Loading...
LTC 232-2024 Cleanliness Index Results for FY24 Quarter 2D o cuSi gn En v el op e ID: 4 C 0 F 9 1 9 3 -D2 0 8 -4 1E B -A 8 3 4-1 4 8 8 7 A 2 1 9 54 C MIAMI BEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER LTC# LETTER TO COMMISSION TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor Steven Meiner and Members of the City Commission Rickelle Williams, Interim City Manager <J?u.) June 7, 2024 Cleanliness Index Results for FY 24 Quarter 2 The purpose of this Letter to Commission (L TC) is to communicate the results of the Cleanliness Index for Fiscal Year 2024 Quarter 2 (January 1, 2024 to March 31, 2024). Key Q2 Metrics: • Citywide Cleanliness Index Rating: 1.31 • Citywide Cleanliness Index Compared to FY 19 Quarter 2: 21% improvement • Citywide Percent Assessments Meeting Target of 2.0: 98% Background The Miami Beach Public Area Cleanliness Index is an objective measurement of performance ranging from 1.0 (Extremely Clean) to 6.0 (Extremely Dirty) and includes assessments of litter/trash, garbage cans/dumpsters, organic material, and fecal matter (attachment A).The scale used is as follows: 1.0 extremely clean, 2.0 clean, 3.0 somewhat clean, 4.0 somewhat dirty, 5.0 dirty and 6.0 extremely dirty. 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. Quarterly sample sizes are set to ensure no greater than a ± 5.0 percentage point sampling error given the 95% confidence level for each of the public areas assessed. The City tightened the target for the Citywide and area- specific cleanliness indicators 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 to date. As important, the City also has a goal to ensure that 90 percent of assessments score 2.0 or better, with awareness to seasonal fluctuations. The scores are compared to the same quarter in prior years to account for seasonal variations. The program received the 2007 Sterling Quality Team Showcase Award. All improvement action plans historically implemented are validated against the Index. Cleanliness results at the end of each quarter inform stakeholders if the action plans have worked or if they need to be adjusted. Tangible benefits obtained as a result of the program include the city's achievement of one of its strategic objectives to be cleaner. Due to circumstances at the time, all performance initiatives, including the cleanliness index, were paused in FY 20. The index was reinvigorated in FY 24 including real time alerts for lower scoring areas, as well as a cleanliness index dashboard. The Cleanliness Index interactive dashboard of historical data is available on SharePoint and can be accessed through the following link: https://miamibeach.sharepoint.com/dept/orqdev/BI/SitePaqes/Cleanliness-Dashboard.aspx 232-2024 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C0F9193-D208-41EB-A834-14887 A21954C A user manual and training videos for the dashboard are also available through the following link: https://miamibeach.sharepoint.com/dept/orgdev/BI/SitePages/Home.aspx The dashboard will be updated over the next few months to include FY 24 data. Summary of the Cleanliness Assessment Results FY 24 Quarter 2 Overall, the Citywide Cleanliness Index improved during FY 24 Quarter 2 when compared to the previous quarter and the same quarter in FY 19 by 13% and 21 % to 1.31. Additionally, FY averages reflect steady improvement as evidenced by the Index, anecdotal information, and results from the 2022 resident survey. Additionally, 98% of all public area assessments scored 2.0 or better (target= 90%) in FY 24 Quarter 2 which represents a 21 % improvement when compared to Q2 in FY 19 and 4% when compared to the previous quarter. Cleanliness continues to remain a top priority for the City. Positive and Stable Areas in FY 24 Quarter 2 • Streets- Streets scored 1.37 which is a 15% improvement when compared to the same quarter in FY 19 and an 7% improvement when compared to the previous quarter. Commercial entertainment streets improved to 1.33 which is an 18% improvement from the same quarter in FY 19 and an 5% improvement when compared to the previous quarter. 