LTC 291-2019 Highlights of the 2019 Community Satisfaction SurveMIAMI BEACH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
NO. LTC # 291-2019 LETTER TO COMMISSION
FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manage
DATE : May 15, 2019
SUBJECT : Highlights of the 2019 Commu ity Satisfaction Survey
I am pleased to provide you with highlights of the 2019 Resident Survey results.
Conducted routinely since 2005, the survey measures satisfaction levels with City
services and reflects community priorities. This data will allow the city to identify areas of
improvement and guide the Strategic Plan through the Lens of Resilience, the annual
operating budget, and services. The 2019 Business Survey results will be provided
once received.
You will receive an overview of the results from Chris Tatham, CEO of ETC Institute at
the May 21st Commission retreat. ETC Institute is the survey provider in charge of
administering the survey, ensuring that results are statistically valid and representative of
Miami Beach 's population and main geographical areas.
I am sharing his presentation before the retreat for your review. Mr. Tatham will cover
the highlights and main priorities to help inform your discussions. After your
presentation, he will present to the Management Team . Full survey results will be posted
online shortly thereafter.
Survey Summary
Miami Beach is setting the standard for service delivery and public engagement
0 Overall satisfaction with city services rated 19% above national results
0 Overall satisfaction with public engagement rated 29% above national
results
The City of Miami Beach is moving in the right direction
Since 2016, satisfaction ratings increased or stayed the same for all 15
major services that were assessed (14 of 15 areas improved).
0 Major services continue to receive high levels of satisfaction among
residents. Top rated services include: Fire services , ocean
rescue/lifeguard/beach patrol services , emergency medical services and
City's emergency/hurricane preparedness efforts.
The percentag e of residents who would recommend the city as a place to
live increased 10% from 2016.
The items be low are opportunities for improvement as they ranked lower in satisfaction
and higher in terms importance :
0 Efforts to Address Homelessness
° Condition of Streets
0 Efforts to Manage Stormwater Drainage and Flooding
0 Quality of Police Services
° Cleanliness of Streets in Neighborhoods
encourage you to review the survey highlights attached, which include Florida and
national benchmarking . I look forward to a more in-depth analysis and discussion of
results at the Commission retreat on May 21st.
For questions, contact Amy Knowles , Deputy Resiliency Officer at x6081 or
amyknowles@miamibeachfl.gov
Thank you
JLM/SMT/AK
Attachment: Survey Results Presentation by ETC , Institute
City of Miami Beach
Resident Survey
PRESENTED BY ETC INSTITUTE
1
Agenda
Purpose
Methodology
Bottom Line Up Front
Survey Results
Summary
Questions
2
A National Leader in Market Research for Local Governmental Organizations
More than 2,000,000 Persons Surveyed Since 2009 in more than 900 cities in 49 states
Helping organizations make better decisions
3
Purpose
To objectively assess satisfaction with the delivery of major City services
To help determine priorities for the community
To measure trends over time to help guide and evaluate the implementation of the City’s
strategic plan and budget process
4
Methodology
Method of Administration
◦Conducted early 2019
◦A random sample of households were selected for the survey
◦Households were mailed a survey and given the option of responding by mail, phone, or the Internet
Sample Size: 1,324 resident surveys were completed
◦851 by mail, 411 on-line, and 62 by phone
Confidence level: 95%
Margin of error: +/-2.69
Home address of respondents were geocoded
Demographic composition of the sample was similar to recent Census estimates for the City’s
population
5
Location of
Survey
Respondents
Good representation of responses
from throughout the City
Distribution by Area
•Mid Beach: 234
•Condo Corridor: 210
•North Beach: 300
•South Pointe: 176
•South Beach and Belle Isle: 404
North Beach
Condo Corridor
Mid Beach
South Beach
South Pointe 6
Demographics
Attribute Census Survey Difference
% Male 53%50%-3%
% Female 47%50%+3%
% White/Other 94%93%-1%
% Black/African American 4%3%-1%
% Asian 2%2%0%
% Hispanic 55%47%*-8%
% of adults Age 65 and older 19%21%2%
*Note: Some respondents who would have been counted as “Hispanic” by the U.S. Census did not identify
themselves as such on the survey, which is the reason the percentage is slightly lower in the survey.
