 48%

39% 39%

Officers are respectful Is friendly Officers are ethical Demonstrates the appropriate level ofcare and concern

Based on your experiences or just your general impressions, please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the following statements. Please use a scale where 1 is “strongly disagree” and 10 is “strongly agree”. The Calgary Police Service…

Next, I am going to read you a number of statements that may describe the Calgary Police. Please rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements. Scale: 1=Strongly disagree / 10=Strongly agree

C4.

D1. *Excludes don’t know

OFFICER CHARACTERISTICS

19

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

n=

974

n=

969

n=

982

n=

969

n=

970

n=

971

n=

975

n=

994

n=

986

n=

989

n=

991

n=

989

n=

995

n=

994

n=

916

n=

904

n=

895

n=

887

n=

907

n=

892

n=

912

n=

981

n=

991

n=

992

n=

992

n=

990

n=

995

n=

993



38% 37% 30%

30%

42% 37% 34% 34%

43% 38% 36% 35%

43% 39%

31% 33%

45%

38% 34% 35%

52% 48%

43% 39% 38% 48%

43% 43%

34% 36%

Officers are professional Officers are competent intheir duties

Officers clearly understandmy safety needs and concerns

Responds in a fair way whendealing with all segments of

the Calgary Community

Uses its authority and forceappropriately

Top Box Scores (9-10) – Professionalism Performance*

Perceptions that “officers are competent” and “respond in a fair way when dealing with all segments of the Calgary community” declined in 2016.

Figure 10




C4.


PROFESSIONALISM

20

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

CPPI Question



n=

1000

n=

1002

n=

961

n=

960

n=

969

n=

946

n=

970

n=

961

n=

958

n=

909

n=

924

n=

909

n=

918

n=

936

n=

936

n=

927

n=

891

n=

905

n=

875

n=

871

n=

886

n=

866

n=

864

n=

946

n=

945

n=

950

n=

923

n=

940

n=

925

n=

936

NA

Citizen perception of the service provided by the CPS remains strong.

Figure 11 Top Box Scores (9-10) – Service Performance*


50%

35% 32% 28%

53%

37% 44% 41%

32%

53%

39% 44%

40%

31%

51% 42% 44% 41%

34%

54%

42% 45% 43%

35%

54%

46%

43% 40% 38%

50% 45% 43%

40% 36%

Is dedicated to reducinglevels of crime

Officers are there when Ineed them

Meets my expectations as apolice service

Responds quickly whenneeded

Provides an adequate amountor level of service to the

public



C4.


SERVICE

21

CPPI Question

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

n=

988

n=

996

n=

988

n=

995

n=

997

n=

994

n=

993

n=

915

n=

909

n=

920

n=

913

n=

921

n=

924

n=

919

n=

997

n=

993

n=

999

n=

998

n=

998

n=

997

NA n=

937

n=

948

n=

953

n=

951

n=

978

n=

969

n=

970

n=

971

n=

981

n=

981

n=

971

n=

970

n=

969

n=

976



Citizen perceptions that the CPS “supports the community” and that “community police facilities make it easy to access police services” have declined in 2016.

Top Box Scores (9-10) – In The Community Performance* Figure 12


44% 39%

31% 28% 29%

51%

40% 32%

32% 32%

48% 41% 35% 32% 32%

51%

39% 35% 33% 32%

51% 41%

35% 37% 33%

52% 46%

39% 36%

32%

48% 40%

36% 34%

29%

Supports the community The community policefacilities make it easy toaccess police services

Maintains appropriatevisibility in the community

Adequately communicatescrime issues and trends to the

community

Uses crime preventionmeasures and programs

effectively



C4.


IN THE COMMUNITY

22

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016



n=

986

n=

989

n=

986

n=

993

n=

991

n=

995

n=

991

n=

904

n=

922

n=

900

n=

893

n=

903

n=

895

n=

893

n=

988

n=

980

n=

986

n=

979

n=

985

n=

980

n=

974

n=

932

n=

941

n=

961

n=

932

n=

944

n=

940

n=

932

n=

929

n=

952

n=

939

n=

948

n=

967

n=

965

n=

957

CAPACITY

23

Top Box Scores (9-10) – Capacity Performance*

Citizen perception that the CPS “is adequately staffed” continues to receive the lowest score of all attributes measured.

Figure 13



C4.

13% 14% 14% 15% 19% 17% 18%

Is adequately staffed

n=941 n=918 n=934 n=921 n=963 n=933 n=923

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016




Contact with the CPS and Victimization

24

The majority of in-person contact with the CPS was related to an officer being dispatched or following up on an investigation.

Thinking only about the last contact you had in-person with an Officer or other on-duty employee of the Calgary Police Service, can you tell me what type of contact it was? [OPEN END] E11.