94% of streets assessed achieved a score of 2.0 or better. Commercial non-entertainment streets remained stable when compared to the same quarter in FY 19 with 96% of assessment scoring a 2.0 or better. • Parks- Parks scored 1.15, a 25% improvement when compared to the same quarter in FY 19 and an 11% improvement when compared to last quarter with 99.6% of assessment scoring a 2.0 or better. Over the past several years, park rangers have been placed in active parks across the city. • Beaches Beach areas maintained by Miami Beach scored 1.17, a 26% improvement when compared to the same quarter in FY 19 and a 13% improvement compare to the previous quarter. Additionally, 98% of assessments scored a 2.0 or better. Also, Beach areas serviced by the county recorded a 16% improvement scoring 1.21 when compared the same quarter in FY 19. • Waterways - Waterways scores improved by 12% reaching 1.40 when compared to the same quarter in FY 19 and 23% when compared to the previous quarter with 91% of assessments scoring a 2.0 or better. • Sidewalks- Sidewalks showed improvement, scoring 1.26, a 21 % improvement compared to the same quarter in FY 19 and a 16% improvement when compared to the previous quarter, with 97% of assessments scoring 2.0 or better. Areas of Focus in FY 24 Quarter 2 • Parking Lots - Parking lots scored 1.51 which is a 25% improvement from the same quarter in FY 19 with 89% of assessment scoring a 2.0 or better. Organic material and litter/trash were noted to be the driver of the lower scores with the lowest scoring lots being P#83, P#11, P#4 and P#86 at 1.95. In addition, garbage cans, litter/trash, and organic materials were the main drivers during both weekday and weekend daytime assessments, as well as for weekend late-night assessments. Also during both daytime and nighttime on weekends, garbage cans and litter/trash were the main drivers. • Alleys - Alleys scored 1.61 which is a 14% improvement for the same quarter in FY 19 with 84% of the assessments scoring a 2.0 or better. Litter/trash and organic material contributed the most to the low scores reaching 1.87 and 1.92 respectively in terms of factors. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C0F9193-D208-41EB-A834-14887A421954C Tari et 1.Sor better public Area overall city Score streets sidewalks tot including alleys rrercal Erfertairrenl Commercial- ton-Entertainment Residential eye Corrercial Entertainment .orrercal- Nuon-Entertainment Residential parks marking tatera peach Area r 19 o1 o2 a3 a4 rev Score 1.61 1.65 1.64 1.65 1.64 1.61 1.62 1.57 1.54 1.59 1.55 1.5s 1.52 1,5a 1.52 1.62 1.55 1.53 1.s6 1.57 1.63 1.58 1.52 1.58 1.5a 1.53 1.97 1.88 1.85 1.88 1.59 1.59 1.52 1.55 1.61 1.6o 1.53 1.56 1.6o 1.6o 1.54 1.56 1.40 1.53 2.15 1.99 1.85 1.96 1.4o 1.59 1.84 1.71 Miami Beach Responsibility only Miami-Dade Coan Erp EI Hr ETTI Tari.et1.sor better rv2a Public Area o3 overall ityScore streets sidewalks tot including alleys Corrercial- Entertainrment Cornrnercial - Non-Entertainment Residential fey Corrercial- Entertainren' Corrercial- Mon-Entertainment residential pear ks marking aterray teach rea a4 reyscore %6 change from prior atr 9 change from base year same tr (rYv 19) -13.2% -20.6% 15.4% -12.2% -18.1%6 -5.0% -17.9% -17.3% -20.9% -20.9% - 1a.a% -16.0% -20.8% -16.3% -15.2% -20.0% -16.2% -10.9% -24.8% -6.8% -23.1% 24.1% -11.9% Miami teach Responsibility only Miami-Doade County Responsibility -26.a% -11.7% -16.0% %of assessments scoring 2.0or better {target= oo%) r 19 public Area 01 02 a3 04 rv score Citywide 80.0% so.7% 83.2%6 83.2%6 s1.8% streets 85.6% 84.5% 86.7% 86.a% 85.8% Commercial- Entertainment 88.3%6 85.3%6 s7.2% 86.7% 86.9% Correrccial- Non-Entertainment 83.6% s3.1%6 85.2% 86.3%6 84.6% Residential 85.0% 85.2% 87.7% 86.1%6 s6.0% Alleys 73.296 75.7% 77.98% 76.9% 75.9% Sidewalks 86.5%6 85.8%6 86.7% 89.2% s7.1% Commercial- Entertainment 89.8% 88.8% Commercial- ton-Entertainmentl 85.0% I 84.8% 86.9% I 88.7%6 I s6.a% I Residentiall 83.9% I 82.9% 84.5%6 I 86.1%6 I 84.a% I parks 87.8%6 marking I 1. I 69.8% I 74.1%6 I 73.2%6 I 69.7% aterray 88.6% 76.9% I 71.6%6 81.8% Beach rea Miami Beach Responsibilit•y Only- 86.8%6 s7.1% I 86.5%6 s7.7% Miami-Dade County Responsibility %of assessments scorin, 2.0or better target= 90%6) rv 24 public Area a1 a2 o3 citywide streets Commercial- Entertainment Commercial- Nuon-Entertainment Residential Alleys sidewalks Commercial- Entertainment Commercial- Non-Entertainrert Residential arks Parking aterray Beach rea a4 score %6 change from 2,2%" I»rs·var same 0tr prior atr rev19) Niami Beach responsibility only Miami-ade County Responsibility 3.6% 21.2% 0.2% 11.1% 2.8% 14.3% 3.8%6 14.9% -0,1% 13.6% 10.3% 5.4% 13.a% .2% 8.6% 5.0% 1a.7% 9.0% 16.8% 1.7% 13.a4% 5.1% 27.8% 10.8% 2.3% 1.9% 12.3% 0.2% a.1% EA.co1.