7
Summary of Major Findings
(Bottom Line Up Front)
Miami Beach is setting the standard for service delivery and public engagement
◦Overall satisfaction with City services rated 19% above the national average
◦Overall satisfaction with public engagement rated 29% above the national average
The City of Miami Beach is moving in the right direction
◦Since 2016, satisfaction ratings increased or stayed the same for all 15 major services that were
assessed (14 of 15 areas improved)
◦The percentage of residents who would recommend the City as a place to live increased 10% from 2016
There are opportunities for improvement
◦Efforts to Address Homelessness
◦Condition of Streets
◦Efforts to Manage Stormwater Drainage and Flooding
◦Quality of Police Services
◦Cleanliness of Streets in Neighborhoods
8
Residents Are Generally
Satisfied
MAJOR FINDING #1
9
69% of Residents Gave Positive Ratings for the Overall Quality of City Services; Only 9% Gave Negative Ratings 10
Location of
Survey
Respondents
Good representation of responses
from throughout the City
Distribution by Area
•Mid Beach: 234
•Condo Corridor: 210
•North Beach: 300
•South Pointe: 176
•South Beach and Belle Isle: 404
North Beach
Condo Corridor
Mid Beach
South Beach
South Pointe 11
Ratings for the City
as a Place to Live
are High
Throughout
the City
Citizen Satisfaction
Mean rating on a 5-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.8 Very Dissatisfied
1.8-2.6 Dissatisfied
2.6-3.4 Neutral
3.4-4.2 Satisfied
4.2-5.0 Very Satisfied
No Response
12
Most Services Received High Ratings 13
Residents Gave the Lowest Ratings for the City’s Efforts to Address Homelessness 14
The City of Miami Beach is
Setting the Standard for
Overall Quality of City
Services
MAJOR FINDING #2
15
Significantly Higher Than State Average: :Significantly Lower Than State Average
Setting the Standard
for the Overall
Quality of City Services
16
Significantly Higher Than State Average: :Significantly Lower Than State Average 17
Sat isfacti1on w i1th Major Ca tegor ies of Ci ty Se rvi ces
Mia mi Beach vs. F lo ri da vs_ th e U .S.
by p ercentage of r es p ondents w ho rated the ite m 3 or 4 on a 4-point scale
w here 4 w as "excellen t" and 1 w as "p oor " (exc lud ing don't kno w s)
if Fire services
if E m erg·enc y m edical services ~===============~~
if Ap p eara nee /maintenance of the City s pu blic
b uild ings i------....,.....-------..,....----.,.-
~ •••••••••••••••• 82°/Q LI u .uality of park s and recreation prog ram s F-'-'-""~""""""~~~~""""""~~~~.:;,,:;,:;,,,;.~
~ ••••••••••••••• 18:1% LI Main t en ance of park s :/.: .Yo
Yo :
...................... lllj79Jo,
Garbage /trash co llection /.7%
5Wo -·-·74%. if Landscaping along City streets /publi c areas !""=========""-"'~
if Availability of Polic e in y our neigh borhood
0% 40% ·66% .8G%
ETC Instit ute (20 19)
!•Miami Beach PZi FJod da o U. S.
93 I
Significantly Higher Than State Average: :Significantly Lower Than State Average 18
Satisfaction wi1th Major 1Ca tegor ies of 1City Services (cont .)
Miami Beach vs. F lorida vs. the U .S.
by p e rc enta g e of respondents who r ated the ite m 3 or 4 on a 4~p oint scale
where 4 was "exc e ll ent" and 1 was "poor" (excluding 1don 't kn ows )
'frstreet lighting '"0=========.:;.-;i.,~.