Type of In-Person Contact with CPS Table 6

Type of In-Person Contact with CPS 2015

n=499 2016

n=481

Officer dispatched / follow-up investigation 36% 31%

Stopped because of a traffic violation 14% 13%

Spoke with an officer on the street (e.g., asked officer for information)

13% 13%

Witnessed or was involved in a traffic accident where officer was dispatched

12% 10%

Went to a police facility 9% 6%

Professional / social capacity (general) 6% 6%

For a criminal record check / clearance 1% 6%

Attended a community meeting, crime prevention or educational program, or police presentation

4% 5%

Charged by a police officer <1% <1%

Submitted a complaint about a neighbour or other citizen

-- 2%

Encountered a check stop 2% 2%

Submitted a complaint about an officer or interaction with the police service

-- 1%

Other 2% 5%

Don't Know 1% 1%

IN-PERSON CONTACT WITH CPS

25

In the past 12 months, approximately how many times have you had any in-person contact with an Officer or other on-duty employee of the Calgary Police Service? E10a.

50%

21% 18% 11%

<1%

51%

21% 19%

9% <1%

No contactwith theCalgaryPolice

Service

Once 2 or 3times

More than3 times

DK

2016

Amount of In-Person Contact in 2016

Figure 14

2015



Satisfaction with in-person contact remains high in 2016.

On a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is “not at all satisfied” and 10 is “extremely satisfied”, how satisfied were you with the in-person contact you had? E12.

SATISFACTION WITH IN-PERSON CONTACT

26

Satisfaction with In-Person Contact Figure 15

6%

18%

75%

1%

14%

19%

67%

0%

13%

20%

67%

0%

15% 18%

67%

0%

Dissatisfied (Bottom Box 1-6) (Middle Box 7-8) Satisfied (Top Box 9-10) Don't Know

2013 n=195 2014 n=229 2015 n=498 2016 n=481



IN-PERSON OFFICER INTERACTION

27

77% 77% 75% 73% 71%

74% 75% 75% 71% 70%

The officer was professional The officer was respectful The officer was courteous The officer communicatedinformation clearly

The officer was knowledgeable

Top Box Scores (9-10) – In-Person Officer Interaction


Scores for in-person interactions with the CPS continue to be strong in 2016.

Next, I am going to read you a number of statements that may describe the most recent in-person contact you had with the Calgary Police Service. Please rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements.

E15.

Figure 16

2015 n=498 2016 n=481




n=

497

n=

478

n=

497

n=

480

n=

493

n=

479

n=

490

n=

475

n=

479

n=

459

The percentage of citizens who have been a victim of crime has increased.

VICTIMIZATION

28

Were you the victim of a crime on your person, such as an assault, or property crime such as a break and enter, or another type of crime? F2.

Personally, have you been a victim of a crime during the last 12 months? F1.

Type of Crime Table 7

2010 n=140

2011 n=120

2012 n=116

2013 n=96

2014 n=87

2015 n=NA

2016 n=130

Property crime 79% 84% 88% 86% 80% NA 79%

Person crime 6% 7% 3% 9% 11% NA 15%

Fraud / identity theft

8% 6% 8% 2% 3% NA 5%

Both property and person crime

3% 1% 0% 2% 2% NA 0%

Other 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% NA 1%

Victim of a Crime in Past 12 Months Figure 17

14%

86%

<1%

12%

88%

<1%

12%

88%

<1%

10%

90%

0%

9%

91%

<1%

13%

87%

<1%

Yes No Don't Know

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016 2010

NA NA NA



NA Question was not asked this year

“Did not want to bother the police” continues to be the primary reason citizens do not report crimes.

CRIME REPORTING

29

Why did you NOT report it to the Police? F3b.

Did you report the incident to the Police? F3a.

2010 n=36

2011 n=51

2012 n=37

2013 n=32

2014 n=24

2015 n=NA

2016 n=35

Did not want to bother the police/ incident was not serious enough

53% 51% 65% 47% 58% - 51%

I felt that the police could not do anything

28% 29% 22% 25% 25% - 11%

I dealt with it in another way (private matter that I took care of / reported to another official)

8% 14% 19% 13% 13% - 9%

Personal matter / did not feel comfortable discussing the incident with anyone

3% 4% 11% 0% 8% - 6%

Did not have enough information to report

- - - - - - 6%

The police were already on scene

- - - - - - 6%

I called police but waited too long on phone and hung up

- 2% - - - - 3%

Someone else reported the crime and the police contacted me

- - - 9% - - 3%

Other 3% 8% 3% 13% 4% - 6%

DK 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% - 3%

Reported Incident to Police Figure 18

74%

26%

0%

58%

43%

0%

68%

32%

0%

67%

33%

0%

71%

28%

1%

72%

27%

1%

Yes No Don't Know

2014 2013 2011 2012 2015 2016 2010

NA NA NA

Reasons for Not Reporting to Police Table 8 Caution:

Small bases



NA Question was not asked this year

Neighbourhood Traffic Safety

30

NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC SAFETY CONCERNS

31

Over three quarters of citizens feel safe in their neighbourhoods with regard to traffic safety.

