Loading...
25 Staff Report - General Plan Update Community SurveyCOUNCIL AGENDA REPORT DATE: June 4, 1998 TO: MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL FROM: TOWN MANAGER SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: 6/15/98 ITEM NO. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE COMMUNITY SURVEY A. CONCUR WITH GENERAL PLAN COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO CONDUCT A TOWN WIDE COMMUNITY SURVEY; B. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH GODBE RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS FOR CONSULTING SERVICES TO PREPARE A SCIENTIFICALLY BASED COMMUNITY SURVEY. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Concur with General Plan Committee recommendation to conduct a Town wide community survey; 2. Adopt Resolution authorizing Town Manager to execute an agreement with Godbe Research and Analysis for consulting services to prepare a scientifically based community survey. BACKGROUND: The first General Plan Task Force conducted an informal survey in October 1997. The survey results were useful for the Task Force and the Town appreciates the efforts of the subcommittee that compiled the results. Although the survey response included 1,397 Town residents, it was not scientifically controlled. The respondents were not randomly selected, they were self selected for inclusion. Over -representation by special interest groups and/or particular neighborhoods may have skewed the data. Survey results may not have represented the entire community. Therefore, the General Plan Committee recommends that the Town conduct a scientifically based survey that will better represent the entire community. To conduct such a survey, the Town needs the assistance of a firm with expertise in the area of community assessment. On March 2, 1998, Town Council authorized staff to send Requests for Proposals (RFP's) to consulting firms for meeting facilitation, community survey, planning, data collection and environmental services related to the General Plan update. On April 22, 1998 the General Plan Committee approved the final draft of the RFP for the survey consultant and recommended that the Council select a consultant to conduct the Town wide community survey. A subcommittee of the General Plan Committee was formed to work directly with the consultant to ensure that the survey will provide information and address issues that will assist with the General Plan update. In May 1998, the RFP for the survey was sent to five consultants and two consultants submitted proposals. On May 26, 1998 Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates was selected for meeting facilitation, planning, data collection and environmental services for the General Plan update. This report provides a discussion and recommendation about the proposals submitted for the survey consultant. Proposals were submitted by the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and Godbe Research and Analysis. PREPARED BY: LEE E. BOWMAN 4— PLANNING DIRE TOR Reviewed by: Attorney Finance Revised: 6/4/98 12:36 pm Reformatted: 10/23/95 PAGE 2 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: Community Survey Consultant June 4, 1998 DISCUSSION: The proposals were evaluated based on the criteria identified in the "Comparison of Proposals for the Community Survey" (Attachment 2). Highlights from the proposals submitted by each consultant are discussed below. American Institute for Research (AIR) AIR stresses the importance of using a tested set of community concepts and assessment processes in a community survey and needs assessment. The proposal states that the community needs assessment should be thought of as a methodology that relates residents' sense of community to their perceptions of local needs. As a result, the survey results will have more promise for guiding the decisions of the General Plan Task Force II and General Plan Committee in the General Plan update process in a way that strengthens the entire community, rather than satisfying the immediate needs of a selected interest group. The qualifications of the project manager and assistant are extensive. Dr. Robert Rossi has worked with AIR since 1974, performing various research, evaluation and technical assistance roles aimed at building community in organizations, groups and regional settings. Project Assistant Dr. Kaaren Hanson has experience using quantitative and qualitative research methods to measure community in the workplace, schools, neighborhoods and congregations. The tasks in the scope of work include meetings and focus groups, survey design, survey administration, analysis and reporting. The scope involves meetings with Town staff and General Plan Task Force II. The survey design involves structured items with one or two free response items, guarded against bias in the form of nonresponse. The survey administration involves 750 Los Gatos residents, selected at random using a computer assisted telephone interview. (A drawback with this type of survey is that merchants may not be involved.) The survey will ensure that well-defined geographic areas of the Town are represented. The overall project approach demonstrates an understanding of what information the Town needs during the General Plan update process. The work product is not clear. The total cost for AIR services is $44,888. For more detailed information, see Attachments 2 and 3. Godbe Research and Analysis (GRA) GRA's experience in surveying the needs and opinions of residents and merchants in California Communities is extensive. The proposal stresses the importance of a comprehensive, actionable and easy to understand research product. It is also stated in the proposal that the survey will assess community needs, not just measure public opinion. Focus groups will be used to test ideas and refine the research objectives for the telephone survey. Once the qualitative data from the focus groups is analyzed, GRA will design the quantitative survey. A final report will summarize the focus group outcome and serve as a tool for survey development. GRA provides several alternatives for the survey process. In each alternative, attention is paid to residents and businesses. Stakeholder focus groups are included in each alternative, with an additional business and resident focus group option. GRA includes two alternatives for the survey: Random Digit Dial (RDD) or a registered voter survey. The sample group for the survey is recommended as 400 residents. GRA recommends the RDD survey in combination with the mail -back business survey. The final research product will be in the form of a written report, including but not limited to: • A question by question summary of the data; • A complete set of cross -tabulations; • A detailed matrix grouping the responses to two question sets in four quadrants; • A graph that plots responses to the two question sets, importance of Town service/issue and satisfaction with Town service / issue. Issues that rank high on the importance scale but low on the satisfaction scale will stand out as areas for improvement or attention in the Town. The final report will demonstrate the use of qualitative and quantitative data based in social and scientific principle. PAGE 3 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: Community Survey Consultant June 4, 1998 Staff recommends the alternative including the stakeholder focus groups, RDD survey, and mail -back business survey for a total cost of $29,417. For more detailed information about the proposal, please see Attachments 2 and 4. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that Council adopt the Resolution authorizing an agreement with Godbe Research and Analysis (Attachment 1 ). This recommendation is based on the following factors: • GRA's scope of work clarity and related work products ; • Project managers Bryan Godbe and David Kaefer's extensive community research experience for municipalities that includes research for Strategic Plan updates; • GRA research will focus on assessment of community needs rather than reaction to public opinion; • Both quantitative and qualitative research methods will be employed; • GRA realizes the importance of both businesses and residents in the community wide survey; • GRA places importance on a research product that is "actionable" and easy to understand; • Timely completion of the survey proposed (October 1998); ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: Consultant services for a community survey are not a project defined under CEQA, and no further action is required. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs for conducting the survey will be funded from the General Plan Update fee. The following cost breakdown sub -totals task costs as outlined in the Godbe Research and Analysis scope of work. GRA will invoice the Town for services based on task completion and work products. A 10% contingency is included (based on the total project cost) to cover required work that may be beyond the scope of services. Funding for the cost for GRA to conduct the survey has been included in 1998-99 Operating Budget. The project tasks are summarized below: Facilitation: Task 1 Focus Groups $ 4,980 Task 2 Telephone Survey (RDD) $16,260 Task 3 Mail -Back Business Survey $ 8,180 Total $29,420 10 % Contingency $ 2,940 TOTAL COST WITH CONTINGENCY: $32,360 State law requires that a General Plan is updated periodically. Therefore, staff will continue to collect the General Plan update fee on development applications and Account 100-26751 will be ongoing. The revenue stream will continue and the balance will apply toward future General Plan update tasks. Attachments: 1. Resolution authorizing Town Manager to execute an agreement with Godbe Research and Analysis for consulting services to conduct a community survey. Exhibit A: Agreement with Godbe Research and Analysis for contract services to conduct a community survey. 2. Comparison of proposals for community survey 3. Proposal from American Institutes for Research 4. Proposal from Godbe Research and Analysis PAGE 4 MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL SUBJECT: Community Survey Consultant June 4, 1998 Town Council Report and Attachment 2 distributed to: John C. Flanagan Research Center, Attn: Dr. Robert Rossi, 1791 Arastradero Road, P.O. Box 1113, Palo Alto, CA 94302 Godbe Research and Analysis, 225 South Cabrillo Highway, Suite 200, Building B, Half Moon Bay, CA 94019-1738 LEB:KS:cm N:1DEV\CNCLRPTSISURVEY. REC RESOLUTION 1998- RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH GODBE RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE RESOLVED, that the Town of Los Gatos Town Council has determined that an update to the 1985 General Plan is necessary; and RESOLVED, that the Town has started the General Plan update process with the successful General Plan Task Force Final Report 1998 and the establishment of General Plan Task Force II; and RESOLVED, that the General Plan Task Force conducted a survey in October 1997 that was not scientifically based and measured opinions more than community needs; and RESOLVED, that the General Plan Committee has determined that a Town wide community needs assessment conducted by experts in the field of research and analysis is needed for General Plan Task Force II and Town use; and RESOLVED, that the Town sent Requests for Proposals to four consulting firms for conducting a Town wide community survey; and RESOLVED, that the Town received two proposals for the community survey services; and RESOLVED, that the most concise, pertinent and desirable proposal for the community survey was submitted by Godbe Research and Analysis; and RESOLVED, that Project Managers Bryan Godbe and David Kaefer have extensive experience with community survey processes and in-house expertise for designing and administering a qualitative and quantitative survey; and RESOLVED, by the Town Council that the TOWN OF LOS GATOS enter into an agreement for conducting a community survey with Godbe Research and Analysis (Exhibit A). n: \dev\resos\gpupdate. agr FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Town Council that the Town Manager is authorized and directed to execute the attached agreement for conducting a community survey in behalf of the TOWN OF LOS GATOS. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council held on the 15th day of June, 1998, by the following vote: COUNCIL MEMBERS: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: /s/ Linda Lubeck MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: /s/ Marian V. Cosgrove CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA n:\dev\resos\gpupdate.agr AGREEMENT FOR GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CONSULTANT SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this 15th day of June, 1998, by and between the Town of Los Gatos, State of California, herein called the "Town", and Godbe Research and Analysis, engaged in providing community survey consulting services herein called the "Consultant". RECITALS A. The Town is undertaking activities to update the General Plan and the update includes a General Plan Task Force that will use survey results. B. The Town desires to engage this consulting firm to provide consulting services for preparing and administering a quantitative survey that will identify the community needs. C. The Consultant represents and affirms that it is qualified and willing to perform the desired work pursuant to this Agreement. AGREEMENTS NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. Consultant will provide research and analysis services in the form of conducting a community survey. The project tasks are summarized below: Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Focus Groups Telephone Survey (Random Digit Dial) Mail -Back Business Survey A more detailed list of tasks and the project budget is listed in Exhibit A. 2. Time of Performance. The services of the Consultant are to commence upon the execution of this Agreement with completion of the program by October 1998, as provided for in Consultants Project Schedule. 3. Compliance with Laws. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, and regulations of governing federal, state and local laws. Consultant represents and warrants to Town that it has all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatsoever nature which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant represents and warrants to Town that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals which are legally required for Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a Town of Los Gatos business license pursuant to Chapter 14 of the Code of the Town of Los Gatos. Revised: March 11, 1997 N:IDEV\KS\SURVEY. AGR Page 1 of 8 A 4. Sole Responsibility. Consultant shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to perform the services under this Agreement. 5. Information/Report Handling. All documents furnished to Consultant by the Town and all reports and supportive data prepared by the Consultant under this Agreement are the Town's property and shall be delivered to the Town upon the completion of Consultant's services or at the Town's written request. All reports, information, data, and exhibits prepared or assembled by Consultant in connection with the performance of its services pursuant to this Agreement are confidential until released by the Town to the public, and the Consultant shall not make any of the these documents or information available to any individual or organization not employed by the Consultant or the Town without the written consent of the Town before such release. The Town acknowledges that the reports to be prepared by the Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of evaluating a defined project, and Town's use of the information contained in the reports prepared by the Consultant in connection with other projects shall be solely at Town's risk, unless Consultant expressly consents to such use in writing. Town further agrees that it will not appropriate any methodology or technique of Consultant which is and has been confirmed in writing by Consultant to be a trade secret of Consultant. 6. Compensation. Compensation for Consultant's professional services shall not exceed $32,360; and payment shall be based upon Town approval of each task as outlined in the Council adopted scope of work. Payments are made on a reimbursement basis for services actually performed by the consultant and for eligible costs actually incurred and paid by the Consultant pursuant to the Agreement. Also, plans, specifications, documents or other pertinent materials shall be submitted for Town review, even if only in partial or draft form. The statement or statements requesting payment shall be in a form approved by the Town, and the Consultant shall specify in detail the services performed by the Consultant during the month or quarter for which payment is sought. In no event shall the Consultant overrun the total budget for any quarter without obtaining prior written approval from the Town. It shall be the policy of the Town to pay promptly (net 30 days) all bills which become due and payable by the Town. Payment to the Consultant shall be made 30 days after receipt by Town of monthly or quarterly reports required by the Agreement. The Consultant's invoice must include a purchase order number. The Town will determine whether payment can be made under the Agreement and may rely upon the certification by Consultant that the items appearing on the statement and its supporting data are eligible items under the Scope of Work. However, no such determination shall constitute a waiver by the Town of its right to recover from Consultant any monies paid on items that were not eligible to payment under the Scope of Work and the Agreement. Revised: March 11, 1997 N: \DEV \KS\SURVEY. AGR Page 2 of 8 7. Availability of Records. Consultant shall maintain the records supporting this billing for not less than three (3) years following completion of the work under this Agreement. Consultant shall make these records available to authorized personnel of the Town at the Consultant's offices during business hours upon written request of the Town. 8. Project Manager. The Project Managers for the Consultant for the work under this Agreement shall be Bryan Godbe abd David Kaefer. 9. Assignability and Subcontracting. The services to be performed under this Agreement are unique and personal to the Consultant. No portion of these services shall be assigned or subcontracted without the written consent of the Town. 10. Notices. Any notice required to be given shall be deemed to be duly and properly given if mailed postage prepaid, and addressed to: To Town: Planning Department 110 E. Main Street Los Gatos, CA 95030 To Consultant: Godbe Research and Analysis 225 South Cabrillo Highway Suite 200, Building B Half Moon Bay, CA 94019-1738 or personally delivered to Consultant to such address or such other address as Consultant designates in writing to Town. 11. Independent Contractor. It is understood that the Consultant, in the performance of the work and services agreed to be performed, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the Town. As an independent contractor he/she shall not obtain any rights to retirement benefits or other benefits which accrue to Town employee(s). With prior written consent, the Consultant may perform some obligations under this Agreement by subcontracting, but may not delegate ultimate responsibility for performance or assign or transfer interests under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to testify in any litigation brought regarding the subject of the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall be compensated for its costs and expenses in preparing for, traveling to, and testifying in such matters at its then current hourly rates of compensation, unless such litigation is brought by Consultant or is based on allegations of Consultant's negligent performance or wrongdoing. Revised: March 11, 1997 N:1DEV \KS\SURVEY. AGR Page 3 of 8 12. Conflict of Interest. Consultant understands that its professional responsibilities is solely to the Town. The Consultant has and shall not obtain any holding or interest within the Town of Los Gatos. Consultant has no business holdings or agreements with any individual member of the Staff or management of the Town or its representatives nor shall it enter into any such holdings or agreements. In addition, Consultant represents that it does not presently and shall not acquire any direct or indirect interest adverse to those of the Town in the subject of this Agreement, and it shall immediately disassociate itself from such an interest should it discover it has done so and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, divest itself of such interest. Consultant shall not knowingly and shall take reasonable steps to ensure that it does not employ a person having such an interest in this performance of this Agreement. If after employment of a person, Consultant discovers it has employed a person with a direct or indirect interest that would conflict with its performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall promptly notify Town of this employment relationship, and shall, at the Town's sole discretion, sever any such employment relationship. 13. Equal Employment Opportunity. Consultant warrants that it is an equal opportunity employer and shall comply with applicable regulations governing equal employment opportunity. Neither Consultant nor its subcontractors do and neither shall discriminate against persons employed or seeking employment with them on the basis of age, sex, color, race, marital status, sexual orientation, ancestry, physical or mental disability, national origin, religion, or medical condition, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification pursuant to the California Fair Employment & Housing Act. 14. Insurance. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance: Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, General Liability insurance policies insuring him/her and his/her firm to an amount not less than: one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. ii. Consultant agrees to have and maintain for the duration of the contract, an Automobile Liability insurance policy ensuring him/her and his/her staff to an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. iii. Consultant shall provide to the Town all certificates of insurance, with original endorsements effecting coverage. Consultant agrees that all certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the Town before work commences. Revised: March 11, 1997 N:\DEV\KS\SURVEY.AGR Page 4 of 8 iv. Consultant agrees to have and maintain, for the duration of the contract, professional liability insurance in amounts not less than $1,000,000 which is sufficient to insure Consultant for professional errors or omissions in the performance of the particular scope of work under this agreement. B. General Liability: i. The Town, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers are to be covered as insured as respects: liability arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of the Consultant; products and completed operations of Consultant, premises owned or used by the Consultant. This requirement does not apply to the professional liability insurance required for professional errors and omissions. ii. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the Town, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers. Any insurance or self -insurances maintained by the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it. iii. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the Town, its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. iv. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability. C. All Coverages: Each insurance policy required in this item shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be suspended, voided, cancelled, reduced in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days' prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the Town. current certification of such insurance shall be kept on file at all times during the term of this agreement with the Town Clerk. D. In addition to these policies, Consultant shall have and maintain Workers' Compensation insurance as required by California law and shall provide evidence of such policy to the Town before beginning services under this Agreement. Further, Consultant shall ensure that all subcontractors employed by Consultant provide the required Workers' Compensation insurance for their respective employees. Revised: March 11, 1997 N: \DEV \KS\SURV EY. AGR Page 5 of 8 15. Indemnification. The Consultant shall save, keep and hold harmless indemnify and defend the Town its officers, agent, employees and volunteers from all damages, liabilities, penalties, costs, or expenses in law or equity that may at any time arise or be set up because of damages to property or personal injury received by reason of, or in the course of performing work which may be occasioned by a willful or negligent act or omissions of the Consultant, or any of the Consultant's officers, employees, or agents or any subconsultant. 16. Waiver. No failure on the part of either party to exercise any right or remedy hereunder shall operate as a waiver of any other right or remedy that party may have hereunder, nor does waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement constitute a continuing waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. 17. Governing Law. This Agreement, regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed to the laws of the State of California. Venue for any action regarding this Agreement shall be in the Superior or Municipal Court of the County of Santa Clara. 18. Termination of Agreement. The Town and the Consultant shall have the right to terminate this agreement with or without cause by giving not less than fifteen (15) days written notice of termination. In the event of termination, the Consultant shall deliver to the Town all plans, files, documents, reports, performed to date by the Consultant. In the event of such termination, Town shall pay Consultant an amount that bears the same ratio to the maximum contract price as the work delivered to the Town bears to completed services contemplated under this Agreement pursuant to Exhibit A hereto, unless such termination is made for cause, in which event, compensation, if any, shall be adjusted in light of the particular facts and circumstances involved in such termination. 19. Amendment. No modification, waiver, mutual termination, or amendment of this Agreement is effective unless made in writing and signed by the Town and the Consultant. 20. Disputes. In any dispute over any aspect of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees, as well as costs not to exceed $7,500 in total. 21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete and exclusive statement of the Agreement between the Town and Consultant. No terms, conditions, understandings or agreements purporting to modify or vary this Agreement, unless hereafter made in writing and signed by the party to be bound, shall be binding on either party. Revised: March 11, 1997 N:\DEV\KS\SURVEY.AGR Page 6 of 8 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Consultant have executed this Agreement as of the date indicated on page one (1). Town of Los Gatos David W. Knapp, Town Manager Consultant: David Kaefer Town of Los Gatos Godbe Research and Analysis Print Name Title ATTEST: Clerk of the Town of Los Gatos, Approved as to Form: Los Gatos, California Marian V. Cosgrove, Town Clerk Orry P. Korb, Town Attorney Revised: March 11, 1997 N:\DEV\KS\SURVEY.AGR Page 7 of 8 Project Budget Godbe Research & Analysis takes great pride in delivering usable research projects on time and on budget. For this research project, GRA recommends the Town of Los Gatos conduct two stakeholder focus groups and a survey consisting of telephone and mail -back components. GRA has provided estimates for the stakeholder focus groups, optional focus groups (resident and business groups), and the quantitative component of the survey (estimates for both voter and random digit dial telephone surveys are included). Focus Groups Stakeholder Focus Groups (2) Recruitment Fee - Facility Rental Fee Participant Incentives - AudioNisual Equipment Rental $425.00 Refreshments $300.00 Research Fee $3,000.00 Miscellaneous Expenses $250.00 Total $4,975.00 Telephone and Mail -Back Surveys Telephone Survey N=400, 15-Minute Random Digit Dial Survey (RDD) Random Sample $1,073.00 Questionnaire Copying $275.00 Telephone Interviewing $8,000.00 Data Processing $1,165.00 Research Fee $5,500.00 Miscellaneous Expenses $250.00 Total $16,263.00 Mail -Back Business Survey N=200 Random Sample $660.00 Printing (Questionnaire and Envelopes) $1,270.00 Mailing Service $1,190.00 Postage $484.00 Data Processing $800.00 Toll -Free Fax Number $75.00 Research Fee $3,500.00 Miscellaneous Expenses $200.00 Total $8,179.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET (RDD) $29417.00 sfa Godbeflesearch 3 Analysis EXHIT A Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 12 COMPA, .iSON OF PROPOSALS FOR COMMUNITY SURVEY FIRM LOCATION BACKGROUND A.I.R. Palo Alto G.R.A. Half Moon Bay Project Staff Robert Rossi, Ph.D. Principal Research Scientist & Director; Kaaren Hanson, Ph.D. Research Scientist, Chris Huber, Assistant Bryan Godbe, Principal; David Kaefer, Senior Research Analyst: Gregory Harrison, Research Coordinator Years consulting 24 16 Previous work assessing community needs yes: Santee Community Group (San Jose), The AdGap Group, Girl Scouts, 3Com yes:Campbell, Cupertino, Mountain View, Lake Forest, Santa Monica References Types of groups surveyed/ analyzed PROJECT APPROACH yes: as listed above plus additional private sector yes: as listed above residents, non-profit, municipal, corporate, schools Task breakdown w/ costs Scientifically based survey yes (without sub -tasks) yes: with a methodology that relates residents' sense of community to their perception of local needs residents, non-profit, municipal, transportation, corporate, schools 1111111111111111111111111111 yes (with sub -tasks) yes: using qualitative information from focus groups to structure quantitative survey Preliminary schedule Meetings with Town staff Meetings with General Plan Task Force 11 yes (complete survey between 10/9/98 to 11/27/98) yes (complete 12 weeks from starting date; approximately 10/98) yes (minimum three) yes ("as often as necessary") yes (amount not indicated) not indicated Focus Groups yes - (residents mentioned only) yes (optional - involving merchants and residents) Role of General Plan Task Force II Review survey design and hypothetical findings; suggest "vehicles" for sharing survey results Review survey design Type of survey Random phone sample of 750 residents Random Digit Dial (RDD) OR registered voter survey (both of 400 resident sample) Examples of work products yes: 2 example questionnaires, workplace/ neighborhood survey forms, written survey report, graphic displays of survey results yes: Cities of Campbell & Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Reports and Questionnaires Subconsultants Maximum total cost Venture Data: data tabulation company $44,888 (includes focus groups and phone survey) not indicated $29,417 (RDD survey) $25,570 (voter survey) With optional focus groups: $40,592 (RDD) $36,745 (voter) A.I.R. : American Institutes for Research G.R.A.: Godbe Research Analysis Page 1 n:\devlks\survey.xls ATT r fC A 1 E R I C N INSTITUTES FOR R E .3 E A R C H May 11, 1998 Lee M. Bowman, Director Town of Los Gatos Planning Department Civic Center 110 East Main Street PO Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 95031 Dear Mr. Bowman: EGEI MAY 1 2 1998 TOWOF LOS GA I OS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 8y-- The American Institutes for Research (AIR) is pleased to submit the attached proposal to conduct a communitywide survey for the Town of Los Gatos that will inform the General Update process. If questions should arise concerning any of the technical aspects of our proposal, please contact Dr. Robert Rossi at 650 493 3550. For matters related to the cost estimates, please contact Mr. Thomas Jesulaitis in our corporate business office at 202.342.5031. The enclosed budget estimates are firm for 90 days from the date of this submission. Thank you for your time and the opportunity to work with you in Los Gatos. Sincerely, Kevin J. Gilmartin, Ph.D. Vice President and Office Director JOHN C. FLANAGAN RESEARCH CENTER 1 7 9 1 ARASTRADERO ROAD P.O. BOX 1 1 1 3 PALO ALTO, CA 9 4 3 0 2 ( 4 1 5) 4 9 3- 3 5 5 0 ATTACH ENT 3 f { 1 2-» :d J _.� Communitywide Survey MAY 1 "290 oF To Inform Plan Review ,-- ._,, : + '. '� Submitted to the Town of Los Gard's--Califor-nia,-by-the Center for Community Research at the American Institutes for Research Bidder Information 1. Organization: Corporate headquarters — American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences (AIR) 3333 K Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20007 (202) 342-5000 Federal Tax ID: 25-0965219 Contact: Thomas Jesulaitis, Director, Contracts and Grants AIR site from which proposed work will be carried out — John C. Flanagan Research Center (JCFRC) P.O. Box 1113 Palo Alto, CA 94302 (650) 493-3550 Contacts: Kevin Gilmartin, Office Director Robert Rossi, Director, Center for Community Research 2. Staff for the Proposed Work: Drs. Robert Rossi, Kaaren Hanson, and Ms. Chris Huber Proposal Contents 1. Introduction 2. Detailed Outline of Services to be Performed 3. Budget and Town Business License 4. Organizational Experience 5. References 6. Example Products 7. Staff Resumes 8. Time Schedule 1. Introduction The American Institutes for Research (AIR) is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the Town of Los Gatos and its General Plan Task Force II in updating the General Plan for the community. The aims and requirements of the information gathering process described in the Request for Proposal (RFP) fit well with our corporate mission and the capabilities of our Center for Community Research. We understand that this information gathering process will include meetings, focus groups, and a scientific survey of Los Gatos residents. We also understand that this process is an important next step in efforts to provide the General Plan Task Force II with a clear sense of the extent of shared community values, visions, and purposes among Los Gatans. Finally, we know that instead of a simple canvassing of resident opinions, the proposed survey in particular must relate residents' shared values, visions, and goals to perceived community needs, thereby identifying alternative actions and projects for the Town to consider in the years ahead. In seeking consultants for this effort, the Town of Los Gatos requires special expertise in the area of community assessment. Based on our work with John W. Gardner since 1991, we will bring a tested set of community concepts and assessment processes and strategies to the General Plan Update process. Operationally in our view, community needs assessment should be thought of as a methodology that relates residents' sense of community to their perceptions of local needs. In this way, the actions and projects identified for further development will be ones that have the greatest promise for strengthening the Los Gatos community over the next decade, not ones that merely satisfy the immediate needs of selected interest groups. For us, the sense of community in a group, an organization, or a city is defined in terms of 11 elements: 1. shared vision 2. shared values 3. shared sense of purpose 4. trust 5. respect 6. recognition 7. caring 8. communication 9. participation 10. teamwork 11. incorporation of diversity Identifying these 11 elements through empirical studies, measuring them reliably in neighborhoods, residential facilities, workplaces, schools, civic associations, and congregations, and relating them to needs, goals, and desired outcomes within each of these settings has been our sole focus for the past seven years. 2. Detailed Outline of Services to be Performed Meetings and focus groups. To ensure that our communitywide survey will provide the General Plan Task Force II with what it requires to evaluate possible future directions for the Town 2 of Los Gatos, we will meet a minimum of three times with Town staff and facilitate discussions with other representatives knowledgeable about Town issues. In our experience, interviews with key staff are essential for setting expectations and clarifying issues that must be included within the survey scope. For example, the rationale(s) for possible decisions (e.g., to rezone previously buildable sites as open -space areas) can be probed for in these interviews, as can the possible root causes of current issues of concern. Similarly, we know that focus groups with various other representatives —including resident/neighborhood groups —are important both for gaining insights useful to the survey design process and for providing opportunities to inform and to educate the public concerning the purposes and uses to be made of the survey information. For our approach in particular, these focus groups will serve as a stage to familiarize residents with the key elements of community in terms of which we will be evaluating current and projected needs. Depending on the travel schedules of Town staff and key representatives, we estimate that these interviews and focus groups will take from two to three months to organize and carry out, including the time to review and analyze the data that are collected. Survey design. We envision that the survey design process will be an iterative one, whereby we will work with Town staff to set the community assessment items we have developed and used over the past seven years in the context of the Los Gatos General Plan Update. From our experience, this will likely involve the development of two types of additional items that will be added to the Los Gatos survey form. First, needs assessment items will be crafted to gauge the perceived gap between what Los Gatos residents say they value personally in their lives and what they experience on a daily basis in Los Gatos in terms of assurance of personal safety and protection of property, land use and development, availability of services and programs, historic and community preservation, and quality and accessibility of public facilities. Second, background items will be crafted that permit the disaggregation of survey results in terms of resident groups and residential areas important for the policy development process. As a test of the coverage of the survey instrument prior to administration, we will prepare hypothetical statements of findings based on the items that are included and share these with Town staff and task force members for reflection and comment. Depending on the travel schedules of Town staff and key representatives, we estimate that the process of survey design will take from two to four weeks. Survey administration. We propose a computer -assisted telephone interview (CATI) survey administration that will involve 750 Los Gatos residents selected at random. Using a random - digit dialing technique with Los Gatos prefixes (and a survey "screen" to ensure Town residence), we will interview adult heads of households with listed and unlisted telephone numbers. We will use quota -constraints to ensure that about as many men as women are interviewed and that as many respondents from well-defined geographic areas of the Town are interviewed (e.g., using zip codes as area referents). We expect that the survey will contain mostly structured, or close -ended items, but 3 we have also planned for one or two free -response items. These free -response items will be coded, and they will serve to underscore our intent to hear from residents in their own words about issues and trends that are of concern. Using a CATI approach, which automatically creates an edited data file, we estimate that the data collection and data file preparation will require three weeks. It is particularly important to note that our approach will guard against possible bias due to nonresponse in two ways. First, each Los Gatos telephone number that is dialed without a resident connection will be tried five times —three times at different times of the day on three different weekdays and twice at different times on weekend days. Second, all Los Gatos telephone numbers that are dialed five times in the manner described but still fail to produce a connection with a resident will be catalogued. A ten percent sample of these catalogued numbers will then (a) be followed up five additional times, and, if a connection is still not made, (b) traced to zip codes for comparison with sampling quotas (i.e., to ensure geographic representativeness). Of course, the most effective way of minimizing nonresponse is to publicize the important aims of the survey to all Los Gatos residents, so we will work with Town staff from the outset of the project to identify as many communication channels as possible that can be used for this purpose. Analysis and reporting. We will analyze the survey data and report findings to Town staff and members of the General Plan Task Force II. Our quantitative analyses will include comparisons of views for different resident populations and estimation of the relationships among variables describing community and community needs. We will also work with staff and task force members to determine the best formats and vehicles (e.g., community forums, Town meetings) for sharing the survey information meaningfully with residents. In our work, we use a variety of print and graphics approaches to ensure findings are clearly presented with maximum impact for diverse audiences. We estimate that analysis and reporting of the data from this communitywide survey will require four weeks. 