'fr Qu a li ty of public en gage me nt efforts "'""'"""""""""'"""'"""""""""""""""""''"""'""...,
64%
63%
.J Clean li ne s s of s t re et s in businesslc omm erci a l are a ~==========~
.J Effort s to m an a ge s t ormw ate r d ra inag1e a nd flooding """'""'"""'""""..:..,;...w;...'"""""""======~~
.J Co ndition of stre ets ~=======~~,...,·=~=61%
.J Condition of s id ewa I ks f-"'-"~""""""'"~~="""""""~'""+-'+""+
10% 40%
I• Miami Beac h m FJorida D U. S.
E'DC In sti rute (20 19)
Significantly Higher Than State Average: :Significantly Lower Than State Average 19
Sati1s fa ction With Parks an d Rec rea ti o n
Mia mi Beach v s. F l o rida vs . .th e U .S.
by percentage of r espondents w ho r ated the ite m 3 or 4 on a 4,-p oint scal e
w here 4 w as "excellent " an 1d 1 w as "p oor" (excl uding do n't k no w s )
'fi' Qu ality of City recreational facil it i es ......................... ~ ........................................................................... ~ ................................. ...........
&% 40% 16'0r% 180%
ETC Insti tute (20 19)
I •Miami Beach f22J FJonda o U. S . I
82%
e.1%
The City is Moving in the
Right Direction
MAJOR FINDING #3
20
Percentage of Residents Who Would Recommend Miami Beach as a Place to Live Increased 10%21
:Significant Decrease in Satisfaction from 2016Significant Increase in Satisfaction from 2016: 22
:Significant Decrease in Satisfaction from 2016Significant Increase in Satisfaction from 2016: 23
O v e ra U Ratin gs for th e Ci ty of M ia mi Beac h (co nt.)
2009 to 20 19
by pe rc en t age of responden t s who rated th e item as "exc el len t" or "good " (excl uding "1don 1 know ")
if cleanliness of streets in y our neigh borhood
I
1----------------~68=..;% I 1-----------------~74~ 1------~---~---~--~75~
••••••••••••• 64%, :
~==""-'~"""~"""'"""'"''"""'"''""~64% : Street lightin g 65%71 % :
1------..,----....,-------:-------' ts%
if Cleanliness of streets in bu si nesslco mmercial a re as 1----------------6"""'1...:..;...,% 6'9%
t-----~---~---~-__,71%
if Efforts to m anage sto rmwate r drain age /flood in gi
if cleanliness of canals/w ate rway s 53% ........... -----------~57% ,__ ___________ _,61%
if condition of si,de w al k s 50%
if Efforts to address ho m elessness
0% 20% 40% i60% 80 o/o 100%
1•2019 Jm 201 s, 0 2014 0 2012 02009'
Source: ETC Institute DirectionFtndor (2 019-}Jiami &11.Ch, FL) Trends
There are Opportunities
for Improvement
MAJOR FINDING #4
24
25
Top Priorities:
Importance-Satisfaction Rating
City of Miami Beach Resident Survey
OVERALL
Category of Service
Most
Important
%
Most
Important
Rank
Satisfaction
%
Satisfaction
Rank
Importance-
Satisfaction
Rating
I-S Rating
Rank
High Priority (IS .10-.20)
Efforts to address homelessness 22%6 30%28 0.1503 1
Condition of streets 26%4 47%26 0.1407 2
Efforts to manage stormwater drainage and flooding 22%5 50%23 0.1098 3
Quality of Police services 37%1 72%16 0.1024 4
Cleanliness of streets in your neighborhood 33%2 69%17 0.1016 5
Medium Priority (IS <.10)
Condition of sidewalks (few or no cracks)17%10 42%27 0.0958 6
Overall quality of the beaches 32%3 76%8 0.0770 7
Cleanliness of canals/waterways 15%15 49%24 0.0755 8
Street lighting 18%9 64%18 0.0648 9
Cleanliness of streets in business/commercial areas 16%13 58%22 0.0648 10
Availability of Police in your neighborhood 19%8 73%14 0.0514 11
Availability of recycling in public places 9%19 47%25 0.0496 12
Reliability of potable (drinking) water 16%11 76%9 0.0402 13
Garbage/trash collection 14%16 75%11 0.0348 14