23%

37% 40%

0%

Not at All Safe(Bottom Box 1-6)

(Middle Box 7-8) Extremely Safe(Top Box 9-10)

Don't Know

2016 n=1000

Neighbourhood Traffic Concerns Table 9

Types of Neighbourhood Traffic Concerns* 2016

n=1000

Speeding (non-specified) 43%

None / no issue of great concern 23%

School or playground zone safety issues 13%

Careless driving / not following signs or rules (general) 8%

Intersection safety issues 7%

Pedestrian safety issues (e.g., jaywalking) 6%

Need crosswalks, traffic lights or stop signs 6%

Distracted driving 5%

Traffic volume / amount of traffic 4%

Commuter traffic cutting through neighbourhoods 3%

Parking / illegal parking 3%

Bicycle safety issues 3%

Other 7%

*Responses 3% or greater based on total mentions

Sense of Neighbourhood Traffic Safety Figure 19

We’d like you think about traffic in residential areas. In regard to traffic safety, how safe do you feel in your neighbourhood? Please use a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is “not at all safe” and 10 is extremely safe.”

What traffic issues, if any, are of greatest concern to you in your neighbourhood? [OPEN END]

L1.

L2.

2016: 77% Feel Safe

NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC SAFETY SATISFACTION

32

While more than one-third of respondents stated they have no traffic safety concerns, others indicated that speeding and a lack of police presence is affecting their satisfaction with traffic

safety in their neighbourhood.

Using a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 is “not at all satisfied” and 10 is “extremely satisfied,” how satisfied are you with the traffic safety in your neighbourhood?

Why did you give that rating for your satisfaction with traffic safety in your neighbourhood? [OPEN END]

L3.

2016 n=1000

Reason for Traffic Safety Satisfaction Table 10

Reason for Neighbourhood Traffic Safety Satisfaction* 2016

n=1000

NET: Negative 54%

Issues with speeding 23%

Always room for improvement 11%

Lack of police presence / lack of enforcement 11%

Bad drivers – don’t obey signs / rules 8%

Traffic / congestion / commuters cut through my neighbourhood

7%

Bad drivers – other 5%

Issues with crosswalks 5%

I have witnessed / heard about accidents 5%

NET: Positive 47%

No issues / everyone follows the rules / haven’t seen any 37%

Quiet neighbourhood / not a lot of traffic 10%

Satisfied with police presence / enforcement / issues being addressed

6%

No issues with speeding (specified) 4%

Other 4%

Don’t know / Refused 3%

*Responses 3% or greater based on total mention L4.

25%

41%

34%

<1%

Not atAll Satisfied

(Bottom Box 1-6)

(Middle Box 7-8) ExtremelySatisfied

(Top Box 9-10)

Don't Know

Neighbourhood Traffic Safety Satisfaction Figure 20

2016: 75% Satisfied

Understanding the Community

33

UNDERSTANDING THE COMMUNITY

We’d like to ask about your community. When we say ‘community,’ we mean a group of people that you may identify with because you share the same race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs or neighbourhood. Would you say you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or strongly disagree with the statement that “The Calgary Police Service has a good understanding of your community and its concerns?”

M1

34

2016 n=1000

1% 2%

35%

56%

5%

Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Somewhat Agree Strongly Agree Don't Know

% Agreement - The CPS Has a Good Understanding of My Community and its Concerns

Figure 21

Most citizens agree that the CPS has a good understanding of their community and its concerns.

2016: 92% Agree*

*NOTE: Percent does not match sum of somewhat agree and strongly agree due to rounding


Why do you say that you [INSERT M1] that the Calgary Police Service has a good understanding of your community and it’s concerns? [OPEN END] M2

35

Reasons for Rating of “CPS has a Good Understanding of Your Community” Table 11

Total Mentions* n=951

NET: Positive Sentiment 57%

Good service / no crime issues / they do a good job (general) 13%

I have not had a bad experience / feel safe / trust them 13%

Officers understand the needs of my community / interact with citizens 11%

Satisfied with police presence / active within community 10%

Officers are responsive / address issues 9%

Officers are understanding / accommodating / tolerant / fair 5%

Officers are helpful / polite / answer questions 5%

Police force works well with community organizations / government 4%

Officers are professional / well-trained 3%

NET: Neutral Sentiment 21%

Based on my experience / general impression 7%

I am not a visible minority / not part of a minority group 7%

Based on word of mouth 3%

NET: Negative Sentiment 19%

Room for improvement / nobody is perfect 6%

Lack of police presence / lack of involvement 5%

Poor service – intolerant / cultural issues 3%

Other 3%

DK 10%

*Responses 3% or greater based on total mentions

Citizens stated that the CPS provides them with good service, makes them feel safe, and that officers understand their community.

