13
Resident Satisfaction Survey 28 th Annual Survey Assistance from Institute for Design Research and Outreach (IDRO), College of Design, ISU Extension City/ISU distribution • 1,350 utility bill customers • 986 email surveys to ISU students • 728 returned surveys (48.7% response rate) • 61% Ames utility users, 39% ISU students

Resident Satisfaction Survey

  • Upload
    eytan

  • View
    33

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Resident Satisfaction Survey. 28 th Annual Survey Assistance from Institute for Design Research and Outreach (IDRO), College of Design, ISU Extension City/ISU distribution 1,350 utility bill customers 986 email surveys to ISU students 728 returned surveys (48.7% response rate) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction Survey 28th Annual Survey Assistance from Institute for Design

Research and Outreach (IDRO), College of Design, ISU Extension

City/ISU distribution• 1,350 utility bill customers• 986 email surveys to ISU students• 728 returned surveys (48.7% response rate)• 61% Ames utility users, 39% ISU

students

Page 2: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyOn-going service priorities (P. 6)

On-going service

Should the city spend….?

AverageLess(1) Same(2) More(3)

Transit system (CyRide) (n=704) 10% 65% 26% 2.2

Recreational opportunities (n=713) 17% 59% 24% 2.1

Law enforcement (n=716) 15% 61% 24% 2.1

Sanitation/food inspections (n=713) 6% 73% 21% 2.1

Human service agency funding (ASSET) (n=703) 16% 64% 20% 2.0

Land use planning (both current and long-term)

(n=706) 25% 56% 20% 1.9

Parks activities (n=714) 21% 60% 19% 2.0

Public Library (n=711) 19% 62% 18% 2.0

Fire protection (n=716) 6% 78% 16% 2.1

Ames Animal Shelter & animal control (n=984) 15% 69% 16% 2.0

Arts programs (Public Art & COTA) (n=716) 31% 55% 14% 1.8

Other (please specify) (n=30)        

Page 3: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction Survey On-going service priorities

– Spend “same” in 11 out of 11 categories Increase in “spend more” respondents

– Transit (26%)– Recreational opportunities (24%)– Law Enforcement (20%)– Sanitation/food inspections (21%)

Page 4: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyFigure 1. Trends in preferred property tax adjustments for next year

(P. 9)

26%

30%

46%

19%

26%

27%

27%

18%

44%

51%

44%

50%

57%

30%

22%

30%

27%

25%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Decrease No change Increase

Page 5: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction Survey Preference for “No Change” in

property tax rate• 57% of respondents

– (+7% from 2009)– (+11% from 2008)

“Increase” support gained 6% “Decrease” support dropped by 12%

Page 6: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyCapital improvement priorities (P. 10)

Somewhat or Very

Unimportant

Somewhat or Very

Important Average*

Reconstructing existing streets (n=713) 13% 87% 3.4

Traffic flow improvements (n=706) 32% 68% 2.9

Storm water drainage improvements (n=712) 33% 67% 2.8

Bike path improvements (n=710) 45% 55% 2.6

Improvements to existing parks (n=712) 45% 55% 2.5

Library facility improvements (n=588) 47% 53% 2.5

Other (specify ______________) (n=103)

Page 7: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction Survey

Capital Improvement Priorities– Reconstructing existing streets– Traffic flow improvements– Storm water drainage improvements

Page 8: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveySummary Table of Satisfaction with City Services(Removing “don’t know”) – P. 12

City ServicesVery/

Somewhat Dissatisfied

Very/Somewhat

Satisfied

Fire Department services (n=539) 1% 99%

Library services (n=597) 5% 95%

CyRide (n=575) 6% 94%

Sanitary sewer system (n=652) 4% 96%

Water Department services (n=676) 5% 95%

Parks & Recreation services (n=649) 5% 95%

Electric Department services (n=673) 6% 94%

Law enforcement services (n=635) 12% 88%

Public Nuisance Enforcement (n=576) 31% 69%

Page 9: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveySummary Table of Satisfaction with City Services – P. 11

*1=very dissatisfied; 2=somewhat dissatisfied; 3=somewhat satisfied; 4=very satisfied

Page 10: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyNew Initiatives (P. 27)

FeatureNot Very Important

Not Important Important

Very Important

Don’t Know Average*

Percent

Campustown redevelopment

13 21 35 31 5 2.8

Campustown parking ramp

19 24 31 27 6 2.7

Library expansion

17 27 38 18 7 2.6

Industrial park 21 28 35 16 17 2.5

Downtown parking ramp

27 36 26 11 6 2.2

*Don’t know responses not included in calculating average.

Page 11: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyEntrances to Ames (P. 28)

FeatureNot Very Attractive

Not Attractive Attractive

Very Attractive

Don’t Know Average*

Percent

University Blvd and US 30 2 17 35 40 6 3.2

Bloomington Ave. and US 69/Grand Ave 13 30 22 5 30 2.3

South Dakota and US 30 19 36 24 6 14 2.2

Thirteenth St and I-35 29 34 24 5 8 2.1

Lincoln Way and Wilder Ave. 12 17 9 2 60 2.0

S. Duff Ave. and US 30 35 34 17 6 8 1.9

S. Duff and Ken Maril Road 22 19 9 2 47 1.8

Lincoln Way and Dayton Ave. 34 31 13 4 18 1.8

*Don’t know responses not included in calculating average.

Page 12: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction Survey

0

20

40

60

80

100

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Internet High Speed Connection

Trends in Internet service at home (P. 34)

Page 13: Resident Satisfaction Survey

Resident Satisfaction SurveyTrends in overall satisfaction with City of Ames service quality(P. 34)

65% 64%69%

32% 34%28%

64%60% 62%

54% 56% 49%64%

60%64% 60%

64%

35%37% 36%43%

41%

50%

34% 38% 34% 38%35%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Good Very good