«0 _1.s1.999 Lil0so % n79.999 and below 80.0-89.999 so so» DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C0F9193-D208-41EB-A834-14887A421954C Cleanliness Key Intended Outcome Cleanliness continues to be in our community surveys as a key driver affecting overall quality of life. In addition, in the 2024 survey, residents and businesses rated cleanliness as one of the services the City should strive not to reduce. In fact, 41.8% of respondents rated cleanliness as the top and most important city service, while also identifying it as a top opportunity for improvement the city should focus on. Additionally, 64% of residents surveyed indicated they were satisfied or very satisfied with cleanliness in their neighborhoods. Next Quarter Assessments City part-time staff is conducting cleanliness assessments every quarter. If you or any member of your staff is interested in participating in the City's Public Area Cleanliness Index, please contact Dr. Leslie Rosenfeld, Chief Education Officer at extension 26923. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Attachment A- Cleanliness Index Scoring Guide c: Eric Carpenter, Deputy City Manager Mark Taxis, Assistant City Manager Joe Gomez, Public Works Director John Rebar, Parks and Recreation Director Jose R. Gonzalez, Transportation and Mobility Director Hernan Cardena, Code Compliance Director Amy Knowles, Chief Resiliency Officer Environment & Sustainability Bradford Kaine, Sanitation Division Director Jason D. Greene, Chief Financial Officer G~ ~ Rosenfeld, Chief Education Officer JDG/LDR/OD DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C0F9193-D208-41EB-A834-14887A421954C Attachment A ic material i,e. leaves, bran yed area, 2 Clean • Isolated pieces of fitter on the entire assessed area, which is not void of litter, but may contain an isolated incidence of litter. Or« ic lat ·#al • Can is in good working order, no more than 34 full, Isolated piece of trash outside of the can Can is free of items {ie. stickers, yalfiti. r • Less than 10% of a 10 step distance paved area is • Past residue of fecal matter. It seems that an covered by small organic materials, but no more attempt was made to clean the fecal matter, but than 10% of the entire assessed area. residue was left behind. h stors • Small to moderate amounts of litter. Litter • Can is functioning, but is full with trash, which accumulation should account to less than 10 small can be seen from the eye level, No litter above pieces ot 2-4 pieces of large litter, but no more the rain guard. 3 than 10% of the entire assessed area. • One small isolated instance of a sticker or raffiti, which the lrawn to it bing%lat l,z·a«jg'g ] Clean • One instance of fecal matter is present on the public area. • Between 10%- 30% of a 10 step ayed_ area is covered by organic materials, but no mote than 10% of the entire assessed area. tt€3 eces of largo organic materials tteor • Can is full and there is trash above the rain guard. • Can is in a usable and working condition, but contains items (i.e. stickers, graffiti) on them and/or some damage (ex. dents). 4 omowhat timidimndi he-!-kmh!Uhm"Im!"Imm!znlilililmIInssesee@al hll.ho cull7iwoo Dirty • Between 30%- 50% of a 10 step paved area is • Two instances of fecal matter are present on covered by organic materials. the public area. • 2t03instances of organic material accumulation caused by standing water/poor drainage. The organic material is beginning to turn brown. • Consistently scattered trash, The trash accumulation should account to more than 10 pieces of small litter or over 4 pieces of large litter, but no more than 10% f the entire assessed area. Litter / 'ras s Dirty • Consistent accumulation of trash. There are multiple piles of trash consisting of more than 10 pieces of small litter or over 4 pieces of large litter. • Over 50% of gayed area is covered by organic materials. Over 10 pieces of large organic materials. • 3-4 instances of organic material accumulation caused by standing water and oor drainage. • Can is full and there is trash above the rain guard and beginning to overflow. • A large area of the can contains items (i.e. stickers or graffiti) on them. oc« latter » Three instances of fecal matter are present on the public area. rl'rash 6 Extremely Dirty • Area is blocked by an accumulation of trash and litter. Illegal dumping may be evident. Hazardous materials on the street. • Can is full and trash has overflowed to the ground, In some cases, there is a rat/rodent/insect infestation. • Can is covered of items (i.e. stickers or raffiti} and needs to be laced. ecal • 90-100% of pavgd area is covered with organic material, The organic material has turned brown, • Over 5 instances of organic material accumulation caused by standing water and 0or drainate. • Four or more instances of fecal matter are present on the public area. DocuSign Envelope ID: 4C0F9193-D208-41EB-A834-14887 A21954C Cleanliness Index for Waterwavs Litter / Tr sh e No litter and/or debris floating on or in the water and up to the high tide watermark. No signs of floating liquid. 