Appendices

36

Appendix A:

Research Methodology

37

DETAILED METHODOLOGY

38

Sampling The 2016 CPC Citizen Annual Survey was conducted between June 28 and August 18, 2016 with a sample of 1,000 City of Calgary residents aged 18 years of age or older. Data was collected proportionate to gender and the population of CPS District Locations. To increase representation of younger age groups who may not have a land-line, the sample included 580 land-line and 420 cellphone users as well as age quotas. Because the responses from the cellphone sample were not significantly different when compared to the land-line sample, cellphone and land-line respondents were combined rather than reported separately. The survey was conducted via Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) to randomly selected Calgarians with listed and unlisted landline and cellphone numbers. Eight call backs were made to each listing before replacing with an alternate phone number. Interviews took an average of 17 minutes to complete.

Limitations This survey is conducted over eight weeks to minimize the impact of point-in-time events.

Interpretation of Results

Given the population of Calgary (1,096,833 based on the 2011 Census) with a sample size of 1,000 interviews, the results are predicted to be accurate for the general population to within +/- 3.1% 19 times out of 20 (a 95% confidence level). When results are analyzed within each segment, the margin of error becomes larger due to smaller sample sizes. Some graphs will not show results equal to 100%. This is due to rounding or to the remainder of the sample having responded “Don’t Know/Refused.” Unless otherwise stated, results are presented on the total sample of Calgary residents.

SAMPLE DISTRIBUTION

39

City of Calgary residents 18 years of age or older Data collected proportionate to the population of CPS District Locations

Sample Distribution

District Location

% of City of Calgary

Population n

District 1 6% 61

District 2 14% 144

District 3 10% 103

District 4 7% 73

District 5 12% 119

District 6 12% 115

District 7 22% 217

District 8 17% 168

Total 100% 1000

Methodology Changes

Fewer Calgarians have a landline telephone, especially younger age groups. In 2014, the sample was divided between landline (n=700) and cellphone (n=300) numbers to reach younger demographic groups. This was continued in 2015. In 2016 a larger number of cellphone numbers were contacted (land-line n=580 and cell phone n=420). In 2013 and 2012, age quotas based on 2011 results were introduced to reduce the impact of fewer younger Calgarians having a land-line telephone. Quotas were not used in 2014 or 2015. In 2016 age quotas were again used to reach younger Calgarians. These changes in methodology do not impact comparability to previous years data.

Distribution of sample by district Table 12

TOP BOX REPORTING

40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 to 6 Ratings

Unaware,

“don’t care” or

unsatisfied.

7 to 8 Ratings

Satisfied,

but not

committed.

9 to 10 Ratings

Satisfied and

committed.

Not at all Satisfied Very Satisfied

Top box results (% of 9 and 10 ratings) are recommended and used rather than mean scores or as a supplement to mean scores. Top box ratings are the best-in-class standard in performance tracking; the most relevant measure for tracking true satisfaction.

Research has shown that top box ratings (% of 9 and 10 ratings) are awarded by individuals who have very strong, positive opinions. They are the most satisfied and least likely to change their opinions.

By collapsing the value ranges into a “top box”, research results become more focused, clear and actionable.

Top Box Results

Throughout the survey, rating scales of 1 to 10 are used.

Unless otherwise noted, rating scales represent: 1=strongly disagree, 10=strongly agree.

Scale

Top box reporting (focusing on 9 and 10 ratings) is a high standard that makes the results more focused and actionable.

41

Appendix B:

Demographics

Demographics Table 13

Demographics (Total Mentions)

2009 n=1006

2010 n=1004

2011 n=1005

2012 n=1002

2013 n=1003

2014 n=1000

2015 n=1002

2016 n=1000

Gender

Male 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

Female 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

Age

18 to 24 5% 3% 3% 4% 4% 6% 6% 8%

25 to 34 9% 10% 7% 7% 6% 13% 11% 15%

35 to 44 16% 14% 13% 13% 14% 16% 17% 19%

45 to 54 26% 23% 22% 22% 20% 18% 17% 19%

55 to 64 20% 24% 23% 24% 21% 19% 21% 16%

65 to 74 12% 13% 16% 17% 17% 15% 15% 14%

75+ 10% 12% 14% 12% 15% 10% 11% 8%

DK/NA 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 3% 2% 2%

Household Residents by Age Group

Under 13 years old 25% 19% 18% 17% 19% 24% 23% 25%

Between 13 and 18 years old 18% 17% 14% 15% 15% 15% 15% 18%



65 years of age or older 27% 31% 36% 35% 41% 32% 32% 30%

DEMOGRAPHICS

42

Demographics Table 14

Demographics (Total Mentions)