Maintenance of parks 15%14 81%7 0.0284 15
Miami Beach trolley system 11%17 75%10 0.0268 16
Miami Dade County's bus service 7%23 59%21 0.0265 17
Emergency medical services 20%7 88%3 0.0243 18
Quality of customer service 6%26 63%20 0.0223 19
Availability of green space near your home 8%21 72%15 0.0220 20
Reliability of sewer (wastewater) services 8%20 74%13 0.0215 21
Landscape maintenance of rights of way along City
streets/public areas 6% 25 74% 12 0.0160 22
City's emergency/hurricane preparedness efforts 10% 18 85%4 0.0155 23
Quality of parks and recreation programs 6% 24 82%6 0.0115 24
Fire services 16% 12 93%1 0.0113 25
Quality of public engagement efforts 2% 27 63% 19 0.0084 26
Ocean rescue/lifeguard/beach patrol services 7% 22 90%2 0.0067 27
Appearance/maintenance of the City's public buildings 2% 28 82%5 0.0030 28
26
Top Priorities:27
The City’s Efforts
to Address
Homelessness
Satisfaction with
Major Services
Mean rating on a 4-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.75 Poor
1.75-2.5 Fair
2.5-3.25 Good
3.25-4.0 Excellent
No Response
#1 Opportunity
For
Improvement
(based on I-S Analysis)
28
Condition of
Streets
Satisfaction with
Major Services
Mean rating on a 4-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.75 Poor
1.75-2.5 Fair
2.5-3.25 Good
3.25-4.0 Excellent
No Response
#2 Opportunity
For
Improvement
(based on I-S Analysis)
29
The City’s Efforts to
Manage Stormwater
Drainage and
Flooding
Satisfaction with
Major Services
Mean rating on a 4-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.75 Poor
1.75-2.5 Fair
2.5-3.25 Good
3.25-4.0 Excellent
No Response
#3 Opportunity
For
Improvement
(based on I-S Analysis)
30
Quality of Police
Services
Satisfaction with
Major Services
Mean rating on a 4-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.75 Poor
1.75-2.5 Fair
2.5-3.25 Good
3.25-4.0 Excellent
No Response
#4 Opportunity
For
Improvement
(based on I-S Analysis)
31
Cleanliness of
Streets in
Neighborhoods
Satisfaction with
Major Services
Mean rating on a 4-point scale
ETC INSTITUTE
1.0-1.75 Poor
1.75-2.5 Fair
2.5-3.25 Good
3.25-4.0 Excellent
No Response
#5 Opportunity
For
Improvement
(based on I-S Analysis)
32
Customer Service
Findings
33
34
35
Satisfaction with
Customer Service Has
Increased Significantly
in All Areas Since 2016
:Significant Decrease in Satisfaction from 2016Significant Increase in Satisfaction from 2016: 36
Mobility Findings
37
38
39
40
41
Additional Findings
42
43
44
45
82% of Respondents Are Supportive of Increased Taxes to Address Rising Sea Levels 46
Willingness to Pay More Taxes for the Maintenance of Buildings, Streets, Sidewalks, and Vehicles is Mixed 47
The Top 3 Sources of Information Are Provided By the City of Miami Beach 48
49
Summary of Major Findings
Miami Beach is setting the standard for service delivery and public engagement
◦Overall satisfaction with City services rated 19% above the national average
◦Overall satisfaction with public engagement rated 29% above the national average
The City of Miami Beach is moving in the right direction
◦Since 2016, satisfaction ratings increased or stayed the same for all 15 major services that were
assessed (14 of 15 areas improved)
◦The percentage of residents who would recommend the City as a place to live increased 10% from 2016
There are opportunities for improvement
◦Efforts to Address Homelessness
◦Condition of Streets
◦Efforts to Manage Stormwater Drainage and Flooding
◦Quality of Police Services
◦Cleanliness of Streets in Neighborhoods
50
Questions?
THANK YOU
51