LTC 117-2009 Cleanliness Index & Assessment Program Results for FY 2007/08 Quarter 4 and FY 2008/09 Quarter 1
` _ ~ ~;:~
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER '~ ~ fl
LTC # >:, ~-zoo9 LETTER TO COMMISSION "~ -.^',~
r
TO. Mayor Matti H. Bower and Members of the City Commission ~'
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager ~ ~~
i
DA'E: May 4, 2009 ~ ~ ~ ~~
SUBJECT. Cleanliness Index & Assessment Pr~glram Results for FY 2007108 Quarter 4 and
FY 2008/09 Quarter 1
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to communicate the results of the Cleanliness Index
and Assessment program from FY2007/08 Quarter 4 (July 1, 2008 to September 30, 2008) and
FY 2008/09 Q1 (October 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008)
Background
The Miami Beach Public Area Cleanliness Index is an objective measurement of pertormance
ranging from 1.0 (Very Clean) to 6.0 (Very Dirty) and includes assessments of litter, litter/
garbage cans/dumpsters, organic material, and fecal matter. The results of the assessments are
used to monitor the impacts of recently implemented initiatives to target areas for future
improvements, and assure the quality of services.
During FY2006/07, the City tightened the target for the Citywide and area-specific cleanliness
indices from 2.0 to 1.5 -the lower the score on the cleanliness index indicates a cleaner area.
This target continues to be the same for both FY2007/08 and FY 2008109 and it is intended to
reflect the additional resources the City has invested in cleanliness services. As important, the
City also has a goal to ensure that 90 percent of assessments score 2.0 or better.
Summary of the Cleanliness Assessment Results FY 2007108 Quarter 4 and FY 2008109
Quarter1
Overall, the citywide cleanliness index improved slightly in at the end of FY 2007108 when
compared to FY 2006107. All public areas achieved the FY 2005106 target of 2.0 or better during
FY 2007108, except for alleys with an overall score of 2.07 and waterways with an overall score
of 2.09. Also, during FY 2007108 Quarter 4 scores improved in all areas, especially the alleys
with a 15.8% improvement when compared to the same quarter in FY 2006107 and parks, with a
25.4% improvement during the same period.
During FY 2008/09 Quarter 1, scores increased slightly when compared to FY 2007108 Quarter
4, but they improved in most public areas when compared to FY 2007108 Quarter 1 scores. The
overall city score improved by 9% when compared to the overall city score during FY 2007108
Quarter 1 and parks scores improved by 8.6% during the same period.
In general, City cleanliness has progressed to the point at which major improvements cannot be
accomplished without additional resources. The actual improvements possible may not be
justified by the potential expense and it is not recommended at this time. As a result, cleanliness
assessment adjustments are focused on smaller or incremental adjustments. Also, review has
started to focus on areas that might be positively influenced through legislative or other exiemal
agency changes. These changes take more time to be vetted in our public process and some
noted may ultimately not be deemed feasible.
Positive and Improved Areas in FY 2007108 Quarter 4
Alleys -Improved by 15.8% when compared to the same quarter in FY2006/07 and
22.6.4% when compared to the same quarter in FY2005/O6.
• Parks -Scores improved by 25.4% when compared to the same quarter in FY2006/07
and 30.9% when compared to the same quarter in FY2005/06.
• Beach Areas - City of Miami Beach responsibility improved by 10.9%when compared to
the same quarter in FY2006/07 and by 22.8% when compared to the same quarter in FY
2005106.
Positive and Improved Areas in FY 2008109 Quarter 1
Streets -Residential scores improved by 4.7%when compared to the same quarter in
FY2007/08 and 30.5% when compared to the same quarter in FY2005/06, the base
year.
Parks -Scores improved by8.6%when compared to the same quarter in FY2007/08 and
31 %when compared to the same quarter in FY2005/06.