2009 n=1006

2010 n=1004

2011 n=1005

2012 n=1002

2013 n=1003

2014 n=1000

2015 n=1002

2016 n=1000

Coming to Live in Calgary

Born in Calgary NA 21% 19% 21% NA NA NA 24%

Born in another part of Alberta and moved to Calgary

NA 19% 16% 16% NA NA NA 15%

Born in another part of Canada and moved to Calgary

NA 39% 42% 40% NA NA NA 35%

Born in another country NA 21% 22% 23% NA NA NA 27%

Don’t know /Refused NA <1% 1% 1% NA NA NA <1%

Member of a Visible Minority Group

Yes 17% 13% 15% 13% NA NA NA 21%

No 82% 86% 83% 86% NA NA NA 78%

Don’t Know /Refused 1% 1% 1% 1% NA NA NA 1%

DEMOGRAPHICS

43

44

Appendix C:

CPPI Calculation

45


The CPPI is calculated as follows: each individual’s score from the 3 component questions are

combined and divided by the total number of questions. This results in an index score for Calgary

Police Perception. .

The Calgary Police Perception Index (CPPI) represents an overall measure of the service’s reputation and allows for a) a comparison of perceptions between key demographic groups and b) for tracking over time to identify changes in community perceptions.

The index uses three key perception measures to profile citizens overall opinions of the CPS. The questions used are illustrated in the diagram to the right. Advanced analytics were used to develop the CPPI and to capture the three measures which represent the strongest combination of factors.

Low High

Officer Competence

Level of Service

Overall Rating

Calculation of the Calgary Police Perception Index (CPPI)

1-6 7-8 9-10

1-6 7-8 9-10

1-6 7-8 9-10

46

Appendix D:

Additional Reporting

Safety or Crime Issue of Greatest Concern – First Mention* Table 15

Considering the City of Calgary as a whole, what would you say is the safety or crime issue of greatest concern to you, if any? B3A.

SAFETY OR CRIME ISSUE OF GREATEST CONCERN

47

Safety or Crime Issue of Greatest Concern

2009 First Mention n=1006








None / no issue of great concern 10% 12% 14% 15% 19% 20% 18% 16%

House break-ins / break and enter 6% 13% 19% 14% 15% 19% 15% 21%

Illegal gang activities 46% 24% 18% 24% 16% 8% 12% 11%

Illegal drug activities 8% 13% 12% 9% 10% 7% 8% 10%

Theft other than vehicles 1% 2% 2% 2% 4% 4% 5% 6%

Traffic violations (speeding, unsafe driving) 2% 3% 4% 4% 6% 6% 6% 4%

Gun crime / shootings 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 1% 6% 3%

Theft of vehicles 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 3% 3%

Assault causing injury 3% 3% 4% 5% 4% 8% 5% 3%

Murder 1% 1% <1% 1% 1% 3% 3% 2%

Maintaining safety in the neighbourhood <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 2%

Other 2% 1% <1% 1% 1% 2% <1% 2%

Don’t know 3% 4% 4% 2% 4% 3% 3% 4%

*Responses 2% or greater based on total mentions in 2016



Safety or Crime Issue of Greatest Concern – Total Mentions* Table 16

Considering the City of Calgary as a whole, what would you say is the safety or crime issue of greatest concern to you, if any?

What other safety or crime issues come to mind?

B3A.

B3B.

Safety or Crime Issue of Greatest Concern

2009 Total Mention n=1006








House break-ins / break and enter 22% 30% 35% 30% 27% 31% 27% 34%

Illegal drug activities 21% 25% 23% 19% 18% 13% 16% 19%

None / no issue of great concern 10% 12% 14% 15% 19% 20% 18% 16%

Illegal gang activities 54% 33% 25% 32% 22% 13% 18% 16%

Theft other than vehicles 6% 7% 5% 9% 11% 12% 11% 13%

Traffic violations (speeding, unsafe driving) 12% 15% 15% 15% 17% 16% 13% 11%

Theft of vechicles 6% 8% 7% 7% 8% 7% 9% 10%

Assault causing injury 8% 7% 9% 12% 10% 14% 9% 8%

Murder 3% 3% 2% 3% 3% 6% 6% 6%

Gun crime / shootings 6% 4% 3% 4% 2% 3% 8% 5%

Maintaining safety in the neighbourhood <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1% 4%

Domestic abuse 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 3%

Violent crimes (general) 1% 2% 1% 1% 2% 1% 2% 3%

Sexual assault 3% 2% 2% 7% 3% 3% 2% 3%

Damage to property 2% 5% 4% 4% 3% 4% 2% 3%

Drinking / alcohol-related crime - - - 3% 2% 1% 1% 2%

LRT Safety 2% 3% 4% 3% 3% 4% 2% 2%

Organized crime 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2%

Kidnapping / abductions - - - - - 2% 1% 2%

Other 3% 1% 1% 2% 2% 4% 5% 5%

Don’t know 5% 4% 4% 4% 6% 6% 5% 8%

SAFETY OR CRIME ISSUE OF GREATEST CONCERN

48

*Responses 2% or greater based on total mentions in 2016



PRIORITY SETTING

49

Priority Setting 2010

n=1004 2011

n=1005 2012

n=1002 2013

n=1003 2014

n=1000 2015

n=1002 2016

n=1000

Crime / crime prevention (general) 4% 9% 11% 12% 14% 12% 13%

No suggestions (keep up the good work / general positive comment)

