LTC 296-2011 Cleanliness Index m MIAMI BEACH RF0 Vi: 0
2011 NOV 23 PM 3.52
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER CITY CLE l K'S CF F
LTC # 296 -2011 LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jorge M. Gonzalez, City Manager
DATE: November 23, 2011 W
SUBJECT: Cleanliness Index & Assessment Pr am Results for FY 2010/11 Quarter 4
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to communicate the results of the award
winning Cleanliness Index and Assessment program from FY2010/11 Quarter 4 (July 1,
2011 to September 30, 2011). As the following chart displays, this past year marks the
lowest (best) cleanliness scores since the City began the assessments, with scores having
improved by 31.3% from FY2005/06 to FY2010/11.
Cleanliness Program Results
3.00 sr►•pr
2.80 —sidewalks
2.60
2.40 ....... Pa ?ks
2.20 �•■•rr• ■airst ■■ss••� Pa *king
a 2.00
hd Mb
ai o 1.80 __ ■ ■ • • _ • Waterway
1,60 Beach Areas(W81
1.40 ...... overall ci ty scare
1.20
1.00 — -
FY05 /06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08 /09 FY09 110 FY10/11
Fiscal Year
Background
Cleanliness was identified in our community surveys as a key driver affecting overall quality
of life. In addition, in the 2009 survey, residents and businesses rated cleanliness as the
number one service the City should strive not to reduce. The City has implemented
increases in service levels and community satisfaction levels have improved. Overall scores
have improved by 31.3% from FY2005/06 to FY2010/11.
i
The Miami Beach Public Area Cleanliness Index is an objective measurement of
performance 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 FY 2006/07, 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 through FY 2007/08, FY 2008/09, FY
2009/10; and FY 2010/11. 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 2010/11 Quarter 4
Overall, the citywide cleanliness index improved during FY 2010/11 Quarter 4 by 26.6%
when compared to the same quarter in FY2005/06 (the first year the program was
implemented) and improved by 14.4% when compared to the same quarter in FY2009/10. In
general, the City's cleanliness has steadily progressed as evidenced by the index, anecdotal
information, and results of our most recent resident surveys.
Positive and Improved Areas in FY 2010/11 Quarter 4
• Parks Scores improved by 16.8% when compared to the same quarter in
FY2009/10, with a 31.9% improvement when compared to the same quarter in
FY2005/06. Parks will continue to work with sanitation to address any issues, as
well as waste hauler responsibilities.
• Beaches - Scores improved by 28.3% for areas covered by Miami Beach staff and
26.2% for areas covered by MDC compared to the same quarter in FY2005/06, with
a 13.8% improvement from same quarter in FY 2009/10. Cleanliness of beaches
remains a priority, with multiple departments collaborating to address prior issues.
Miami -Dade County personnel are invited to participate in all quarterly meetings.
• Alleys Overall scores in alleys improved by 29.7% when compared to the same
quarter in FY 2005/06, and 5.4% when compared to the same quarter in FY 2009/10.
Alley cleanliness ratings at 1.75 remain among the lowest citywide, although reflect a
20.1 % improvement from the prior quarter. Code has reinstated daily reporting to
sanitation and expanded alley drain inspections to include weekends twice daily.
Two additional code officers are inspecting alleys twice per day after 5:00 p.m..
• Streets /Sidewalks Streets /sidewalks across the Beach improved by 20.1 % and
23.4% respectively when compared to the same quarter in FY 2005/06, with an
increase in street litter of 12.9% when compared to the same quarter in FY 2009/10.
Scores this quarter are the best scores to date, with an overall quarter four score for
streets of 1.47 and sidewalks of 1.41. The percentage of street assessments scoring
2.0 was 84.8% with the commercial non - entertainment area exceeding the target at
97.9 %.
• Parking Lots - Parking lots have improved 26.4% when compared to the same
quarter in FY 2005/06 and by 17.8% when compared to the same quarter in FY
2009/10. Sanitation has adjusted service schedules as needed to address issues
and will be adding an additional crew in FY 2011/12 to provide an additional day or
two of service to 30 identified parking lots. Additional garbage cans and increased
garbage cans have been placed in high traffic locations.
Areas of Focus
• Waterways - Overall scores improved when compared to FY 2009/10 Q4 and the
same quarter in FY 2005/06, but this continues to be an area of focus, especially in
the waterway hotspots. The main factor affecting the score is litter accumulation on
the edge of the water and debris coming down as a result of the high tide. Sanitation
will reach out to Miami Dade County to discuss areas of responsibility and cleaning
cycle dates. County staff will also be invited to all future cleanliness meetings and
provided cleanliness program data to assist with the identification of hotspots and
issues.