3. Budget and Town Business License Upon notification of contract award, AIR will obtain a Business License from the Town of Los Gatos if it is required (See Appendix A for AIR insurance information and statement of intent to obtain a Los Gatos Business License). We are a 501(c)(3) not -for -profit organization incorporated in the state of Pennsylvania. For the four principal tasks associated with the proposed work, our budget estimates are as follows: Meetings and focus groups $ 7,500 Survey design 7,250 Survey administration 19,388 Analysis and reporting 10,750 TOTAL $44,888 4 4. Organizational Experience The American Institutes for Research (AIR) is an independent, not -for -profit corporation engaged in research and service in the social and behavioral sciences. We conduct basic and applied research to solve significant societal problems and improve the quality of life of all people. Our clients include government agencies, public service institutions, foundations, and other private sector sponsors. Originally focusing on the scientific study of human resources, our expertise has grown during the past 50 years to encompass community research, education research, urban life studies, international studies, survey and statistical methods, employment equity analysis, and human factors engineering. We have completed more than 3,000 projects since 1946, with an annual total volume of over $30 million in FY 1997. AIR staff and research facilities. The AIR approach combines a strong quantitative orientation with the best theories and methods available in the behavioral and social sciences. A distinguishing characteristic of the organization is our multidisciplinary problem -solving capability. We select from the full range of social science methods the approaches that are best suited to the particular problems being addressed. We employ approximately 350 research, technical, administrative, and clerical personnel. Sixty percent hold advanced degrees. Our research offices are located in Washington, DC; Arlington, VA; Palo Alto, CA; and Concord, MA. We establish other facilities as needed in off -site locations in this country and abroad. Centralized accounting and business management are provided by the Corporate Business Office in Washington, DC. The work we are proposing here to the Town of Los Gatos will be carried out by staff from our John C. Flanagan Research Center (JCFRC), located at 1791 Arastradero Road in Palo Alto, CA, near Stanford University. AIR collaboration with John W. Gardner. AIR's Center for Community Research, located at the JCFRC, and Dr. John W. Gardner of Stanford University have been working together since 1991 to understand, measure, and build community in neighborhoods, civic associations, workplaces, schools, and congregations. Dr. Gardner, former HEW Secretary and President of the Carnegie Corporation, serves as a national resource for research and thinking in the areas of leadership and community. His books On Leadership and Building Community are recognized as seminal in the field and have influenced many thousands of individuals in both the public and private sectors. Sponsors of our collaborative efforts have included several prominent foundations and a variety of private groups. (Abstracts of selected projects carried out by staff of the Center for Community Research at AIR are included in Appendix B.) Our approach is distinctive in that we have moved beyond the rhetoric and vague generalizations that typically surround discussions of `community.' We develop tools for assessing and building sense of community and utilize these tools to assist groups and organizations in realizing their goals. 5 CATI survey capability. For this survey, AIR will rely on the technology and staff capability supplied by Venture Data —a survey research field and data tabulation company with 193 interviewing stations in two facilities. Venture Data's primary function is the collection of quantitative data via Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) and preparation of data for analysis. CATI data collection implements an electronic version of the survey instrument, allowing interviewers to enter all respondent data directly into the computer. Sample (phone number) management and calling, quota controlling, and report generation is also handled by the computer. Venture Data has successfully fielded nearly 2,000 CATI data collection projects entailing varying requirements and challenges since 1994. 5. References The names and contact information of six references that can verify AIR-CCR qualifications and previous performance are included in Appendix C. 6. Example Products Two example questionnaires, a workplace form and a form for the neighborhood, are included in Appendix D. Also in that appendix please find an example of a written survey report (with appended figures) and selected graphical displays of survey results. 7. Staff Resumes Resumes for Drs. Robert Rossi and Kaaren Hanson are included in Appendix E. 8. Time Schedule Our estimated minimum and maximum times for completion of the principal tasks associated with the proposed communitywide survey are as follows: Minimum Maximum Meetings and focus groups 6/ 12 - 8/7 6/ 12 - 9/11 Survey design 8/7 - 8/21 9/11 - 10/9 Survey administration 8/21 - 9/11 10/9 - 10/30 Analysis and reporting 9/4 - 10/9 10/30 — 11/27 6 Appendix A: AIR Certificate of Liability Insurance 1;'I VR.HIVt�[ �� 1fJ'v'l riL'l C_ JU: 1I) I'JO VL�J r .'JG ACORD,,.:VOMPICA ii DATE tMMrDDVY,; �... :%05/08/98 mooucet• Insurance & Investments, Inc. Suite 100 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OP INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND. EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POUCIEB BELOW. 2401 Research Boulevard COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE Rockville MD 20850- (301) 670-6737 ( ) - COMPANY CNA Insurance Companies INiUREO American Institutes for GCMPAM 0 Research 3333 K Street, NW COMPANY LL C Washington DC 20007- (co,,ID,I,r,, oE CE. - THIS I8 TO CERTIFY THAT THE POUCIEB OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY 8E ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED 8Y THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT 70 ALL THE TERMS. EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMRB SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. co URTYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY MWISER EFFECTIVE DA POUE �wDD/T POLICY (II IY/ YYUNa A mom'. urn GENL;gAI AGGREGATE 52000000 X ICOMMEROAL GENERAL LIAauTY C 155528908 09/01/97 09/01/98 PRooucTB - cOMPlOP AGG s 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 j «UAIMa MADE CX I OCCUR MAMMA. aMN M4JURY $1 0 0 0 0 0 0 OWNER'S i CONTRACTORS PRIM EACH OCCURRENCE s 1000000 FIREDAMAGE(AnyorwArM s100000 MEDEXP;Any ore Avian) s5000 A Autowopti X LIABILITY ANY AUTO C1 5552891 1 09/01/97 09/01/98 °0M°'"E°6IPdoL `�M"T - :1 000000 LL O AWNED AU TOG LOREDULED AUTOS BODILY INJURY (P� Pwswd HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTDG [Lv.uuRv — $ PROPERTY DAMAGE S GARAGE LIABILITY AUONLY EA ACCIDENT f ANY AUTO / / / / OTH_ERTHAN AUTO ONLY: _ EACH ACCIDENT II I AGGREGATE S A ExcEis uABIUTY EACH occuRa>,E>uce 510000000 x IWAORMAFORM C155528925 09/01/97 09/01/98 Amwom .10000000 OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM* s - A WORM COMPENSATION AND yyyppp��� M oat EMPLoreRs•LIMnm WCC157020578 1 1 /30/97 1 1 /30/98 ELEAO AtxIDENT 8500000 THE PflOITIVEYOR, i PARTNERsrpECUTNE X I INCL EL D19EASE •POLICY LAW 1500000 oFCICEge ApE• II EL DISEASE - EA EMPtnYEE 65 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER 'ATIONNYEHIc EW$IECIAE ITEMS THE BELOW CERTIFICATE HOLDER IS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED. ALL OF THE ABOVE COVERAGES ALSO APPLY TO THE INSUREDS CALIFORNIA OFFICE, LOCATED AT 1791 ARASTRADEO BLVD PALO ALTO CA. *MAWS HOUR DAi11611A'tlOM Town of Los Gatos Office of the Town Clerk P.O. Box 949 Los Gatos CA 95031 MCMOZPWWW • SHOULD ANY OP THE MOVE DESCRIBED FOUCAS BE CANCELLED WORE THE EAPMATNTN DATE THEREOF, TINE AMINO COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAK 3 0 DAYI morn NOTATE TO INC CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT. auT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR mourn OF A5L NM UPON THE COMPANY. ITf AGENTS OR REFTEVENTATTVES. TATWE :K .AecIoOQAPARAIA,S Upon notification of contract award, the American Institutes for Research will apply for a Business License in the Town of Los Gatos. (408) 354-6831 or 399-5704 In accordance with Los Gatos Town Co( id businesses that are owned or operates ;hin the Town Iimrts. are required to have a valid Town business license, and are required to have Planning Department approval regarding use of the business location. I understand that obtaining this business license will not authorize me to use the property or conduct the business in violation of any Federal, State, or local law, and I understand it is my obligation to determine the legal restrictions involved before beginning or changing the business. Signature ate instructionl: t. All questions on this form must be answered or designated not applicable (N/A), as appropriate. 2. Additional information may be required pursuant to Los Gatos Town Code. Chapter ta. 3. Applicants are required to declare, under penalty of penury, that the statements made heroin are true. a. In order to comply with requirements of the State Controller's Office, Business Licenses cannot be issued without this information. PLEASE PRINT ALL INFORMATION Business Name 2. Business Address Number Street City State ZIP 3. Business Telephone Number 4. Billing Address if different from above: Number Street City State ZIP 5. License Period: s. Type of Ownership (check one) { } Partnership { } Corporation { } Trust { } Sole Proprietorship Owners Name: Cwnesrs Phone No.: Owners Address Number Street City State ZIP 7. Driver's License Number 8. At (east one of the following is required: Fed. Employer ID #: - Soc. Sec. it State Employer ID It: Board of Equalization #: - (4 - 5 alpha plus 8 numeric) 3. Type of Business - Be Specific (g/ See SIC Code directory ) 10. Complete one of the following: - Gross Receipts (retail, manufacturing, wholesale, jobbing etc.) for the period ending December 31st are estimated to be: _ (see reverse `or scale) Estimate± fee due 3 Professional: ($200 per professional/Semi-professional p to $15 per support staff) Number of professionals/semi-professionals Number of support staff Total due $ Flat fee or Unit based fee { } Contractor - $224/year - State Contractors License Number Class { } Service - $100/year { } Solicitors • $210/year - (requires solicitors permit from Police Dept} { } Other DECLARATION DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY that the foregoing is true and correct and if called as a witness I could ornpetently testify to the facts contained herein. Executed this day of , 19_ i the Town/City of , County of , State of iIGNED' TITLE: Appendix B: CCR Project Abstracts Project Abstract Developing a Community Assessment Framework for Neighborhoods Sponsor: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation For some time now, questions about the effectiveness of social and economic programs intended to benefit American cities have spurred interest in measuring the health and well-being of these jurisdictions. In particular, measures of community status in neighborhoods (i.e., the sense of shared vision, shared values, trust, incorporation of diversity, respect and recognition, and so on) can serve both evaluation and planning aims. Reaching beyond mere descriptions of failed resources, community measures can provide a sense of the capacities, resources, rights, and responsibilities that are shared by city residents. With this information, leaders at every level can act and empower others to act to strengthen the community fabric. In an effort to begin development of community assessment tools for use by local governments and agencies, foundations, and neighborhood associations, we are working with the four community foundations and their neighborhoods participating in the David and Lucile Packard Foundation's Communities 2000 Initiative: Community Foundation of Santa Clara County, Community Foundation of Monterey, Greater Santa Cruz County Community Foundation, and Peninsula Community Foundation. Our data collections involve neighborhood residents from these counties, and our panel of advisors includes representatives of each of the four foundations. Our workplan for this first year of the project is comprised of three phases: 1. development of a community critical incident survey/interview form 2. use of this form to gather data from neighborhood residents in Santa Clara, Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo Counties 3. analysis of the data that are collected to determine a framework for community assessment in neighborhoods Based on the information we collect during this first year, we will, in a later step, develop and test a survey protocol capable of producing community profiles for neighborhoods. These profiles will be multidimensional, and they will be based on an assessment of the quality of interpersonal relationships involving residents within their neighborhoods and outside, with other neighborhoods and with the agencies, associations, and regional media that affect their lives. We will also use this assessment protocol to develop a self -assessment guide for residents interested in learning about and strengthening the sense of community where they live. This effort will involve surveys of neighborhoods in several counties, coupled with the collection of information on neighborhood characteristics (e.g., availability of "common" areas or established mechanisms to welcome new residents) and neighborhood performance (e.g., victimization or vacancy rates). In this way, we will determine the strengths of relationships among contextual factors, the sense of community among residents in neighborhoods, and the outcomes for neighborhoods. From the point of view of neighborhood leaders, this self -assessment process will provide a shared framework in terms of which residents can discuss area needs. For residents generally, this process may assist in translating often hard -to -describe feelings into action items. Project Abstract Creation of Survey Assessment Instrument and Self -Study Guide for Neighborhoods Sponsor: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation. In January 1998, AIR/CCR was awarded a second grant from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation to develop measurement tools that local organizations concerned with neighborhood functioning (e.g., governmental agencies, foundations, civic associations, organizing groups) and residents themselves can use to take stock of the sense of community that exists in neighborhoods. Based on the community assessment framework developed during the initial grant, we are engaged in creation of two distinct products: a survey assessment instrument and a self -study guide. The survey assessment instrument will be designed to be administered to individual residents of a neighborhood to assess the sense of community that has been achieved. This instrument will provide an efficient means of gauging neighborhood readiness for participation in programs or initiatives. In addition, the instrument will provide groups with a cost-effective approach to evaluating the success of their efforts to strengthen neighborhood functioning. Like the workplace and school instruments we have developed previously, the neighborhood survey assessment instrument will consist of approximately 50 structured items designed to capture the dimensions of community represented in our framework for understanding the construct. The neighborhood form, like its workplace and school counterparts, will also be designed so that these dimensions and facets of community can be assessed relative to multiple referents (e.g., other area residents, police or other city/county service providers). In addition, the instrument will include items related to respondents' personal backgrounds and experiences in the neighborhood (to help in understanding and interpreting their responses) and items related to possible outcomes of neighborhood sense of community (to help in understanding the meaning and importance of community in the neighborhood). The self -study guide will be designed for use by groups of neighborhood residents interested in Teaming about and in encouraging others to think about the sense of community where they live. The self -study guide will complement the survey assessment instrument by facilitating residents' own efforts to renew and strengthen their communities. The guide will first introduce our framework for understanding community in neighborhoods. It will then help residents evaluate aspects of their neighborhoods from a community perspective, thereby providing a basis from which they can discuss area needs and develop action plans. This self -study methodology has proven effective in furthering other forms of regional development. It is used, for instance, in the Civic Index, developed by the National Civic League to help regional leaders enhance their problem -solving capabilities by evaluating and improving "civic infrastructures." Project Abstract 'Building Community' Workshops for Neighborhood Leaders Sponsor: The Luke B. Hancock Foundation To support community -related data collection efforts involving residents in 50 neighborhoods in California's Santa Clara County (see description of developing a community assessment framework sponsored by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation), we are organizing and conducting workshops for neighborhood leaders and other residents interested in local leadership roles and opportunities. These workshops will provide attendees with an understanding and a sense of the importance of the community framework developed by AIR and John W. Gardner for sustaining interest and participation in neighborhood development efforts. The workshops we conduct for leaders are designed to complement the ongoing collection of residents' personal experiences of community in two ways. First, they are designed around the personal community experiences of the neighborhood leaders who participate—i.e., we will ask them to describe and to work with us in identifying the elements of community in their own personal experiences drawn from the neighborhood; in this way they will learn just how we make use of these sorts of described experiences in developing community indicators and community -building strategies. Second, their cooperation in helping us collect community experiences from the residents in their neighborhoods will assume new meaning once they have been formally introduced to the community concept; these leaders will more clearly understand that they are contributing to the development of tools that they and other leaders can use in meeting their community -building responsibilities. In carrying out this project, we will accomplish the following objectives: • develop the contents for the neighborhood workshops based on our previous experience in working with business and school groups and with representatives of civic associations to introduce the community concept • develop strategies for notifying and encouraging the participation of residents in these community -building workshops • meet with selected neighborhood association leaders to refine workshop plans and contents and strategies for ensuring active participation • conduct one- to two-hour interactive community -building workshops in 50 neighborhoods —in English and Spanish • collect critical incident data on community experiences from workshop participants • build a network of leaders from diverse neighborhoods to assist in our continuing efforts to develop community assessment protocols for use by foundations, government and private agencies serving local areas, and local area residents themselves Project Abstract Developing a Prototype Community Report for the Mid -Peninsula Sponsor: AIR Internal Funds The American Institutes for Research (AIR) and John W. Gardner are working with the Mid - Peninsula YWCA in Palo Alto, California, on a pilot project to develop a prototype community profile report. For some time now, the Mid -Peninsula YWCA has promoted activities to capture the opportunities a diverse community brings to this region. The organization has sponsored annual conferences, held monthly sessions that feature guest speakers and panels, and worked with diversity teams and consultants from various organizations in both the public and private sectors. The Mid - Peninsula YWCA also has been interested for some time in taking a "snapshot" every so often of how well the Mid -Peninsula Area is doing with respect to diversity -related issues and concerns. This interest serves as the impetus for the current project. To develop a prototype Community Profile on diversity, the YWCA called on a variety of the organizations that have been leading sponsors of its diversity efforts to participate: local schools, businesses, civic associations, city governments, and nonprofits (e.g., hospitals). Samples of employees (and students in high schools) from each of these organizations were asked to complete the Community Assessment Guide©. A special version of the CAG was developed containing background items that assessed various status characteristics of respondents (e.g., age, gender, race/ethnicity) as well as diversity -related workplace experiences (e.g., participation in diversity training and conflict resolution programs, membership in employee 'resource groups'). The results from these surveys will be compiled across the participating organizations to create a regionwide report, which will be shared with all participants and used in planning future diversity activities. Information will also be reported for individual organizations at their request. Questions of primary interest that will be addressed include the following: • Do individuals with differing personal characteristics (e.g., races/ethnicities) have different perceptions of the opportunities for self-expression, quality of relations, or opportunities for advancement at work? • Do individuals of different genders and races/ethnicities have different perceptions of the sense of community at their workplaces? • In what ways are the community perceptions of individuals, particularly women and individuals from specific gender and race/ethnicity groups, affected by their participation in special diversity -related programs or membership in resource groups? • Are there significant variations in the community perceptions of individuals from specific gender and race/ethnicity groups across different organizational sectors, e.g., business, education, civic nonprofit? • Do community perceptions vary with the ages of respondents; in particular, how similar are the community perceptions of younger versus older individuals from specific gender and race/ethnicity groups? Project Abstract Creating Tools to Assess and Build Community in Work Settings Sponsor: The W.K. Kellogg Foundation From 1991 to 1994, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation sponsored the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and John W. Gardner in their efforts to conceptualize and design tools to assess and build community in work settings. Beginning with Dr. Gardner's monograph Building Community, three activities were undertaken to develop further that conceptualization of community in the context of the workplace: 1. Literature review of several hundred materials from the social science literature to identify extant conceptualizations of and instruments related to community 2. Critical incident study of specific community -related behaviors in 40 workplaces across the U.S. 3. Organization of an advisory task force of business, education, and civic leaders committed to understanding and building community in California's Silicon Valley As a result of these activities, a conceptual model of community in the workplace was created that relates definitional variables (those that represent the core or defining elements of workplace community) and regenerative variables (those that are necessary for the continual renewal of workplace community). Regenerative variables are of two types: investment variables (those that are related to the extent of individual and organizational investment in maintaining and strengthening workplace community), and resource variables (those that address the resources present within an organization to support community -maintenance and community -building activities). Based on this conceptual framework, three measurement tools were developed in cooperation with a special AIR advisory group on survey/test development and small groups of employees at selected companies throughout the San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose Greater Bay Area: 1. a Community Assessment Guide, which measures existing levels of community within companies (i.e., the definitional variables noted above) 2. a Community Investment Guide, which measures the ability and willingness of individuals and organizational leaders to invest in workplace community 3. a Community Resources Guide, which measures the resources available in a company for community maintenance and building Project Abstract Documenting Internal Community Investments in the Nation's Workplaces Sponsor: The W.K. Kellogg Foundation The W. K. Kellogg Foundation is supporting the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and John W. Gardner in a national study of the personal and organizational investments being made internally in high community companies within the U.S. With the valuable assistance of researchers and human resources experts, as well as various organizations such as the Business Enterprise Trust and the Business for Social Responsibility, the project team has begun to characterize the sorts of investments that seem most important to building and maintaining the various elements of community. We are now working to • refine our understanding of investment behaviors related to achieving higher levels of community • document the necessary resources associated with these behaviors at the individual and organizational levels • identify the "triggers" and other factors that affect or moderate the occurrence of these behaviors in specific settings Our approach involves a diversified sample consisting of two types of companies: those that have excelled through implementing socially responsible practices in the workplace (23 different sources were used to identify these companies), and those that comprise the group of the nation's leading companies — whether or not these sorts of practices have been made a priority. For each of the companies in this sample, we are • assessing community investment practices at the firm level using our Organizational Community Investment Survey (OCIS) developed on the basis of 10 core community dimensions and standard firm level characteristics; • assessing the organizational level correlates of community investment practices using the OCIS and describe the strength and direction of their impact on patterns of firm behavior With future support, we will continue our work with this sample. Specifically, we will • assess the sense of community among employees using the 10 community elements incorporated in our Community Assessment Guide (CAG) • assess the individual -level correlates of perceived community status by means of a special supplement to the CAG, covering demographic and work -related characteristics of respondents (such as work values and job rewards) and outcomes (such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment) that may be affected by levels of community • identify the current status of community development within a specific organizational unit by analyzing the relationship between company investments and individual attitudes and behaviors; • identify the precursors to these investment behaviors (e.g., necessary levels of resources, perceived investment opportunities and returns, external factors and conditions) by means of focus groups and focused ethnographic studies. Project Abstract Workplace Community Assessment and Report of Findings Sponsor: AdGap Group. The AdGap Group contracted with AIR/CCR to carry out an organization -wide community assessment at three functional levels. Background items and a specially designed item related to work environment priorities were included to target reporting and recommended community - building strategies to areas of concern. Project Abstract Workplace Community Assessments and Reports of Findings Sponsor: SKOPOS consulting. In 1997, SKOPOS Consulting and AIR/CCR entered into an agreement to jointly offer organizational development consultation related to increasing workplace community to SKOPOS clients in the western states. Under this agreement, the Community Assessment Guide is being administered along with selected background and context -setting items and interpretive reports with recommendations are being prepared for each client. In addition to these reports, client presentations are organized to share results and begin development of community action plans. Project Abstract Demonstrating the Role of Campus Community in School Reform Sponsor: The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation is supporting the Bay Area Region Coalition of Essential Schools (BAYCES) and the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and John W. Gardner in a demonstration of the role of community in ongoing efforts to achieve reform on high school campuses. The lack of community among groups involved in reform activities can effectively derail attempts at positive change. Without community, campus leaders are powerless to lead, and discussions of needed changes in school programs and procedures grow rancorous and unproductive. At the same time, students in schools without community are apt to find themselves treated inconsistently by staff on campus, and they are certain to be denied the opportunity to learn about shared values, trust, caring, respect and recognition, and so on at first-hand at school, by watching, listening to, and interacting with the adults around them. Our approach melds the community -building strategies developed by the AIR/Gardner team together with CES strategies that aim to create empowered cadres of teachers, administrators, and classified staff engaged in reform activities. Specifically, this approach includes the following elements: 1. Assessment of the quality of relations among administrators, faculty, classified staff, and students at six CES high schools using a specially designed instrument system 2. Analysis of this assessment information to determine existing problem areas and to begin to identify barriers to and potential for community development on the campuses 3. Use of specially created instruments in small -group settings to identify extant resources for community -building 4. Engagement of school staff and students in development of strategies to remove community barriers and, generally, to foster community growth on campus 5. Ongoing "coaching" of staff and students on the six campuses by experienced educators with special training and experience in the creation and maintenance of campus community 6. Periodic assessments of levels of individual and organizational investment behaviors related to community -building to chart the progress of resources development and use 7. Summative evaluation involving both re -assessment of community status and capacity and examination of over -time changes in key indicators of campus climate and student and staff engagements in campus activities Project Abstract Understanding Community in the Congregational Setting Sponsors: The Eli Lilly Endowment, Inc., and the Carnegie Corporation The Independent Sector, the Carnegie Corporation, and the Lilly Endowment, Inc., are supporting the American Institutes for Research (AIR) and John W. Gardner in an exploratory planning study of the roles of community and sense of community in congregational settings. Previous studies have suggested that congregational life, to be empowering and fully satisfying, requires conscious attention to, and candid exploration of, relationships and events that occur both within a congregation and between the congregation and the world outside. Strengthening the sense of community that exists in congregations may increase their ability to accomplish their aims. Equally important, by being strong communities, congregations may be able to enhance the sense of community that exists in the neighborhoods and cities in which they are located. A congregation that is a true community can be a learning ground for civic participation, training its members to find strength in diversity, teaching them the arts of diminishing polarization, schooling them in teamwork and collaborative problem solving. In this study, we are working with the leaders of variously affiliated congregations in the San Francisco -Oakland -San Jose Bay Area to better understand the nature of their experiences with congregational community. We have attended the Congregational Studies Institute at Hartford Seminary and benefitted there from direct interactions with congregational leaders and researchers. We are also engaged in an extensive review of existing ideas and research related to the following topics: • factors affecting the development of sense of community among members of congregations —especially the types of investments on the parts of individuals and congregational groups that are needed to achieve higher levels of community in these settings • nature of individual- and group -level resources necessary to support community investments in congregations • types of perceived opportunities, or "triggers," that encourage the making of community investments in congregations • effects of community within the congregation on individual members' satisfaction with their experiences in the church or synagogue, including their appreciation of the services provided and the effectiveness of congregational affiliation in promoting their personal faith relationships and their interpersonal relationships • effects of congregational community on the organization and functioning of special interest or congregational resource groups (e.g., teen groups) • effects of community within the congregation on the outreach efforts of individual members and congregational groups to the larger neighborhood or city setting Project Abstract Conducting Community Training and Surveys of Council Boards Sponsor: Girl Scouts U.S.A. Girl Scouts U.S.A. is seeking to infuse community -building activities into its programs. To begin the process, the presidents, executive directors, and other board members of Girl Scout Councils in Service Area 8 (i.e., the western states, including Alaska and Hawaii) are being surveyed using the Community Assessment Guide°. Two representatives from each of these Council boards will also take part in a two and one-half day retreat and training session in Santa Cruz, California. The agenda for the community training session includes coverage of key community concepts, review and analysis of community survey data, board strategy planning, and definition of community leadership roles. Participating Councils will receive tailored reports of the sense of community among members of their boards and comparative/summary information on community status among board members in the service area. Project Abstract Consultation for the Statewide Community -Focused Court Planning Conference Sponsor: Judicial Council of California. California courts find themselves in a time of profound change with respect to funding processes, collaboration within counties, and renewal of public confidence and trust. For this reason, the Judicial Council of California has undertaken efforts to develop a community -focused court planning process and to introduce this process at a first -ever statewide conference of county teams composed of judges, court executives, bar representatives, public members, and county government officials. CCR staff have been selected by the Judicial Council to serve as community consultants. As consultants to the Judicial Council, we will help develop the planning process for the courts so that this process involves community -building opportunities for the courts themselves and between the courts and their diverse county constituencies. We will also provide resource materials, assist in the selection of conference facilitators and presenters, as well as serving in these capacities, and we will help in identifying consultants to continue to provide technical assistance to the county teams following the conference. Finally, we will participate in the planning of follow-up activities to sustain and further develop the work of the conference. Appendix C: Selected References 9 Reference No. 1: Brooks Carder (619) 450-0728 The AdGap Group 6725 Mesa Ridge Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92121 Surveys of sense of community among top managers, operations staff, and sales staff to gauge individual and situational factors affecting an ongoing organizational transformation. Reference No. 2: Hida Avent (212) 852-5013 Girl Scouts of the U.S.A. 420 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10018-2798 Surveys of Girl Scout Council presidents and board members from Service Area 8 (Western States) to determine community strengths and weaknesses related to effective board performance. Reference No. 3: Debra Engel (408) 764-5000 3Com Corporation 5400 Bayfront Plaza, P.O. Box 58145 Santa Clara, CA 95052-8145 Survey of HR employees worldwide to determine factors affecting their sense of community with the global HR team and with employees at their units of assignment. Reference No. 4: Sister Miriam Fahey Santee Community Group (408) 292-7444 82 Tami Lee #4 San Jose, CA 95122 Survey of sense of community within the Santee neighborhood in San Jose and factors affecting resident involvement with community programs and the neighborhood association. 10 Reference No. 5: Kay Phillips (650) 494-0972 Jim Phillips (650) 494-3541 YWCA of the Mid -Peninsula 4161 Alma Street Palo Alto, CA 94306 Surveys of diverse individuals within distinctive organizational settings to create a profile of sense of community in the Mid -Peninsula area. Reference No. 6: Steve Jubb (650) 802-5482 Bay Area Coalition of Essential Schools (BAYCES) 101 Twin Dolphin Dr. Redwood City, CA 94065 Karl Sonntag (408) 522-2412 Fremont High School 1279 Sunnyvale -Saratoga Road Sunnyvale, CA 94087 Surveys of teachers and students to assist school planning -teams in developing community -building activities and events as part of school restructuring processes. 11 Appendix D: Examples of Products Bay Apartment Communities Organization Culture Survey The purpose of this survey is to obtain your candid views regarding your work environment. Your participation is completely voluntary and confidential. Your answers to the survey questions can help us to better understand your opinions on: The work environment, management, your job, and your department. Your responses will be held in the strictest confidence, as any groups with less than 5 respondents will not be analyzed. Please do not write or sign your name anywhere on the survey. If you are unable to answer a specific question, please leave it blank and go on to the next question. Thank you for your cooperation. Marking Instructions Use No. 2 Pencil Only • Use No. 2 pencil only • Darken the circles completely • Cleanly erase any marks you wish to change • Do not make any stray marks on this form • Do not fold this form INCORRECT MARKS Q Q Q Q CORRECT MARKS 0 Before you begin, we ask that you provide us with some background information. This information is being collected to help us better understand the survey results. The results will not be reported in any way that would allow particular individuals to be identified. Job Role O Community Managers O On -site Associates O Project Managers O Portfolio Managers O Directors & Above O Corporate Staff O Other Location O Northern California O Southern California O Northwest O Home Office O Other Copyright (C) 1997 SKOPOS CONSULTING - American Institutes for Research, used by permission Department O Property Management O Accounting/Finance O HRfTraining/Facilities O Development & Acquisitions O Corporate Administration O Construction O Other Length of Service O Less than 1 Year O 1 year but less than 3 years O 3 years but less than 5 years O 5 years but Tess than 10 years O Over 10 years — — im tl — — — — — — — — S IM — S IM — MIN — fl. — For this survey you are asked to r your level of agreement with each star ent that follows from two perspectives: First, with regard to your office or your property, and secondly, with regard to Bay Apartment Communities in general. Part I Personal Relationships My Property/Office Co-workers ...Other Members of — Bay Apartments — Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagrcc Disagrcc Disagrcc Agree Agree Agree Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagrcc Disagrcc Disagree Agree Agree Agree 1. My personal well-being is important to 0' ® 0 0 0 0 2. When it comes to looking out for me, I really can't trust 0 ® 0 0 0 0 3. I am treated with respect by ® ® 0 0 0 0 4. I am not given credit for things I do at work by 0 0 0 0 0 0 5. If I had a personal problem, I'd have the support of 0 ® ® 0 0 0 6. I can depend on the honesty of 0 0 ® ® 0 0 7. Respect for my privacy is shown by OQ ® ® 0 ® 0 8. When problems come up, the wrong people are blamed by 0 ® 0 0 0 0 9. I feel that I matter as a person to ® ® ® ® 0 0 10. I can count on being treated fairly by 0 0 0 0 0 0 11. My abilities are respected by 0 0 0 0 0 0 12. My accomplishments are recognized by 0 0 0 0 0 13. In dealing with personal problems, I can expect understanding from 0 ® ® 0 0 0 14. When it comes to keeping their word, I trust 0 ® 0 0 0 0 15. Respect for things that belong to me is shown by 0 0 OQ 0 0 0 16. I get blamed for things that aren't my fault by 0 ® 0 0 0 0 17. I know I am cared about by 0 ® '3 0 0 Part II Work Relationships My Property/Office Co-workers O ® 0 O 0 0 ® ® ® 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 ® ® ® O 0 0 O 0® 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ® ® ® 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0® 0 O ® 0 0 0 O ® 0 0 0 0 ® ® 0 0 0 0 O ® ® O 0 0 O ® 0 0 0 0 O ® 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0® 0 0 0 ...Other Members of — Bay Apartments — Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree 1. Information I need is not given to me by 0 ® 0 0 0 0 2. When we do things together, I work well with 0 ® 0 0 0 0 3. Spending extra time to make this a better place to work isn't of interest to OQ ® 0 0 0 0 4. Misunderstandings happen when I communicate with0 0 ® 0 0 0 5. In taking care of problems here, I work together with0 ® ® 0 0 0 6. I have a voice in important decisions that are made by® 0 0 0 0 0 7. I'm the last to know what's going on with 0 0 0 0 0 ® 8. I don't get much done when I have to work together with 0 0 0 0 0 9. Responsibility for improving this company is taken by 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. I have trouble communicating with 0 ® ® 0 0 0 11. At work, I feel that I'm on the same team as 0 ® 0 0 0 0 12. When they are making decisions, my opinion is not important to 0 ® 0 0 ■ rV — 1 ® ® 0 O 0 0 ® ® ® 0 ® 0 O 0 0 0 0 0— ® ® 0 0 0 0 O ® ® 0 0 © O ® 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0- - O ® ® O 0 O 0® 0 0 0- O ® 0 0 0 0- O 0 0 0 0 0— O ® 0 0 0 0 — ■■■ ■ ■ — rl Please rate your level of agreem with each statement that follows from a perspectives: First, with regard to your office or property, and secondly, with regard to Bay Apartments in general. Part III Direction and Purpose • My Property/Office Co-workers ...Other Members of Bay Apartments Strongly Somewhat SOmcw hat Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Agree Agree Agree I= 1. I have a different sense of where this company should go in the next few years when compared to 0 ® ® ® ® 2. My ideas about the importance of what we do in this company are like those of 0 ® ® ® ® ® 3. When it comes to how people should be treated here, I agree with 0 20 0 ® ® 4. This company is being taken in the wrong direction by the actions of ®i ® ® ® ®s ® 5. You can see the importance of what we do in this company in the behavior of ® ®Q ® ® ® ® 6. The "rules" they say are important are not followed by 0 ® ® ® ® ® 7. My sense of what this company's future should be is different from that of 0 ® ® ®a ® ® 8. I see the value of what we do here differently than do®i ® ® ® ® ® 9. My ideas about how people should act here are like those of 0 ® 0 ® ® 10. What they say they want this company to become doesn't show up in the actions of 0 ® 0 0 0 0 I I. The value of what we do here doesn't motivate 0 0 0 ® 0 ® 12. I have a problem with the behavior of 0 0 0 0 0 ...Is something I Part IV must have in my job What's Important to You? • O ® ® O ® 0 ® ® O 0 ® ® ® O ® 0 ® ® O 0 0 ® ® 0® 0 0 0 0 0 ® 0 ® ® O ® 0 ® ® ® O ® O O ® O ® ® ® O ® o O ® 0 ...Is something I have at Bay Apartments Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Disagree Disagree Disagree Age Agra Agree • 1. A balance between work and family 0 0 0 0 0 2. The ability to respond to (internal or external) customer needs OO ® 0 ® ® ® 3. The chance to grow professionally and develop new capabilities 0 ® 0 0 0 0 4. An opportunity to achieve professional goals 0 ® 0 ® 0 ® 5. The chance to do different things at work 0 ® 0 0 0 0 6. The opportunity to engage my creativity in improving the company 0 ® ® ® 7. Assurance that I will be consulted when decisions that impact me are made 0 ® 0 ® ®s ® 8. The ability to be creative in what I do 0 ® 0 ® 0 ® 9. A participative workplace 0 0 0 0 0 ® 10. A work process that allows me to do my best 0 ® ® ® ® ® ■ N EN Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly t• Disagree Disagree Disagree Age Agree Agree 0 ® 0 O © 0 ® 0 O ® 0 0 0 O ® 0 0 0 ® O ® O ® 0 O ® O ® ® O ® ® ® ® 0 O ® 0 Open -Ended Comments --- What aspects of the culture and work environment would you like to see preserved? cu iI z © .c .5,1 0) az ..