Areas of Focus
Parkinct Lots -Overall scores remained almost the same during FY 2007108 Quarter 4
and FY 2008109 Quarter 1, but continue to be an area of focus with poor litterand garbage
can scores due to overflowing trash. The latter has been tied to the impact caused by the
shift from city crews to contracted haulers now picking up garbage cans in the city's
parking lots. The contracted haulers pick-up garbage cans at different times of the day
depending on the route they follow and this is affecting the score of the parking lots. The
Sanitation Division will coordinate with private haulers to pick-up the City's garbage cans
first as part of their route. In addition, litter continues to be tied to parking lots close to
construction sites. The Parking Department will continue to explore the option of passing
an ordinance that will require construction contractors to provide a parking plan in order to
have permits approved by the Building Department that will include some cleanliness
requirements based on the City's index.
Allevs -Scores remained during FY 2007108 Quarter 4, but increased by almost 15%
during FY 2008109 Quarter 1 due to overflowing garbage dumpsters, the condition of
dumpsters, and standing water. Some action plans include:
o Continue joint effort between Public Works and Code with the alley crews
comprised of both Sanitation and Code employees.
o Code will increase enforcement of businesses, especially on the south-end of
the city that are dumping trash and Leaving standing water in the alley when
cleaning their business. Code will give citations to those not placing their waste
in the dumpsters and leaving the alley full of water and trash.
o The Sanitation Division will request that dumpsters be repainted to take care of
issues related to graffiti on dumpsters.
• Trends - As the City's cleanliness program enters its fourth year, trends are beginning to
appear and both prior Quarter 4 and Quarter 1 scores show similar patterns, although
scores have continued to improve from year to year when comparing similar quarters. In
an effort to continue to explore these trends in depth, Sanitation will look into how the use
of vacation in the holiday period in the second half of Q1 might be affecting the scores of
this quarter due to key staff being out during that time of year.
Cleanliness Key Intended Outcome
Cleanliness was identified in our community surveys as a key driver impacting overall quality of
life. Although additional improvement is still needed, since the inception of the cleanliness
assessment program, the City has seen noted increases in overall service levels and
satisfaction in the community in this important service area.
P
c~..,au r_~
1
r~~,
,i,
. uWlc Aree :-f - D1
".83
~I FS C3
1.7i
1 F~ -
1.82
t 72 ~. i--
'_78 _
1.64 Y n
t76
1 66 base7~8.
-i er~s
' C D^a
,
, wrircbL'q ales 1.8A 15~ 1.60 1.52 S7 .19.i".
r omrmm~P Eralurn.hnr
G~;rroaiabno+mmneart
zr.:xiua tsa
LG6
L73 156
'..61 1.60
'. ~l
1.65 1.53
'b8 '.x
1.57
1.fi3
2C. 1 ~6
.i' 6"~°
-18.5"6
aicr:° 2.12 2.30 2.40 2,28 226 -12.2^c
'
Sloewa,ks 1.73 1.55 1.62 1.7t 1.66 -19.3?
.
'
fenrrevm-Erwumvel 1.58 1.62 1.60 tEb '.61 Q10°
.
Ga„na¢u~~hot Erxtrrmaor 1.77 1.53 1.53 1Y 169 ~16.OYF.
'
Rt:: carro 1.8a 1.62 '..73 ill 174 -1 B.T'+
•
'
Packs
Parkin
5ia~ewA• 1.58
t57
2.36 1.78
t.76 _
1.57 7.77
1.68
2.06 _ 1.89
'..89
192 1.75
1.81
2.OB ~1.8"~
~
-r.5y6
-19Jti
96JC11 AreA9
~irydaa'n;fCachRawanaelr
1Fnr-Oaa:::ax.. Raxaonsnltt~
171
LBd
tfi:)
tb'[
'L.05 _
2.24
1.85
173
_'. 75
1.`d7 -
-i:+^'.~
- _ Fvzab7ro6
p3
ps
FY Score
III
~O~' c l l r =
F]Imet, Pubbe Aru _i
av. T[lalH3 mb¢
caRncrcul-v.yav.rnrnr
G:rornaanbao+o-e,terarr;a~.
Rr.;xnbm
We.:" G1
1.DG
15/.`
1.65
1 66
1.73
1.64 _
2.36 Qy
1 ~l
t!?