Ge ant tt ese Index swore Per Public zr" (fagot = 1.SI
Fy""
Public Area Qi Q2 Q3 Q4 FY Score
vera City Score 220 1-94 2.24 2.03 2.113
Streets M 1.98 2.22 1.64 2.03
Not ncwding a�!eys
Commercial - Entertainmem 164 1.78 2.44 1-74 1.95
Commercial - Nor.- Entertainme -t +
Residential 225 1.83 2 -11 1.74 _01
Aheys
Sidewalks 1.64
Commercial - Entertain! ne -t
Commercial- Nc-- Entertainme -t 197 1 1. _�1 179 1 95
Res dential 220 2.11 1 .d
Parks 1.53 2.04 1 90
P1rki0s 225 2-30 2.01 211
W aterway -i 2-0 2.53 2.59
Reach Areas
Marr Beac- Respo°stilityO -y 2M 1.58 1.6 1 c1 1 85
Atarri -Cade County Respo ^s5ility f r
FY0609 FYOC17 F'F"M FVGM F1fO = FtlMII
%r+rira a a�mye
Public Area FY Score FY Scorf FY Stare FY Scan FY Scam Fir Score mean pew" won Wo Fr
Overall City Scare 210 1.78: 1.75 175 1.80 1-00
Std 2.03 1.66 1.89 1 7 3 1.74 1 A 5.5%
Not incluaingalleys '..94 1.57 1..59 186 1.66 1-54 7.S% _c.2':<
Comrrerc:al - E^tertainment ".0 1.5a 185 1.09 Im 9. "r-1.9%
Coenmertdal - Non- E- tertainment 1 1.93 1.51 f.00 155 1.6 1 3.8% 778.6%
Residental 1 1.63 1.64 1,88 1.85 1 -51 9.3% 33.1%
Alleys 219 2= 97 1.99 1.89 5.3% 37.e re'
Sidewalkz .06 1.68 1,72 1,73 175 1 7.4%
Commercial - Entertainment 104 1.61 t OT 7 1.7 1. 9 :6 24.4%
Commeraai - Non- Entertainment 1.95 1.64 1.75 179 1.77 1B3 B.8% 19.d%
Residental 14 1.74 175 177 131 1 7.5% 34.c"
Parks 1. 1.5 1.52 1.55 1.57 12.4% 38.716
Parking 2.21 t.81 187 2.00 10.5% 22.1%
Waterway 2.59 1 2.08 2.09 2.10 2.11 1?0 24.1% 52.4%
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibiity Only 1.85 1.75 1.59 162 1.59 11.2% 1 29.4%
Miami -Dade County Responsibility 1.93 Iw 1 1.70 161 1. 10.1% 30.4'.6
P!pl1111
l� ahma xotaiWR
PI�r AID a 67 0l W Fr revue tan rrler FY fo®b ," Fv
aww c�ei
Overall _i ate 1.71 1.92 ISO 174 1.50 2.B% -14 3%
Streets 1.68 17 t 70 163 1.74 0.6% -14.3%
Not including alleys 7 1.8? 1.65 1.54 1.86 0.0% 44.4%
Commeroial - Entertainment 1.70 1.92 1 t3 1.152 2.4% -13.3%
Cornmemai - Nam - Entertainment 1.61 1.84 1 56 154 1.63 -1.2% - 10,2%
Residental 1.55 117 1 78 183 t.d5 -16% -179%
Alleys 1. t 8 1. 1.99 1.0% ,23.5%
idewal. s 1. 4 1.92 1. t. 1. 1.2% -15.0%
Commercial - Entertainment 1.82 1.98 170 1,50 1-777 4.7% -Is 2%
Commercal - Non - Entertainment 1.72 1.93 1.80 163 1.77 -9.1% -9.2%
Residentaal 1. 1. 4 t 9 1. 1.. 1 3.4 ' _20. 1%
Parks 11.01 181 t.
EAELI a 2.00 2.22 199 I SO 2. Do 2.0% -9.51%
Waterway 191 r7 27 r .i 2.11 0 57 -1S 5%
Roach Amas,
Miami Beach Responsiblity Only 1.58 1.58 t e7 1 -9 1.59 -1.9% -t4.1%
Miami -Dade Cc my Resoonsibilty 1.63 1.5@ 1 65 161
HiR 1
x wam"
rum Am G2 00 ri4 FY too" x MsrW! x ""w a am &A"
tan P~ Qv P~ FY Qv 4oww In
Overall City Score 1.63 1.00
,St 1. 1.60 1.92 1.85 -23.4% -9.8% -20.1%
Not including alleys 1.54 1.51 1.78 1.54 - 22.7% -117% - 21.8%
Commerml - Entertainment 1.54 1.74 1.5 -19.0% -8. -173%
Corrlmeruat - Non-Entertainment 1. 2.. -11.7% - 22.3%
Residental 9.58 1. 1 1,07 1.51 -221%
Alleys 1.71 1.89 2.10 -54% 21 -
skiewallts 1. 1.66 17! 1., 3 1 .4L' -1 ".3% -23.4%
Commercial - En.tertainrrwit 1. 1. 1 SC t_ 6': 8.3X -23.1
Commercat - Non- Entertahrrent 1.64 1.59 15` 1.58 - 22.2% -11.7% - 19.d "e
Residential 1. I'l 150 1.59 -10.7% - 15.7% - 2 -?`�
Parks 1.30 1 o O.D% -18.$% _ • ".