= CU)J-0 4 a) a, cl 7) THE SANTEE NEIGHBORHOOD SURVEY Instructions .a aU • 3 �' �� c 3 0. C 0 = 0 0 0 - .-. — .- a°> E y .14 C� � a. 0 b 0 - O 0 al °, a-) c •y o 0 cn a) a) 2 bA 3 O = . ZCA .3 0 N 0 3 ^0 c_ 0 v C c) y sO. > O C W s. . 0 _ C E 0+ O O a) a, otS cn cd •C C = Q. 0 O F"' E > 0 o 3 cn cn 4. 0 cci 00 00�— V _ca.00 R C a) Z. 1 C is a) l ctS y • 0 FN. r.d Q) �(+ Q. Clt.ed 0 0 • 3 a My personal well-being is important to ... When it comes to looking out for me, I really In Section D of this survey, you are asked to provide some information about yourself. n 2 o ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ zo❑o❑ ❑ ❑❑❑ ed LY, a) s_ Q Other Services: How many close friends do you have in your neighborhood? N 00 c Ili w 10 a) ❑ ❑ 03> C O ..a 0 0 �Q V 1 '.0 t N ❑ ❑ C y O -• L L 7 O • a.. a O T. C oo o to >•. L E ' O N M 'Tr ▪ • + c s ew 0.0N xzxoo❑ 30❑ O N What do you like best about the Santee neighborhood? What are the biggest problems in the Santee neighborhood'? M D. Background Information • N y ^7 Overall, how satisfied are you with your neighborhood? • What languages do you speak? � Q) cii s Q Q Q Q Q Q Q r O cc-)c) c) c, c, cf.) 1' Z cn v) cn cn cn c1) cn O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cn c co A. Personal Relationships Q Q D SWD SWA 0 v1i 5 5 c'', c¢ 5 5 Q < < < < Q Q Q c, c) c, cp c-) c) c, N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D SWD SWA D SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 co • 0 0 0 0 0 U — -a N i �, N E c.. o E i O i O �+ OU L c cts oa +. -a co O c5 _ O C 4- w . j cC a O .� CU O N O O . "� c� CU c cn •— C Y C Q c Ci E ms` o 0) L c L i O O V a)a)O C _ i CT c ) EO c� OU O E O — .— U as •_ • t U U O C .fl cts a) a) C RS cC O CI) O Q •03 • w "O 0_ c� + , O L N O CD T c QXj — M E Q Q < Q 0 0 c) c)0 0 0 0 I I I - CV c7 4 lf) CO a) CD CD a) Q L >+ c1 (1) a) o 2 E Q U) o U) II II II a can < CCn 5 �',c/C 5 5 5 5 a.4 Q Q Q Q << Q Q Q Q TS e c < • •Q Q Q < Q Q < = o Q< y Z (rip (ID c) c) 34 L C. L • O ,a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c.s 0 0 ,. y cn c, c) cc) cc) y • cn c.) IJ s C O 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w 5) c(n c(r) 5) 5)) 5) c¢n c¢n Q Q Q Q < Q Q Q c.� � � O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (<5) Q Q 0 SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA c¢n c¢n c'r) Q Q Q Q Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c 4- o E >, E ° Y E as �� o E .- 4 E as • X — a�i °. 0' E .( • CI)c L a) o LE E•0 • p>. .� a) c� N a) o - a) o as 2 i ai a 4 a C a▪ i Cr) a)Ei m EE.`a) .� c 0 C° a) o s a�i cii o -� ° �.7.60 '- as o CDcr.)6 C • .� 0) U) E E • — a) C 0co a) a) Y N as -o O a) • E U CL e -C 03 N a) a) N E _c .a o a)0 Q 2.cmES - _ soma fQ r N 6 4 6 CO I: CO Neighbors who speak The Santee Community Group C. Direction and Purpose SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA 0 0 O 0 c¢ c.c, SWD SWA A SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA SWD SWA A SA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (ID can Q Q Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cn 0 0 0 o s � as E - � 0 2 CIS Cf) c _Co "0 0C m co C as O O Q 00 0) co CD0 .0 p c a) CD a) E ° >. °- 2 : - > a) 00 o�.ch o •as a) _ m � ° .c .� : 0 •� C o o - 0 a) cti �- O >, a) .. 0 > a) co >, L L c . • Tj E .O as o 0 ▪ C _V — (n Q >, > "0 p) 0 0 . .- >, 4) ✓ N M • t.[) CO 382 surveys were received from 31 Councils and from the Council Service Team for the area. Community Status in GSUSA Service Area 8 To complement ongoing efforts within Girl Scouts to support board effectiveness and to help maintain a positive environment for board work, members of Girl Scout Council boards in Service Area 8 were surveyed in the summer of 1997 regarding their perceptions of the level of community on their boards. The survey was conducted using the Community Assessment Guide (CAG), which staff at the Center for Community Research, American Institutes for Research (AIR), have developed as a tool for measuring sense of community in work settings. The CAG is comprised of items designed to assess community and a series of additional items asking respondents to provide selected information about their backgrounds and experiences. The community -related items are organized into subscales intended to assess 11 core dimensions of community: Shared Vision, Shared Purpose, and Shared Values; Caring, Trust, Recognition, and Respect; and Teamwork, Incorporation of Diversity, Communication, and Participation. This report first presents a general overview of the survey context, highlighting respondent characteristics and thoughts related to board effectiveness. The report then summarizes aggregate scores on the 11 community dimensions for this Service Area and compares scores for councils of various sizes. Finally, the report draws on the survey data to speak in a more focused' way to two issues likely to be of current concern: incorporation of diversity and development of new members. Survey Context Respondent Characteristics Despite short notice and summer vacations, 31 Girl Scout Councils in Service Area 8 and the Council Service Team for this area responded to AIR's Community Assessment Guide for Council Boards. A total of 382 completed survey forms were returned-375 from board members and 7 from service team members, sufficient numbers to create profiles for every responding group. While the majority of respondents were women, more than 70 men responded as well. Most of the respondents were white, but 70 respondents identified themselves as belonging to some other race/ethnicity group. The largest group of minority respondents were African Americans. Twenty-three Council presidents and 14 Council executive directors responded to the survey. 1 68 percent of respondents reported having participated in Girl Scouts USA board training. Improving skills for Council governance and fund-raising may be a priority for many board members. Over one-half of respondents reported having served on their Council boards for two years or less; about 20 percent reported having served for less than one year. At the same time, almost 25 percent of respondents reported serving on their boards for 5 or more years. The majority of respondents have long been active in Girl Scouting, and fully 34 percent reported more than 15 years of involvement. In contrast, about 8 percent of respondents reported less than one year of experience. Sixty-eight percent of those responding to the survey reported having participated in Girl Scouts USA board training, and 85 percent reported they were employed for pay outside the home. Thoughts about Board Effectiveness Relations with Council staff and the national office. Survey respondents were quite positive concerning the relationships of their boards to both Council staff members and the Girl Scouts USA national office. Eighty percent or more of those responding reported that their boards show confidence in Council staff, share necessary information with Council staff, display mutual respect with Council staff, and maintain effective relations with the national office. Mixed or negative feelings were most apparent with respect to the item concerning the sharing of necessary information: for this item, 19 percent of respondents either disagreed or only somewhat agreed with the statement. Council leadership/oversight functions and board skill levels. More than 80 percent of respondents also were positive concerning their boards taking their responsibilities seriously and providing direction and oversight to their Councils. The one area in which mixed and negative feelings emerged most prominently had to do with board members' evaluation of their own skills related to Council governance. Twenty-six percent of respondents said they either somewhat agreed, agreed, strongly agreed, or only somewhat disagreed with the statement that "Members of our board lack the skills that are critical for the governance of the Council." Fund raising. Fund raising is an important concern and responsibility of Council boards, and the survey responses indicate a careful evaluation of success to date. In response to the item "Our board has been successful in raising funds for the Council," more than one-half of respondents reported either mixed or negative feelings. In response to the item "The members of our board agree on the steps to be taken to raise the funds necessary to sustain the Council in the future," 42 percent of respondents also reported mixed or negative feelings. 2 For the most part, there is a strong base of community in Service Area 8. Overview of Community Findings We cluster the 11 community dimensions into three groups using a "puzzle person" metaphor. These three groups are the head, which refers to shared vision, values, and purpose; the heart, which refers to respect, recognition, trust, and caring; and the hands and feet, which refer to the "bridging" elements of communication, participation, teamwork, and incorporation of diversity. The rationale for the puzzle reference has to do with our larger goal of building, or piecing together, the community puzzle within an organization or on a board one person at a time. To summarize community scores for Service Area 8 within these three clusters of community elements, we first examine the survey data for all respondents (i.e., without reference to particular Councils or to the Service Team). Then, we consider these scores for each of the 32 groups that responded to the survey. Summary Community Scores Community scores for the 11 dimensions of community, organized by cluster, are presented in figures 1-3 in the Appendix to this report. "The Head". Twenty to thirty percent of survey respondents reported strongly positive feelings regarding the shared values, purpose, and vision among the members of their Council boards. In the case of each of these dimensions, about 80 percent of respondents reported overall positive attitudes. The area of most prominent mixed or negative feelings was shared sense of purpose (almost 25 percent). For shared vision, about 20 percent of respondents reported mixed or negative feelings. "The Heart". Slightly more than 90 percent of survey respondents reported strongly positive or positive attitudes regarding the levels of respect shown to them by the members of their Council boards. More than 80 percent of respondents also reported strongly positive or positive feelings of trust with respect to other board members. Caring and recognition were the two dimensions with the highest percentages of mixed or negative feelings reported (about 35 percent and 25 percent, respectively), although the majority of responses in each of these cases were generally positive. "The Hands and Feet". Between 80 and 90 percent of survey respondents reported overall positive feelings concerning incorporation of diversity on their Council boards. Similarly, almost 80 percent of respondents reported strongly positive or positive attitudes concerning the levels of teamwork and communication they had experienced on their boards. Participation also was regarded positively by the majority of respondents, but this dimension saw the 3 10 Councils recorded high scores on all three community clusters. Council size, measured in terms of girl members, has little to do with the sense of community among Council board members. largest percentages of respondents reporting mixed or negative feelings (about 25 percent). Community Scores for Councils Cluster analysis. Elements that we regard as the hands and feet of community —communication, participation, teamwork, and incorporation of diversity —provide a bridge from the head to the heart (e.g., from shared vision to caring). For that reason, we first examine the distribution of groups scoring high (i.e., recording positive or very positive responses) or low (i.e., mixed or negative responses) on these elements. In Service Area 8, NUMBER Councils averaged high scores on these elements, while NUMBER groups averaged low scores on them. We next examine the average scores of groups on the two other clusters of community elements (i.e., the head and heart). For Service Area 8, no Council that was low on the bridging elements recorded high scores on both the head and the heart. Conversely among those Councils that scored high on the bridging elements, 10 Councils averaged high scores on both these clusters. Figure 4 in the Appendix to this report displays the 31 service area Councils and the Council Service Team for Area 8 in terms of their scores on these three clusters of community elements. High and low scores on the bridging elements are displayed using different colors. The two -by -two matrix in which these scores are placed describes scores on the head and heart clusters of elements. For example, the upper left corner area of the figure shows those Councils that are high on shared vision, values, and purpose and low on respect, recognition, trust, and caring. Likewise, the upper right corner area describes Councils that are high on both these clusters. Community and Council size. Often in organizational settings, size plays an important role in affecting perceptions of community; smaller work units or class groupings in schools typically record higher community scores, especially when the individuals in these smaller units have the chance to opt into the groups. In the case of Girl Scout Council boards, however, the numbers of board members from site to site may not vary significantly on the basis of total girl membership —a typically used measure of Council size. For this reason, we find no pronounced differences in the community relations among board members from Councils with small, medium, or large numbers of girl members. (Figure 5 in the Appendix shows the average community scores of Councils in three size classifications based on total girl memberships.) 4 Men have markedly positive attitudes about how well diversity is being incorporated on Council boards. The situation for non- white board members seems less positive. Special Issues of Interest Incorporation of Diversity As Councils reach out to serve an increasingly diverse population, Council boards can benefit from the insights and special talents of members with diverse backgrounds. Earlier it was noted that more than 70 men and about 70 board or team members representing non -white race/ethnic groups responded to the AIR community survey. We looked specifically at the responses of both these groups to items concerned with incorporation of diversity. Perspectives of men. Men often reported more positive attitudes related to incorporation of diversity than did women. For example, in response to the question "Because of their ethnicity, gender, age, or lifestyle, some individuals can be made to feel like `second class citizens' by the members of my Council board," 96 percent of men said they disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement. Fifty-five percent of these men said they strongly disagreed. In contrast, 88 percent of women who responded said they disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement, with 42 percent saying they strongly disagreed. Perspectives of non -white members. For the members of non -white race/ethnic groups, the situation on Council boards or on the service team with respect to incorporation of diversity may be less positive than it is for whites. For example, in response to the survey item "Stereotypes or prejudices can make some people feel like `outsiders' with the members of my Council board," 79 percent of white members either disagreed or strongly disagreed, while 62 percent of non -white members so reported. Similarly, while 90 percent of white members agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "It's what you have to contribute rather than your ethnicity, gender, age, or lifestyle that counts with the members of my Council board," 76 percent of non -white members reported these feelings. Development of New Members To function effectively and make use of every resource, boards and service teams must move quickly to assist new members in gaining a sense of community with others who are serving the Council. How quickly this sense of community can be achieved may depend on many factors, but the level of community already established among more experienced board members is certain to be an important resource. For this reason, we examined the sense of community among new and more experienced individuals serving on Council boards or on the service team for Service Area 8. 5 New board members may find it difficult establish a base of shared values with other members. Perspectives of new members. For the newest members of Council boards, i.e., those individuals with less than one year of board experience, there is a lower sense of shared values with their board colleagues than is true for all other members. For example, in response to the item "I share common principles regarding ethical behavior with the members of my Council to board," 82 percent of new members agreed or strongly agreed compared to 95 percent of those board or team members with three or more years experience. Board or team members with one or two years of experience agreed or strongly agreed with the statement somewhat more frequently (88 percent) than did new board members. Similarly, 68 percent of new members agreed or strongly agreed with the item "It's clear that a core of common values guides the work of the members of my Council board," as compared to 79 percent of members with one or two years of experience and 86 percent with three or more years experience on the board. Members with five or more years of board experience are enjoying many of the benefits of community with their colleagues. Perspectives of most experienced members. For those with the greatest Council board experience, i.e., those individuals with five or more years of service on the board, there is a greater sense of caring, teamwork, recognition, and participation. For example, while 75 percent of the most experienced board or team members agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "I know from my interactions with them that I am cared about by the members of my Council board," 67 percent of those with fewer than five years of experience responded in this way. Similarly, 65 percent of the more experienced members agreed or strongly agreed that "In a time of personal crisis, I know I'd have the support of the members of my Council board," while 56 percent of less experienced members felt this way. Individuals who have opted to remain on their Council board or on the service team for five or more years also have had the time to build strong teamwork relations, and 80 percent of these individuals agreed or strongly agreed that "I experience a real sense of teamwork in my work with the members of my Council board." In contrast, 68 percent of board or team members with four or fewer years of experience agreed with this statement. With teamwork comes shared decisionmaking or, at the least, the opportunity to voice one's opinions without reluctance. For this reason, it may not be surprising that the most experienced board or team members rather uniformly agreed or strongly agreed that "I have a real say when decisions affecting the Council are made by the members of my Council board" (89 percent). Seventy-four percent of members with less board experience agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. Being part of decisionmaking processes, if only as a result of voicing one's opinions, can earn recognition from others for accomplishments that are achieved. In this case, for example, we find that 88 percent of the most experienced board or team members agreed or strongly agreed with the 6 Council boards may need to work on breaking down stereotyping behaviors and renewing their sense of purpose on a more continuous basis. statement "My accomplishments are recognized by the members of my Council board." In comparison, 72 percent of members with fewer than five years experience on the board or team agreed or strongly agreed with this statement. Finally, it is interesting to note that all Council presidents who responded to the survey were among the most experienced board members. For these individuals, there are likely to have been even more opportunities for developing a strong sense of community with others on the board. An example from the caring dimension makes just this point: 87 percent of presidents reported that they agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "When a personal problem affects my board work, I can count on the understanding of the members of my Council board." (Thirty-five percent of these presidents strongly agreed with the statement.) In contrast, 78 percent of the most experienced board non -presidents agreed or strongly agreed, as did 68 percent of those individuals with fewer than five years board or team experience. Implications Some concerns about the skills necessary for effective Council governance and about effectiveness in fund raising provide an operational context for considering the level of community among board members in Service Area 8. Without a strong sense of community, identifying and ameliorating skill deficiencies can be delayed, and achieving consensus on steps to be taken to raise necessary funds may be a slow and difficult process. The results presented here evidence a healthy base of community among the members of Girl Scout Council boards in this service area. At the same time, there are signs that current community status in some locales can be improved. From individual respondents across all boards and the Council Service Team, we see that the areas of shared sense of purpose, participation, recognition, and caring may need attention. For the majority of council boards, lower scores on some or all three clusters of community dimensions (i.e., head, heart, and hands and feet) indicate the need for greater attentiveness among board leaders to creating and taking advantage of community -building opportunities that arise in the normal course of board work. The perceptions of non -white board members and those who only recently have joined Council boards may be especially noteworthy given current efforts to include more diverse participants in the governance process. From non -white members, we gain a sense that current board or team procedures may not be fully effective in breaking down perceived stereotyping. From new board members and from those who have served on boards or on the service team for only one year or two, we begin to see that, in many cases, the 7 development of shared values may be more a matter of tenure than of intentional processes designed to promote the continuous renewal and affirmation of how it is believed Council and team goals should be achieved. 8 Appendix The Head: Shared Values, Shared Purpose, and Shared Vision Shared Values Shared Purpose Shared Vision O 0 T 0 0) 0 W 0 O co 0 in hO CV) OMM 0 N O O Mixed Feelings Strongly Positive ■ O 0) O 0 CE C cd U 0 0 O CO 0 0 CO 0 0 0 cr) 0 N O 0 Mixed Feelings Strongly Positive L O E O cp V c .N • L E O � c = O O cc et 1— � O Q. cv v m c LL C co RI t 1— C 0 ro 0 0 Communication 0 E fLJ N a� 0 0 Q 0) Q CO r- 0 CD 0 0 0 cY) 0 N O O Mixed Feelings w 0 CL Strongly Positive ■ HEAD 6 3 1 Head and Hid Sra for Councils 1 2 3 4 5 6 HEAR? LEGEND Hi Mas Sire to Hays Score Shared Vision Shared Values Shared Purpose AdGap Comparison Scores 17) p 1- U O cC Communication Teamwork Inc. Diversity • Top Mngt —• Operations —A- Sales 100 _ 90 80 70 60 50 - 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Direction and Purpose: Shared Vision crop Mgt., Operations, Sales) VIS1 VIS2 VIS3 VIS4 50 65 66 ■ 65 ■ • 21 22 25 • 19 58 48 45 49 ■ ■ 33 30 29 21 56 46 ■ _ 38 43 ■ t ■ •- • 31 33 29 21 —MI— Favorable —!— Unfavorable VLSI: I have a different sense of where this company should go in the next few years than does... VIS2: My sense of what this company's future should be is different from that of... VIS3: What they say they want this company to become doesn't show up in the actions of... VIS4: This company is being taken in the wrong direction by the actions of... 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Direction and Purpose: Shared Values (Top Mgt., Operations, Sales) VAL1 VAL2 VAL3 VAL4 7 ■ 66 ■ 71 52 • }k9 10 20 25 52 48 47 ■ 40 • 23 22 39 1 29 100 90 80 70 60 50 _ 40 30 20 10 0- 46 45 ■ 36 37 41 •- 21 30 25 —• Favorable —•— Unfavorable VAL1: When it comes to how people should be treated here, I agree with.... VAL2: My ideas about how people should act here are like those of... VAL3: I have a problem with the behavior of... VAL4: "Walking the talk" describes the actions of... 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Direction and Purpose: Shared Purpose (Top Mgt., Operations, Sales) PUR1 PUR2 PUR3 PUR4 60 ■ 59 76 72 ■ • 16 19 • 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 i ■ 49 56 54 ■ • 26 29 • 23 • 16 58 47 52 III 32 29 _"• 20 28 • 15 —111— Favorable • Unfavorable PUR1: My ideas about the purpose of our company's work are like those of... PUR2: I see the value of what we do here differently than... PUR3: The purpose of what we do here doesn't seem to motivate... PUR4: You can see the importance of what we do in this company in the behavior of... 4 Q co cr Q Q Q co LC) N 1 aAJaSoIpaaN isa8Aoloa Aoenowaa ' 4!unwwoo paTInsuooa8 anilealaa8 Toii4uoaanIosaH Auedwooa;eaao s6uiul}uaialpa sleoaanaiyoy 4IMoa J asodJndy6iH aOIAJas Aed u6!H weal-6uo1 dsabluaiia wedVIJM CIustr Srca for Rests - - To Referet , A , , , 2 9 4 S 6 HEART LEGEND Mi Hads Score to Hands Score Cluster Spa for FunioaI Groups - - To ROM 2 3 4 5 6 HEART LEGEND 0 1 i Hi Han�s Scat Appendix E: Staff Resumes Education Ph.D. M.A. B.A. Present Position Robert J. Rossi American Institutes for Research P.O. Box 1113 (1791 Arastradero Road) Palo Alto, CA 94302 (650) 493-3550 1976, Stanford University, Philosophy and Educational Research 1971, University of California, Davis, Philosophy of Education 1968, University of California, Davis, Sociology 1969, Standard Teaching Credential, State of California (Lifetime) American Institutes for Research: Principal Research Scientist and Director, Center for Community Research Responsible for research, evaluation, technical assistance, and training efforts aimed at building community in organizations, groups, and in regional settings. Special interests in education and in intercollegiate athletics. Professional Experience Community Research and Community Building Project Director, Carrying out community assessments in neighborhoods, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (1998-99). Comparative assessments of community status in neighborhood settings. Project Director, Step 2: Developing surveys and self -study guides to assess the sense of community in neighborhoods and cities, David and Lucile Packard Foundation (1998). Development of community assessment protocols (i.e., survey instruments and self -assessment guides) for use by residents. Project Director, Planning a statewide community -focused court planning conference, Judicial Council of California (1997-98). Consultation on development of a court planning process for California that builds community within and among courts and with the public. Project Director, Workplace community assessment and reporting of results, The AdGap Group (1997-98). Assessment of community status and presentation of findings and recommendations. Project Director, Workplace community assessments and reports of results, SKOPOS Consulting (1997-98). Assessments of community status, preparation of reports of findings, and presentations of assessment results to client organizations Project Director, Community -building workshops for neighborhood leaders, Luke B. Hancock Foundation (1997-98). Presentation of workshops in neighborhoods to collect reports of experiences with sense of community, impart community concepts, and identify community -building strategies. 1 Project Director, Community training and survey of Girl Scout Council boards, Girl Scouts USA (1997-98). Collection of survey data from GSUSA Council Boards in Service Area 8 (western states,including Alaska and Hawaii) and training sessions to create stronger community ties among Council presidents and board members and to promote effective board leadership strategies through community building. Project Director, Study of community investment behaviors in the workplace, W.K. Kellogg Foundation (1995-98). Determination of organizational policies and human resources practices that positively affect the level of community (e.g., trust, shared vision, caring, respect and recognition) among individuals in work settings. Project Director, Step 1: Developing an assessment framework for neighborhood sense of community, David and Lucile Packard Foundation (1997). Collection and synthesis of critical incident data from local residents to determine the parameters of community assessment protocols for use in neighborhoods. Project Director, Study of the role of community in support of school reform, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (1994-97). Demonstration of the effects of community assessment and community -building activities on promoting and sustaining efforts to restructure high schools. Project Director, Research project to study the elements of effective congregational communities, Carnegie Corporation of New York (1996). Background readings and interviews to establish a preliminary framework for thinking about sense of community in congregational settings. Project Director, Planning for study of community -building in congregations, Lilly Endowment, Inc. (1996). Meetings and discussions related to study planning, including participation in the Congregational Studies Institute at the Hartford Seminary. Project Director, Development of a community assessment system, W.K. Kellogg Foundation (1992-95). Development of instruments (i.e., the Community Assessment Guide, Community Investment Guide, and Community Resources Guide) for use in assessing and guiding community -building efforts in the workplace. Education and Intercollegiate Athletics (since 1988) Task Director, Review and assessment of NCES six library surveys, Education Statistics Services Institute (1998). Development of a guide to measurement strategies used in NCES library surveys and recommendations for survey enhancements. Project Director, Evaluation of the San Francisco 49ers Academy, SF 49ers Academy (1998). Determination of the outcomes achieved by the Academy program for students and parents, from the perspectives of the program's principal funders and local constituencies. Task Director, Development of issue briefs and descriptive survey reports, National Center for Education Statistics (1994-97). Analysis and reporting efforts designed to inform education policymakers, researchers, and practitioners. Project Director, Evaluation of educational reforms for students at risk, U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, (1991-95). Determination of the characteristics and necessary attributes of effective instructional programs for children and youth at risk in the nation's schools. Project Director, Evaluation of the School Dropout Demonstration Assistance Program, U.S. Department of Education (1989-94). National study to determine effective strategies to prevent dropout from school at elementary, middle, and high school levels. Project Director, Study of the status and well-being of student -athletes at the University of Georgia, University of Georgia (1992-93). Comparative study of the well-being of student -athletes at the University of Georgia, using surveys from the National Study of Intercollegiate Athletes. Project Director, National study of intercollegiate athletes, National Collegiate Athletic Association (19881'11992). National baseline study of the effects of participation in intercollegiate athletics on student - athletes in Division I institutions. Earlier Research Activities Principal Investigator/Project Director, Various projects involving educational and social indicators. For the Office of Special Education Programs, implemented and evaluated demographic accounting procedures for use in the administration of special education programs. For the National Center for Education Statistics, led educational indicator development activities in areas related to women and minorities in education, the federal role in education, the status of professional education, the financial viability of postsecondary institutions, and use of international indicators of educational performance. For the Youth Development Bureau, provided a conceptual framework and implementation strategy for the establishment of a series of youth -specific indicators to monitor the quality of youth development in the United States. For the National Institute of Health, determined the utility of including youth -specific social indicators of educational performance based on existing macro- and microlevel data in statewide school district program evaluations. Principal Investigator/Project Director, Various projects involving evaluation design, data collection, analysis, and reporting of findings. For the California State CETA Office, assessed efforts aimed at improving local cooperative planning among public and private agencies in three California counties. For the ACTION agency, directed the design phase of an effort to develop impact evaluation models for the VISTA and University Year for Action programs. For the National Manpower Institute, directed planning for an evaluation of industry -education -labor councils, which operated at the local level in various states to assist youth in the transition from school to work. For the U.S. Office of Education, carried out a nationwide survey and assessment of career education in the public schools. For the National Science Foundation, explored the effects of career guidance factors on student decisions to enter science careers. Employment History 1968-1970 1974-present Del Paso Heights School District, Sacramento, CA American Institutes for Research, Palo Alto, CA Publications Community Research and Community Building Rossi, R. J., Vergun, P.B., & Weise, L.J. (1997). Serving rural youth at risk: A portrait of collaboration and community. Journal of Education for Students Placed At Risk, 2(3), 213-227. Royal, M.A., & Rossi, R.J. (1997). Schools as communities. (Issue Brief.) Seattle, WA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Administration. Royal, M.A., & Rossi, R.J. (1996). Individual correlates of sense of community: Findings from workplace and school. Journal of Community Psychology, 24(4), 395-416. 3 Royal, M.A., DeAngelis, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (1996) Teachersi sense of community: How do public and private schools compare. Issue Brief. Washington, DC: NCES/Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Rossi, R.J., & Royal, M.A. (1994). Measuring workplace community: Final report. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Education Rossi, R.J. (1997). Education reform and students at risk.. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Rossi, R.J., Hefting, J., & Wolman, J. (1997). Profiles of students zvith disabilities as identified in NELS:88. Washington, DC: NCES/Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. Rossi, R.J. (1996).Evaluation of projects funded by the school dropout demonstration assistance program. Washington, DC: Office of the Undersecretary, U.S. Department of Education. Rossi, R.J., & Stringfield, S.C. (1995). What we must do for students placed at risk. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(1), 73-76. Montgomery, A.F., & Rossi, R.J. (Eds.). (1994). Educational reforms and students at risk: A review of the current state of the art. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Montgomery, A.F., & Rossi, R.J. (1994). Becoming at risk of failure in Americais schools. In R.J. Rossi (Ed.), Schools and students at risk: Context and framework for positive change. New York: Teachers College Press. Rossi, R.J. (Ed). (1994). Schools and students at risk: Context and framework for positive change. New York: Teachers College Press. Rossi, R.J. (1990). Demographic accounting for special education. Social Indicators Research, 22, 1- 30. Rossi, R.J., & DuBois, P.A. (1989). Project MAP: Model accounting plan for special education, final report. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., Wolman, J.M. (1988). A model accounting plan for special education. The Journal of Special Education, 21(4), 57-73. Rossi, R.J. (1987). Project MAP year one final report: Pilot -test of the model accounting plan and preliminary results of expectancy analyses. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Gilmartin, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (1982). Monitoring educational goals: A new optimism. In K.J. Gilmartin & R.J. Rossi (Eds.), Monitoring educational outcomes and public attitudes. New York: Human Sciences Press. Gilmartin, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (1982). Monitoring educational outcomes and public attitudes. New York: Human Sciences Press. Rossi, R.J. (1982). Development of higher education product -value indexes. Social Indicators Research, 11, 227-258. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1982). Models and forecasts of federal spending for elementary and secondary education. In K.J. Gilmartin & R.J. Rossi (Eds.), Monitoring educational outcomes and public attitudes. New York: Human Sciences Press. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1981). Workplans for developing educational indicators (Technical report to the National Center for Education Statistics). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1980). Social indicators of youth development and educational performance: a programmatic statement. Presented as a two-hour training session at the fourth annual conference of the California Society of Educational Program Auditors and Evaluators, San Diego, May 1978. Social Indicators Research, 7, 157-191. 4 Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1979). Non -test indicators of educational performance. The Clearing House, 53(2), 90-96. Rossi, R.J., Gilmartin, K.J., & Pletcher, B.P. (1979). Study of the feasibility of producing social indicator reports in three content areas (Technical report to the National Center for Education Statistics). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. McLaughlin, D.H., Gilmartin, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (1977). Controversies in the evaluation of compensatory education (Final report to the National Institute of Education). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., McLaughlin, D.H., Campbell, E.A., & Everett, B.E. (1977). Summaries of major Title I evaluations, 1966-1976 (Final report to the National Institute of Education). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & McLaughlin, D.H. (1976). Longitudinal evaluation in career education. Journal of Career Education, 2, 91-108. Intercollegiate Athletics Royal, M.A., & Rossi, R.J. (1993). A comparative approach to assessing the quality of life of intercollegiate athletes. Social Indicators Research, 29:317-330. Royal, M.A., & Rossi, R.J. (1993). Drawing comparisons. Athletic Management, V(5):27-32. Royal, M.A., & Rossi, R.J. (1992). The status of student -athletes at the University of Georgia: A comparative analysis using data from the 1987-88 National study of Intercollegiate Athletes. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Studies of intercollegiate athletics: Summary results from the 1987-88 National Study of Intercollegiate Athletes (Report No. 1). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Studies of intercollegiate athletics: Methodology of the 1987- 88 National Study of Intercollegiate Athletes (Report No. 2). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Studies of intercollegiate athletics: The experiences of Black intercollegiate athletes at NCAA Division I institutions (Report No. 3). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Studies of intercollegiate athletics: Women in intercollegiate athletics at NCAA Division I institutions (Report No. 4). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Analysis of the academic transcripts of intercollegiate athletes at NCAA Division 1 institutions (Report No. 5). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Armstrong, T. (1989). Comments from students in the 1987-88 National Study of Intercollegiate Athletes (Report No. 6). Palo Alto, CA: Center for the Study of Athletics, American Institutes for Research. Social Indictors Research Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1980). Handbook of social indicators: Sources, characteristics, and analysis (A textbook for undergraduate and graduate students and professional workers). New York: Garland STPM Press. Gilmartin, K.J., Rossi, R.J., Lutomski, L.S., & Reed, D.F.B. (1979). Social indicators: An annotated bibliography of current literature. Cambridge, MA: Garland. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1979). Demographic profile system for the United States (Final report to the National Institute of Health). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. 5 Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1979, August). Social indicators and policy issues: The matter of relevance. Invited paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Statistical Association, Washington, DC ASA 1979 Proceedings of the Social Statistics Section, 339-340. Gilmartin, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (1978). Concepts and methods for identifying and establishing youth- specific social indicators: A strategy paper (Technical report to the Youth Development Bureau, DHEW). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., Gilmartin, K.J., & Reed, D.F.B. (1978). Report on a feasibility study to develop youth- specific social indicators and data source directory (Technical report to the Youth Development Bureau, DHEW). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1977). Developing youth -specific social indicators to identify critical areas of need: A concept paper (Technical report to the Youth Development Bureau, DHEW). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Interagency Coordination Rossi, R.J., Gilmartin, K.J., & Dayton, C.W. (1982). Handbook for interagency coordination. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Gilmartin, K.J., & Rossi, R.J. (Eds.). (1982). Demonstration and analysis of inter -agency coordination: Findings fro the 1979-1982 Cooperative Planning Demonstration Program in California (Final report to the California State CETA Office). Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., & Gilmartin, K.J. (1981). Information exchange among public agencies in three California counties. Knowledge: Creation, utilization, diffusion, 2(3), 413-436. Methodology Rossi, R.J., & McLaughlin, D.H. (1979) Establishing evaluation objectives. Evaluation Quarterly, 3(3), 331- 346. Rossi, R.J. (1978). Application of inductive logic to the analysis of experimental episode construct validity. Syntheses, 37(3), 285-319. Rossi, R.J., Wise, L.L., Williams, K.L., & Carrel, K.S. (1976). Methodology of the Project TALENT 11- year follow-up study. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J., Bartlett, W.B., Campbell, E.A., Wise, L.L., & McLaughlin, D.H. (1975). Using the TALENT profiles in counseling: A supplement to the Career Data Book. Palo Alto, CA: American Institutes for Research. Rossi, R.J. (1975). Teaching, values, and valuing. In J.J. Jelinch (Ed.), The teaching of values. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Rossi, R.J. (1974). Experience and reason: The three hypotheses of seeing as. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 6(2), 55-63. Technology Hall, J.K., & Rossi, R.J. (1986). Transactional systems: Observations, developments and research -based training strategies for success. Proceedings of the May 1986 Conference, Society for Applied Learning Technology (SALT). Rossi, R.J. (1986). The role of research in making interactive products effective. Performance and Instruction, 25(2), 20-23. Recent Major Presentations Community and the Assurance of Quality in Providing Financial Aid. (June 1998). Address to the Annual National Meeting of the Quality Assurance Program for Postsecondary Education. New Orleans, LA. Enabling Community Focus. (May 1998). Address to the California Statewide Community -Focused Court Planning Conference. Long Beach, CA. 6 Why Community Matters. (November 1997). Luncheon presentation to the annual meeting of the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County. San Jose, CA. What Alternative Education Professionals Should Know about Community. (October 1997). Keynote address to the First Annual Ventura County Continuation and Alternative Education Summit. Camarillo, CA. Making Reforms Work for Students. (January 1997). Invited presentation to the U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. 7 "AAREN A. HANSON Ph.r EDUCATION Ph.D. Stanford University, Social Psychology, 1996. Minor: Applied Statistics B.A. Clark University, Psychology, Summa Cum Laude, 1992. WORK EXPERIENCE Research Scientist, Center for Community Research, February, 1998 to present. • Use quantitative and qualitative research methods to measure community in the workplace, schools, neighborhoods, and congregations. Write grant proposals, author articles, analyze quantitative data. Write research reports, moderate focus groups, conduct cognitive interviews, maintain and develop client relationships, speak at a variety of conferences and seminars regarding the antecedents and consequences of community. Trial Consultant & Quantitative Analyst, National Jury Project/West, Sept., 1995 to Feb., 1998. • Use quantitative and qualitative research methods to investigate jury trial issues. Design surveys, develop research proposals, analyze quantitative data. Write research reports, moderate focus groups, conduct in -court jury selections, assist attorneys with opening statements, prepare witnesses for trial, maintain and develop client relationships, speak at a variety of conferences and seminars regarding questionnaire design and voir dire. Primary focus: employment law. Doctoral Student, Stanford University, September 1992 to September 1996. • Conducted numerous experimental investigations in social and cognitive psychology, managed dozens of research assistants, utilized rigorous statistical and experimental methods, wrote several research papers and presented findings at various psychological conferences. • Analytical techniques used include: multiple regression, logistic regression, factor analysis, segmentation, log -linear modeling, Anova, Manova, Ancova, repeated measures analysis, longitudinal analysis, correlations, t-tests and chi-squares. Instructor, Stanford University, June 1994 to September 1995. • Designed and taught courses on Cross -Cultural Psychology and Adult Development. Teaching Assistant, Stanford University, September 1993 to June 1995. • Taught sections in courses such as Statistical Methods, Social Psychology, and Cultural Psychology. Conference Coordinator, Stanford University, January 1995 to April 1995. • Co -Coordinated Annual Stanford -Berkeley Research Talks. Research Assistant, Information Express Inc., August 1993 to March 1995. • Conducted library research for a variety of Silicon Valley Companies. FELLOWSHIPS & AWARDS • National Science Foundation Fellowship Award, 1993-1996. • Culture and Cultures Research Grant, 1995. • Stanford University Fellowship Award, 1992-1996. • Jacob Javits Foundation Fellowship Award, 1992-1993. • Phi Beta Kappa Honor Society, 1992. • Clark University Outstanding Research Award, 1992. • National Science Foundation Summer Fellowship, 1991. • Colin Creativity Research Grant, 1991. (ridin, 1, III Godbeflesearch & Analysis RECEIVE) MAY 15 1998 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DEPARTMENT By 225 South Cabrillo Highway Suite 200 Building Half Moon Bay CA 34019-1738 phone 415 712-3137 lax 415712-3131 445 South Figueroa Street Suite 2600 los Angeles CA 90071-1631 phone 213624-8863 fax 213 624-8864 Godbe Research & Analysis Proposal to Conduct a Community Needs Assessment Survey for the Town of Los Gatos ATTACH ENT Godbefiesearch & Analysis May 14,1998 Mr. Lee E. Bowman Planning Director Town of Los Gatos P.O. Box 949 Los Gatos, CA 95031 Dear Mr. Bowman: RECEIVED MAY 18 1998 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 8y Godbe Research & Analysis (GRA) is pleased to submit this proposal to conduct a needs assessment survey for the Town of Los Gatos. GRA has long been recognized as a leader in public opinion research. But more importantly, GRA's experience in surveying the needs and opinions of residents of California communities is quite extensive. For cities and towns throughout the State, GRA has been able to identify which services residents are most satisfied with, which services need improvement, and which capital improvement projects have the greatest support. GRA firmly believes that any effort to update the Los Gatos General Plan should be based on accurate and predictive survey research. GRA has provided useable resident satisfaction data to a number of Santa Clara County communities, including the Cities of Campbell, Cupertino, and Mountain View. These cities have used the results of our surveys to make important decisions that have improved the quality of life for their residents. GRA is also quite experienced in facilitating focus groups among community stakeholders. GRA will work hard to make sure Los Gatos receives excellent qualitative research results by designing a focus group discussion guide, moderating the focus groups, and producing a comprehensive report that will assist the Town in deciding upon an appropriate survey instrument. With a staff of highly -trained professionals, GRA has earned a reputation among its clients for producing comprehensive, actionable, and easy -to -understand research on -time and on -budget. From designing a superior sample and questionnaire to ensuring that interviewers are properly trained and data processing is completed by experienced professionals, GRA will make sure the job is done right. This means the Town of Los Gatos will have complete and accurate data upon which to base any changes to its General Plan. GRA is eager to assist the Town of Los Gatos in updating its General Plan and looks forward to working with the Town on this exciting research project. If you have any questions or would like further information about the services GRA offers, please do not hesitate to contact me at (650) 712-3137. Sincerely, David Kaefer Senior Research Analyst 225 South Cabrillo Highway Suite 200 Building 0 Hall Moon Bay CA 94010-1130 ohone 415112-3137 fax 415112-3131 445 South figueroa Street Suite 2600 Los Angeles CA 90071-1631 phone 213824.8863 fax 213624.8864 Table of Contents 1( a About Godbe Research & Analysis 2 Key Project Staff 5 References 6 Scope of Work 8 Project Schedule 11 Project Budget 12 List of Materials Required from the Town 13 Attachments City of Campbell Resident Satisfaction Survey Report and Questionnaire City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Report and Questionnaire Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 1 GodbeHesearch & Analysis About Godbe Research & Analysis Godbe Research & Analysis (GRA) was originally founded in January 1990 as the research division of Godbe Communications. The firm is a full -service public opinion research agency that offers its clients extensive experience in public opinion research for political campaigns, public education projects, corporate image campaigns, jury selection and marketing efforts. The firm's Principal Researcher has been employed by candidate and ballot measure campaigns, as well as by public and private sector clients, throughout the state of California and in Alaska, British Columbia, Colorado, Idaho, Ontario, Oregon and Washington. His expertise spans sixteen years in the field of public opinion research. Complementing the Principal Researcher's efforts is a staff of Research Analysts, Research Associates, and Statisticians. GRA relies on research as a primary tool to define and evaluate public opinion and assist with the development of effective campaign strategies for all its clients. The firm has considerable experience in both qualitative and quantitative research techniques. The following qualitative and quantitative research services are provided by GRA to the firm's clients in the areas of political polling, public policy, advertising, media research and jury selection: • Baseline Polling: Baseline polling analyzes the current trends in a given community that are likely to drive public opinion. The method is particularly helpful for governments, corporations or political candidates who are interested in testing their approval in the community while gauging the community's pulse on a variety of relevant issues. • Threshold Polling: Threshold analysis is frequently used to assess public approval of changes in service, tax or fee levels. The process involves careful testing of different option levels and then 'pushes' these initial tests by offering further information to respondents to see if the respondents will change their opinions. The 'push' reveals both the strength of the opinions and the room available for future persuasion through public relations efforts. GRA has conducted a number of successful threshold surveys for school districts, counties, cities and special districts. • Tracking Polls: Tracking polls take place after a baseline poll establishes a level of support or opposition to various messages. The tracking polls that follow a baseline survey allow for a refinement of the messages first tested in the baseline and also allow for the analysis of opinions over different periods in time. Refinement of messages, especially for ballot propositions, is often needed to make marginally supported messages into messages that meet with success. In addition, by looking at survey data over time, the stability of a message can be assessed; a key consideration for messages that may be affected by current events. • Focus Groups: This qualitative research technique offers a unique opportunity to analyze the detailed opinions of select groups of individuals. The format allows for considerable interaction between participants and permits in-depth discussion of themes and ideas which are brought out in the course of the discussion. GRA's experience in the field of focus group research includes projects for government agencies, corporations, public utilities and political campaigns. • Executive Interviews: Before entering into lengthy survey research projects or costly public relations campaigns, executive interviews are often cost-effective ways of understanding key aspects of an issue. Interviews offer the opportunity to conduct in-depth discussions with community leaders and policy experts on topics where the client must make a decision in the absence of personal expertise. GodbeRasearch & Analysis Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 2 ■ Intercept Interviews: Occasionally the best way to obtain information on the opinions of a given group of people is to conduct the research in -person where the target group may cluster. Shopping -mall intercept interviewing is one popular example of this technique. In this example, intercepts are one way of assessing the opinions of consumers on a number of products. Intercept interviewing is also succPcsful when government agencies want to assess customer satisfaction of a given service such as public transportation. Client List The following listings represent a portion of the school districts, corporate clients, non-profit clients, transportation planning clients, counties, municipal districts, companies, and political campaigns for which Mr. Godbe has conducted public opinion research projects. Municipal Clients City of Campbell City of Cupertino (1990 & 1992) City of Fontana City of Hayward City of Lake Forest City of Lathrop City of Livermore City of Los Angeles City of Malibu City of Mill Valley City of Millbrae (1992 & 1994) City of Modesto City of Mountain View (1991 & 1995) City of Novato (1989, 1994, 1996, 1997) City of Pomona City of Rocklin City of San Bruno (1989 & 1992) Town of San Anselmo City of San Lorenzo City of San Ramon City of Santa Clara City of Santa Monica City of South Lake Tahoe City of South Pasadena City of Turlock City of Whittier Non -Profit Clients Bay Area Catholic Homes Catholic Healthcare West Center For The Study of Los Angeles Latino Issues Forum Jewish National Fund Martinez Regional Land Trust Riverside County Deputy Sheriffs Association Resources For The Future San Francisco Chamber of Commerce San Francisco Visitors & Convention Bureau Santa Monica Youth Athletic Foundation Stanislaus County Economic Development Corp. Sonoma County Board of Realtors Southern Alameda County Board of Realtors Students for Educational Opportunity Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce GodbaResearch & Analysis Corporate Clienrs Bank of America C.J. Segetstrom & Sons Del Monte Corporation Hewlett-Packard Company Hosie, Wes, McLaughlin & Sacks McCutchen, Doyle, Brown & Enersen Media & Associates Netiva Pacific Gas & Electric Company Perkin-Elmer Corporation San Deigo Gas & Elearic Company Santa Fe Pacific Realty Sequoia Associates Southern California Edison Stevens/Garland Summerlill Homes TCI of California The Siena Group Whitecliff Homes, Inc. Winning Results, Inc. Transportation Clients Bay Area Rapid Transit (BARD CCS Planning and Engineering Federal Highway Administration Marin County Public Works Marin/Sonoma Hwy.101 Corridor Action Cmte. Metropolitan Transportation Association Metropolitan Transportation Commission Parsons, Brinkerhoff, Quack & Douglas Regional Transit Resources for the Future San Mateo Transit District (SamTrans) Santa Clara Valley Transportation Agency So. California Air Quality Management Dst Southern California Association of Goverrunents Stanislaus Area Association of Governments Transportes Interoalifomias Transportation Management and Design Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 3 Special Districts Alameda County Libraries Contra Costa County Contra Costa Water District (1986 - 1989) Contra Costa Clean Water Program East Bay Municipal Utility District Fresno County Libraries Friends of the Santa Monica library Friends of the Saratoga Library Inland Empire West Resource Conservation District Los Angeles County Department of Public Worlts Los Angeles County Public library Foundation Marin County Free library Marin County Public Work Department Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Monterey County Public Library Sacramento Public Library San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority San Joaquin County Library District San Mateo County Park & Recreation Department Santa Clara County Library District Scotts Valley Fire Protection District Solano County libraries Candidate Clients Richard Alatorre (14th City Council District, Les Angeles) Leo Bazile (7th City Council District, Oakland) Ruben Barrales (4th Supervisorial District, San Mateo Cnty) Hal Brown (State of California, Insurance Commissioner) Charles Calderon (State of California. Attorney General) Denise DeVille (3rd Supervisorial District, San Mateo Cnty) Don Freitas (5th Supervisorial District, Contra Costa Cnty) Mary Griffin (1st Supervisorial District, San Mateo Cnty) Mike Hernandez (1st City Council District, Las Angeles) Tom Huening (2nd Supervisorial District, San Mateo Cnty) Don Horsley (San Mateo Cnty Sheriff) Bill Mahar (5th Congressional District) Shannon Reeves (Mayor, City of Oakland) School District and Education Clients CenterUnified School District Davis Joint Unified School District Dude Elementary School District Fremont Unified School District Geyserville Unified School District Kentfield Elementary School District Laguna Salada Unified School District Lagunitas Elementary School District Larkspur Elementary School District Loyola Marymount University Martinez Unified School District Mill Valley School District Montebello Unified School District Moorpark Unified School District (1997 & 1998) Novato Unified School District (1990,1995, & 1998) Redwood City Elementary School District San Mateo Best Schools Committee San Rafael Elementary School District San Rafael High School District Sierra Joint Community College District Tamalpais Unified School District Tehachapi Unified School District Turlock High School District University of California California State Universities Windsor Unified School District Godbellesearch & Analysis Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 4 Key Project Staff Bryan Godbe, PrrcQal Researcher Cofounder of Godbe Research & Analysis, Mr. Godbe has over 16 years of experience in public opinion research, public relations and government affairs. A significant amount of Mr. Godbe's research has been conducted for Santa Clara County communities. Mr. Godbe is directly responsible for all of GRA's public opinion research including both qualitative and quantitative research projects, focus groups, baseline polling and tracking projects. He is directly responsible for research design, questionnaire development, overseeing data collection and data processing, analysis of results and the presentation of findings. In this capacity, he has conducted both public opinion and market research projects at the national, state, and local levels including projects in and for Los Angeles, Marin, Riverside, Sacramento, San Joaquin, San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties; the cities of Cupertino, Lathrop, Livermore, Mill Valley and Turlock, the Hewlett-Packard Company (Boise, ID; Cupertino, CA; Corvallis, OR; Fort Collins, CO; Kitchener, Ontario; Richmond, British Columbia; Roseville, CA; Santa Rosa, CA; and Vancouver, WA), Hosie, Wes, McLaughlin & Sacks (Juneau, AK), Pacific Gas & Electric Company, Southern California Edison, the Building Industry Association, the Contra Costa Water District, the East Bay Municipal Utility District and the Southern California Association of Governments as well as for dozens of cities, school districts, and special districts. Mr. Godbe has substantial experience meeting the research needs of Santa Clara County communities. He has conducted research in and for the Cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Mountain View, San Jose, Santa Clara, and Saratoga. Many of these projects were resident satisfaction surveys which assessed service needs in these communities and provided information that has helped them update their General Plans. In addition, Mr. Godbe's research helped the Santa Clara County Library pass a sales tax increase. In 1989, Mr. Godbe received a Silver Anvil Award from the Public Relations Society of America for the development and implementation of an outstanding government affairs program on behalf of the Contra Costa Water District. This program was based on Mr. Godbe's extensive research including baseline research, focus groups and three tracking polls. Prior to founding the firm, Mr. Godbe was Vice President of Research at Solem & Associates, a California based public relations firm. Mr. Godbe also serves as the senior research consultant at the Center for the Study of Los Angeles at Loyola-Marymount University. He has a Masters Degree from the University of Michigan where he studied survey research methodology at the Institute for Social Research; and a BA degree from the University of California, Berkeley. David Kaefer, Senior Research Analyst Mr. Kaefer has served as the day-to-day project manager for more than 100 of GRA's research projects, including a number of those in Santa Clara County. He managed resident satisfaction surveys in Campbell, Cupertino, and Mountain View, as well as the survey GRA conducted for the Friends of the Saratoga Library. He has provided important survey research information to many communities, which has helped them to update their General Plans. In addition, Mr. Kaefer has managed numerous qualitative research projects. He has moderated a wide variety of focus groups and has provided useable focus group information to community decision -makers. Mr. Kaefer has worked extensively on target -audience marketing surveys that assess such issues as media consumption patterns, point -of -purchase behavior, incentive threshold analysis and slogan evaluation. Mr. Godbefesearch & Analysis Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 5 Kaefer's experience on this type of marketing -based research frequently entwines itself with customer satisfaction issues. Mr. Kaefer has worked extensively on cable provider customer satisfaction, newspaper customer satisfaction and public satisfaction towards public agency services. His clients in these areas include work for such cities as Mountain View and Lake Forest, the county of Los Angeles and corporate clients such as Hewlett- Packard. Mr. Kaefer's other research projects have included work for the counties of Contra Costa and San Mateo, the Sacramento Public Library, the Solano County Library, the Cities of Santa Monica and South Lake Tahoe, Hasseltine-Best, Media & Associates, Winning Results, the Committee to Elect Tom Huening Supervisor and the Committee to Elect Mary Griffin Supervisor. Prior to joining GRA Mr. Kaefer served as Senior Research Associate working for Dr. Larry Sabato, a well known professor and political commentator. Mr. Kaefer co-authored one section of Dr. Sabato's book When Should the Watchdogs Bark? and then finished work for Dr. Sabato on a second book, Corrupt Campaigns, where he served as co -project manager. In 1996, Mr. Kaefer was named a "Rising Star" by Campaigns. & Elections magazine following the publication's national competition. The magazine recognized Mr. Kaefer as an emerging national leader in public opinion research. Mr. Kaefer received a B.A. in Economics and American Government from the University of Virginia. Gregory Harrison, Research Coordinator Mr. Harrison brings a wealth of political and research experience to GRA. Mr. Harrison's current projects for GRA include work for Calderon for Attomey General, San Francisco International Airport, and the Cities of Lake Forest, Rocklin, and South Pasadena. Prior to joining GRA, Mr. Harrison served as an aide to Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), advising her on a number of issues including transportation, housing, telecommunications, and crime. Mr. Harrison served as a Legislative Assistant in the Congresswoman's Washington, D.C. office before returning to California to work as a Field Representative in her Sonoma County office. From 1993-1995, Mr. Harrison worked as a consultant for the National Urban League's Research Department, co-authoring several reports including, "Fast Facts: Comparative Views of Afncan-American Status and Progress". This piece appeared in The State of Black America 1994. Mr. Harrison holds a MA in Government and Politics from the University of Maryland and a BA in Political Science and Economics from Sonoma State University. References Godbeflesearch & Analysis City of Campbell Project: Project Budget: Project Dates: Project Contact: Telephone: Resident Satisfaction Survey $17, 500.00 October 1997 Barbara Lee, General Services Administrator (408) 866-2103 Abstract: GRA completed a telephone survey for the City of Campbell that assessed support for a future Teen Center and expansion of the public library. The City was also interested in measuring resident satisfaction with a variety of services, including recreation, street maintenance, police services, neighborhood parks, and communications. Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 6 (illasat6.— Godbeflesearch & Analysis City of Cupertino Project: Resident Satisfaction Survey Project Budget: $15,730.00 Project Dates: January 1998 Project Contact: Don Brown, City Manager, Donna Krey, Public Information Officer Telephone: (408) 777-3200 Abstract In January, GRA completed an analysis of resident satisfaction in the City of Cupertino. This poll of Cupertino residents probed satisfaction with general city services (such as police, fire, and parks and recreation services), tested support for a Teen Center and library expansion, and evaluated race relations in Cupertino. City of Mountain View Project: Resident Satisfaction Survey Project Budget: $17,070.00 Project Dates: January 1996 Project Contact: Linda Forsberg, Assistant to the City Manager Telephone: (408) 903-6301 Abstract: In January 1996, GRA completed a public opinion research project for the City of Mountain View aimed at assessing the needs of city residents with respect to parks and recreation services, library services, communication services, and police services. City of Lake Forest Project: Resident Satisfaction Survey and Focus Groups Project Budget: $34,730.00 Project Dates: April 1998 Project Contact: Dave Bass, Director of Administrative Services Telephone: (714) 461-3431 Abstract: GRA's most recent resident satisfaction survey was conducted for the City of Lake Forest. This survey assessed the needs of Lake Forest voters, evaluated the importance of a number of City services to these voters, and measured voters' satisfaction with City services. The survey also tested support for a number of proposed public works projects and measured library usage and Internet access among Lake Forest voters. GRA is currently conducting a series of focus groups for the City of Lake Forest. This qualitative research will build upon the voter survey and further explore voters' service needs. City of Santa Monica Project: Survey of Residents Regarding Telecommunications Services Project Budget: $9,000.00 Project Dates: October 1997 Project Contact: Kate Vemez, Senior Management Analyst Telephone: (310) 393-9975 Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 7 Abstract In October 1997, GRA conducted a telephone survey for the City of Santa Monica. The City was interested in determining the Internet usage habits and communication needs of city residents and examining opportunities for the City to address those needs. Scope of Work Task 1 Task 2 GodbeResearch g Analysis For this particular project, GRA is recommending two focus group sessions among Los Gatos stakeholders and a telephone survey. The focus groups will be conducted first — as a means of testing ideas and refining the research objectives for the telephone survey. Once the qualitative data from the stakeholder focus groups has been analyzed, GRA will begin to draft a quantitative survey instrument. The specifics of the research design are presented below. GRA is eager to meet with Town staff to finalize the work scope and discuss the research objectives of both the qualitative and quantitative components of this study. GRA is prepared to meet with staff as often as is necessary to ensure the study achieves these objectives. Once the research objectives have been established, GRA will work with Town staff to determine the composition of the community stakeholder focus groups. GRA recommends conducting two stakeholder focus groups of approximately 12 participants each. For example, one group could be made up of downtown merchants, while the second could be made up of neighborhood residents, for example. Once the Town has provided GRA with a list of potential stakeholder participants, GRA will contact the stakeholders and alert them to the time and place the groups will be conducted. To save the Town money, GRA recommends conducting the focus groups at Town Hall or another community facility. This would save approximately $1,000 on facility rental fees and make attending the focus groups much more convenient for Los Gatos stakeholders who may not want to drive to a focus group facility in San Jose. GRA will work with the Town of Los Gatos to develop a Focus Group Discussion Guide for each group. This guide will be developed to achieve the project goals and reflect the composition of the two focus groups. It will assist in determining which capital projects stakeholders feel are important, which services are most and least important to Los Gatans, and which services Los Gatans are most and least satisfied with. The firm's Senior Research Analyst will be moderating the two focus groups. The focus groups will be conducted on one weekday evening that is convenient for Town staff (one group will begin at 6:00 and the other will begin at 8:00 P.M.) The groups will last two hours each, which will provide ample time to discuss the issues which are of interest to Town staff concerning the Los Gatos General Plan. GRA believes it is critical that the moderator of the focus groups be intimately involved with the project from its first scoping session until the completion of the project. This complete commitment ensures a consistent and surrPs ful project which achieves research goals. GRA will also assign a Research Analyst or Research Coordinator to take notes during the two sessions. After completing the groups, GRA will review the focus group findings and prepare a detailed written report of findings. The Town of Los Gatos will also be provided with an executive summary, a description of each focus group discussion, a summary of results, and conclusions. In GRA's final report, the following components of the focus groups will be analyzed: IN Respondent specific facial expressions and moods • Respondent specific key comments Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 8 Task 3 (rag.'" as GodbeResearch & Analysis ■ Respondent specific initial impression and written response • Topic specific respondent input and timing ■ Topic specific general mood ■ Topic specific general discussion If the Town is interested in conducting additional focus groups to study the needs and opinions of non - stakeholder Los Gatos residents, GRA would be interested in conducting such groups. For these groups, GRA would use a professional focus group facility and recruiting agency to recruit participants (GRA recommends using San Jose Focus in San Jose or Nichols Research in Sunnyvale). GRA would develop a screener questionnaire to divide the participants into two focus groups. The first of the two focus groups, for example, could be made up of citi7Pns who are satisfied with the job the Town is doing to provide Town services, while the second group could be made up of citizens who are dissatisfied with the job the Town is doing to provide Town services. Alternatively, one group could be made up of Los Gatos residents, while another could consist of Los Gatos business owners. In addition to the screener questions, participants would be asked demographic questions that would help GRA achieve a balance of gender, age, and income in each group. Participants would be given an incentive for their participation in the groups. GRA has provided cost estimates for these groups in the Project Budget section of this proposal. GRA's approach to the quantitative component of this research project will include rigorous attention to research methodology. The first step in this process is to determine the appropriate sample size to meet the Town's research objectives, reduce the sampling error to an acceptable level, and conform to the Town's budget. The quantitative component of the project will begin immediately following the completion of the focus groups. GRA recommends conducting 400 interviews with residents, 15 minutes in length, which would test support for various capital improvement projects, assess satisfaction with Town services, and determine which Town services are most important to Los Gatos residents. This technique, in which residents are asked about the importance of Town services and the level of satisfaction with these services, has been used recently by the research team at GRA for the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, and Lake Forest. For most city or town satisfaction projects, a sample of 400 to 600 respondents is generally acceptable for quantitative research. With the number of Los Gatos residents around 29,000, a sample size of 400 will allow for analysis of important subgroups and reduce the statistical margin of error to an acceptable level for most population groups. If there are special areas or demographic groups the Town wishes to analyze, oversampling may be necessary. For this type of survey, GRA recommends drawing a random digit dial sample of adult residents of Los Gatos. An RDD sample is drawn by determining the active phone exchanges within a given sampling area and then producing a random list of all active residential phone numbers in the area. The RDD sample is most appropriate when it is necessary to sample the attitudes of an entire city or town population, not just residents who are registered voters. If the Town is only interested in measuring the needs and opinions of registered voters, then a stratified sample of registered voters in Los Gatos may be an appropriate altemative sampling method for this project. The registered voter type of probability sample is drawn by computing the appropriate frequency for the total number of registered voters in the sampling area and using these frequencies to randomly select every "nth" voter. Once the initial data points are randomly selected, the computer fills each "cluster" based on its geographic proximity to each cluster's randomly selected voter. Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 9 The costs associated with each sampling method are presented in the Project Budget section of this proposal. The next step in the research process is to design a survey instrument. Before drafting a survey instrument, GRA will meet with Town staff to thoroughly discuss the results of the stakeholder focus groups and the research objectives of the quantitative component of the survey. The information gained from this meeting, combined with our research experience, will be used to develop a telephone survey questionnaire to meet your needs. GRA is recommending a 15 minute survey instrument for the current project, but depending on the Town's needs and budget, the length of the survey can vary from a short poll of only a few minutes to a detailed study of 25 minutes or more. Currently, telephone interviewing is considered to be state-of-the-art in public opinion data collection. GRA uses a research phone bank located in Sacramento that has an outstanding reputation for speed and accuracy. All interviews are reviewed for completeness and ten percent of respondents are actually called back to verify that the interview was completed professionally. GRA will use this facility to conduct the 400 interviews with Los Gatos residents. To survey business owners in Los Gatos, GRA recommends sending a mail -back questionnaire to 2,000 of the 3,600 businesses in the Town (this will yield approximately 200 completed surveys if our anticipated response rate of 10 percent is realized). These businesses will be selected by a random sampling process similar to the RDD sample described above for telephone interviewing. The mail -back questionnaire will be substantively identical to that used to interview residents over the phone. Business owners will have the option of either mailing their responses to GRA or faxing them to GRA via a toll -free fax number. Once the interviewing is complete and a sufficient number of mail -back questionnaires have been returned, each response will be coded and keypunched. GRA will then produce detailed crosstabulations that generally include such variables as age, gender, parent/non-parent, ethnicity, income, home ownership, geographic breakdowns, and other banner points based on attitudinal data. Analysis of the data and presentation of the findings is the last component of any research project. Because a concise summary of the data and actionable recommendations are critical to a client's objectives, GRA takes great care in analyzing the data and preparing a written final report In GRA's final report, the Town of Los Gatos can expect a question -by -question summary of the data and a complete set of crosstabulations. In addition, the Town will receive a detailed matrix which groups the responses to two different question sets into four quadrants. In one question set, respondents will be asked how important specific Town services are to them. In the second question set, respondents will be asked how satisfied they are with each service the Town of Los Gatos is providing. By plotting the responses to these questions on a graph, it will become clear where the Town needs to focus its time and financial resources. Services that rank high on the importance scale but low on the satisfaction scale will stand out as areas for improvement for the Town, while services that rank high on the satisfaction scale but low on the importance scale will stand out as areas which may not need a great deal of attention in Los Gatos's updated General Plan. Task 4 GRA will ensure that both the qualitative and quantitative components of the survey are based on sound social scientific principles. GRA has become a national leader in public opinion polling because each member of GRA's staff has a solid understanding of survey research methodology. GRA maintains a staff of seven trained researchers with expertise ranging from sampling to research design, data processing, data interpretation, and statistical analysis. GRA's staff includes two Ph.Ds, two researchers with training from the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research, and four researchers with M.A. degrees in social and behavioral research. Godb.Hesearch & analysis Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 10 Task 5 Task 6 GRA will work with the Town of Los Gatos to ensure the focus groups and subsequent survey are structured to reveal Los Gatans shared values, vision, and purpose. Survey questions will be designed to gauge support for existing Town services and potential new services and capital improvement projects among Los Gatos residents. This will assist the General Plan Task Force II in developing an updated General Plan that reflects the community's vision for the future of Los Gatos and recognizes the different values residents place on various Town services. GRA will construct the survey instrument to assess community needs in Los Gatos, rather than simply measure opinions. The results will help Los Gatos produce its next General Plan by demonstrating which Town services residents feel are most important and which they are most satisfied with. Conversely, the results will indicate which services residents feel are least important and which residents are least satisfied with. The results will also test support for a number of projects that may or may not be included in the General Plan, depending upon the support they receive. This will provide Town decision -makers with information about the needs of Los Gatos residents. Project Schedule r .4 Because of our experience in conducting public opinion polls for local governments, Godbe Research & Analysis can generally conduct an integrated focus group and survey research project in approximately 12 weeks — and in some situations preliminary data can be available much sooner as deadlines require. The table below shows one possible schedule for completing each of the key components of the Los Gatos needs assessment research project Initial client meeting Preparation for Focus Groups, including Development of Discussion Guide Conduct Stakeholder Focus Groups Analyze Focus Groups Client meeting to disciss results of Focus Groups and Questionnaire Design Questionnaire Drafting and Pretesting Telephone Interviewing Business Survey Questionnaire Mail -Back Data Processing Analysis and Report Writing Presentation of Final Report (Analysis of focus groups and drafting of survey questionnaire often overlap) June 12 June 15 - 24 June 25 June 26 — July 8 July 9 July 10 -17 July 18 — 20 July 20 — Aug 7 Aug 8—Aug 14 Aug 15—Sept4 Sept 8 GodbeResearch & Analysis Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 11 Project Budget Godbe Research & Analysis takes great pride in delivering usable research projects on time and on budget. For this research project, GRA recommends the Town of Los Gatos conduct two stakeholder focus groups and a survey consisting of telephone and mail -back components. GRA has provided estimates for the stakeholder focus groups, optional focus groups (resident and business groups), and the quantitative component of the survey (estimates for both voter and random digit dial telephone surveys are included). Focus Groups Recruitment Fee Facility Rental Fee Participant Incentives Audio/Visual Equipment Rental Refreshments Research Fee Miscellaneous Expenses Total Telephone and Mall —Back Surveys Telephone Survey N=400, 15-Minute Random Sample Questionnaire Copying Telephone Interviewing Data Processing Research Fee Miscellaneous Expenses Total Mail -Back Business Survey N=200 Random Sample Printing (Questionnaire and Envelopes) Mailing Service Postage Data Processing Toll -Free Fax Number Research Fee Miscellaneous Expenses Total Stakeholder Focus Croups (21 $425.00 $300.00 $3,000.00 $250.00 $4,975.00 Random Digit Dial Survey (RDD) $1,073.00 $275.00 $8,000.00 $1,165.00 $5,500.00 $259.00 $16,263.00 $660.00 $1,270.00 $1,190.00 $484.00 $800.00 $75.00 $3,500.00 $200.00 $8,179.00 optional Focus Groups (1 Business Group & 1 Resident Group) $2,400.00 $1,000.00 $1,800.00 $425.00 $300.00 $5,000.00 $250.00 $11,175.00 Voter Survey $520.00 $275.00 $4,706.00 $1,165.00 $5,500.00 $250.00 $12,416.00 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET (RDD) TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET (Voter) (including optional focus groups) GodbeResearch & Analysis 4. 