1 F.a
1 FU
:.58
1.77
2.18
1 7G
1.07
1.56--
1.57
1.61
160
fiF
t%2
1.51
'..52
1.92
1 "
I tie
S4
1.?A,
1.60
1.60
2.07 %chanye from
pnor 0tr
- '. _
os9: .
-: •>.
0.3'e_
-1.0"'•
-T2ti
6.794
'
S~oesvalks 183 1 7B 1.08 _ 1.bt '_72 J.2
b
Wmn:rcmb_rvatarr•am- _
1 80 1.79 1.61 1 Sft 1.6B -t a°.:
Gnrnvrtrol.nam necarrna^
1.93
1.77
7.fl7
1 Bd
175 -
-2.0%
Rc:W:nbm '.l3 t.d/ 1.77 t.G3 1 75 5.3^6
p-,*„ 1.5]
~ oa 1.59
1 afi 1.52
1.63
1.B0 L5L
'.87 ~7 2ti
a.8ti
Parknui
Cleanliness Intlex Score Per Public Ar6a (target = i.S)
' FY2008:09 '
Public Araa
___._j
^Ilp `- Q1
-_ _ _
~ tiy- - Q2 Q3 Qa FY Scoro
__
- ~
%cttanga from
Dnor ptr
2.1`4,
=v?? s~ 1 80 11.114.
ha~ ,~•feelnp «krys 1.66 1 G9 `L
CGmnarnal-=n~:rta rnrrr 1.68 13.5".
~::mnlMAJI'h01-~'1lyrgfnCrt 1 ?L 1S.S%
R.^.smru 1.57 2.7%
i.IC/s- 2.21 ta.d%
Sldeaalks '.?7 102%
Ccrmerca.c+laru:rorr.: '.73 9A%
:urmaaal .WrE~~¢caPrner. '..80 15.0%
neyifnnlial
Porky
Parking 1.8C
1:38
~ 10.9%
1.9%
9.1°,S
V:afamay 2.^.8 7.1 Y.
~ -
BWeh dreds
Cilyc`!diam.8cachRu::roiuihililY t.fi5 16.2%
!.tl:nn -0sOe OOUnly Respmtsai :y 171 '~.
I
32%
' ?rrvale ~ Business 9arW ge: durrps:crs sc:ures are nul use? in I^e rv rulalkn c' :his s;.on:.
^ Pnvate i Busness garoage c.:m W16•s 'were Itm assessed m FY05 D4 and FY00 C
Nolen Targel in ~ V2005d5E •eax 2 G and +~as changed 1G LS In fY2000:0!
- ~ 006!07 6kronu MOm
p-- G1 ~ CF W FY corn 6x66 fim
CP~nr9P Y2 :'N •!y: d2.2k )3.]Y. 11 [.<'4 11.2=..
6hett5 b--1~ A }.;i)V. I,`iuM 1n.1':.
1'i r:.
mnhnna n:~r. r~rnp.r:
...y„nm 66.9% 9=.1% 66.6% 64.6K 65.654 121'r'..
8 wwalk 66.7% N 9% 93.0% 9?b% 20.E „
r. 0R 86.6E B?.Z% PQ.6% _26.2 ~.
.1 N E ~-~ r SS =% 5.". <% N9 9% 16.2
pA.n.. 81 •v8 86'6 N695 /66). 84'.R t).9
ula s' ]0.0% 66.3%, 5% 51.A% 5L.6 n i .
P~ n~ ~8 A% E! ts. )+'f'w 66.314 )6.8N to a ~,
VndT ^ 7<.6% b W 77 1. 70.OK i6.<% 11 Y..
yVar.r.ra r• ". 85.3% 2T1. 72.V16 6?. % 69.<% 11 r:.
6war~'CUB. _ N0.5% d .5.6 66.7% f.1 6's. b' 9% B 3 ~,
69a Cn •AL'.CI ~ Et :3N :!u'6 57.6% x. 76.G% 2.6;.
Next Quarter Assessments
City employees and Neighborhood Leadership Academy alumni and students are conducting
cleanliness assessments every quarter. If you or any member of your staff is interested in
participating in the City's Public Area Cleanliness Program, please contact Isabel Stillone with
the Office of Budget and Performance Improvement at extension 6354.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
JMGIRCM/KGBlIAS