2 Clean • No or isolated instances of small fresh organic material., • No large organic material, such as tree limbs or palm fronds in the water and up to the high tide watermark. • Isolated pieces of litter floating on or in the entire area of water and up to the high tide watermark. No signs of floating liquid. Less than 10% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water and up to the high tide watermark is covered by organic material, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area. • No large organic materal, such as tree limbs or palm fronds in the water and up to the high tide watermark. 3 Somewhat Clean • Small amount of litter including floating liquids, such as oil. This includes litter floating on the water or in the water and up to the high tide watermark. Mote than two pieces of litter and less than 5% of about a 20 sq foot area of water up to the high tide watermark are covered by litter, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area up to the high tide watermark being assessed. • Between 10% • 30% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water and up to the high tide watermark is covered by organic material, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area. • Between 1 and 3 pieces of large organic material, such as tree limbs or palm fronds in the water and up to the high tide watermark. 4 Somewhat Dirty • Small to moderate amounts of litter, including floating liquids, such as oil. Between 5% and 10% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water up to the high tide watermark is covered by litter, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area being assess0d. • Slight unnatural or foul smell is being emitted. • Between 30% - 50% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water and up to the high tide watermark is covered by organic material. • Between 4 and 10 pieces of large organic material, such as tree limbs or palm fronds in the water and up to the high tide watermark. 5 Dirty • Consistent accumulation of trash including floating liquids, such as oil. Between 10% and 25% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water up to the high tide watermark is covered by litter, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area up to the high tide watermark being assessed. • One extra-large piece of litter, such as a tire, a grocery cart, etc. • Stron unnatural or foul smell is being emitted. • Over 50% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water and up to the high tide watermark are covered by organic material, but occurring in no more than 10% of the entire water area up to the high tide watermark. • Over 10 pieces of large organic material, such as tree limbs or palm fronds in the water and up to the high tide watermark. 6 Extremely Dirty e Large accumulation of litter and trash including floating liquids, such as oil. Over 25% of about a 20 sq. foot area of water area up to the high tide watermark are covered by litter. There may be evidence of illegal dumping. e Two or more extra·large pieces of litter, such as tires, a grocery carts, etc. e Very strong unnatural or foul smell is being emitted. • 90-100% of the water and up to the high tide watermark is covered by organic material. Note: When assessing litter/trash for all areas:. • lf the litter density for the observed condition is occurring between 10-25% of the assessed area, then add 1 point on the rating scale. • If the litter density for the observed condition Is occurring more than 25% of the assessed area, then add 2 points on the rating scale. When assessing organic material for all areas: • If organic material density for the observed condition Is occurring in more than 10% of the entire assessed area, then add 1 point on the rating scale.