4h?6e $24,40 -g24-,5}000 4.25, 57o 439692700 (RDD) -4C,592. $357745 {Voter) $ 36,'745 Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 12 List of Materials Required from the Town GRA will require the following information, materials, and facilities from the Town of Los Gatos to successfully complete this research project Godbeflesearsh & Analysis 1) Names and telephone numbers of community stakeholders that may participate in focus groups 3) 2 rooms for stakeholder focus groups (1 room for participants; 1 for observers) Los Gatos Community Needs Assessment Survey Proposal Godbe Research and Analysis Page 13 ) Godbe ;T1 Research ( grit & Analysis '%d City of Campbell Resident Satisfaction Survey October 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction . 2 Methodology 3 Executive Summary 4 Key Findings 4 Conclusions 5 Summary of Results . 7 Length of Residency 8 Best Thing About Living in Campbell .10 Worst Thing About Living in Campbell 11 City Satisfaction 12 Importance of City Services 13 Satisfaction with City Services 15 Importance and Satisfaction Matrix 17 Facility Usage 19 Meeting Attendance . 21 Contact With Campbell Police Department. 22 Perception of Crime , 23 Job Performance of Campbell Police Department 24 Campbell Community Center — Usage, Program Preference and Awareness 25 Cultural and Recreation Events 27 Need for Athletic Center, Teen Center �9 The Campbell Library 32 Shopping Center Remodel 33 News Sources in Campbell 34 Effectiveness of 'The Profile' 36 Internet Access 37 Appendix A - Guide to Statistical Significance 39 Appendix B - Questionnaire 40 Appendix C - Crosstabulations 55 City of Campbell Godbe Aesea,jh and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 1 PROPRIETARY` METHODOLOGY This study was conducted by interviewing adult residents of the City of Campbell. Specifics of the research design are as follows: Technique Universe Field Dates Sample Size Sampling Method Language of Interview Telephone Interviewing Adults,18 years old an older September 12-September 16,1997 N=400 Stratified Cluster Sample English Understanding the 'Margin of Error' — All responses have a statistical margin of error between 2.92 and 4.87 percent. This means that for a given question answered by all 400 respondents, the percentage breakdowns of the sample population will vary by no more than 4.87 percent 95 out of 100 times. The percent margin of error applies to both sides of the answer so that for a question in which 50 percent of the respondents said 'yes', we would expect that 95 out of 100 times the actual percent of the population that would say 'yes' would be between 45 and 55 percent. The margin of error for a given question in this survey actually moves between 2.92 percent and 4.87 percent as stated above. The 4.87 percent number refers to questions, such as a yes/no question, where opinions are evenly split in the sample with 50 percent of respondents saying yes and 50 percent saying no. If that same question receives a response in which 10 percent of respondents said yes and 90 percent said no, then the margin of error would be 2.92 percent. Controlling for 'Position Bias' — In order to control for location bias (position bias), some of the items in the survey were rotated. Survey items 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 were structured so that a different item within the set was chosen as the starting point for each respondent that was interviewed. Sample Selection — Respondents for the survey were selected using a random digit dial sample of adults, 18 years and older, living within the City of Campbell. GRA completed 400 interviews throughout the city and did not deem it necessary to oversample any specific demographic populations or geographic areas. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 3 PROPRIETARY INTRODUCTION Godbe Research & Analysis is pleased to present the results of a public opinion research project conducted for the City of Campbell. This report is organized into four sections: The Methodology section explains the methodology used to conduct this type of survey research. The Executive Summary section summarizes the key findings and conclusions arrived at through analysis of the survey results. The Summary of Results section reviews the findings of the quantitative research on a question -by -question basis. The Appendices include the questionnaire, a guide to statistical significance and the computer -generated crosstabs. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 2 PROPRIETARY } year, aquatics was by far the most popular program. Other popular programs included 'special interest classes' and 'adult sports programs' as activities they are most likely to participate in. • Forty-three percent of respondents indicated they had been to one of the City's cultural events or recreation activities. After being asked to specify which activities or events they had attended, respondents listed the Prune • The perceived need for a Teen Center in Campbell is far greater than the need for additional athletic facilities in the City. Overall, 76 percent of respondents perceive a need for a Teen Center and 75 percent would support using city money to provide a Teen Center. In comparison, only 43 percent of respondents perceived a need for additional athletic facilities in Campbell. • The remodel of several shopping areas in Campbell was satisfactory (either very or somewhat) to almost 80 percent of respondents. • Forty-two percent of respondents indicated they receive information on city events by reading the San Jose Mercury News. 'The Profile' was the second news source of choice (23 percent), followed by the Campbell Express (11 percent) and seeing flyers or posters around town (11 percent). • Almost 70 percent of Campbell residents (all of whom receive 'The Profile') responded that the newsletter was an effective way of telling residents about city services and events. • Access to the Internet was available at home or through work for sixty percent of the households surveyed and 15 percent of respondents had visited the City of Campbell website. • The City receives high marks from residents that are closely comparable to the marks given by Campbell voters in previous surveys conducted by Godbe Research & Analysis. • A 1.3 ranking is considered by GRA to be the point at which an item (or service) becomes a 'top of mind' response. Campbell's services that received a ranking of 1.3 or higher were: 'Police services', 'Emergency medical services', 'Fire protection services', 'Garbage collection', 'Street maintenance', 'Sewer and stormdrain services', 'Recycling program', 'Traffic safety program', 'Library services' and 'Traffic circulation planning'. • The Satisfaction/Importance Matrix on page 16 plots each service tested on a grid. GRA expected to see some services in each of the four quadrants. However, the rankings given by Campbell residents were high enough so as to place every service in the upper right quadrant. This is not to say that respondents offered high satisfaction and high importance on every service. As the matrix shows, there are areas of possible improvment that should not be overlooked including traffic circulation planning, land use planning, street maintenance, and sidewalk maintenance. • The Campbell Police Department received high marks from the respondents, especially in the areas of traffic enforcement and overall response time. The relative ambivalence and lack of awareness of the Animal Control services and DARE program, respectively, are areas in which a public education effort would likely increase community support and satisfaction with the Department. City o/ Campbell Godbe Research and Ana ysis Satisfaction Survey Page 5 PROPRIETARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After reviewing the research results, Godbe Research & Analysis has arrived at the following key findings: • Almost 90 percent of respondents to the survey were either 'very' or 'somewhat' satisfied with the job the City of Campbell is doing to provide city services. • When asked to rank a selection of services as being 'very important', 'somewhat important', 'not too important' or 'not important at all', respondents ranked 'Police services' highest, followed by 'Fire Protection', and 'Emergency Medical services'. • Of the 22 services tested, 'The Profile' was given the lowest ranking by respondents in terms of how important the newsletter was to them. • The matrix plotting respondent satisfaction with level of importance shows there are areas in which the City could improve. In general, street maintenance and traffic circulation planning emerged as areas with relatively high rankings on the importance scale and corresponding low rankings on the satisfaction scale. • The downtown area of Campbell and the Campbell Public Library were the two items in the City of Campbell that received the most usage by respondents to the survey. Overall, 91 percent of respondents had visited the downtown area in the last year and 70 percent indicated they had visited the Campbell Public Library in the last year. Despite the high percentage of respondents indicating they had used the Campbell Public Library, the frequency of library usage is low among respondents. A plurality of respondents (33 percent) indicated they use the library only a few times a year. Fifteen percent indicated they use the library once a month, 16 percent said they use the library a few times a month, eight percent said they use it once a week and six percent said they use the library a few times a week. • The facilities with the least amount of usage were the Campbell Historical Museum and Ainsley House, the Senior Center and Jack Fischer Park. • Respondents having contact with the Campbell Police Department in the last year were asked to describe their experience in an open-ended format. Seventy-three percent of respondents chose descriptions or words that were positive in connotation. Among the positive responses were phrases such as, 'very helpful', 'very responsive', 'outstanding' and 'very satisfied'. Eleven percent of respondents chose descriptions with a negative connotation. Some of the most common were 'frustrating' and 'slow'. Thirteen percent of respondents offered a neutral description of their experience with the Police Department ('Everything was fine') and five percent of respondents could not describe their experience. • When asked to rate the overall quality and effectiveness of the Police Department programs, 80 percent answered that traffic enforcement was either 'excellent' or 'good'. Sixty-three percent of respondents answered that overall response time was either 'excellent' or 'good'. When asked about the DARE program, over 50 percent of respondents were not able to give an answer and 44 percent of respondents did not give an answer when asked about the Department's Animal Control program. • Among the 37 percent of respondents indicating they had used the Campbell Community Center in the last City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Page 4 Satisfaction Survey PROPRIETAR Y SUMMARY OF RESULTS J Understanding a 'Ranking' — For purposes of this summary, most results will be discussed in a question -by -question format except for those questions asked for demographic or comparison purposes. Because of the number of response categories for most of the questions, many questions are discussed with respect to a descriptive ranking instead of the actual response percentages. The rank conveniently expresses the results of three, four and five option response categories in a single numeric figure, thereby making interpretation of the data considerably easier. Where particular insights can be obtained by using the actual response percentages, these percentages are analyzed; usually in a section following an analysis of the question with regard to the question's descriptive ranks. Types of Analysis — Regardless of whether response percentages or rankings are chosen for analysis, each question is presented with comments highlighting the important findings. Due to rounding, those tables using response percentages may not round to 100 percent. Each table generally includes the total category percentage, or the rankings from the entire sample. These figures are followed by distributions from various subgroups identified by a descriptive label. The following subgroups are referred to frequently in the substantive section of the report Gender Male or Female. Political Party Registered political party (Democrat, Republican and Other). Geography Three geographic zones within the Campbell city limits were used to segment the overall population. Zone 1 encompassed the central down- town area, Zone 2 was made up of the San Tomas neighborhood (west of the Expressway) and Zone 3 represented residents living east of Highway 17. Length of Residency Length of residency is broken up into several groups. In this report, those living in Campbell more than 16 years are referred to as 'long-time' residents. Homeowner Status Owner or Renter Under 20K, 20-40K, 40-60K, 60-80K and 80K or more each year on a household basis. Income More on Rankings — As was mentioned briefly above, some of the questions discussed on the following pages will refer to a 'ranking'. Because of the difficulty involved with assessing statistics based on four and five point scales, it is sometimes preferable to simplify the data for analytical reasons. For example, each of the questions which asked respondents to assess the impact of various items (i.e. Question 5) were candidates for a ranking system. To further simplify the data in these questions, the four point scale used in the survey for assessing the importance of the items (very important, somewhat important, not too important and not at all important) was collapsed into a single measure that is sensitive to the intensity and direction of opinion. This single number enables one to construct a relative ranking of each question with regard to the other questions. To derive the rank, all responses are aggregated from the four point scale using the following system: 2 = very important, 1 = somewhat important, -1 = not too important and -2 = not at all important. In all cases, a high positive rank corresponds to large numbers of respondents choosing the 'important' response categories for the given question. Reminder — As a matter of clarification, the questions discussed and analyzed on the following pages include only a subset of the various crosstabulations available for each question. Only those subgroups that are of particular interest or that illustrate a particular insight are included in the discussion on the following pages. Should readers wish to conduct a closer analysis of subgroups for a given question, the complete breakdowns appear in Appendix C. City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 7 PRU►r , it Wit( J • Support for a Teen Center is high — 76 percent of respondents would support the idea and 75 percent of all respondents would support using city funds to finance the project. Support for additional athletic facilities is considerably lower among overall respondents. • While 'The Profile' ranks last as a service, respondents believe the newsletter is a positive addition to the community and think it is an effective communication link between the City and the residents. • In short, Campbell residents are satisfied 'customers' of the City. When asked about the worst thing about living in Campbell, 26 percent of respondents remarked that 'there's nothing wrong with Campbell'. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 6 PROPRIETARY Attendees at Campbell City Council meetings are much more likely to be long-time residents than new residents to the City. The table below shows that over 60 percent of those who have attended City Council meetings have lived in Campbell at least 16 years. There is no relationship between length of residency and not having attended a City Council meeting. The relationship between perception of crime in Campbell and length of residency is inconsistent. Those indicating the amount of crime in Campbell has 'stayed the same' were more likely to be one to three year residents (29 percent) but also quite likely to be long-time residents (25 percent). Those who indicated that crime had increased were definitely more likely to be long-time residents of Campbell, but among respondents who feel crime has decreased, 33 percent are long-time residents. Attended Meetings Yes No Crime Level Increased Decreased Same Event Attendance Yes No Ins than one year 3% 16% 5% 5% 10% 9% 18% One to three years 3% 26% 11% 16% 29% 17% 25% Four to nine years 15% 25% 19% 23% 22% 24% 21% Ten to fifteen years 17% 12% 18% 21% 13% 15% 12% Sixteen or more years 61% 20% 46% 33% 25% 34% 23% Don't know 3% 1% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% The table above also shows that event attendance (i.e. have you been to one of the cultural or community celebrations in Campbell) is not nearly as related to length of residency as was 'City Council attendance'. The data show there is an equal spread of the community at such events, irrespective of the respondent's length of residency in Campbell. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 9 PROPRIETARY 1 El it(..1 l►CITt LIi This survey of adult residents in the City of Campbell began after a careful screening of potential respondents. Each respondent to the survey had to be at least 18 years of age and a resident of the City of Campbell. After these qualifications had been established by the interviewer, the substantive section of the survey began. The first substantive question, in which each respondent was asked how long they had lived in the City of Campbell, is a common feature of city satisfaction questionnaires. In short, this question lets respondents know that the survey will probably be about issues in their community. Almost 30 percent of respondents to the survey indicated they had lived in Campbell 16 or more years, 23 percent of respondents indicated they had lived in Campbell between four and nine years and 22 percent of respondents had lived in Campbell between one and three years. The remaining 30 percent of respondents split between having lived in Campbell less than one year (14 percent) and between 10 and 15 years (13 percent). Those having lived in Campbell more than 16 years were much more likely to be Republican than any other group of residents (39 percent). This group of residents were also more likely than any other group to indicate that they were Democrats (33 percent). Those indicating membership in another political party were most likely to have lived in Campbell between one and three years (26 percent) and between four and nine years (30 percent). Respondents having not designated a political party identification were also most likely to have been living in Campbell between one and three years (24 percent) and between four and nine years (40 percent). Overall Dem Party Rep Other No Party IPss than one year 14% 11% 3% 13% 8% One to three years 22% 19% 19% 26% 24% Four to nine years 23% 22% 21% 30% 40% Ten to fifteen years 13% 15% 15% 13% 12% Sixteen or more years 28% 33% 39% 13% 16% Don't know 1% 1% 2% 4% 0% The newest residents in Campbell are those between the ages of 18 and 29 (32 percent). There are a fair number of new residents in their 30's but not nearly as many new residents among adults in their 40's, 50's and 60's. Adults in their 50's and 60's, for example, make up the largest contingency of long-time Campbell residents. Almost half of respondents in their 50's have lived in Campbell for more than 16 years and almost two-thirds of respondents over 60 years of age have been in Campbell that long. Over 80 percent of renters have lived in Campbell less than 10 years and almost 60 percent of homeowners have lived in Campbell more than ten years. Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Homeowner Status Own Rent Less than one year One to three years Four to nine years Ten to fifteen years Sixteen or more years Don't know 32% 18% 8% 4% 5% 37% 26% 16% 11% 14% 12% 30% 35% 20% 9% 8% 13% 22% 15% 8% 11% 12% 17% 48% 63% 0% 1% 3% 2% 1% 6% 26% 14% 33% 21% 25% 16% 9% 42% 5% 1% 2% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 8 PROPRIETARY Respondents were also asked to describe the worst thing about living in the City of Campbell. To eliminate the possibility of location bias, this question and the preceding one were rotated so that half of the respondents were asked to ascribe the worst thing about living the Campbell first and the other half was asked to describe the best thing about living in Campbell first. The list of answers offered by respondents when asked to describe the worst thing about living in Campbell are shown below. It is noteworthy that 'traffic' was the answer given by 18 percent of respondents overall. Males were only slightly more likely than females to mention this concern, but the difference in not statistically significant (20 percent compared to 17 percent). It is also noteworthy that over 25 percent of respondents failed to offer a single negative concem concerning the Campbell community. Males were slightly more likely than females to say 'there is nothing wrong with Campbell'. The remaining individual responses were all below six percent. Overall Gender Male Female Traffic High cost of living Bad roads Too crowded Arrogant police force No rent control Growing too quickly Bad services (phone, sanitation, fire) Schools could be better Teenage crime Boring place --there's nothing to do Construction on Hamilton Avenue No sidewalks Public transportation Homeless Miscellaneous Nothing wrong with Campbell Nothing Don't know 18% 6% 5% 5% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% 13% 26% 3% 4% 20% 17% 6% 6% 5% 5% 4% 6% 5% 3% 3% 4% 2% 4% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 0% 2% 1% 1% 0% 1% 15% 11% 29% 23% 4% 2% 3% 6% In the May 1995 survey of voters in Campbell, 'traffic' and 'road repairs' were cited by 22 percent of respondents as being the number one problem facing Campbell. Specifically, 'traffic' (in general) was offered by eight percent of respondents, necessary 'road repairs' was cited by six percent, 'traffic signals' was mentioned by four percent of respondents and another four percent singled out 'congestion' as the number one problem in Campbell. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 11 PROPRIETARY y.�.ii.i[. _( I The second substantive question in the survey asked respondents, in an open-ended format, to describe the best thing about living in the City of Campbell. Verbatim responses were recorded and coded into similar categories where appropriate. Almost two-thirds of all respondents gave one of the following answers: 'small community', 'good location' or 'quiet'. Other answers from the respondents are shown below. Males and females offered similar answers with slightly more females indicating an appreciation of Campbell's 'small community' (33 percent compared to 26 percent). Overall Gender Male Female Small community 30% 26% 33% Good location 22% 23% 21% Quiet 12% 16% 9% Nice place in general 7% 5% 8% Nice neighborhoods 5% 4% 6% Low crime rate 4% 5% 4% Close to freeways 3% 3% 2% Good shopping 2% 3% 2% Good climate 2% 3% 1% Good schools 2% 1% 3% Miscellaneous 8% 9% 6% Nothing 1% 1% 2% Don't know 4% 4% 5% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 10 PROP; : A'k The next set of questions asked respondents how important 22 individual city services are to them. The answer categories for this question are: very important, somewhat important, not too important or not important at all. The numbers in the table represent the ranking of each service, based on a four -point scale. To develop this scale, each response is assigned a numeric value (very important = 2, somewhat important = 1, not too important = -1 and not important at all = -2). This calculation shows the relative importance of each service and is sensitive to both the intensity and the direction of opinion. After ranking the items in this manner, the following table was constructed to show the relative position of each item. The number one ranked service by overall respondents is 'Police services' (1.9). Respondents in their 50's are concerned with 'Emergency medical services' (2.0) and respondents over 60 years old offer their top ranking to 'Fire protection services' (1.9). While health and safety issues dominate the top three rankings among the various age groups and overall, 'garbage collection' and 'street maintenance' emerge in a second tier. Respondents in their 50's gave a considerably higher ranking to 'sidewalk maintenance' (1.5) as did respondents in their 60's (1.4). Respondents in these two age categories also seem more concemed than younger respondents with 'street tree maintenance' and 'street sweeping services'. Younger residents, on the other hand, are more concemed with 'park and picnic area availability' than older respondents. A complete listing of each service and its ranking from the overall respondents and each age group is shown below. Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Police services 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.8 C 1.8 Emergency medical services 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.8 Fire protection services Z 1.8 f 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 Garbage collection 1.7 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 Street maintenance 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.7 1.7 1.6 Sewer & stormdrain services 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.7 Recycling program 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.6 Traffic safety services 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 Library services 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 Traffic circulation planning 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.2 City recreation services 1.2 1.1 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.2 Park & picnic area availability 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.9 Street sweeping services 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 C 1.5 i Park & picnic area maintenance 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 Street tree maintenance 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 Sidewalk maintenance 1.2 0.8 1.2 1.1 1.5 ( 1.4 ',- Land use planning services 1.1 0.8 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.2 Building permit & inspection services 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.3 1.1 C 1.3 Economic development efforts 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.1 Community center facilities 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.6 0.9 1.0 Performing arts facilities 0.6 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.8 :The Profile" Newsletter 0.0 -0.4 -0.1 -0.1 0.2 0.5 City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 13 PROPRL TAR-Y J The next question in the survey asked respondents how satisfied they were with the job the City is doing to provide city services. Almost 90 percent of respondents indicated they were either 'somewhat' or 'very' satisfied with the City. A small percentage (seven percent) of respondents were 'somewhat' dissatisfied and a very small percentage (two percent) were 'very dissatisfied' with the City's ability to provide services to the community. Neither homeownership nor gender affected the respondent's approval of the City. In other words, homeowners, renters, males and females were all just as likely to indicate satisfaction with the City's job at providing city services. Overall Homeowner Status Own Rent Gender Male Female Very satisfied 46% 44% 48% 43% 48% Somewhat satisfied 43% 43% 42% 43% 41% Total satisfied - 89% 87% 90% 86% - 89% . Somewhat dissatisfied 7% 9% 3% 8% 5% Very dissatisfied 2% 2% 1% 2% 2% Total dissatisfied 9% 11% 4% 10% 7% Don't know 4% 3% 5% 3% 5% In May 1995 and February 1990 this question was asked of Campbell voters in surveys conducted by Godbe Research & Analysis. It is important to note the difference between asking a group of voters this question and a group of adult Campbell residents. A citizen's status as a registered voter suggests they are at least somewhat interested and involved in the political process. As such, they tend to be better educated about the role of city government and its performance in providing city services. With this in mind, the table below provides the data from this question in 1990 and 1995. May-95 Feb-90 Very satisfied 40% 44% Somewhat satisfied 52% 43% Total satisfied 92% 87% Somewhat dissatisfied 5% 7% Very dissatisfied 2% 2% Total dissatisfied 7% 9% Don't know 2% 4% City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 12 PROPRIETAR The second question in this set asked respondents how satisfied they were with 'the job the City of Campbell is doing to provide the same 22 services tested already. Whereas the preceding question aimed to determine how important each service is to a respondent, this question asked the respondent to rate the City's performance on providing the particular service. What becomes obvious at first glance is the highest ranking given by respondents overall is 1.6 - whereas the highest ranking in the previous question was a 1.9 overall. The services residents were most satisfied with were the same three services that captured the top three spots in the previous question, but 'emergency medical services' captured the highest satisfaction ranking over 'police services'. When asked specifically about satisfaction, 'emergency medical services' and 'fire protection services' tied for the top spot with a ranking of 1.6. 'police services', 'garbage collection' and 'library services' followed with rankings of 1.5, 1.4 and 1.4, respectively. Overall 18-29 Age 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Emergency medical services r 1.6 1.4 1.6 1.5 1.8 1.7 Fire protection services 1., 1.. 4111111S1111111111S 1,8.0 Police services 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.6 Garbage collection 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.4 Library services 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.5 City recreation services 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.3 Park & picnic area availability 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 c 1.5 7 1.3 Community center facilities 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 Recycling program 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.5 Park & picnic area maintenance 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 Sewer & stormdrain services 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.2 (14-7 1.1 Traffic safety services 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.0 "The Profile" Newsletter 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.3 1.0 1.0 Street sweeping services 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.8 1.1 Street tree maintenance 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.7 1.0 Building permit & inspection services 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.1 Sidewalk maintenance 0.9 Z 1.2 _) 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.7 Street maintenance 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.8 Economic development efforts 0.8 1.0 0.7 0.6 0.8 1.0 Performing arts facilities 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.9 Land use planning services 0.7 T 1.3 T 0.6 0.5 0.9 0.7 Traffic circulation planning 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.7 By adding every ranking for each age group and then dividing by the number of services tested (22), a satisfaction index score is given to each demographic group. The first age category (18-29 years) has a score of 1.16, respondents in the second age category (30-39 years) has a score of 1.09, the third age category (40-49 years) has a score of 1.12, the fourth age category (50-59 years) has a score of 1.12 and the final age category (60 years or more) has a score of 1.17. City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Ana ysis Page 15 PROPRIETAR` It is noteworthy that of all the services listed, 'The Profile' newsletter received the lowest ranking overall and in each age group. In some cases, the newsletter received a negative ranking. It is sometimes helpful to compare rankings between males and females and homeowners and renters. The table below does just that. The rankings offered by males and females generally follow the same ordering given by respondents overall. Of interest, however, is that females only offered two rankings below 1.0 (performing arts facilities and 'The Profile'), while males offered six rankings below 1.0 (land use planning services, sidewalk maintenance, performing arts facilities, Community Center facilities, economic development efforts and 'The Profile'). There were only a couple significant gaps between male and female respondents. For example, female respondents offered a 1.4 ranking to 'sidewalk maintenance' and men only offered this service a 0.9 ranking (difference of 0.5). Females also gave a higher ranking to 'The Profile' newsletter (0.3) than males (-0.3). There were no significant gaps between the rankings of homeowners and renters. Respondents in each Zone gave their three top rankings to the same services given by overall respondents (police services, emergency medical services and fire protection services). Respondents in Zone 1 and 3 indicated stronger feelings about the importance of each service to them. As such, respondents in these group gave more high rankings than did respondents in Zone 2. Homeowner Status Own Rent Gender Male Female Zone 1 Geographic Zones Zone 2 Zone 3 Police services 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 Emergency medical services 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 Fire protection services 1.99 1.81.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.8 Garbage collection 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.6 1.6 Street maintenance 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 Sewer & stormdrain services 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.5 Recycling program 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.5 1.7 Traffic safety services 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.5 1.4 Library services 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.4 Traffic circulation planning 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.4 City recreation services 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.4 Park & picnic area availability 1.1 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2 Street sweeping services 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 Park & picnic area maintenance 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.2 1. 1. Street tree maintenance 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.2 Sidewalk maintenance 1.2 1.1 0.9 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.1 Land use planning services 1.1 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.1 Building permit & inspection services 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.2 Economic development efforts 1.0 1.0 0.8 1.2 1.2 0.8 1.1 Community center facilities 0.9 1.0 0.8 1.1 1.0 0.8 1.0 Performing arts facilities 0.5 0.7 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.7 "The Profile" Newsletter 0.1 -0.2 ,,,..,_ -0.3 0.3 0.2 (-0.2 j 0.4 City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research end Analysis Page 14 PROPRIETARY } , r co. and "Satisfaction Matrix The matrix below plots each service on two scales. The scale along the X-axis corresponds to the ranking the service was given in terms of importance. The scale along -the Y-axis corresponds to the ranking the service was given in terms of satisfaction. Over the years, GRA has presented this matrix in several forms. Sometimes it is useful to show all four quadrants, ranging from -2 to +2 on each axis. In this particular case, however, all of the rankings fell between 0 and +2 on the satisfaction scale and the importance scale. As such, it is more useful and easier to compare the location of each service if they are shown together in one quadrant. To get a sense of what this chart is showing, the City of Campbell should set a baseline set of coordinates representing where each service needs to be in terms of satisfaction vis-a-vis importance. GRA recommends setting the baseline at 1.0 on each scale. Maintenance & Avail. of Parks & Picnic Areas City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 17 PROPRIETARY The table below highlights the level of satisfaction for homeowners, renters, both gender groups and respondents in different geographic areas. Owners offer slightly lower rankings for street maintenance, sidewalk maintenance and street tree maintenance compared to renters. The full list of services and their respective rankings by homeowners, renters, males and females is presented below. Already mentioned previously was that respondents in Zone 1 and 3 (east of Highway 17) gave more services higher rankings than respondents in Zone 2. The table below also shows that respondents in Zone 3 area more satisfied with city services (especially 'The Profile', 'street sweeping' and 'sidewalk maintenance') than respondents in Zones 1 and 2. Homeowner Status Own Rent Gender Male Female Zone 1 Geographic Areas Zone 2 Zone 3 Emergency medical services 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.7 1.6 Fire protection services 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.7 1.7 Police services 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.5 ( 1.7 Garbage collection 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.4 1.6 Library services 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.5 City recreation services 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.5 Park & picnic area availability 1.2 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.3 1.2 Community center facilities 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 Recycling program 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.4 Park & picnic area maintenance 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.4 Sewer & stormdrain services 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.3 Traffic safety services 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.9 1.2 1.1 "The Profile" Newsletter 1.0 1.1 0.9 1.1 1.0 1.0 ( 1.3 Street sweeping services 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.0 0.9 C 1.4' Street tree maintenance 0.8 1.1 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.2 Building permit & inspection services 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 Sidewalk maintenance 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.7 1.0 (, 1.3 Street maintenance 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.6 1.2 Economic development efforts 0.8 0.9 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.6 1.1 Performing arts facilities 0.7 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.9 Land use planning services 0.6 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.9 Traffic circulation planning 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.8 0.9 City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 16 PROPRIETARY .1.41 Cfi'! 