4% 9% 9% 9% 4% 7% 9%

Improve officers training / competence 2% 4% 3% 5% 4% 7% 8%

Illegal drug activities 9% 9% 8% 7% 5% 5% 8%

Illegal gang activities 21% 14% 16% 7% 7% 9% 7%

Traffic violations (speeding, unsafe driving) 6% 4% 6% 5% 8% 5% 7%

More visible presence 5% 6% 4% 6% 8% 7% 5%


3% 4% 5% 7% 4% 7% 5%

Hire more officers / more funding 16% 13% 11% 8% 10% 4% 5%

Safety in public places (downtown, streets) 7% 6% 2% 2% 6% 7% 2%

More efforts to reduce crime 2% 2% 1% 5% 5% 4% 2%

House break-ins / break and enter <1% 1% 1% <1% 1% 1% 2%

Gun crime / shootings <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 1% 1%

Quicker response time <1% <1% 1% <1% 1% 1% 1%

Theft other than vehicles <1% <1% <1% <1% 1% 1% 1%

Violent crimes (general) 1% 1% <1% <1% 1% 1% 1%

Not preoccupied with minor crimes / issuing traffic tickets 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% <1% 1%

Child abduction / kidnapping / child safety 1% 0% <1% <1% 1% <1% 1%

Other 1% 1% 1% <1% 1% 1% 3%

Don’t know 9% 9% 9% 16% 10% 14% 16%

What do you think the Calgary Police should focus on going forward? G1. *Responses 1% or greater based on first mention in 2016

Priority Setting – First Mention* Table 17



PRIORITY SETTING

50

Priority Setting 2010

n=1004 2011

n=1005 2012

n=1002 2013

n=1003 2014

n=1000 2015

n=1002 2016

n=1000

Crime / crime prevention (general) 4% 15% 13% 16% 21% 19% 16%

Illegal drug activities 21% 18% 22% 12% 12% 10% 14%

Illegal gang activities 28% 23% 28% 12% 13% 13% 12%

Improve officers training / competence 3% 6% 5% 9% 8% 13% 12%

Traffic violations (speeding, unsafe driving) 10% 9% 11% 10% 14% 9% 10%

No suggestions (keep up the good work / general positive comment)

4% 9% 10% 10% 4% 8% 9%

More visible presence 8% 10% 8% 11% 17% 12% 8%


4% 8% 8% 14% 8% 17% 7%

Hire more officers / more funding 17% 15% 14% 10% 13% 8% 6%

House break-ins / break and enter 2% 4% 3% 2% 5% 2% 4%

Safety in public places (downtown, streets) 9% 9% 4% 8% 14% 15% 3%

Gun crime / shootings 1% 1% 2% 2% 2% 4% 3%

Violent crimes (general) 1% 3% 5% 1% 3% 2% 3%

Theft other than vehicles 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 3%

More efforts to reduce crime 2% 2% 2% 10% 10% 11% 2%

Not preoccupied with minor crimes / issuing traffic tickets 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Child abduction / kidnapping / child safety 2% <1% 1% 2% 2% 1% 2%

Domestic violence 1% <1% 1% <1% 1% 1% 2%

Other 1% 1% 1% <1% 3% 1% 5%

Don’t know 9% 9% 9% 16% 10% 14% 16%

What do you think the Calgary Police should focus on going forward? G1. *Responses 2% or greater based on total mentions in 2016

Priority Setting – Total Mentions* Table 18



Officer Characteristics* Table 19

Performance of the CPS 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Officers are respectful n=968 n=969 n=982 n=969 n=970 n=971 n=975 n=974

Strongly Agree (Top Box 9-10) 44% 41% 44% 47% 44% 46% 49% 46%

Middle Box 7-8 44% 43% 41% 41% 45% 40% 41% 41%

Disagree (Bottom Box 1-6) 12% 16% 15% 12% 11% 14% 11% 13%

Is friendly NA n=986 n=989 n=991 n=989 n=995 n=994 n=994

Strongly Agree (Top Box 9-10) NA 44% 46% 47% 48% 49% 50% 48%

Middle Box 7-8 NA 40% 37% 39% 38% 37% 37% 37%

Disagree (Bottom Box 1-6) NA 16% 17% 14% 14% 14% 13% 15%

Officers are ethical n=883 n=916 n=904 n=895 n=887 n=907 n=892 n=912


Middle Box 7-8 49% 50% 48% 47% 47% 43% 44% 47%


Demonstrates the appropriate level of care and concern

NA n=981 n=991 n=992 n=992 n=990 n=995 n=993


Middle Box 7-8 NA 47% 43% 44% 47% 41% 43% 45%



OFFICER CHARACTERISTICS

51



C4.

