LTC 083-2020 Valet Operator Index Results for FY 2019 20 Quarter 1MI A MI BEA CH
OFFICE OF THE CITY MA NAGER
LTC#
083-2020
LETTER TO COMMISSION
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Mayor Dan Gelber and Members of the City ~cion
Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager t¿µ ar .fa<'
February 5, 2020
SUBJECT: Valet Operator Index Results for FY 2019/20 Quarter 1
The purpose of this Letter to Commission is to communicate the results of the newly
developed Valet Operator Index from FY 2019/20 Quarter 1 (October 31, 2019 to December
31,2019).
Key Q1 Metrics:
• Valet Average Index Rating: 4.77
• Number of Experiences less than 4.0 score: 3
• Percent of scores not meeting standard: 7%
Background
At the July 2018 City Commission meeting, the Mayor and City Commission authorized the
administration to enter negotiations with Concessionaire for valet services for City properties
including the Fillmore at the Jackie Gleason Theater, Miami Beach Convention Center,
Lincoln Road, and other City properties as may be authorized by the City Manager. The
agreement executed on November 26, 2018 includes performance standards aligned to the
City's customer service excellence standards, as well as penalties for not meeting those
standards.
The Valet Operator Index is an objective measurement of customer service performance
ranging from 1.0 (not satisfied) to 5.0 (extremely satisfied) and includes assessments of
conduct, professionalism, attire, and knowledge. 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. Each valet operator is assessed at
varying times of the day and evening.
Any assessment resulting in a score between 1.0 and 3.99 on a 5.0 scale results in a $100
penalty and shall require a memorandum indicating corrective action items taken to remedy
the situation. Critical item questions scoring 1.0 will result in an override of the total
assessment to a 1.0.
M IA M I BEACH PARKING VALET OPERATOR INDEX
CITYWIDE SUMMARY FY 2020
4 Experiences
Avg Score TT Below 4 Experiences ($100 fine)
Valet 4.77 44 3
MIAMI BEACH PARKING VALET OPERA TOR INDEX
CITYWI DE SUMMARY FOR VALET
Average Score Per Quarter Per Year
Y'er 2019 21120
I .l al la z cnange
1% chmgefran change from from base yer
Quarter a1 a prior Gtr prior FY Ou Otr
Parkina Valet 6.00% 5.30%
Valet Operator Index Results FY 2019/20 Quarter 1
Overall, the City Valet Operator Index in FY 2019/20 Quarter 1 was a 4.77 on a 5.0 scale.
Parking staff have reviewed the results of the assessments with the contractor for valet and
issued penalties per the agreement based on 44 assessments conducted with 3
assessments scoring 3.99 or below resulting in a fine of $300. Citywide scores improved
this quarter by 6.0% compared to the prior quarter. Additionally, a memorandum was
issued to correct the identified deficiency. Parking staff have reviewed the results of the
assessments with the contractor for valet.
Areas of Focus in FY 2019/20 Quarter 1
• Employee had necessary tools- Employees are required to provide water to the
customer. In several instances water was not offered.
• Greeting - employees are to greet employees upon arrival.
Next Quarter Assessments
City part-time staff is conducting valet assessments every quarter. Additionally, residents are
always welcome to participate. If you or any member of your staff is interested in
participating in the City's Valet Operator Index, please contact Dr. Leslie Rosenfeld with the
Office of Organizational Development & Education at extension 6923.
If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me.
""Rin %$$-
C: Mark Taxis, Assistant City Manager
Saul Frances, Parking Director
Dr. Leslie Rosenfeld, Chief Learning Development Officer
Evaluation C riteria fo r each assessm e nt are listed be low : C ritical ite m s w ith an aste risk (*)
scoring a 1 result in overall score of 1 fo r expe rie nce :
• V alet first im pression w as 1- cle a n , 2- pro fessio na l, 3- gree te d w ith a sm ile , a nd 4-
displayed appro priate be havio r. *
• Serv ice w as pro m pt. T ransa ctio n tim e w as qu ick an d w a it tim e fo r pe rso na l
assistance by attendant/se curity w as no lo ng e r tha n 1 O m in ute s or sche d u le fo r a
m utually convenient tim e . *
• I w as greeted in a court eo us m a n ne r. * (V alet gree ted m e w ith 1- sin ce re hel lo , 2-
w elcom ing attitude , and 3- he lpful )
• Em ployee respo nde d to custom e r in a court eo us m a n ne r fo llo w in g the ph ilo so p h y
that "the custom e r is not alw ays rig ht, but alw ays de se rv es to be tre a ted w ith
respect".*
• Em ployee pro vide d accurate and und e rstanda b le so lutio ns/o p tio n s (in E ng lish ) to
custom e r request or directed the custom e r to the ap p ro pria te pe rso n w ho m a y ha ve
know ledge in the subje ct m atte r. E m p loyee ap pea red kno w le d g e a b le .
• Em ployee had access to ne cessa ry too ls to m e et req ue st an d pro vid e d a re ce ip t.
Info rm ation and m ateria l to obtain answ ers and or se rv ices w e re re a d ily ava ila b le .
• I received the se rv ice/info rm atio n req uired . (A ll of m y que stio n s o r the entire se rv ice
w as pro vide d concise ly and accurate ly) E m p loyee ha d a po sitive , he lp ful att itud e ,
w as efficie nt and fo llow ed thro ug h w ith req ue st. E m p loyee ap p e a red to go the extra
m ile to assist m e .
• T he V alet sa id, "T hank Y ou!" end ing the conversatio n sho w in g tha t the y ap p re cia ted
m y business (E x. H ave a great da y, enjo y your stay, w e ap p re cia te yo u r busin e ss,
w e hope to see you soo n ).
• V alet w as w earing an ap pro p riate clea n unifo rm w ith na m e tag an d/o r ID , co n siste nt
w ith the contract requirem e nts.
• T he overall im pressio n of m y visit w as po sitive . S atisfie d w ith tim e lin e ss,
com pleteness, and clarity of info rm atio n and/o r se rv ices rece ive d . E m p lo yee
de m o nstrated pro fessio na lism and co urt esy.