1; After the set of questions establishing areas of improvement and achievement, the survey switched gears and began to focus on some specific facilities and services in the City of Campbell. First, respondents were asked if they had been to any of the following places in Campbell over the past year. Two findings below are worth comment. First, usage rates are very different between Campbell, John D. Morgan Parks versus Jack Fischer Park (68, 65 percent vs 27 percent). Second, it is noteworthy that usage differs among respondents overall and among respondents with children at home. Clearly, there are areas and facilities in Campbell where usage is greater among families with children. Some of the biggest differences between overall usage rates and usage among respondents with children are apparent in the results for Campbell Public Library, John D. Morgan Park, the Campbell Community Center and Jack Fischer Park. In each of these examples, usage increased substantially among respondents with at least one child at home. Overall None Number of Children One Two Three + Have visited the Downtown Area 91% 90% 97% 90% 86% - Have visited Los Gatos Creek Trail 73% 68% 81% 79% 79% Have visited Campbell Public Library 70% 61% 85% 87% 82% Have visited Campbell Park 68% 63% 76% 85% 68% Have visited John D. Morgan Park 65% 55% 74% 89% 82% Have visited Campbell Community Center 53% 47% 62% 61% 71% Have visited City Hall 39% 34% 53% 39% 50% Have visited Jack Fischer Park 27% 20% 35% 46% 36% Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House 23% 24% 22% 18% 25% Have visited the Senior Center 14% 16% 12% 3% 18% The age of respondents also impacts usage of individual facilities and recreation areas in Campbell. As the circles indicate, the highest usage age group by facility cluster among younger respondents. The youngest respondents were more likely than any other age group to visit Campbell Park and they indicated relatively high usage of the downtown area, the Los Gatos Creek Trail and the Campbell Public Library. Ninety-four percent of respondents in their 30's had visited the downtown area and compared to other age groups, this group had the highest percentage of respondents having visited the Campbell Public Library. Respondents in their 40's indicated higher than average usage of Jack Fischer Park and the highest percent of usage of John D. Morgan Park. Respondents in their 50's were significantly less likely to have visited the Los Gatos Creek Trail and slightly more likely than younger respondents to have visited the Historical Museum and Ainsley House. Thirty-four percent of respondents over 60 had used the Senior Center in Campbell. However, usage of the downtown area, the Los Gatos Creek Trail and the Campbell Public Library was lower among respondents in this age group compared to the other age groups and the respondents overall. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Pays 19 PROPRIETARY With some projects, Godbe Research & Analysis deems it necessary to show all four quadrants (I. High Importance, High Satisfaction; II. Low Importance, High Satisfaction; III. High Importance, Low Satisfaction; and IV. Low Importance, Low Satisfaction). Typically, a chart with all four quadrants ranges from -2 to +2 on both the x and y axes. However, since none of the services provided by the City of Campbell receive a negative ranking overall, the chart on the previous page displays adjusted ranges for the two axes (0 to +2). With a smaller area to analyze, it is still possibly to draw comparisons between the various data points. To make four sub -quadrants, the chart is divided at 1.0 on the x-axis and 1.0 on the y-axis. The paragraphs to follow focus on the quadrant which suggests improvements - sub -quadrant III. After drawing lines at 1.0 for each axis, areas of possible improvement emerge. There are five or six service areas that appear in this area (below 1.0 on the satisfaction scale). First is 'Street maintenance (1.6, 0.8), followed by 'Traffic circulation planning' (1.4, 0.7). 'Sidewalk maintenance', 'Economic Development Efforts', 'Building and Permit Inspection services' and 'Land Use Planning' also emerged in this quadrant, representing services of high importance and low satisfaction to respondents. While the rankings of resident satisfaction are not terrible, they do warrant attention from the City because respondents are offering many of these items rankings of 1.6 and 1.7 on the 'Importance of service' scale. Therefore, to ignore these items could be a mistake. On a more positive note, eleven of the services tested fell in the sub -quadrant representing services of high importance and high satisfaction (Sub -quadrant 1). Among these services were 'Police services', 'Emergency Medical services', 'Fire Protection', 'Garbage Collection', 'Sewer and Stormdrain services', 'Traffic Safety', 'Recycling', 'Library services', 'City Recreation facilities', Parks and Picnic Area availability' and 'Parks and Picnic Area maintenance'. The Community Center facilities were alone in the quadrant representing low importance but high satisfaction. The Performing Arts facility and 'The Profile' were also the only two services in the quadrant representing low importance and low satisfaction. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 18 PROPRIETARY ( :1 Cif.;!:.ilr-rit i11 ) The next two questions in the survey asked respondents whether or not they had ever attended a City Council, Advisory Board or Commission meeting. Overall, only 20 percent of respondents reported having attended a City Council meeting, with voters being more likely than non -voters to attend. Attendance rates also increase with age, as shown in the table below. Overall Registered Age Yes No 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Yes 20% 24% 4% 8% 13% 18% 32% 35% No 80% 76% 94% 92% 87% 81% 69% 65% Don't know 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% Homeowners were more likely than renters to have attended a City Council meeting, females were slightly more likely than males to have attended a City Council meeting. With respect to a respondent's length of residency, as length of residency increases, so does the likelihood of attending a City Council meeting. The table below shows the attendance habits of each demographic group. Homeowner Status Gender Length of Residency Own Rent Male Female 0-3 Years 4-9 Years 10-15 Years 16 or More Yes 26% 9% 16% 23% 3% 13% 25% 43% No 73% 90% 83% 76% 97% 86% 74% 57% Don't know 0% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% No consistent correlation exists between a respondent's income and their attendance at council meetings. Respondents in the 20K-40K income bracket were more likely than any other income bracket to have attended a meeting (26 percent). Respondents in the other four income brackets exhibited similar attendance levels. Income $20Kor $20Kto $40Kto $60Kto $80Kor Less $40K $60K $80K More Yes No Don't know 16% 26% 16% 20% 17% 84% 74% 83% 80% 82% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% Almost 30 percent of respondents in Zone 3 (east of Highway 17) had been to a Campbell City Council meeting. Considerably less respondents in Zones 1 and 2 reported having been to a meeting (18 percent and 15 percent, respectively). Geographic Area Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Yes No Don't Know 18% 15% 29% 82% 85% 71% 0% 0% 0% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 21 PROPRIETARY 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Have visited the Downtown Area Have visited Los Gatos Creek Trail Have visited Campbell Public Library Have visited Campbell Park Have visited John D. Morgan Park Have visited Campbell Community Center Have visited City Hall Have visited Jack Fischer Park Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Have visited the Senior Center 94% 65% C. 74% -) 59% 51% 32% 17% 15% 7% 94% 94% C 78% ') 69% 69% 69% 68% C 70% 53% 53% C 42% 38% 30% C35% 19% 23% 10% 5% 91% 61% 76% 65% 69% 52% 41% 33% 26% 11% 82% 58% 58% 65% 58% c 57%0 39% 20% C 31% ( 34%% The table below presents facility and recreation area usage by income level. In all but one area, usage is unaffected by income. The downtown area is the only item below where there is a clear relationship between income and usage. Income $20Kor $20Kto $40Kto $60Kto $80Kor Lim $40K $60K $80K More Have visited the Downtown Area Have visited Los Gatos Creek Trail Have visited Campbell Public Library Have visited Campbell Park Have visited John D. Morgan Park Have visited Campbell Community Center Have visited City Hall Have visited Jack Fischer Park Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Have visited the Senior Center 76% 52% 64% 56% 64% 60% 52% 20% 20% 20% 95% 82% 57% 71% 69% 54% 36% 20% 21% 20% 93% 75% 69% 69% 68% 51% 32% 25% 18% 16% 93% 79% 78% 75% 66% 61% 46% 30% 18% 9% 92% 74% 76% 67% 67% 54% 36% 36% 27% 4% Only small differences exist between males and females. The table also compares usage of City facilities and recreation areas between homeowners and renters. In general, homeowners tend to exhibit higher rates of usage; especially of the Campbell Public Library and John Morgan Park. Gender Male Female Homeowner Status Own Rent Have visited the Downtown Area 92% 89% 90% 91% Have visited Los Gatos Creek Trail 75% 70% 72% 74% Have visited Campbell Public Library 68% 71% 75% 62% Have visited Campbell Park 68% 69% 70% 66% Have visited John D. Morgan Park 66% 64% 70% 58% Have visited Campbell Community Center 51% 56% 57% 46% Have visited City Hall 42% 36% 41% 34% Have visited Jack Fischer Park 27% 27% 320,E 21% Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House 22% 24% 26% 17% Have visited the Senior Center 14% 13% 13% 14% City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 20 PROPRIETARY Slightly over half of respondents (51 percent) answered Question 10 correctly (crime has indeed stayed 'about the same' in the past five years). Approximately 20 percent of respondents did not know enough about crime statistics in Campbell to answer, 16 percent answered that crime had increased in the past five years and 14 percent believed crime to have decreased in the past five years. Younger respondents, those in their 20's and 30's, were not as likely as respondents in their 40's and 50's to perceive an increase in crime in Campbell. Instead, they believed crime to have stayed about the same in the last five years. Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Increased 16% 12% 12% 21% 20% 17% Decreased 14% 9% 14% 17% 11% 19% Stayed about the same 51% 59% 56% 49% 50% 42% Don't know 19% 20% 18% 13% 19% 23% Males were slightly more likely than females to perceive a decrease in crime in Campbell. Males and females were equally likely to perceive an increase in crime (15 percent and 16 percent) and no change in crime levels (49 percent and 53 percent). Those having had contact with the Campbell Police Department are more likely to perceive an increase in crime in Campbell. However, the data below also show that those having had contact are slightly more likely to think that crime has decreased in the last five years. There is also a 15 percent gap between the number of respondents having had contact with the Police Department who think crime has stayed the same in the last five years (41 percent) and those not having had contact with the Police Department (56 percent). Gender Male Female Police Contact Yes No Increased 15% 16% 24% 12% Decreased 18% 10% 17% 13% Stayed about the same 49% 53% 41% 56% Don't know 18% 20% 18% 19% Respondents in central Campbell (Zone I) were much more likely than respondents living in the San Tomas neighborhood (Zone 2) or east of Highway 17 (Zone 3) to believe crime had increased in the last five years (23 percent compared to 17 percent and 14 percent). Geographic Area Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Increased Decreased Stayed about the same Don't know 23% 17% 14% 14% 15% 17% 43% 53% 48% 19% 15% 21% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 23 PROPRIETARY tJIli:l:_l.CCti .ii Approximately one-third of all respondents had non -traffic related contact with a police officer or the Campbell Police Department in the last year. Parents with children at home were significantly more likely to have had contact with an officer or the department. There were only small differences in the likelihood of contact between homeowners and renters or males and females. Overall Number of Children Homeowner Status Gender None One Two Three + Own Rent Male Female Yes 32% 27% 45% 30% 54% 30% 35% 35% 29% No 67% 73% 55% 69% 43% 70% 64% 64% 70% Don't know 1% 0% 0% 2% 4% 0% 1% 1% 1% Those having had contact with a police officer or the Campbell Police Department were asked the follow-up question, "How would you describe your experience in contacting and working with the Police Department in your particular situation?". Overall, respondents were overwhelmingly positive about their experiences. Only 11 percent of all respondents gave an answer to this question which indicated they were unsatisfied with the treatment they had received or the help they had been given. The remaining three-quarters of the respondents were generally pleased with the responsiveness and help they received from the Police Department. The most common answers to this open-ended question are presented below. It is noteworthy that females were twice more likely than males to indicate that the Police [officers], 'have bad attitudes'. However, a higher percentage of females than males answered 'very satisfied' and 'outstanding' in describing their contact with the Campbell Police Department. Overall Gender Male Female Very helpful Very responsive Very satisfied Everything was fine Police have bad attitude Outstanding Slow response times Don't know 32% 20% 13% 13% 10% 38% 24% 17% 22% 9% 17% 17% 7% 7% 14% 6% 10% 0% 2% 6% 3% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 22 PROPRIETARY 1 ; ) 4'1_I: daub rvAa L1.u'"—*!k i:l•: 1;41o(.Kill i ! 7:lILiJt]Lt!(I.\ 1i l,(1iL.1. All respondents were asked whether or not they had used the Campbell Community Center in the last year. Just under 40 percent of respondents overall had used the Campbell Community Center in the past year. Respondents with children were more likely to use the Community Center. In fact, the difference in use rates between respondents with no children and respondents with one child was over 20 percentage points (48 percent of respondents with one child had used the Community Center compared to 26 percent of respondents without children). Homeowners were more likely than renters to have used the Community Center, while there was no difference between the usage habits of male and female respondents. Overall None Number of Children One Two Three or More Homeowner Status Own Rent Male Gender Female Yes 37% 26% 48% 56% 64% 42% 29% 36% 38% No 62% 73% 52% 44% 36% 57% 71% 63% 61% Don't know 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% Almost half of respondents in their 30's have used the Community Center in the past year. This group reported the highest percentage of use among all age groups. The lowest percentage of use was among respondents in their 40's. Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Yes No Don't know 34% 46% 30% 32% 35% 63% 54% 70% 68% 65% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% The table below is particularly interesting for demographic purposes. Typically, GRA finds that as income increases, participation or visitation in local athletic or recreational programs tends to decrease. In this case, however, as income increases for a respondent, their chance of having visited the Community Center in Campbell tends to increase. Income Geographic Zone $20Kor $20Kto $40Kto $60Kto $80Kor Less $40K $60K $80K More Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Yes 32% 38% 31% 41% 41% 44% 32% 22% No 60% 62% 68% 59% 59% 54% 67% 78% Don't know 8% 0% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% The table on the next page breaks down each activity or class at the Community Center by usage. Aquatics, special interest classes and adult sports programs took the top three spots when respondents were asked what activities they participate in most at the Campbell Community Center. Aquatics was especially popular among respondents 18-49 years, but participation dropped significantly among the latter two age categories. Special interest classes and adult sports programs were most popular among respondents over 40 years of age (except for adult sports programs among 50-59 year olds). Males were partial to aquatics and special interest programs while females tended to participate in aquatics and a variety City of Campbell Godbe Research end Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 25 PROPRIETARY �ta.5i.bJ"Ili kl.t (yi Ii�J 'L�Jt1 1��IC�i ,��:x� ��; , it Among the five criteria chosen to judge the overall quality and effectiveness of the Campbell Police Department, 'overall response time' received the highest overall ranking (1.3). The DARE program and 'traffic enforcement' received rankings of 1.1, the 'graffiti abatement program' received a ranking of 0.9 and 'animal control' received the lowest ranking of 0.7. Voter registration status, homeowner status and gender breakdowns are presented below. There are two significant differences to be noted - the DARE program is ranked much higher by voters than non -voters (1.2 compared to 0.8) and animal control' is ranked higher by renters than homeowners (0.9 compared to 0.6). Overall Registered Yes No Homeowner Status 0um Rent Gender Male Female Overall response time 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.4 The DARE Program 1.1 1.2 0.8 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.2 Traffic enforcement 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.1 1.0 1.1 Graffiti Abatement Program 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 Animal control 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.9 0.8 0.7 Respondents over 60 years of age consistently gave the Police Department programs higher rankings than did respondents overall. Each age group except the 18-29 year olds followed the same ordering of performance measures as respondents in other age groups. Among 18-29 year olds, 'traffic enforcement' received the highest ranking (1.2) of the performance measures tested. Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Overall response time The DARE Program Traffic enforcement Graffiti Abatement Program Animal control 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.5 0.9 1.2 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.2 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.9 Respondents in Zone 1 gave their highest rankings to the Campbell Police Department's 'overall response time' (1.3) and the 'DARE program' (1.3). Respondents in Zone 2 gave their highest ranking to 'overall response time' (1.4) and respondents in Zone 3 also gave their highest ranking to 'overall response time' (1.2). Geographic Area Zone I Zone 2 Zone 3 Overall response time The DARE Program Traffic enforcement Graffiti Abatement Program Animal control 1.3 1.4 1.2 1.3 1.2 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.7 It is notable that there was a large percentage of overall respondents who did not know about the DARE program or could not rank the program. The crosstabulations show which demographic groups were particularly unaware of the program. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 24 PROPRIETARY ��itlii!tr_�_t:;11Cal1►.(_��3 LC::i is '_[1ili;ilii('i-_tiiJ;ii1-il In addition to offering classes and programs through the Campbell Community Center, the City also sponsors several annual celebrations throughout the community. GRA asked respondents, 'Have you or anyone in your household been to such an event?'. Among overall respondents, 43 percent indicated they had been to one of the cultural or recreation activities sponsored by the City. As with the previous question, the number of children a respondent has living at home impacts participation in these events. Only 37 percent of respondents without children had attended an event, compared to attendance rates in the 50 to 60 percent range for respondents with children. Homeowners were more likely than renters in Campbell to have attended one of the cultural or recreation events in Campbell but there was little significant difference in attendance when comparing male respondents to female respondents. Overall Number of Children Homeowner Status Gender Three or None One Two More Own Rent Male Female Yes 43% 37% 52% 51% 61% 48% 35% 45% 41% _ No 55% 61% 47% 48% 39% 51% 62% 53% 58% Don't know 2% 2% 2% 2% 0% 1% 3% 3% 1% Attendance at cultural and recreation events in Campbell peaked among residents in their 40's but attendance was significantly lower in other age groups especially among respondents 18-29 years of age. The data from this question, crossed by age category is shown below. Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Yes No Don't know 31% 37% 68% 61% 2% 2% 64% 34% 3% 35% 48% 61% 52% 4% 0% After the question on whether or not the respondent had attended one of Campbell's cultural and recreation events, respondents were asked to specify which events they had attended. The Prune Festival (36 percent) was the most common mention by respondents overall to the question asking which recreational and cultural activities or events respondents have attended in Campbell. The Summer Concert Series and Octoberfest were also popular among respondents (23 percent and 22 percent, respectively). The Prune Festival tended to attract younger residents and Octoberfest seemed particularly successful at attracting residents between the ages of 18 and 29. The Carol of Lights was a popular event for respondents in their 50's and among those 18-29 years of age. No differences were found between the attendance habits of male and female respondents. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 27 PROPRIETARY of adult sports programs. Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Gender Male Female Aquatics 35% 32% 44% 57% 18% 14% 34% 36% Special interest classes 18% 14% 13% 26% 24% 25% 21% 16% Adult sports programs 15% 9% 15% 22% 0% 25% 11% 18% Day camps 7% 5% 7% 9% 6% 11% 4% 10% Fitness Center 7% 5% 11% 0% 12% 4% 9% 7% Senior Center 7% 0% 4% 0% 0°% 32% 6% 9% Pre-school classes 5% 5% 6% 9% 6% 4% 3% 8% Trips & tours 3% 0% 0% 4% 0% 14% 4% 3% Other 32% 27% 40% 17% 47% 25% 38% 27% Don't know 4% 14% 2% 0% 0% 4% 4% 4% Geographic Areas Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Aquatics Special interest classes Adult sports programs Day camps Fitness Center Senior Center Pre-school classes Trips & tours Other Don't know 33% 13% 10% 10% 10% 8°% 5% 5% 35% 50% 46% 21% 4% 21% 0% 0% 8% 0% 33% 42% 54% 15% 0% 31% 0% 0% 8°% 0% 23% 8% Aquatics was mentioned by 33 percent of respondents in Zone 1, 46 percent of respondents in Zone 2 and 54 percent of respondents in Zone 3. Day camps were also very popular among respondents in Zone 3, but received considerably less mention by respondents in other geographic areas of Campbell After asking questions about a respondent's participation in various Community Center programs, GRA asked respondents if they were aware of the rental options available at the Campbell Community Center. Just over half of respondents overall were aware that Campbell residents could rent some of the facilities at the Community Center such as the Reception Hall, the swimming pool, seminar and meeting rooms and sports fields. Since this question was pre -coded, GRA did not anticipate some answers given by respondents. For example, 11 percent of respondents listed individual sports (i.e. basketball, soccer, ballet, track) instead of choosing the 'Fitness Center' answer category. Five percent of respondents listed activities, such as 'Church group', 'AA Meeting' or 'Optimist Club Meeting' which indicated they were part of a group that rented a seminar room in the Community Center for their event. Finally, a very small number of respondents offered activities such as 'Bingo', 'Art Fair', 'Playing cards' and 'Summer programs'. Awareness of the rental options was higher than average among homeowners and residents who have lived in Campbell at least four years. There was no significant difference in the awareness level between male and female respondents. Overall Homeowner Status Gender Length of Residency Own Rent Male Female 0-3 Years 4-9 Years 10-15 Years 15+Years Yes 56% 61% 46% 56% 55% 44% 56% 60% 68% No 43% 39% 51% 42% 44% 54% 43% 40% 32% Don't know 1% 0% 3% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 26 PROPRIETARY The City of Campbell was interested in testing support for additional athletic facilities in Campbell. To test this idea and verify the perception of need in the community, Godbe Research & Analysis asked respondents, "Do you think there is a need for additional athletic facilities in the Campbell community?". Reaction to this plan was mixed. Forty-three percent of respondents perceived a need for additional athletic facilities but 39 percent of the respondents did not. Almost twenty percent of respondents were unsure how they felt about additional athletic facilities in Campbell. Need For An Additional Athletic Facilities Definitely no 19% Probably no 20% Respondents with elementary, middle and high school children were slightly more supportive of additional facilities than respondents overall, respondents with pre-school age children and respondents without children. Male respondents were more likely than females to perceive a need for additional athletic facilities in Campbell (48 percent to 37 percent). Almost 30 percent of female respondents, however, were undecided when this question was posed to them. Overall No Children Pre- School Age of Children Elem. School Middle School High School Male Gender Female Definitely yes 24% 22% 23% 25% 24% 33% 29% 18% Probably yes 19% 17% 14% 21% 32% 11% 19% 19% Total yes s .43% 39% 37% 46% 56% 44% Y'`48% 2 3 f% Probably no 20% 21% 20% 22% 18% 19% 22% 18% Definitely no 19% 21% 18% 14% 12% 26% 19% 18% Total no" :: ' 39% 42% 38% 36% 30% 45% "`41 L '36% Don't know 19% 19% 25% 18% 15% 11% 11% 27% Mean 0.10 -0.03 0.04 0.24 0.45 0.08 0.19 -0.01 City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 29 PROPRIETARY Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Gender Male Female Prune Festival 36% ( 40%D 46% 37% 21% C-29%) 36% 36% Summer Concert Series 23% 15% 4116211110 16% (_34%) 20% 27% Octoberfest 22% c 35%) 21% 16% WOO 18% 20% 23% Carol of Lights 10% 15% 11% 8% 5% 11% 8% 12% Picnic/Park facilities 8% 5% 14% 2% 5% 13% 7% 10% Historical Museum 7% 0% 9% 2% 5% 16% 6% 8% Ainsley House 6% 0% 7% 2% 11% 13% 6% 7% Egg-Stravaganza 5% 5% 7% 8% 0% 3% 5% 6% Other 37% 35% 39% 39% 68% 18% 35% 39% Don't know 7% 5% 2% 14% 0% 8% 9% 5% Respondents in Zone 1 (central Campbell) were most likely to have attended an event in the Summer Concert Series while respondents in Zone 2 (San Tomas neighborhood) and Zone 3 (east of Highway 17) were most likely to have attended the Prune Festival. Octoberfest was also a popular event for respondents in Zone 3, but not as popular for respondents in Zones 1 and 2. Geographic Area Zone I Zone 2 Zone 3 Prune Festival Summer Concert Series Octoberfest Carol of Lights Picnic/Park facilities Historical Museum Ainsley House Egg-Stravaganza Other Don't know 23% 32% 16% 14% 11% 7% 5% 5% 36% 9% 42% 19% 19% 12% 0% 4% 8% 12% 35% 12% 48% 19% 30% 4% 11% 4% 4% 4% 30% 4% Since this question was pre -coded, other answers came up during the course of the survey. For example, 'Wine festival' or the 'Campbell Art and Wine Festival' was a common answer to this question (14 percent overall). Six percent of respondents mentioned the 'Highland games' or 'Scottish games' and three percent of respondents mentioned the 'Farmers Market'. Other answers offered by respondents were 'Arts and Crafts Fair' and 'Car shows'. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Anaysis Satisfaction Survey Page 28 PROPRIETARY The next question in this section asked whether or not residents of Campbell would be willing to have money from the City's budget spent on providing a Teen Center. The table below shows the overwhelming support of this proposition, even when respondents are told that City money will be allocated to fund it. Voters and non -voters are equally supportive of City money being spent on providing a Teen Center in Campbell. Democrats and respondents with no political party affiliation are the most supportive of the proposition, but support is generally high across all partisan groups. Sixteen percent of Republicans are undecided about their position on using City money to fund the Teen Center and members of other political parties have the highest percentage (22 percent) of opponents of the plan. Both females and males support City money being used to provide a Teen Center, with women being slightly more likely than men to support the plan (77 percent compared to 72 percent). Overall Registered Party ID Gender Yes No Dem Rep Other No Party Male Female Support 75% 75% 78% 83% 70% 70% 76% 72% 77% Oppose 13% 12% 11% 7% 14% 22% 12% 14% 11% Don't know 13% 13% 11% 11% 16% 9% 12% 14% 12% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 31 PROPRIETARY Because of the currency of the Teen Center issue and the current lack of facilities and programs designed specifically for teens, GRA included the following question in this survey to gauge opinions on the need for such a center in Campbell: "Do you think there is a need for a Teen Center in Campbell?". The response categories were 'Definitely yes', 'Probably yes', 'Probably no' and 'Definitely no'. Respondents overall were supportive of the idea of a Teen Center (76 percent). When the table below is examined by demographic breakdowns, it is clear that having children (especially middle school age and high school age) increases 7 the likelihood of support for the center. Gender does not seem have a significant impact on support for the center. Overall No Children Pre- School Age of Children Elem. School Middle School High School Male Gender Female Definitely yes 54% 50% 59% 48% 62% 67% 53% 54% Probably yes 22% 23% 24% 30% 18% 22% 21% 24% Total yes u 76% 73% 83% 78% 80% - . 89% : - 74% ' 78% Probably no 4% 4% 4% 4% 6% 0% 5% 39% Definitely no 5% 5% 1% 7% 9% 11% 6% 5% Total no F 9% :. 9% 5% 11% 15% 11% ,;11°6 8'�., . Don't know 15% 19% 11% 12% 6% 0% 15% 15% Mean 1.35 1.33 1.52 1.24 1.25 1.33 1.29 1.41 Geographic Area Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Definitely yes Probably yes Total yes Probably no Definitely no Total no'_ Don't know • 52% 47% 55% 23% 27% 28% 75% 74% 83% 3% 3% 0% 8% 5% 3% 11% 8% 3% 13% 19% 14% Mean 1.26 1.31 1.52 City of Campbell Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 30 PROPRIETARY (' t1 llt. E ' 1 li fi it I_it 1 LLB' i t-iF Several of Campbell's shopping centers have been remodeled recently. When respondents were asked about the remodels, almost 80 percent expressed satisfaction with the projects. Specifically, 51 percent of overall respondents indicated they were 'very satisfied' and 28 percent of respondents answered they were 'somewhat satisfied' with the remodels. Younger respondents were more satisfied with the remodel than older respondents to the survey. However, it is noteworthy that the highest percentage of 'don't know' responses come from respondents in their late teens and early 20's and from respondents over 60 years of age (15 percent and 14 percent, respectively). Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Very satisfied 51% 65% 56% 48% 39% 43% Somewhat satisfied 28% 17% 29% 34% 32% 25% Total satisfied ' 79% ; 82% 4 ` ` 85% `' 82% .71% . 68% . Somewhat dissatisfied 8% 3% 7% 5% 17% 9% Very dissatisfied 4% 0% 3% 4% 6% 9% Total dissatisfied 12% 3% :_ , s 10% 9% 23% . 18% Don't know 10% 15% 4% 9% 7% 14% Mean 1.3 1.7 1.3 1.3 0.9 1.0 As expected, newer residents are more satisfied with the remodel than older residents in Campbell. This data confirms what the table above shows — younger, mobile respondents are overwhelmingly satisfied with the remodel of the Campbell shopping centers, while older respondents and long-time residents are more critical of the results from the remodel. Residents from all over Campbell report a high amount of satisfaction with the results. 0-3 Years Length of Residency 4-9 Years 10-15 Years 15+Years Geographic Area Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Very satisfied 56% 51% 45% 46% 51% 52% 62% Somewhat satisfied 28% 26% 32% 27% 28% 29% 19% Total satisfied : , 84% 77% 77% 73% _ 79% 3:- 81% 81%- Somewhat dissatisfied 2% 8% 9% 14% 7% 9% . 7% Very dissatisfied 4% 6% 4% 5% 6% 5% 7% Total dis Totsatisfied :: 6% 14%' 13% 19% -; 43%1496 14% : Don't know 10% 10% 9% 9% 9% 4% 5% Mean 1.5 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3 City Of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 33 PROPRIETARY Over three-quarters of Campbell residents have visited the Campbell Library at least once in the last year. Eighteen percent of respondents said they had never having used the library. Regular users, defined in this study loosely as those having used the library at least a few times a month, account for 45 percent of the survey respondents. Library usage is positively impacted if a respondent has children; especially if the children are at least elementary school age. The table below shows that a plurality of respondents without children use the library only a few times a year. However, once a family has children that reach elementary school age, usage increases and the percentage of respondents who have never been to the library decreases substantially. Respondents of high school children are the most frequent library users; 22 percent of respondents in this group report using the library a few times a week. Overall No Children Pre- School Age of Children Elem. School Middle School High School Have never used library 18% 21% 18% 8% 6% 0% A few times a year 33% 38% 31% 18% 15% 22% A few times a month 16% 12% 13% 29% 38% 33% Once a month 15% 13% 17% 20% 18% 15% Once a week 8% 5% 13% 13% 9% 7% A few times a week 6% 4% 3% 10% 12% 22% Other 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 0% Don't know 2% 3% 1% 0% 0% 0% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Anaysis Satisfaction Survey Page 32 r'kOPRIETARY Gender Male Female 0-3 Years Length of Residency 4-9 Years 10-15 Years 15+Years San Jose Mercury News 50% . 35% 40% 47% 55% 33% "The Profile" 20% 26% 17% 22% 30% 28% Flyers or posters around town 11% 11% 11% 13% 9% 12% Campbell Express 8% 13% 6% 9% 11% 17% Television 10% 8% 10% 11% 11% 5% Campbell Times 8% 6% 3% 7% 9% 12% Internet 6% 2% 5% 2% 2% 4% Radio 3% 3% 5% 2% 2% 1% Local cable station 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% San Francisco Chronicle 2% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% Other 11% 20% 18% 14% 9% 18% Don't know 8% 8% 12% 7% 6% 6% Respondents in Zone 2 (San Tomas neighborhood) were more likely than respondents in central Campbell or respondents in the areas east of Highway 17 to receive their local news information from the San Jose Mercury News. Respondents living east of Highway 17 (Zone 3) were the most likely readers of 'The Profile'. Geographic Area Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 San Jose Mercury News "The Profile" Flyers or posters around town Campbell Express Television Campbell Times Internet Radio Local cable station San Francisco Chronicle Other Don't know 37% 29% 14% 10% 10% 7% 2% 1% 0% 0% 19% 9% 45% 16% 15% 5% 12% 9% 4% 3% 1% 3°/ 0 15% 8% 33% 31% 9% 0 5% 12% 10% 5% 0% 0% 5% 16% 10% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 35 PROPRIETARY ►�. C 1 `�E_.��.1! (.i.�i I.'• ?�i t �.'~�' 1i.iJ':1_1:1.1 When asked about which local news sources respondents rely on to provide information on city news and events, 42 percent of respondents answered that the San Jose Mercury News was their primary news source. Twenty-three percent of respondents mentioned 'The Profile', 11 percent mentioned seeing flyers around town and 11 percent mentioned the 'Campbell Express' in answer to this open-ended question. A respondent's top two responses were accepted so the percents below total more than 100 percent. The San Jose Mercury News was the favorite response for respondents in each age category. Respondents in their 40's were more likely than respondents in other age groups to offer two sources when asked. Almost 60 percent of respondents in this group mentioned the Mercury and 29 percent also mentioned 'The Profile'. Overall 18-29 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ San Jose Mercury News "The Profile" Flyers or posters around town Campbell Express Television Campbell Times Internet Radio Local cable station San Francisco Chronicle Other Don't know 42% 23% 11% 11% 9% 7% 4% 3% 1% 1% 16% 8% 31% 411M10 39% 15% 12% 6% 7% 3% 3% 3% 2% 0% 20% 17% 22% 12% 8% 10% 7% 7% 4% 0% 0% 19% 5% ( 29% 7 11% 13% 17% 2% 13% 4% 2% 2% 0% 13% 11% 33% 6% 15% 10% 10% 1% 1% 1% 0% 15% 8% 14% 9% 5% 5% 0% 3% 0% 4% 10% 3% Male respondents were considerably more likely than female respondents to mention the Mercury as their source for city news and information (50 percent compared to 35 percent, respectively). 0n the other hand, female respondents were more likely than males to mention 'The Profile' as their news source for information on city news and events (26 percent compared to 20 percent). While use of 'The Profile' increases with a respondent's length of residency (from 17 percent to 28 percent), the San Jose Mercury News was only mentioned by 33 percent of long-time Campbell residents. It appears that once a respondent has lived in Campbell for 15 years, they are only marginally more likely to mention the San Jose Mercury News than 'The Profile' as their news source for city information. City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 34 • PROPRIETARY /11ll;--t-ct( 1;isJ_z.tI Two questions designed to analyze the Internet habits of Campbell residents concluded the questionnaire. When asked if 'you or anyone in your household has access to the Internet', 60 percent of respondents answered yes. Several different demographic groups below either increased or decreased the chance of Internet access. Only 58 percent of registered voters in Campbell had Internet access, compared to 68 percent of non -voters. Respondents with older children (either in middle school or high school) were much more likely that respondents of young children to have Internet arrpss Specifically, 78 percent of respondents with high school age children had access to the Internet, 71 percent of respondents with middle school children reported Internet access, 57 percent of respondents with elementary school children had Internet access, 59 percent of respondents with pre-school age children had access and 58 percent of respondents without children had access to the Internet. Overall Registered Age of Children No Pre- Elem. Middle High Yes No Children School School School School Yes 60% 58% 68% 58% 59% 57% 71% 78% No 40% 42% 32% 42% 41% 43% 29% 22% Don't know 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Internet access decreases with age; 75 percent of the youngest respondents had access compared to only 30 percent of respondents in the oldest age category. Males with Internet access outnumbered females with access by a margin of 68 percent to 52 percent. Age Gender 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Male Female Yes 75% 70% 65% 61% 30% 68% 52% No 25% 30% 34% 39% 70% 32% 48% Don't know 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1% Internet access is strongly correlated to income level; as income increases, so does the percentage of respondents in each income bracket with access to the Internet. Income $20Kor $20Kto $40Kto $60Kto $80Kor Las $40K $60K $80K More Yes No Don't know 28% 44% 61% 70% 87% 72% 54% 39% 30% 13% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 37 PROPRIETARY h�it'C1iC1 When asked about 'The Profile', almost 70 percent of respondents answered that this periodic newsletter was an effective vehicle for the City to communicate city events to residents of Campbell. Older respondents, who also tend to be long-time residents of Campbell, were the strongest supporters of 'The Profile'. In fact, 82 percent of respondents in their 50's and 76 percent of respondents over 60 years old indicated that 'The Profile' was an effective communications tool for the City of Campbell. In comparing the responses from males and females, it is noteworthy that females were more apt than males to affirm the effectiveness of 'The Profile' as a news source for Campbell residents. Specifically, 73 percent of females thought 'The Profile' was effective and 63 percent of males thought 'The Profile' was effective. Overall Age Gender 18-29 3D-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Male Female Yes 68% 42% 66% 71% 82% 76% 63% 73% No 13% 14% 13% 16% 13% 10% 18% 9% Don't know 19% 40% 20% 13% 6% 14% 20% 18% After noting the correlation between age and effectiveness ratings of 'The Profile', it was expected that long-time residents would be more likely than new residents to rate 'The Profile' an effective media tool. The data below confirm this expectation. Just over half of the newest Campbell residents rated 'The Profile' as effective, but over 80 percent of long-time residents had no trouble confirming the effectiveness of the newsletter. Length of Residency 0-3 Years 4-9 Years 10-15 Years 15+Years Yes No Don't know 55% 70% 68% 82% 16% 11% 19% 9% 29% 19% 13% 9% City of Campbell Godbe Research and Analysis Satisfaction Survey Page 36 PROP1;TARY Guide to Statistical Significance The table below shows the possible sampling variation that applies to a percentage result reported from a probability type sample (clustering considered). If a sample is drawn from the overall adult population in the City of Campbell, the margin of error due to sampling will not vary, plus or minus, by more than the indicated number of percentage points (plus or minus) from the result that would have been obtained if the interviews been conducted with all persons in the universe represented in the sample. 