Parkinfl 1. 2 t :6 -17.8% -
_ Waterway 1.76 159 1.63 1,8 1.70 10.4% - 1157%
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibady Only 1.52 196 ' 1354 `
Miami -Dade Courtly Responsibility 1 . °_4 .3% 1 13.894
Ci MIAMI BEACH
PwoenbW of Assessmetilis scoring 2 -0 or biller Etarget = W%l
Fr 11W
Public Area 01 02 OD F1' Scott
77ide 57.5 71.1% 56.7% 75.5%
Streets 85-7% 2 83.0% 84.8% 73.4
Commercial - Entertainmen- 66.1% 9 1% 47.5% 74.8% 67.3%
Commercial - Non - Entertainment ?5.T 722% 92 4 67.2% ?'E
Residential .8% 84 e% E5.1% 7S-5%
Alleys 37.7% .8% 3 58. 1.9%
Sidewalks 82.6% 6 . 56. % 7D.3% W.7%
Commercial - Entertalnmer� - 6 . 1. 41.7% 71.7% 03-0
Commercial - Non- Entertainmen- 63.5% 56.4% 'D s?a P'.4% 71.8%
Residential 52.4% 1 % 521% E2._% 66.2%
Parks 46.3% Sc C`Ki 882% 63.8% 66.6%
Parkin 48.D% 9.5 4D 4
Waterway 4 63'% 34.5 50.8% %
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibility Only 64.1% 83.8% 68.0% 78.5% 73 -1%
Miami -03de Count' Responsibility 75. ?% 784% 53.9% .'..%u 71.2%
FY07100 FYOWD9
Public Area FY store FY snore
Citywide 60.3 S' .0%
Streets 87.4% 87.1%
Commercial - Entertainment 88.2% 88.1%
Commercial - Non- Entertainment 88 -5% 84.6%
Residential 86A% 870%
Alleys
Sidewalks %
Commercial - Entertainmen� e%
Commercial -Non-Entertainment 77 -7% 78.3%
Residential 78.3% 83.9%
Park 86.2% 841%
P ark ins
Waterway 69.5% 71.4
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibility Only 86..2% 844%
Miami -Dade County Responsibility 84.5%
FY08118
Public Area 91 92 D} 6M Flt ieare Clete Beim bMle
Citywide 80.0% 71.7% 8C._% 5.611 4 5.d°a 14 21.,
Street 86.5% 78.1% 88.4% 86.4% 4.091. 117 °z
Commercial - Entertainment 86.0% 78.8% 87 -8% 1.095 --
Commercial -Non- Entertainment 87.0% 76.0% 87 -3%
7 3.795 -
Residential 1.191 .
Alleys
Sidewalks 7D. $2.1 7.791
Commercial - Entertainment &!. 9.4 6.895
Commercial - Non- Entertainment 83.1% 59.8% 83.7% 88.8% 81.4% 5:195 B e%
Residential i2�i 79.5% 74.1% 87.0% 79.6% 12.891 13.495
Parks B6. 8 e.a% 89.1 22.5%
Parkins 8 . - -6°.�1 9.391
Waterway 1. _0A% 17.1%
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibility Only 88.6% 80.0% 87.4% 87 -3% 6.5% 14.2%
Miami -Dade County Responsibility 88.0% 89.7% 84.4% 88.7% 17 495
FYtQH1
e
Public Area 91 92 93 9t FYECOre ttosprla Reg te00tYM
�yggjde 88.6% 84.3% 78.5% 85 5% 12.1. -„ 5.0% 15.1%
Streets 79.5% 15.1% 2 -2% S.8 %1
Commercial - Entertainment 79.1% 13.7% - 1.0 °.G 18.291
Commercial - Non- Entertainment 7 18.891 0.2% 3.39s
Residential 83.. 12.891 52% 10440
Alleys 58.4% W111% 'WAS 12.4% 5..6% 2x 61'-a
Sidewalks 86 7 11..191 3140 1'• F .,.
Commercial- Entertainment 84.811 780!1 80.1% 1616% 0.890
Commercial - :.Non - Entertainment 808% 18.7% S.044
Residential 81.7% 82.2% 87.0X 88.8% 7 .0% 7.8%1
Parks 3.1. 8..5%
Parkins 1.4 15.840 12.2%
Waterway 78.9% 117.1% $ 8.5% 111-11%
Beach Areas
Miami Beach Responsibility Only 81.0!►
Miami -Dade County Responsibilty 88.2% 3.6% 7.d td..6 °5
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
Leslie Rosenfeld with the Office of Budget and Performance Improvement Organizational
Development Division at extension 6923.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
< Q /
JMG /DRB /KGB /LDR