D1.



PROFESSIONALISM

Professionalism* Table 20


Officers are professional NA NA NA NA NA NA n=976 n=976

Strongly Agree (Top Box 9-10) NA NA NA NA NA NA 52% 48%

Middle Box 7-8 NA NA NA NA NA NA 39% 40%

Disagree (Bottom Box 1-6) NA NA NA NA NA NA 9% 11%

Officers are competent in their duties n=936 n=961 n=960 n=969 n=946 n=970 n=961 n=958


Middle Box 7-8 49% 50% 46% 48% 47% 45% 44% 45%


Officers clearly understand my safety needs and concerns

n=894 n=909 n=924 n=909 n=918 n=936 n=936 n=927


Middle Box 7-8 50% 44% 45% 45% 46% 47% 44% 42%


Responds in a fair way when dealing with all segments of the Calgary community

n=862 n=891 n=905 n=875 n=871 n=886 n=866 n=864


Middle Box 7-8 52% 48% 45% 46% 51% 47% 45% 45%


Uses its authority and force appropriately n=930 n=946 n=945 n=950 n=923 n=940 n=925 n=936


Middle Box 7-8 51% 48% 45% 47% 51% 45% 47% 44%



52


C4.

D1. Next, I am going to read you a number of statements that may describe the Calgary Police. Please rate your level of agreement with each of the following statements. Scale: 1=Strongly disagree / 10=Strongly agree



SERVICE

Service* Table 21


Is dedicated to reducing levels of crime

NA n=988 n=996 n=988 n=995 n=997 n=994 n=993


Middle Box 7-8 NA 36% 35% 38% 39% 35% 35% 38%


Officers are there when I need them n=887 n=915 n=909 n=920 n=913 n=921 n=924 n=919


Middle Box 7-8 45% 44% 43% 44% 44% 43% 40% 40%


Meets my expectations as a police service

NA NA n=997 n=993 n=999 n=998 n=998 n=997

Strongly Agree (Top Box 9-10) NA NA 44% 44% 44% 45% 43% 43%

Middle Box 7-8 NA NA 40% 42% 43% 41% 45% 41%

Disagree (Bottom Box 1-6) NA NA 17% 13% 13% 14% 12% 15%

Responds quickly when needed NA n=937 n=948 n=953 n=951 n=978 n=969 n=970


Middle Box 7-8 NA 46% 41% 44% 44% 42% 43% 43%


Provides an adequate amount or level of service to the public

n=983 n=971 n=981 n=981 n=971 n=970 n=969 n=976


Middle Box 7-8 57% 55% 53% 53% 53% 50% 49% 49%



53


C4.




IN THE COMMUNITY

In the Community* Table 22


54


C4.



Supports the community NA n=986 n=989 n=986 n=990 n=991 n=995 n=991


Middle Box 7-8 NA 42% 36% 40% 38% 37% 37% 38%


The community police facilities make it easy to access police services

n=887 n=904 n=922 n=900 n=893 n=903 n=895 n=893


Middle Box 7-8 41% 40% 38% 39% 40% 42% 39% 40%


Maintains appropriate visibility in the community

n=978 n=988 n=980 n=986 n=979 n=985 n=980 n=974


Middle Box 7-8 46% 45% 44% 42% 45% 46% 44% 45%


Adequately communicates crime issues and trends to the community

n=927 n=932 n=941 n=961 n=932 n=944 n=940 n=932


Middle Box 7-8 50% 48% 45% 44% 45% 44% 44% 44%


Uses crime prevention measures and programs effectively

NA n=929 n=952 n=939 n=948 n=967 n=965 n=957


Middle Box 7-8 NA 49% 48% 50% 49% 47% 49% 48%




PERFORMANCE

Performance* Table 23


Is adequately staffed NA n=941 n=918 n=934 n=921 n=963 n=933 n=923


Middle Box 7-8 NA 31% 34% 38% 38% 43% 43% 41%



55


C4.




REASON FOR RATING THE CPS OVERALL

56

Reason for rating of CPS overall Table 24

2015 n=1002

2016 n=1000


They do a good / excellent job / they do the best they can 44% 41%




Professional 6% 6%



Good public relations and communication 7% 3%


Law enforcement / maintain order / support the community 4% 2%

They have a very difficult job 3% 2%

I admire / respect them 2% 2%

Well-trained 1% 2%


They have room for improvement 21% 30%


Some officers are not courteous 6% 3%

Not enough visible presence 4% 2%

Discriminate against ethnic and social groups 2% 2%

Slow response time 2% 2%

Police did not respond to my concern 2% 2%

Too preoccupied with minor crimes / issuing traffic tickets 2% 2%

Other 4% 8%

Don’t know 8% 7%

Why did you give that rating for the Calgary Police overall? D5 *Responses 2% or greater based on 2016



NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC SAFETY

57

Neighbourhood Traffic Concerns Table 25

Type of Traffic Concern 2016

n=1000

Speeding (non-specified) 43%

None / no issue of great concern 23%

School or playground zone safety issues 13%

Careless driving / not following signs or rules (general) 8%

Intersection safety issues 7%

Pedestrian safety issues (e.g., jaywalking) 6%

Need crosswalks, traffic lights or stop signs 6%

Distracted driving 5%

Traffic volume / amount of traffic 4%

Commuter traffic cutting through neighbourhoods 3%

Parking / illegal parking 3%

Bicycle safety issues 3%

Traffic issues with kids at play (e.g. street hockey) 2%

Construction issues 2%

Signs not visible 1%

Motorcycle issues 1%

Impaired driving 1%

Trucks/commercial vehicles <1%

Other 7%

Don’t know 2%

Reason for Neighbourhood Traffic Safety Satisfaction

Table 26

What traffic issues, if any, are of greatest concern to you in your neighbourhood? [OPEN END] L2.

Reason for Neighbourhood Traffic Safety Satisfaction* 2016

n=1000

NET: Negative 54%

Issues with speeding 23%

Always room for improvement 11%

Lack of police presence / lack of enforcement 11%

Bad drivers – don’t obey signs/rules 8%

Traffic / congestion / commuters cut through my neighbourhood

7%

Bad drivers – other 5%

Issues with crosswalks 5%

I have witnessed / heard about accidents 5%

Bad drivers - aggressive / rude 2%

Issues with bike lanes / bicyclists 1%

NET: Positive 47%

No issues / everyone follows the rules / haven’t seen any 37%

Quiet neighbourhood / not a lot of traffic 10%

Satisfied with police presence / enforcement / issues being addressed

6%

No issues with speeding (specified) 4%

Other 4%

Don’t know / Refused 3%

Why did you give that rating for your satisfaction with traffic safety in your neighbourhood? [OPEN END] L4.


58

Reason for rating of CPS Understanding the Community Table 27

Total Mentions* n=951

NET: Positive Sentiment 57%

Good service / no crime issues / they do a good job (general) 13%

I have not had a bad experience / feel safe / trust them 13%

Officers understand the needs of my community / interact with citizens 11%

Satisfied with police presence / active within community 10%

Officers are responsive / address issues 9%

Officers are understanding / accommodating / tolerant / fair 5%

Officers are helpful / polite / answer questions 5%

Police force works well with community organizations / government 4%

Officers are professional / well-trained 3%

Police force is diverse / my community is well-represented 2%

NET: Neutral Sentiment 21%

Based on my experience / general impression 7%

I am not a visible minority / not part of a minority group 7%

Based on word of mouth 3%

Based on media coverage 2%

I have had no experience with them / nothing to judge by 2%

NET: Negative Sentiment 19%

Room for improvement / nobody is perfect 6%

Lack of police presence / lack of involvement 5%

Poor service – intolerant / cultural issues 3%

Poor service - crime issues aren't being addressed / high crime rate 2%

Poor service - other issues 1%

Lack of diversity within the police force / my community is not represented 1%

Police force is understaffed / underfunded 1%

Other 3%

Don’t know 10%

Why do you say that you [INSERT M1] that the Calgary Police Service has a good understanding of your community and it’s concerns? [OPEN END] M2

COMBINED OPEN ENDS

59

Open Ends Combined Table 28

2015 n=1002

2016 n=1000


Trust them / they do a good job / the best they can / keep up the good work

73% 73%





Well trained / well managed / good chief 18% 15%


Professional / fair 8% 14%

Officers understand the needs of my community / interact with citizens -- 11%

NET: Negative Sentiment / Suggestion 71% 63%

They have room for improvement / could be better 22% 33%


Officers not courteous / improve training / competence 21% 15%

Not enough visible presence / improve visibility 18% 14%

NET: Type of crime to focus on 59% 52%

Crime / crime prevention (general) 19% 16%



Issues with traffic violations / focus on traffic violations 11% 10%

NET: Neutral comments -- 20%

Based on my experience / general impression / word of mouth / media coverage

-- 11%



*Responses 10% or greater based on 2016 Why do you say that you [INSERT M1] that the Calgary Police Service has a good understanding of your community and it’s concerns? [OPEN END] M2

What do you think the Calgary Police should focus on going forward? G1

Why did you give that rating for the Calgary Police overall? D5

Why are/aren’t you confident the Calgary Police can deliver the services needed? [OPEN END] C5a.

60

Appendix E:

Questionnaire

QUESTIONNAIRE

61

QUESTIONNAIRE

62

QUESTIONNAIRE

63

QUESTIONNAIRE

64

QUESTIONNAIRE

65

QUESTIONNAIRE

66

QUESTIONNAIRE

67

Documents

PowerPoint Presentation · Child abduction / kidnapping / child safety 1% 2% Quicker response time 1% 1% Other 3% 5% Don't Know 16% 16% G1. What do you think the Calgary Police should