90% / 10% 80% / 20% 70% / 60% / 40 % 1000 1.83% 2.45% 2.80% 3.00% 900 1.94% 2.58% 2.96% 3.16% 800 2.06% 2.74% 3.14% 3.36% 700 2.20% 2.94% 3.36% 3.60% 600 2.38% 3.18% 3.64% 3.89% 500 2.61% 3.48% 3.99% 4.27% ` ,32 .. > : 3:9001r0 300 3.38% 4.51% 5.17% 5.52% 250 3.71% 4.94% 5.66% 6.05% 200 4.15% 5.53% 6.33% 6.77% 100 5.87% 7.83% 8.97% 9.59% 5o 8.31% 11.08% 12.69% 13.57% 50% / 50% City of Campbell 3.06% 38,000 3.23% 3.43% 3.67% 3.97% 4.35% 5.64% 6.18% 6.91% 9.79% 13.85% PROPRIETARY Despite high access to the Internet, only 15 percent of respondents have visited the City of Campbell website. Slightly more males than females have visited, but the difference is not significant. Overall Gender Male Female Yes No Don't know 15% 82% 3% 17% 12% 81% 84% 2% 4% City of Campbep Godbe Research and Analysis Satsfaction Survey Page 38 PROPRIETARY 1 Godbe Research & Analysis September 10, 1997 Final Time Began Time Ended Cluster # CITY OF CAMPBELL RESIDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY Hello, my name is and I'm calling on behalf on GRA, a public opinion research firm. We're conducting a survey concerning some important issues in your area and we would like to get your opinions, it should just take a few minutes of your time. (IF NEEDED:) This is a study about issues of importance to residents in Campbell. It is a survey only and I am not selling anything. I. Are you at least 18 years old? (IF UNDER 18 ASK:) Is there someone in the household who is at least 18 that 1 can speak with? (IF NOT, THANK AND TERMINATE) Yes No II. Are you a resident of the City of Campbell? Yes No 1. How long have you lived in the City of Campbell? Less than one year One to three years Four to nine years Ten to fifteen years Sixteen or more years (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 (CONTINUE) 2 (TERMINATE) 1 (CONTINUE) 2 (TERMINATE) 14% 22% 23% 13% 28% 1% INTERVIEWERS: ROTATE QUESTIONS 2 AND 3, READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST. ( )2. Overall, what would you say is the best thing about living in the City of Campbell today? (ONE RESPONSE ONLY) Small community 30% Good location 22% Quiet 12% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 1 k°RO r.RIETARY ( )3. Overall, what would you say is the worst thing about living in the City of Campbell today? (ONE RESPONSE ONLY) Traffic High cost of living Bad roads 18% 6°/a 5% 4. Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Campbell is doing to provide city services? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Very satisfied 46% Somewhat satisfied 42% Somewhat dissatisfied 7% Very dissatisfied 2% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 2 PROPRIETARY INTERVIEWERS: ROTATE QUESTIONS 5 AND 6, READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST. ( )5. Now I'm going to read a list of services provided by the City of Campbell. For each service, please tell me whether it is very important to you, somewhat important, not too important or not important at all. Here's the (first/next) one: (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Is this very important, somewhat important, not too important or not at all important? ROTATE (DON'T Very Swt. Not too Not READ) Imp. Imp. Imp• Imp. DK/NA ( )A. Emergency Medical Services ---- 85% 8% 2% 1 % 5% ( B. Fire Protection Services 87% 8% 1 % 1 % 4% ( )C. 'The Profile' newsletter 13%---- 34% 19% 19% 16% ( )D. Police Services 87% 9% 1 % 1 % 3% ( )E. City Recreation Services 46%---- 41 % 8% 3% 3% ()F. Park and Picnic Area Availability 43%---- 42% 10% 3% 3% ( )G. Community Center Facilities 34%---- 43% 11 % 6% 6% ( )H. Garbage Collection 73%---- 22% 1 % 2% 2% ( )I. Recycling Program 65%---- 27% 4% 3% 2% ( )J. Library Services 59%---- 29% 7% 3% 3% ( )K. Street Maintenance 70%---- 24% 3% 2% 2% ()L. Street Sweeping Services 42%---- 42% 10% 2% 5% OM. Park and Picnic Area Maintenance 47%---- 40% 6% 4% 3% ()N. Traffic Safety Services 64%---- 24% 6% 2% 5% ( O. Sewer and Stormdrain Services 62%---- 28% 4% 1 % 6% ()P. Street Tree Maintenance 39%---- 45% 9% 2% 5% ( )Q. Land Use Planning Services 38%---- 32% 10% 4% 16% ( )R. Economic Development Efforts -- 37%---- 37% 10% 6% 11% ( )S. Traffic Circulation Planning 53%---- 31 % 6% 3% 8% ( )T. Performing Arts Facilities 24%---- 39% 17% 9% 12% ( )U. Sidewalk Maintenance 43%---- 41 % 9% 4% 4% ( )V. Building Permit and Inspection Services 42%---- 34% 9% 5% 11% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 3 PROPRIETARY ( )6. For the same list of services I just read, I'd like you to tell me how satisfied you are with the job the City of Campbell is doing to provide the service. Here's the (first/next) one: (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST AND ASK:) Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the city's performance in this area? (AFTER GETTING ANSWER, ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? ROTATE (DON'T Very Swt. Swt. Very READ) SAL. Sat. Dissat.Dissat DK/NA ( )A. Emergency Medical Services ---- 46%---- 25% 1 % 1 % 28% ( )B. Fire Protection Services 53%---- 24% 1 % 1 % 22% ( )C. 'The Profile' newsletter 25%---- 32% 5% 5% 34% ( )D. Police Services 57%---- 29% 3% 3% 8% ( )E. City Recreation Services 41 %---- 41 % 4% 3% 12% ()F. Park and Picnic Area Availability 42%---- 39% 4% 3% 12% ( )G. Community Center Facilities 35%---- 36% 3% 2% 24% ()H. Garbage Collection 54%---- 34% 5% 3% 5% ( )I. Recycling Program 51 %---- 35% 5% 5% 5% ( )J. Library Services 47%---- 35% 4% 2% 12% ( )K. Street Maintenance 33%---- 41 % 14% 8% 5% ( )L. Street Sweeping Services 33%---- 45% 8% 5% 11 % ()M. Park and Picnic Area Maintenance 41 %---- 43% 5% 2% 9% ()N. Traffic Safety Services 34%---- 45% 8% 4% 9% ()O. Sewer and Stormdrain Services 35%---- 41 % 4% 4% 17% ()P. Street Tree Maintenance 28%---- 45% 8% 6% 14% ( )Q. Land Use Planning Services 17%---- 33% 10% 5% 35% ()R. Economic Development Efforts -- 20%---- 37% 10% 5% 29% ( )S. Traffic Circulation Efforts 22%---- 42% 14% 7% 15% ( )T. Performing Arts Facilities 19%---- 35% 7% 6% 34% ()U. Sidewalk Maintenance 31 %---- 42% 10% 8% 11% ( )V. Building Permit and Inspection Services 22%---- 32% 5% 5% 37% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 4 PROPRIETARY 7. Now I'm going to read a list of facilities maintained by the City of Campbell. Please tell me whetheror not you or anyone in your household has visited each facility in the last year. (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Have you or anyone in your household visited in the last year? ROTATE (DON'T READ) Yes IQ DK/NA ( )A. The Campbell Community Center 53% 46% 1 % ()B. The Campbell Public Library 70% 30% 0% ( )C. Campbell Historical Museum and Ainsley House --23% 77% 0% ()D. City Hall 39% 61% 0% ()E. Campbell Park 68% 27% 5% ( )F. John D. Morgan Park 65% 33% 2% ( )G. Los Gatos Creek Trail 73% 27% 1 % ()H. Senior Center 14% 86% 0% ()l. The downtown area 91% 9% 0% ( )J. Jack Fischer Park 27% 61 % 12% 8. The City Council meetings in Campbell are held regularly and open to the public. Have you ever attended one of the City Council meetings? Yes 20% No 80% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 9. Now I would like to talk more specifically about the Campbell Police Department. Except for contact with an officer regarding a traffic violation, have you or anyone in your household had reason to contact the Police Department in the past year? Yes 32% (Ask 9A) No 67% (Go To 10) (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 % (Go To 10) City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 5 PROPRIETARY 1 ) 9-A. How would you describe your experience in contacting and working with the Police Department in your particular situation? (IF HESITATES, ASK:) For example, was the experience helpful or frustrating? Very helpful Very responsive Very satisfied Frustrating, police have bad attitudes Slow response time 32% 20% 13% 10% 1% 10. In general, do you feel crime in the City of Campbell has increased, decreased or stayed about the same in the past five years? Increased 16% Decreased 14% Stayed about same 51 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 19% 11. I'd like you to consider the overall quality and effectiveness of the Campbell Police Department in a few areas. Here's the (first/next) one: (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Would you say the Campbell Police Department is doing an excellent, good, poor or very poor job in this area? ROTATE ( )A. The DARE Program (DON'T Very READ) Excellent Good Poor Poor DK/NA ( )B. Graffiti Abatement Program ( )C. Traffic enforcement ( )D. Overall response time ()E. Animal Control 19% 25% 4% 2% 52% 22% 41% 9% 3% 26% 30% 50% 9% 2% 9% 32% 31% 3% 2% 33% 14% 31% 9% 4% 44% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 6 i'iOPRIL' r1 AR 1 12. Now l would like to talk more specifically about the Campbell Recreation Department which offers recreation activities and operates facilities for the City of Campbell. First, have you or anyone in your household used the Campbell Community Center in the past year? Yes 37% (ASK 12-A) No 62% (GO TO 13) (DON'T READ) 1% (GO TO 13) 12-A. What activities do you participate in most at the Campbell Community Center? (DON'T READ LIST - MULTIPLE RESPONSES PERMITTED) Adult Sports Programs 15% Aquatics 35% Day Camps 7% Fitness Center 7% Pre -School Classes 5% Senior Center 7% Special Interest Classes 18% Trips and Tours 3% Other 32% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 7 PROPRIETARY 13. There are cultural events and recreation activities that are held throughout the City of Campbell. Have you or anyone in your household been to such an event? Yes 43% (ASK 13-A) No 55% (GO TO 14) (DON'T READ) DK/NA 2% (GO TO 14) 13-A. What recreational and cultural activities or events have you attended in Campbell? (DON'T READ LIST - MULTIPLE RESPONSES PERMITTED) Ainsley House 6% Carol of Lights 10% Egg-stravaganza 5% Historical Museum 7% Octoberfest 22% Picnic and Park Facilities 8% Prune Festival 36% Summer Concert Series 23% Other 37% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 7% 14. Now I would like to talk about other facilities in Campbell. Do you think there is a need for additional athletic facilities in the Campbell community? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Is that definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Definitely Yes 24% Probably Yes 19% Probably No 20% Definitely No 19% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 19% 15. Do you think there is a need for a Teen Center in Campbell? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Is that definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Definitely Yes 54% Probably Yes 22% Probably No 4% Definitely No 5% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 15% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 8 15-A. A Campbell Teen Center would require a financial commitment from the City of Campbell to possibly build and operate. Would you support or oppose using city money to provide a Teen Center? Support 75% Oppose 13% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 13% 16. Are you aware that some of the facilities at the Community Center can be rented by residents, such as the Reception Hall, the swimming pool, seminar and meeting rooms and sports fields? Yes 56% No 43% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 % 17. You may know the City of Campbell has a local library. How often do you or any member of your household use the Campbell Library? A few times a week 6% Once a week 8% A few times a month 16% Once a month 15% A few times a year 33% Have never used library 18% (DON'T READ) Other 3% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 2% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 9 PROPTA J 18. Several of Campbell's shopping centers have been remodeled recently. In general, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the results from the remodel? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied 51% 28% Somwhat dissatisfied 8% Very dissatisfied 4% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 10% 19. What information sources do you use to find out about City news, information and programming? (DON'T READ LIST, RECORD FIRST TWO RESPONSES) Campbell Express 11 % Campbell Times Flyers or posters around town Internet 7% 11% -4 % Local cable station 1 % Radio 3% San Francisco Chronicle 1% San Jose Mercury News 42% Television 9% 'The Profile' 23% Other (Do not specify) 16% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 8% 20. All residents of Campbell receive the city's quarterly newsletter, 'The Profile'. In your opinion, is 'The Profile' an effective way of telling residents about city services and events? Yes 68% No 13% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 19% 21. Do you or anyone in your household have access to the Internet? Yes 60% (ASK 21-A) No 40%(SKIP TO A) (DON'T READ) DK/NA 0% (SKIP TO A) City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 10 PROPRIETARY i 21-A. Have you oranyone in your household visited the City of Campbell website? Yes 15% No 82% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3% Now for some background questions for comparison purposes. A. In what year were you bom? 1973 and after 1968 to 1972 1963 to 1967 1958 to 1962 1953 to 1957 1948 to 1952 1943 to 1947 7% 10% 13% 17% 1 3 % 1938 to 1942 1933 to 1937 1932 and before (DON'T READ) Refused B. Do you own or rent your home? 7% 10% 4% 7% 13% 2% Own 61 Rent 38% (DON'T READ) Refused 1 % (DON'T READ) DK/NA 0% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 11 PROPRIETARY C. What is the last grade or level you completed in school? Elementary (less than 8 years) 0% Elementary school (8 years) 1 Some high school (9 to 11 years) 3% High school graduate (12 years) 18% Technical/vocational school 3% Some college 31 % College graduate 29% Some graduate school 6% Graduate, professional doctorate degree (DDS, DVM, JD, LLM, MA/MS, MBA, MD, PhD) 1 0% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 0% D. How many children under the age of 19 do you currently have living at home? One 15% Two 15% Three 5% Four 1% Five 0% More than five 0% None 62% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 2% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 12 PROPRIETARY ) ) D-1. (IF CHILDREN LIVING AT HOME, ASK): How old are the children? (MULTIPLE RESPONSE OK) 1 year old or less 11% 2 years old 19% 3 years old 8% 4 years old 11% 5 years old 12% 6 years old 14% 7 years old 10% 8 years old 11% 9 years old 12% 10 years old 7% 11 years old 13% 12 years old 10% 13 years old 8% 14 years old 7% 15 years old 8% 16 years old 3% 17 years old 3% 18 years old 8% 19 years old 2% 20 years old 0% 21 years old 0% 22 years or older 1 % (DON'T READ) DK/NA 0% E. What was the total income of your household before taxes in 1996? Less than $20K 6% Between $20K and $40K 15% Between $40K and $60K 18% Between $60K and $80K 14% Greater than $80K 20% Refused 27% F. What ethnic group do you consider yourself a part of or feel closest to? (IF HESITATE, READ): Asian 8% African American or Black 2% Latino or Hispanic 6% Pacific Islander 2% White 75% Other -4% (DON'T READ) Refused 4% City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 13 PROPRIETARY G. Are you registered to vote at your current address? Yes 81 % (ASK G-1) No 18% (DON'T READ) Refused 1 % (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 % G-1. Are you registered as a Democrat, a Republican, a member of another political party or are you not registered with any party? Democrat 46% Republican 29% Other 7% No Party 8% (DON'T READ) DK/NA 10% Thank you so much for participating! H. Respondent's Sex: Male 50% Female 51 % I. RESPONDENT'S ZIP CODE OF RESIDENCE NAME PHONE ADDRESS DATE OF INTERVIEW VALIDATED BY INTERVIEWER: NUMBER: City of Campbell Godbe Research & Analysis City Satisfaction Survey Page 14 PROPRIETARY Godbe Research & Analysis City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 PROPRIETARY TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Executive Summary 4 Key Findings 4 Conclusions 6 Summary of Results 7 Length of Residency 8 Best Thing About Living in Cupertino 9 Worst Thing About Living in Cupertino 10 City Job Performance 11 Importance of City Services 13 Satisfaction with City Services 14 Importance and Satisfaction Matrix .15 Facility Usage 17 Satisfaction with Recreation Department Programs 18 Popular Recreation Department Activities 19 Cost of Recreation Department Classes 20 Need for Additional Teen Programs 21 Need for a Teen Center 22 Use of City Money to Fund a Teen Center 23 Need to Expand Public Library 24 Use of City Money to Fund Library Expansion 25 Ranking of Features - Library Expansion 26 Contact with Sheriff in Past Year 28 Rating of Law Enforcement Services in Cupertino 29 Crime in Cupertino 32 Race Relations in Cupertino 33 Effect of Increased Racial Diversity 34 City Efforts to Ensure All Ethnic Groups Feel Welcome . 35 Commercial Growth . 36 Residential Growth • 37 Information Sources 38 Internet Access 39 Web Site Visits 40 Appendix A - Guide to Statistical Significance A-1 JAppendix B - Questionnaire B-1 Appendix C - Crosstabulations C-1 Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 1 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey PROPRIETARY INTRODUCTION Godbe Research & Analysis is pleased to present the results of a public opinion research project conducted for the City of Cupertino. This report is organized into four sections: The Methodology section explains the methodology used to conduct this type of survey research. The Executive Summary section summarizes the key findings and conclusions arrived at through analysis of the survey results. The Summary of Results section reviews the findings of the quantitative research on a question -by -question basis. The Appendices include the questionnaire, a guide to statistical significance and the computer -generated crosstabs. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 2 PROPRIETARY METHODOLOGY This study was conducted by interviewing 400 adult residents of the City of Cupertino. Specifics of the research design are as follows: Technique Universe Field Dates Sample Size Sampling Method Language of Interview Telephone Interviewing Cupertino Residents 18 and Older January 7 - January 11,1998 N=400 Random Digit Dial (RDD) English Understanding the 'Margin of Error' — All topline responses have a statistical margin of error between 2.93 and 4.88 percent. This means that for a given question answered by all 400 respondents, the percentage breakdowns of the sample population compared to the overall survey population will vary by no more than 4.88 percent 95 out of 100 times. The 4.88 percent margin of error applies to both sides of the answer so that for a question in which 50 percent of the respondents said 'yes', we would expect that 95 out of 100 times the actual percent of the population that would say 'yes' would be between 45 and 55 percent. The margin of error for a given question in this survey actually moves between 2.93 percent and 4.88 percent as stated above. The 4.88 percent number refers to questions, such as a yes/no question, where opinions are evenly split in the sample with 50 percent of respondents saying yes and 50 percent saying no. If that same question receives a response in which 10 percent of respondents said yes and 90 percent said no, then the margin of error would be 2.93 percent. Controlling for Position Bias' — In order to control for location bias (position bias), some of the items in the survey were rotated. Survey questions five, six, seven, sixteen, and eighteen were structured so that a different item within the set was chosen as the starting point for each respondent that was interviewed. Sample Selection — Respondents for the survey were selected using a random digit dial sample of adults, 18 years and older, living within the City of Cupertino. GRA completed 400 interviews throughout the city and did not deem it necessary to oversample any specific demographic populations or demographic areas. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 3 PROPRIETARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After reviewing the research results, Godbe Research & Analysis has arrived at the following key findings: • Eighty-seven percent of respondents to the survey were either 'very' or 'somewhat' satisfied with the job the City of Cupertino is doing to provide city services. • When asked to rank a selection of services as being 'very important', 'somewhat important', 'not too important', or 'not at all important', respondents ranked 'garbage collection' and 'traffic safety' highest, followed by 'police services', the 'recycling program', and 'library services'. • Of the 20 services tested, 'The Govemment Meeting Channel' was identified as the least important by respondents. • Respondents were most satisfied with the 'Quinlan Community Center Facilities' and least satisfied with the City's 'economic development efforts'. • Respondents were very satisfied with many services they consider to be important, including police services, library services, recreation services, garbage collection, the recycling program, park and picnic area maintenance, youth sports fields, park and picnic availability, traffic safety, street sweeping services, and street tree maintenance. They were less satisfied with sidewalk maintenance and economic development efforts, which they also considered to be quite important. • The Cupertino Public Library and neighborhood parks were the two items in the City of Cupertino that received the most usage by respondents to the survey. Eighty-seven percent of respondents said they had visited the library in the past year, 83 percent said they had visited a neighborhood park, and 76 percent said they had visited Memorial Park. The facilities used least were the Senior Center (23 percent) and the Cupertino Historical Museum (22 percent). • Seventy percent of respondents were either 'very satisfied' or 'somewhat satisfied' with the programs and activities offered by the Cupertino Recreation Department. Youth sports programs and adult classes were the most popular programs offered by the Department. Two-thirds of respondents felt the costs of classes offered by the Recreation Department were reasonable. • Forty-seven percent of respondents felt Cupertino needs additional teen programs, 18 percent felt there was no need for additional teen programs, and 36 percent were undecided. • Sixty-two percent of respondents felt Cupertino needs a teen center and 71 percent of respondents felt City money should be used to build and operate such a center. • Two-thirds of respondents felt the Cupertino Public Library should be expanded and 77 percent felt City money should be used to fund an expansion of the library. Respondents were most likely to City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 4 PROPRIETARY support library expansion when they learned it would create more programs for children. • Twenty-two percent of respondents said they had contacted a Deputy Sheriff in the past year. • When asked to rate the quality and effectiveness of eight law enforcement services, 90 percent of respondents said the overall response time of the Cupertino Deputy Sheriffs was either 'excellent' or 'good', 87 percent said 'traffic enforcement' was either 'excellent' or 'good', and 75 percent said the Sheriffs were doing an 'excellent' or 'good' job of ensuring neighborhood safety. Ninety-five percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing an 'excellent' or 'good' job of being courteous toward citizens. • More than two-thirds of respondents either did not respond or answered 'Don't Know' when asked how they felt the Sheriffs were doing in administering DARE and other school -based programs, juvenile early intervention programs, and services at the Sheriff City Hall Center. • More than half of respondents (55 percent) felt that crime in the City of Cupertino has 'stayed about the same' over the past five years, 20 percent said that crime has increased, and eight percent said that crime has decreased. • Seventy-nine percent of respondents described race relations in the City of Cupertino as either 'excellent' or 'good'. Only 14 percent described race relations as 'poor' or 'very poor'. • Nearly half (48 percent) of respondents felt that Cupertino's increased racial diversity has made them more sympathetic and open toward people of other races, while 15 percent said it has made them more resentful and closed toward other races. • Seventy-one percent of respondents felt that Cupertino is doing enough to ensure that members of all ethnic groups feel welcome in Cupertino, while only 14 percent disagreed. • Most respondents felt the amount of commercial growth in and around Cupertino was 'about the right amount' (56 percent), while 24 percent felt there was too much growth, and 14 percent felt there was not enough growth. • When asked about the amount of residential growth in and around Cupertino, 46 percent of respondents felt there was too much growth, 40 percent felt the amount of growth was 'about the right amount', and 11 percent felt there was not enough growth. • When asked about which local news sources they rely on to provide information on city news and programming, half of all respondents said the Cupertino Scene is their primary news source. • Seventy-nine percent of respondents said they have access to the Intemet. • Nineteen percent of respondents said they, or someone in their household, has visited the City of Cupertino's World Wide Web site. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 5 PROPRIETARY } After reviewing the Key Findings, Godbe Research & Analysis has arrived at the following conclusions: • The Satisfaction/Importance Matrix on page 15 plots each service tested on a grid. While respondents were quite satisfied with the job the City is doing of providing many important services, there are areas of possible improvement. In particular, respondents were least satisfied with the City's economic development efforts and sidewalk maintenance services, both of which they considered to be rather important. • There is strong support for both a teen center (62 percent of respondents) and expansion of the public library (66 percent). Even greater percentages of respondents said City funds should be used to pay for these projects. Support for additional teen programs was significantly lower (47 percent). • The Cupertino Deputy Sheriffs received high marks from respondents, particularly in the areas of courtesy, response time, and traffic enforcement. The relative ambivalence and lack of awareness toward DARE and other children's programs, juvenile early intervention programs, and services at the Sheriff City Hall Service Center suggests a public education effort would likely increase community support and satisfaction with the Department. • City efforts to ensure all ethnic groups feel welcome appear to be working. 71 percent of respondents felt the City is doing enough in this area. Race relations in Cupertino do not seem to constitute much of a problem at this time. Seventy-nine percent of respondents said rare relations are either 'excellent' or 'good', including 80 percent of Chinese respondents and 77 percent of white respondents. Moreover, half of all respondents said Cupertino's increased racial diversity has made them more sympathetic toward people of other races. • While 70 percent of respondents expressed satisfaction with programs and activities offered by the Recreation Department, 43 percent of respondents said they do not participate in any Recreation Department activities. This is an area where public education efforts could increase participation. • Respondents appear to be more concerned about the amount of residential growth than the amount of commercial growth in and around Cupertino. While 46 percent of respondents said there was too much residential growth, only 24 percent said there was too much commercial growth . Furthermore, only 14 percent of respondents said there was not enough commercial growth. This is interesting when one considers that, of the 20 services tested in Question six, respondents were least satisfied with the City's economic development efforts. • While nearly four out of every five respondents reported having arrPss to the Internet, only about one in five has ever visited the City's Web site. This is an area where public education efforts could increase the number of Web site visits. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 6 PROPRIE` Ak J SUMMARY OF RESULTS Understanding a 'Ranking' — For purposes of this summary, most results will be discussed in a question -by -question format except for those questions asked for demographic or comparison purposes. Because of the number of response categories for most of the questions, many questions are discussed with respect to a descriptive ranking instead of the actual response percentages. The rank conveniently expresses the results of three, four and five option response categories in a single numeric figure, thereby making interpretation of the data considerably easier. Where particular insights can be obtained by using the actual response percentages, these percentages are analyzed; usually in a section following an analysis of the question with regard to the question's descriptive ranks. Types of Analysis — Regardless of whether response percentages or rankings are chosen for analysis, each question is presented with comments highlighting the important findings. Due to rounding, those tables using response percentages may not round to 100 percent. Each table generally includes the total category percentage, or the rankings from the entire sample. These figures are followed by distributions from various subgroups identified by a descriptive label. The following subgroups are referred to frequently in the substantive section of the report: Gender Male or Female. Ethnicity Self -reported ethnicity. Grouped in 13 categories (White, Chinese, Asian Indian, Latino or Hispanic, Japanese, Korean, Pacific Islander, African - American or Black, Filipino, Thai, Cambodian, Vietnamese, Other) Age Self -reported date of birth. Grouped in five categories (18-29, 30-39, 40-49 50-59, and 60+) . Complete background and demographic data may be found in Appendix B and in the crosstabulations. More on Rankings — As was mentioned briefly above, some of the questions discussed on the following pages will refer to a 'ranking'. Because of the difficulty involved with assessing statistics based on four and five point scales, it is sometimes preferable to simplify the data for analytical reasons. To further simplify the data in these questions, the four point scales used in the survey for assessing importance or satisfaction were collapsed into a single measi that is sensitive to the intensity and direction of opinion. This single number enables one to construct a relative ranking of each questions in relation to the other questions. To derive the rank, all responses are aggregated from the four point scale relation to the other questions. To derive the rank, all responses are aggregated from the four point scale using the using the following system: 2 = very important, 1 = somewhat important, -1 = not too important, -2 = not at all important In all cases, a high positive rank corresponds to large numbers of respondents choosing the 'very' or 'somewhat important' response categories for the given question. Reminder — As a matter of clarification, the questions discussed and analyzed on the following pages include only a subset of the various crosstabulations available for each question. Only those subgroups that are of particular interest or that illustrate a particular insight are included in the discussion on the following pages. Should readers wish to conduct a closer analysis of subgroups for a given question, the complete breakdowns appear in Appendix C. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Reseanh and Analysis January 1998 Page 7 PROPRIETARY Length of Residency This survey of adult residents in the City of Cupertino began after a careful screening of potential respondents. Each respondent had to be at least 18 years of age and a resident of the City of Cupertino. After these qualifications were established by the interviewer, the substantive section of the survey began. The first substantive question, in which each respondent was asked how long he or she has lived in Cupertino, is a common feature of city satisfaction questionnaires. This question lets respondents know that the survey is likely to be about issues in their community. More than 30 percent of respondents indicated they had lived in Cupertino 16 years or more, 24 percent said they had lived in Cupertino between four and nine years, and 18 percent said they had lived in Cupertino between one and three years. The remaining 27 percent of respondents split between having lived in Cupertino between 10 and 15 years (17 percent) and less than one year (10 percent). Respondents who have lived in Cupertino for less than one year were more likely to be male (15 percent as compared to 5 percent female), while those who have lived in Cupertino between one and three years were more likely to be female (23 percent as compared to 13 percent male). Those who have lived in Cupertino for more than four years were split relatively evenly between males and females (73 percent of females as compared to 72 percent of males.) Overall Gender Male Female Homeowner Status Own Rent 1Pss than one year 10% 15% 5% 3% 24% One to three years 18% 13% 23% 15% 25% Four to nine years 24% 24% 24% 21% 31% Ten to fifteen years 17% 18% 16% 19% 10% Sixteen years or more 31% 30% 33% 42% 9% Eighty percent of renters have lived in Cupertino less than ten years, while 61 percent of homeowners have lived in Cupertino for ten years or more. City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 8 PROPRIETARY Best Thing About Living in Cupertino The second substantive question in the survey asked respondents, in an open-ended format, to describe the best thing about living in Cupertino. Verbatim responses were recorded and coded into similar categories where appropriate. 'I\venty-six percent of respondents said 'very good schools' was the best thing about living in Cupertino, while 24 percent said 'nothing,' and 16 percent mentioned miscellaneous things. Fifteen percent mentioned Cupertino's 'small-town atmosphere' and 11 percent said it is 'close to everything.' Other responses are shown below. Best Thing About Living in Cupertino Very good schools Nothing Miscellaneous Small town atmosphere Close to everything Variety of entertainments Low crime rate 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Males and females offered similar responses, with slightly more males mentioning the City's 'small town atmosphere' (19 percent compared to 11 percent) and slightly more females saying Cupertino is 'close to everything.' (14 percent compared to 8 percent). Overall Gender Male Female Very good schools Nothing Miscellaneous Small town atmosphere Close to everything Variety of entertainments Low crime rate 26% 24% 16% 15% 11% 6% 3% 28% 24% 23% 25% 14% 17% 19% 11% 8% 14% 7% 5% 1% 4% January 1998 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 9 PROPRIETARY Worst Thing About Living in Cupertino Respondents were next asked to describe the worst thing about living in Cupertino. As the table below indicates, 'overpopulation' was mentioned by 29 percent of respondents, while 'traffic' was mentioned by 22 percent, and 'cost of living' was mentioned by 20 percent. Eighteen percent of respondents cited 'pollution' as the worst thing about living in Cupertino. Females were slightly more concerned than males about overpopulation and traffic, while males were more concerned than females about the cost of living. Overpopulated Traffic Cost of living Pollution Overdevelopment Miscellaneous Nothing 0% Worst Thing About Living in Cupertino 5/ 0 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Overall Gender Male Female Overpopulated 29% 26% 31% Traffic 22% 19% 24% Cost of living 20% 22% 18% Pollution 18% 17% 18% Overdevelopment 5% 5% 4% Miscellaneous 4% 4% 3% Nothing 2% 2% 1% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 10 PROPRIETARY City Job Performance The next question in the survey asked respondents how satisfied they were with the job the City is doing to provide City services. Eighty-seven percent of respondents said they were either 'somewhat' or 'very' satisfied with the City's job performance, 8 percent of respondents were either 'somewhat' or 'very' dissatisfied with the City's ability to provide services, while 6 percent were undecided. As the table below indicates, gender had no significant impact on respondents' satisfaction with the City's job. Eighty-nine performance. Eighty-nine percent of females and 85 percent of males were either 'somewhat' or 'very' satisfied with the City's performance. Overall Gender Male Female Very satisfied 37% 35% 39% Somewhat satisfied 50% 50% 50% Somewhat dissatisfied 6% 7% 5% Very dissatisfied 2% 2% 1% Undecided 6% 6% 5% Ninety-two percent of those between the ages of 30 and 39 were satisfied with the City's performance, while only 83 percent of those between the ages of 50 and 59 were satisfied. Age Under 30 30-39 40-49 50-59 Over 60 Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Undecided 24% 41% 36% 31% 45% 63% 51% 49% 52% 42% 4% 3% 7% 9% 6% 4% 0% 2% 0% 3% 6% 5% 7% 8% 3% Among respondents who felt that crime had increased over the past five years, 78 percent were either 'somewhat' or 'very' satisfied with the City's job performance. Ninety percent of those who felt crime had decreased and 82 percent of those who felt crime had stayed the same were satisfied. Among those who felt race relations in the City were 'excellent,' 93 percent were satisfied with the City's job performance, while 88 percent of those who felt race relations were 'good' and 81 percent of those who felt race relations were 'poor' were satisfied. Only 25 percent of those who felt race relations were poor were 'very satisfied' with the City's performance, compared to 53 percent for those who felt race relations were excellent. January 1998 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 11 PROPRIETARY Perception of Crime Increased Decreased Same Perception of Race Relations Excellent Good Poor Very satisfied 30% . 45% 42% 53% 36% 25% Somewhat satisfied 48% 45% 50% 40% 52% 56% Somewhat dissatisfied 16% 7% 3% 5% 6% 7% Very dissatisfied 3% 3% 1% 0% 0% 9% Undecided 4% 0% 5% 2% 6% 4% Cupertino's overall job performance rating is similar to those for other cities in Northern California. As the table below indicates, Cupertino's 87 percent satisfaction rating is just below Campbell's 89 percent and Mountain View's 88 percent, and slightly above Novato's 83 percent rating. Cty Cupertino Campbell Mt. View Novato 1998 1997 1996 1996 Very satisfied 37% 46% 36% 23% Somewhat satisfied 50% 43% 52% 60% Somewhat dissatisfied 6% 7% 6% 13% Very dissatisfied 2% 2% 2% 2% Undecided 6% 4% 6% 3% In 1990, GRA conducted a similar public opinion survey for the City of Cupertino among the City's registered voters (as opposed to the current survey which was conducted among all adult residents of Cupertino). In that survey, respondents were asked to evaluate the City's overall job performance on a five point scale (excellent, good, neither good nor bad, poor, terrible, or don't know). At that time, 73 percent of respondents said the City was doing either an 'excellent' or 'good' job, 20 percent said the City's job performance was 'neither good nor bad,' seven percent said the City was doing a 'poor' or 'terrible' job, and one percent said 'don't know.' While the data is not comparable (due to differences in both the sample universes and question scales), it is worth noting that less than ten percent of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the City's services in 1998 and less than ten percent said the City was doing a 'poor' or 'terrible' job in 1990. Cupertino 1990 Excellent Good Neither good nor bad Poor Terrible Don't know 12% 61% 20% 5% 2% 1% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 12 PROPRIETARY Importance of City Services The next question asked respondents how important 20 individual city services are to them. Respondents were asked whether they thought each service was very important, somewhat important, not too important, or not at all important. The responses have been aggregated into a single score or 'rank' that varies between 2.0 (when 100 percent of respondents say the issue is 'very important') and -2.0 (when 100 percent of respondents say the issue is 'not at all important.') The table below highlights the rankings of the issues tested in this question group. Respondents ranked 'garbage collection' and 'traffic safety' as the most important city services (1.80), followed by 'police services' (1.70), the City's 'recycling program' (1.60), and 'library services' (1.60). 'The Government Meeting Channel' was ranked lowest by respondents (-.20) and was the only service to receive a negative ranking. 'The Public Access Channel' was also deemed to be relatively unimportant, receiving a ranking of zero. Overall Garbage collection Traffic safety Police services Recycling program Library services Street pavement maintenance Park and picnic area maintenance City recreation services Street sweeping services Street tree maintenance Park and picnic area availability Economic development efforts Sidewalk maintenance Youth sports fields Senior citizen programs Quinlan Community Center facilities Median strip landscape maintenance Cupertino's monthly newsletter, 'The Scene' The Public Access channel The Government Meeting channel 1.8 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.0 -0.2 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 13 PROPRIETARY Satisfaction with City Services The next question asked respondents how satisfied they were with the city's performance in providing the same 20 services tested in Question five. Whereas the -preceding question was intended to gauge how important each service was to a respondent, this question asked the respondent to rate the City's performance in providing the particular service. Respondents were most satisfied with the 'Quinlan Community Center facilities,' assigning them a ranking of 1.50. This was followed by six services that received rankings of 1.40. These included: 'Cupertino's monthly newsletter, The Scene;' 'police services;' 'City recreation services;' 'park and picnic area availability;' 'library services; 'and 'senior citizen programs.' Respondents were least satisfied with 'economic development efforts,' 'sidewalk maintenance,' and 'the Govemment Meeting Channel.' Overall Quinlan Community Center facilities Cupertino's monthly newsletter, The Scene' Police services City recreation services Park and picnic area availability Library services Senior citizen programs Garbage collection Recycling program Park and picnic area maintenance Youth sports fields Median strip landscape maintenance The Public Access channel Street sweeping services Traffic safety Street tree maintenance Street pavement maintenance The Govemment Meeting channel Sidewalk maintenance Economic development efforts 1.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.8 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysts January 1998 Page 14 PROPRIETARY Importance and Satisfaction Matrix The matrix below plots each service on two scales. The scale along the X-axis corresponds to the ranking the service was given in terms of importance. The scale along the Y-axis corresponds to the ranking the service was given in terms of satisfaction. Over the years, GRA has presented this matrix in several forms. The first of two charts is presented below with all four quadrants visible. A chart with all four quadrants ranges from -2 to +2 on both the x and y axes. However, since all but one service provided by the City of Cupertino received positive importance and satisfaction rankings, the chart on the following page displays adjusted ranges for the two axes. With a smaller area to analyze, it is still possible to draw comparisons among the various data points. • • M Senior Programs Quinlan Comm. Center Facilities Park & Picnic Area Main. Library The Public Access Channel 'The Scene' The Govemment Meeting Channel Median Strip Landscape Maintenance Park & Picnic Avail. Police Services City Rec. 1 Services Youth Sports — Fields QUADRANT TWO Sidewalk Maintenance Economic Development Efforts Garbage Collection Recycling Program Traffic Safety Street Street Sweeping Pavement Services Maintenance Street Tree Maintenance QUADRANT ONI 0 -1.0 -f.5 0.5 05 1 0 '.2 0 • RANT THREE QUADRANT FOUR Importance of Service City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 15 PROPRIETARY The Zoom -In chart (below) shows in a more specific way where room for improvement lies. For example, 'Sidewalk maintenance' and 'Economic development efforts' are services which respondents considered to be quite important, but which they felt were not being provided in a satisfactory manner. 'Street pavement maintenance' is another area where the City can improve their performance. On a more positive note, many of the services tested fell in the upper left area of the first chart, indicating high levels of importance and satisfaction among residents. Among these were 'Police services', 'Library services', City recreation services', 'Park and picnic area availability', 'Park and picnic area maintenance', 'Youth sports fields', 'Garbage collection', the 'Recycling program', 'Traffic safety', 'Street tree maintenance', and 'Street sweeping services'. Several services fell into the upper right area of the first chart, an indication of low importance and high satisfaction with the service. These included: 'Median strip landscape maintenance', 'Senior citizen programs', 'Quinlan Community Center Facilities', The Scene', and 'The Public Access Channel'. 'The Government Meeting Channel' was the only service to fall into lower right area of the first chart, an area indicating low levels of both importance and satisfaction. N 1.6 1.5 ZOOM -IN Quinlan Comm. Center Facilities The Public Access Channel 'The Scene • 1 The Government *The Channel 0.9 0.8 0.7 Median Strip '- Landscape Maintenance Senior Programs 1. Youth Sports Fields City Rec. Services Park and Picnic Area ♦ Availability Park and Picnic Area Maintenance Street Tree Maintenance f S'dewalk Maintenance -0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 Importance of Service Library Services Recycling Program Police Services Street Pavement Maintenance 1.4 1.6 1.8 Garbage Collection 4 2.0 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1996 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 16 PROPRIETARY Facility usage The next set of questions focused on some specific facilities and services in the City of Cupertino. First, respondents were asked if they or members of their families had been to any of the facilities listed in the table below during the past year. Eighty-seven percent of respondents said they had been to the Cupertino Public Library, 83 percent said they had visited neighborhood parks, and 76 percent said they had been to Memorial Park. Only 22 percent said they had visited the Cupertino Historical Museum and only 23 percent had visited the Senior Center. Overall Yes No Cupertino Public Library Neighborhood Parks Memorial Park Quinlan Community Center Blackberry Farm City Hall Cupertino Sports Center McClellan Ranch Park Senior Center Cupertino Historical Museum 87% 14% 83% 16% 76% 21% 53% 46% 47% 53% 42% 58% 34% 65% 32% 66% 23% 76% 22% 77% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 17 PROPRIETARY Satisfaction with Recreation Department Programs The next question asked respondents if they were satisfied with the programs and activities offered by the Cupertino Recreation Department. Respondents were asked whether they were 'very satisfied,' 'somewhat satisfied,' 'somewhat dissatisfied,' or 'very dissatisfied.' Seventy percent of respondents were either 'very satisfied' or 'somewhat satisfied' with the programs and services offered by the Recreation Department, while only five percent were dissatisfied. Twenty-six percent said they 'don't know.' Slightly more females than males said they were 'very satisfied' with the programs. Overall Gender Male Female Very satisfied 30% 26% 35% Somewhat satisfied 40% 41% 38% Somewhat dissatisfied 4% 5% 3% Very dissatisfied 1% 1% 0% Undecided 26% 27% 24% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 18 PROPRIETARY Popular Recreation Department Activities Question nine asked respondents, "What activities offered by the Recreation Department do you or members of your household participate in most?' While 43 percent of respondents said they did not participate in any Recreation Department activities, 11 percent said they participate in 'youth sports programs,' nine percent said they participate in 'adult classes,' and seven percent mentioned 'youth classes.' Females were more likely than males to participate in adult classes (11 percent compared to 6 percent). Overall Gender Male Female Youth sports programs 11% 10% 11% Adult classes 9% 6% 11% Youth classes 7% 6% 8% Aquatics 6% 7% 5% Adult sports programs 6% 6% 5% Day camps 5% 4% 6% Tennis lessons 5% 5% 5% Fitness programs 4% 3% 5% Special interest classes 3% 2% 5% Golf lessons 2% 3% 1% Pre-school programs 1% 2% 1% Senior citizen activities 1% 1% 1% Afterschool enrichment 1% 1% 1% Nature classes 1% 1% 1% Trips and tours 1% 1% 1% Other 11% 14% 9% None 43% 42% 44% Undecided 7% 9% 4% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 19 PROPRIETARY Cost of Recreation Depart - nt Classes The next question asked respondents how reasonable they felt the costs were for classes offered by the Recreation Department. Two-thirds of respondents felt the costs associated with these classes were reasonable, while only 18 percent felt they were unreasonable. Fifteen percent said they did not know if the costs were reasonable. Females were more likely than their male counterparts to say the costs were unreasonable (23 percent compared to 13 percent). Similarly, renters were slightly more likely than homeowners to say the costs were unreasonable (21 percent compared to 16 percent). Those who said they were satisfied with the programs and services offered by the Recreation Department were more likely than those who were dissatisfied with the programs to say the costs associated with classes were reasonable (72 percent compared to 51 percent). Overall Gender Male Female Homeowner Status Own Rent Recreation Dept Rating Satisfied Dissatisfied Very reasonable 28% 27% 29% 32% 22% 32% 11% Somewhat reasonable 39% 42% 36% 38% 40% 40% 39% Somewhat unreasonable 12% 9% 15% 11% 14% 13% 17% Very unreasonable 6% 4% 8% 5% 7% 6% 11% Undecided 15% 17% 12% 14% 17% 9% 22% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 20 PROPRIETARY Need for Additional Teen Programs in Cupertino The next question asked respondents, 'Do you think there is a need for additional teen programs in the City of Cupertino?' Forty-seven percent said 'Yes,' 18 percent said 'No' and 36 percent were undecided. Need Additional Teen Programs Definitely no 7% Probably no 11% Definitely yes 28% Females were more likely than males to see the need for additional teen programs, with 52 percent saying 'Yes' (compared to only 42 percent for males). A third of females responded 'Definitely yes.' Support for additional teen programs was highest among younger respondents than among older respondents. Fifty-five percent of those under the age of 30 expressed support for additional programs while only 36 percent of those over the age of 60 supported such programs. Overall Gender Male Female Under 30 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Definitely yes 28% 23% 33% 31% 30% 30% 30% 17% Probably yes 19% 19% 19% 24% 17% 19% 16% 19% Total ye—.....47% : 7, ' .4 . _ 52% 55% 47% 49% . % 36% Probably no 11% 13% 8% 16% 8% 7% 12% 16% Definitely no 7% 8% 5% 12% 5% 5% 8% 6% Total now 18% 21% 13% 28%, 1396 12% ;; 20% 96 ° Undecided 36% 37% 35% 18% 40% 39% 34% 42% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Malysis Page 21 PROPRIE'fi,ARY Need for a Teen Center in Cupertino Question twelve asked respondents if they felt there was a need for a teen center in Cupertino. Sixty-two percent of respondents said 'Yes,' seven percent said 'No,' and 23 percent were undecided.. Females were more likely to support a teen center than males (69 percent compared to 55 percent), while younger respondents were more likely than older respondents to support such a center. More than two-thirds of those under the age of 40 expressed support for a teen center, while only 53 percent of those over the age of 60 supported it. Overall Gender Male Female Under 30 30-39 Age 40-49 50-59 60+ Definitely yes 38% 33% 44% 31% 45% 40% 43% 31% Probably yes 24% 22% 25% 35% 23% 24% 15% 22% Total yes_. : 62% ,.,5% 69% 66% 68% 64% 53% Probably no 9% 11% 7% 14% 7% 8% 12% 6% Definitely no 7% 10% 3% 12% 5% 6% 6% 8% Total no,- 16% h• 21% 10% 26% 12% 14% 18% A° n 14% Undecided 23% 24% 21% 8% 21% 23% 24% 33% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Godbe Research and Analysis Page 22 PROPRIETARY Use of City Money to Fund a Teen Center After respondents were asked whether they felt there was a need for a teen center in Cupertino, they were asked whether they felt City money should be used to build and operate a teen center. Seventy-one percent of respondents supported using City funds to provide a teen center, 14 percent opposed the idea, and 15 percent were undecided. Females were slightly more likely than males to support using City funds for this purpose. Twenty-seven percent of those who said there was no need for a teen center in Cupertino said they would support using City funds to pay for a teen center and nearly half of those who said there was no need for additional teen programs said they would support using City funds to pay for such a center. Overall Gender Male Female Need for Teen Center Yes No Need for Teen Programs Yes No Support Oppose Undecided 71% 14% 15% 69% 73% 17% 12% 15% 16% 88% 27% 4% 61% 8% 11%. 84% 49% 8% 39% 9% 12% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 23 PROPRIETARY ) Need to Expand Cupertino Public Library Question fourteen asked respondents if they thought there was a need to expand the Cupertino Public Library. As the table below indicates, 66 percent of respondents said 'Yes,' 21 percent said 'No,' and 13 percent were undecided. Males were more likely than females to support expanding the library (74 percent compared to 58 percent). Support for library expansion was also greater among those who have arrPis to the Internet (70 percent) than among those who do not have Internet access (52 percent). Need To Expand Library Undecided 13% Definitely yes 50% Overall Gender Male Female Internet Access Yes No Definitely yes 50% 57% 43% 53% 39% Probably yes 16% 17% 15% 17% 13% Probably no 13% 10% 16% 12% 15% Definitely no 8% 7% 9% 7% 9% Undecided 13% 9% 17% 10% 25% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 24 PROPRIETARY Use of City Money to Fund Library Expansion The next question asked respondents if they would support using City funds to pay for an expansion of the Cupertino Public Library. Seventy-seven percent of respondents said 'Yes,' 16 percent said 'No,' and 8 percent were undecided. Males were more inclined to use City funds to pay for library expansion than females (81 percent compared to 73 percent). Respondents with access to the Internet were more likely to support using City funds for this purpose than were those without Internet access. In addition, a third of those who said there was no need to expand the library would support using City funds to expand the library. Overall Gender Internet Access Need Library Expansion Male Female Yes No Yes No Support 77% 81% 73% 79% 70% 95% 33% Oppose 16% 14% 17% 14% 19% 4% 59% Undecided 8% 5% 10% 7% 11% 2% 8% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbs Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 25 PROPRIETARY Ranking of Features - Library Expansion Question 16 asked respondents how specific features of the library expansion would affect their support for expansion of the library. Specifically, respondents were asked whether a piece of information would make them more or less likely to vote to expand the library. As with previous question sets, responses have been aggregated into a single rank to make analysis and comparison easier. The chart below displays the rankings assigned to each of the eight features tested in the question set. Features with high positive rankings received a high number of 'much more likely to vote for' responses from respondents. Ranking of Features - Library Expansion There would be more programs for children There would be more computers There would be more programs for teens There would be more seats in the library There would be a larger collection of music CDs and videos to borrow There would be more parking spaces There would be a larger Community Room There would be a larger collection of non-English books 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey January 1998 Page 26 Godbe Research and Analysis PROPRIETARY J Of the eight features tested, 'there would be more programs for children' was ranked highest overall, followed by 'there would be more computers,' and 'there would be more programs for teens.' "There would be a larger collection of non-English books' was ranked lowest. Overall There would be more programs for children There would be more computers There would be more programs for teens There would be more seats in the library There would be a larger collection of music CD's and videos to borrow There would be more parking spaces There would be a larger Community Room There would be a larger collection of non-English books 1.23 1.08 1.03 0.89 0.80 0.67 0.43 0.02 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 27 PROPRIETARY Contact with Sheriff in Past Year Question seventeen asked respondents if they had reason to contact a Deputy Sheriff in the past year. Seventy-eight percent of respondents said 'No,' 22 percent said 'Yes,' and one percent responded 'don't know.' Males were slightly more likely than females to say 'Yes` (24 percent compared to 20 percent), as were respondents living east of DeAnza Boulevard. Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West Fast Yes 22% 24% 20% 21% 25% No 78% 75% 80% 79% 74% Don't Know 1% 1% 0% 0% 1% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 28 PROPRIETARY Rating of Law Enforcement Services in Cupertino Question 18 asked respondents to rate the quality and effectiveness of several law enforcement services. Respondents were asked whether they thought Cupertino Deputy Sheriffs were doing an excellent, good, poor, or very poor job in eight areas of law enforcement services. Only respondents who had some contact with the Sheriff's Office during the past year were asked these questions (N=87). The first service area tested was 'DARE and other school -based programs.' Overall, 45 percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing either an 'excellent' or 'good' job of providing these services, eight percent felt they were doing either a 'poor' or 'very poor' job, and 47 percent did not know. Females were more likely than males to say the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent' job, while there was little difference in opinion between those who live east of DeAnza Boulevard and those who live West of DeAnza Boulevard. The DARE & Other School -Based Programs Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 21% 19% 23% 21% 24% Good 24% 21% 28% 25% 21% Poor 8% 4% 13% 10% 3% Very Poor 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Undecided 47% 56% 36% 44% 52% Eighty-seven percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent' job' of providing traffic enforcement services. Males were slightly more likely than respondents overall to say the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent job,' as were those living east of DeAnza Boulevard. However, nearly a quarter of those living west of DeAnza Boulevard said the Sheriffs are doing an 'excellent' job, while only 12 percent of those living east of the Boulevard said they were doing an 'excellent' job. Traffic Enforcement Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 20% 19% 21% 23% 12% Good 67% 69% 64% 63% 79% Poor 8% 6% 10% 10% 3% Very Poor 3% 4% 3% 2% 3% Undecided 2% 2% 3% 2% 3% Ninety percent of those surveyed said the overall response time of the Deputy Sheriffs was either 'good' or 'excellent.' While females were more likely than males to say the response time of the Deputy Sheriffs was 'excellent,' ninety percent of both males and females felt police response time was either 'good' or 'excellent' Cupertino residents living east of DeAnza Boulevard were slightly more likely than those living west of the Boulevard to say the Sheriffs' response time was either 'good' or 'excellent.' City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Reseanch and Analysis January 1998 Page 29 PROPRIETARY Overall Response Time Overall Gender De Anza Male . Female West East Excellent 32% 27% 39% 33% 30% Good 58% 63% 51% 54% 64% Poor 6% 6% 5% 6% 3% Very Poor 1% 2% 0% 2% 0% Undecided 3% 2% 5% 4% 3% The next service tested was juvenile early intervention programs. Overall, 22 percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent' job of providing these services, while 72 percent were undecided. There was little difference in opinion between either males and females or those living east of DeAnza Boulevard and west of DeAnza Boulevard. Juvenile Early Intervention Programs Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 10% 10% 10% 13% 9% Good 12% 10% 13% 13% 12% Poor 5% 6% 3% 4% 0% Very Poor 1% 2% 0% 0% 3% Undecided 72% 71% 74% 71% 76% Twenty-four percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing either a 'good' or 'excellent' job of providing services at the Sheriff City Hall Service Center, while 71 percent were undecided. There was little difference in opinion between males and females. Those living west of DeAnza Boulevard were more likely to say the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent' job than were those living east of the Boulevard. Sheriff City Hall Service Center Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 9% 6% 13% 6% 12% Good 15% 19% 10% 17% 15% Poor 5% 6% 3% 6% 3% Very Poor 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Undecided 71% 69% 74% 71% 70% Ninety-five percent of respondents said the Sheriffs were doing a'good' or 'excellent' job of being courteous toward citizens. Females were more likely than males to feel the Sheriffs were courteous, with 46 percent saying they were doing an excellent job (compared to 35 percent of males). City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 30 PROPRIETARY Courtesy Towards Citizens Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 40% 35% 46% 40% 33% Good 45% 46% 44% 44% 52% Poor 8% 8% 8% 10% 6% Very Poor 2% 4% 0% 2% 3% Undecided 5% 6% 3% 4% 6% Overall, 29 percent of respondents felt the Deputy Sheriffs were doing either a 'good' or 'excellent' job of improving race relations, six percent said they were doing a 'poor' of 'very poor' job, and 66 percent were undecided. Those living east of DeAnza Boulevard were more likely than those living west of the Boulevard to say the Sheriffs were doing a 'good' or 'excellent' job of improving race relations (33 percent compared to 23 percent). Improving Race Relations Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 9% 6% 13% 6% 6% Good 20% 25% 13% 17% 27% Poor 5% 6% 3% 6% 0% Very Poor 1% 2% 0% 2% 0% Undecided 66% 60% 72% 69% 67% Severity -five percent of respondents felt the Sheriffs were doing a'good' or 'excellent' job of ensuring neighborhood safety. Males were more likely than females to feel this way (79 percent compared to 70 percent). Neighborhood Safety Overall Gender De Anza Male Female West East Excellent 20% 19% 21% 19% 18% Good 55% 60% 49% 56% 55% Poor 7% 2% 13% 8% 6% Very Poor 5% 4% 5% 8% 0% Undecided 14% 15% 13% 8% 21% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Research and Analysisshtction Survey January 1998 Page PROPRIETARY Crime in Cupertino Question 19 asked respondents, 'In general, do you feel crime in the City of Cupertino has increased, decreased, or stayed about the same in the past five years?' More than half of all respondents (55 percent) said crime has 'stayed about the same,' 20 percent said crime has increased, and eight percent said crime has decreased over the past five years. Eighteen percent of respondents said they did not know. Females were more likely than males to say that crime had increased (23 percent compared to 16 percent) and residents living west of DeAnza Boulevard were slightly more likely than those living east of DeAnza to say that crime had increased (22 percent compared to 17 percent). Twenty-four percent of respondents who had contacted a Deputy Sheriff in the past year felt crime had increased, while only 18 percent of those who had not contacted a Deputy Sheriff felt crime had increased. At the same time, 15 percent of those who had contacted a Sheriff felt crime had decreased, while only six percent of those who had not contacted a Sheriff felt crime had decreased. Overall Gender Male Female De Anza West Fast Contact with Sheriff Yes No Increased 19% 16% 23% 22% 17% 24% 18% Decreased 8% 1O% 6% 8% 8% 15% 6% Stayed about the same 55% 56% 54% 55% 54% 55% 54% Undecided 18% 19% 18% 15% 21% 6% 22% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 32 PROPRIETARY Race Relations in Cupertino Question 20 asked respondents about race. relations in Cupertino. While only 15 percent of respondents described race relations as 'excellent,' 64 percent described them as 'good' Fourteen percent described race relations as either 'poor' or 'very poor,' while seven percent were undecided. Males were slightly more likely than females to believe race relations were either 'good' or 'excellent.' There was no significant difference in opinion between either Non -White and White respondents or those living east of DeAnza Boulevard and those living west of the Boulevard. Overall Gender Male Female De Anza West East Ethnicity Non-Wbite White Excellent 15% 17% 13% 15% 14% 17% 15% Good 64% 65% 62% 65% 64% 67% 62% Poor 11% 10% 12% 11% 11% 7% 12% Very Poor 3% 3% 4% 3% 3% 1% 4% Undecided 7% 6% 8% 6% 8% 9% 7% Eighty-four percent of respondents in the 30-39 age group said race relations in Cupertino were 'excellent' or 'good,' while only 71 percent of those in the 18-29 age group said race relations were 'excellent' or 'good.' Age 18-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Excellent Good Poor Very Poor Undecided 12% 20% 12% 12% 17% 59% 64% 70% 67% 59% 18% 9% 10% 9% 9% 6% 3% 2% 3% 5% 6% 3% 6% 9% 9% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 33 PROPRIETARY Effect of Increased Racial Diversity Question 21 attempted to gauge the effect of Cupertino's increased racial diversity on respondents' attitudes toward other ethnic groups. Overall, 48 percent of respondents said the increased diversity has made them more sympathetic and open toward people of other races, while 15 percent said it has made them more resentful and closed toward them. Twenty-eight percent said it has not changed how they feel and eight percent were undecided. Twenty percent of White respondents said Cupertino's increased diversity has made them more resentful and closed, while only three percent of Non -White respondents gave that answer. Sixty-three percent of Non -White respondents said the city's increased diversity has made them more sympathetic and open toward people of other races, while only 42 percent of Whites said that. Females were more likely than males to say increased diversity has made them more resentful or closed (18 percent compared to 11 percent), while those living east of DeAnza Boulevard were slightly more likely than those living west of the Boulevard to say they had become more resentful or closed as a result of increased racial diversity. Overall Ethnicity Non -White White Gender Male Female De Anza West Fast More resentful/closed 15% 3% 20% 11% 18% 13% 17% More sympathetic/open 48% 63% 42% 49% 47% 49% 49% No change in feeling 28% 21% 32% 32% 24% 29% 28% Undecided 8% 13% 6% 7% 9% 9% 5% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Surrey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 34 PROPRIETARY City Efforts to Ensure All Ethnic Groups Feel Welcome Question 22 asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement The City of Cupertino is doing enough to ensure that members of all ethnic groups feel welcome in Cupertino. Overall, 71 percent of respondents agreed with this statement, with a third of respondents saying they 'strongly agreed.' Only 14 percent said they disagreed with the statement and 16 percent said they did not know. There was very little difference in opinion between males and females, Non -White and White respondents, and those living east and west of DeAnza Boulevard. Overall Ethnicity Non -White White Gender Male Female De Anza West East Strongly agree 33% 35% 34% 33% 34% 31% 35% Somewhat agree 38% 38% 37% 39% 36% 41% 34% Somewhat disagree 8% 8% 8% 7% 9% 7% 12% Strongly disagree 6% 4% 5% 5% 6% 7% 2% Undecided 16% 17% 17% 16% 16% 15% 17% Among respondents who have a non-English speaker living in their household, 41 percent said they strongly agreed with the statement, while 32 percent of respondents from English -only households strongly agreed with it. Thirty-four percent of those who were satisfied with the job the City is doing to provide city services strongly agreed with the statement, while 24 percent of those who were not satisfied with the job the City is doing strongly agreed. Non -English Speaker Yes No Job Performance Rating Satisfied Dissatisfied Strongly agree 41% 32% 34% 24% Somewhat agree 38% 38% 38% 38% Somewhat disagree 5% 9% 8% 10% Strongly disagree 5% 6% 5% 10% Undecided 12% 17% 15% 17% City of Coconino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 35 PROPRIETARY Commercial Growth The next set of questions asked respondents about economic development in and around Cupertino. Question 23 asked respondents if they felt there was too much commercial growth, about the right amount of growth, or not enough commercial growth in Cupertino. Fifty-six percent of respondents said there was 'about the right amount' of commercial growth, 24 percent said there was 'too much growth,' and 14 percent said there was 'not enough growth.' Females were more likely than males to say 'too much growth' (30 percent compared to 17 percent), while males were more likely to say 'about the right amount' (63 percent compared to 50 percent). Overall Gender Male Female Too much growth About the right amount of growth Not enough growth Undecided 24% 56% 14% 7% 17% 30% 63% 50% 15% 12% 5% 8% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Goabe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 36 PROPRIETARY Residential Growth The next question asked respondents if they thought there was too much residential growth, about the right amount, or not enough residential growth in Cupertino. Forty-six percent of respondents thought there was too much residential growth, 40 percent thought the amount of growth was 'about the right amount,' and 11 percent thought there was 'not enough growth.' Females, homeowners, and those living west of DeAnza Boulevard appear to be most concerned that there is too much residential growth in Cupertino. Overall Gender Male Female Homeowner Status Own Rent De Anza West Fast Too much 46% 44% 49% 52% 35% 54% 39% About the right amount 40% 39% 41% 39% 42% 36% 44% Not enough 11% 14% 8% 7% 20% 8% 15% Undecided 3% 3% 3% 3% 4% 3% 2% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Gods Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 37 PROPRIETARY Information Sources When asked about which local news sources respondents rely on to provide information on city news and programming, half of all respondents said the Cupertino Scene was their primary news source. Thirty-nine percent mentioned the Cupertino Courier, 32 percent mentioned the San Jose Mercury News, and 14 percent answered 'television.' Respondents living west of DeAnza Boulevard were more likely to mention the Cupertino Courier than were those living east of the Boulevard (46 percent compared to 33 percent). Overall Gender Male Female De Anza West Fart Cupertino Scene 50% 45% 55% 50% 52% Cupertino Courier 39% 37% 41% 46% 33% San Jose Mercury News 32% 32% 33% 31% 32% Television 14% 14% 14% 11% 16% Flyers/posters around town 4% 3% 5% 3% 8% Local cable station 4% 3% 4% 4% 3% Internet 3% 4% 2% 2% 5% Radio 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% Cupertino Web site 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% Non -English media 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% San Francisco Chronicle 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% The Profile 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% Other 9% 10% 8% 9% 11% None 36% 39% 33% 36% 35% Undecided 1% 1% 1% 0% 1% January 1998 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Anaysis Page 38 PROPRIETARY Internet Access Question 26 asked respondents if they, or anyone in their household, had access to the Internet Overall, 79 percent of respondents had Internet access. Males were more likely than females to have access to the Internet, while Non -White respondents were more likely than White respondents to have Internet access. Overall Ethnicity Gender Non-Wbite White Male Female Have Internet access 79% 87% 76% 86% 72% Do not have Internet access 20% 12% 24% 13% 27% Don't know 1% 1% 0% 1% 1% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Anaysis January 1998 Page 39 PROPRIETARY Web Site Visits Question 27 asked respondents if they, or anyone in their household, had ever visited the City of Cupertino's World Wide Web site. Nineteen percent of respondents said they had visited Cupertino's web site. Males, respondents living east of DeAnza Boulevard, those who are not satisfied with the City's job performance, and those who believe the city is not doing enough to welcome all ethnic groups are more likely to have visited Cupertino's web site than females, respondents living west of DeAnza Boulevard, those who are satisfied with the City's job performance, and those who believe the City is doing enough to welcome all ethnic groups. Overall Gender Male Female De Anza West East Yes No Don't know 19% 80% 1% 22% 15% 77% 84% 1% 1% 17% 24% 82% 75% 1% 1% Job Performance Rating Satisfied Dissatisfied City is Welcoming Agree Disagree Yes No Don't know 18% 81% 1% 28% 72% 0% 16% 83% 1% 28% 70% 2% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 40 PROPRIETARY Guide to Statistical Significance The table below shows the possible sampling variation that applies to a percentage result reported from a probability type sample. If a sample is drawn from the population of adult residents of the City of Cupertino, the margin of error due to sampling will not vary, plus or minus, by more than the indicated number of percentage points (plus or minus) from the result that would have been obtained if the interviews had been conducted with all persons in the universe represented in the sample. 1000 900 800 700 600 500 300 200 100 50 90% / 10% 1.84% 1.94% 2.06% 2.21% 2.38% 2.61% 3.38% 4.15% 5.87% 8.31% 80% / 20% 2.45% 2.59% 2.75% 2.94% 3.18% 3.49% 4.51% 5.53% 7.83% 11.08% 70% / 30% 2.81% 2.96% 3.15% 3.37% 3.64% 3.99% 5.17% 6.34% 8.97% 12.70% 60% / 40% 3.00% 3.17% 3.36% 3.60% 3.89% 4.27% 5.53% 6.77% 9.59% 13.57% Population 50% / 50% City of Cupertino 3.06% 44,775 3.23% 3.43% 3.68% 3.97% 4.36% 5.64% 6.91% 9.79% 13.85% City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Goobe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page A-1 PROPRIETARY Godbe Research & Analysis January 1998 FINAL Time Began Time Ended Cluster # CITY OF CUPERTINO SATISFACTION SURVEY Hello, my name is and I'm calling on behalf of GRA, a public opinion research firm. We're conducting a survey concerning some important issues the people in your area will be addressing and we'd like to get your opinions, it should just take a few minutes of your time. (IF NEEDED) This is a study about issues of importance in the City of Cupertino. It is a survey only and I am not selling anything. I. Are you at least 18 years old? (1F UNDER 18 ASK:) Is there someone in the household who is at least 18 that I can speak with? (IF NOT, THANK AND TERMINATE) Yes No (CONTINUE) (TERMINATE) II. What is your zip code? (TERMINATE IF OTHER THAN '95014' OR '95015') Record Zip Code III. Are you a resident of the City of Cupertino? Yes No 1. How many years have you lived in the City of Cupertino? Less than one year One to three years Four to nine years Ten to fifteen years Sixteen years or more (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 2 3 4 5 6 (CONTINUE) (TERMINATE) January 1998 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis Page 8-1 PROPRIETARY INTERVIEWERS: READ CHECKED ITEM ONLY ( )2. Overall, what would you say is the best thing about living in the City of Cupertino today? (ONE RESPONSE ONLY) ( )3. Overall, what would you say is the worst thing about living in the City of Cupertino today? (ONE RESPONSE ONLY) 4. Generally speaking, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Cupertino is doing to provide city services? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Very satisfied 1 Somewhat satisfied 2 Somewhat dissatisfied 3 Very dissatisfied 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 199E Page B-2 PROPRIETARY INTERVIEWERS: ROTATE QUESTIONS 5 AND 6, READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST. Now, I'm going to read a list of services provided by the City of Cupertino: ( )5. For the following list of services, please tell me whether it is very important to you, somewhat important, not too important or not important at all. Here's the (first/next) one . (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Is this service very important, somewhat important, not too important or not important at all? (DON'T Very Swt. Not too Not READ) Imp. Imp. Imp. Imp. DK/NA ( )A. Cupertino's monthly newsletter, The Scene' 1 2 3 4 5 ()B. Police services 1 2 3 4 5 ( )C. City Recreation Services 1 2 3 4 5 ()D. Park and Picnic Area Availability -- 1 2 3 4 5 ()E. Quinlan Community Center Facilities 1 2 3 4 5 ()F. Garbage Collection 1 2 3 4 5 ( )G. Recycling Program 1 2 3 4 5 ( )H. Library Services 1 2 3 4 5 ( )I. Street Pavement Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )J. Street Sweeping Services 1 2 3 4 5 ( )K. Park and Picnic Area Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )L. Traffic Safety 1 2 3 4 5 ( )M. Street Tree Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )N. Economic Development Efforts 1 2 3 4 5 ( )O. Sidewalk Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )P. Median Strip Landscape Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( Q. The Government Meeting Channel 1 2 3 4 5 ( )R. Youth Sports Fields 1 2 3 4 5 ( )S. The Public Access Channel 1 2 3 4 5 ( )T. Senior Citizen programs 1 2 3 4 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-3 PROPRIETARY ( )6. For the following list of services, please tell me whether you are satisfied or dissatisfied with the job the City of Cupertino is doing to provide the service. Here's the (first/next) one: (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST AND ASK:) Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the city's performance in this area? (AFTER GETTING ANSWER, ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? ROTATE (DON'T Very Swt. Swt. Very READ) Sat. Sat. Dissat.Dissat. DK/NA ( )A. Cupertino's monthly newsletter, 'The Scene' 1 2 3 4 5 ( )B. Police services 1 2 3 4 5 ( )C. City Recreation Services 1 2 3 4 5 ()D. Park and Picnic Area Availability --- 1 2 3 4 5 ()E. Quinlan Community Center Facilities 1 2 3 4 5 ()F. Garbage Collection 1 2 3 4 5 ( )G. Recycling Program 1 2 3 4 5 ( )H. Library Services 1 2 3 4 5 ( O. Street Pavement Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )J. Street Sweeping Services 1 2 3 4 5 ()K. Park and Picnic Area Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )L. Traffic Safety 1 2 3 4 5 ()M. Street Tree Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )N. Economic Development Efforts 1 2 3 4 5 ( )O. Sidewalk Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ()P. Median Strip Landscape Maintenance 1 2 3 4 5 ( )Q. The Government Meeting Channel 1 2 3 4 5 ()R. Youth Sports Fields 1 2 3 4 5 ( )S. The Public Access Channel 1 2 3 4 5 ( )T. Senior Citizen programs 1 2 3 4 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-4 PROPRIETARY 7. Now I'm going to read a list of facilities located in the City of Cupertino. Please tell me whether or not you or anyone in your household has visited each facility in the last year. (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Have you or anyone in your household visited in the last year? ROTATE (DON'T READ) Yes No DK/NA ( )A. The Quinlan Community Center 1 2 3 ( )B. The Cupertino Public Library 1 2 3 ( )C. Cupertino Historical Museum 1 2 3 ( )D. City Hall 1 2 3 OE. Blackberry Farm 1 2 3 ()F. Cupertino Sports Center 1 2 3 ( )G. Memorial Park 1 2 3 ( )H. Senior Center 1 2 3 ( )I. McClellan Ranch Park 1 2 3 ( )J. Neighborhood parks 1 2 3 8. Now I would like to talk more specifically about the Cupertino Recreation Department which offers recreation activities and programs for the City of Cupertino. First, are you generally satisfied or dissatisfied with the recreation activities and programs offered by the Recreation Department? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (satisfied/dissatisfied) or somewhat (satisfied/dissatisfied)? Very satisfied 1 Somewhat satisfied 2 Somewhat dissatisfied 3 Very dissatisfied 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-5 PROPRIETARY 9. What activities offered by the Recreation Department do you or members of your household participate in most? (DON'T READ LIST - MULTIPLE RESPONSES PERMITTED) Adult Classes 1 Adult Sports Programs 2 Afterschool Enrichment 3 Aquatics 4 Day Camps 5 Fitness Programs 6 Golf Lessons 7 Nature Classes 8 Pre -School Programs 9 Senior Citizen Activities 10 Special Interest Classes 11 Tennis Lessons 12 Trips and Tours 13 Youth Classes 14 Youth Sports Programs 15 Other (SPECIFY ) 16 None 17 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 18 10. The costs associated with the classes offered by the Recreation Department range from $45 for a one-time afternoon program to around $100 for a weekly class that meets for eight weeks. There are also some specialty classes like child birth preparation, piano lessons and sailing that are slightly more expensive. In your opinion, are the costs for these classes reasonable or unreasonable for you? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be very (reasonable/unreasonable) or somewhat (reasonable/unreasonable)? Very reasonable 1 Somewhat reasonable 2 Somewhat unreasonable 3 Very unreasonable 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page B-6 PROPRIETARY 11. Do you think there is a need for additional teen programs in the City of Cupertino? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Definitely Yes 1 Probably Yes 2 Probably No 3 Definitely No 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 12. Now I'd like to talk about recreation facilities for teens in Cupertino. Do you think there is a need for a Teen Center in Cupertino? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Is that definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Definitely Yes 1 Probably Yes 2 Probably No 3 Definitely No 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 13. A Cupertino Teen Center would require a financial commitment from the City of Cupertino to possibly build and operate. Would you support or oppose using city money to provide a Teen Center? Support 1 Oppose 2 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3 14. Now I'd like to talk about some other facilities maintained by the City of Cupertino. The City of Cupertino is interested in making some changes to the Cupertino Public Library. One option would be to expand the current facility. Do you think there is a need to expand the Cupertino Public Library? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be definitely (yes/no) or probably (yes/no)? Definitely Yes 1 Probably Yes 2 Probably No 3 Definitely No 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-7 PROPRIETARY 15. An expansion of the Library would require a financial commitment from the City of Cupertino to possibly build and operate. Would you support or oppose using city money to oversee the expansion of the Cupertino Public Library? Support Oppose (DON'T READ) DK/NA 1 2 3 16. If the City of Cupertino decides to expand the library, voters may have the opportunity to vote on the expansion. As I read the following statements, please tell me if you would be more or Tess likely to vote for the expansion given the information. If you heard that after the expansion (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST) would you be more or less likely to vote to expand the library? (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK): Would that be much (more/less) likely or somewhat (more/less) likely? (REPEAT IN SEQUENCE UNTIL ALL ITEMS ARE READ) ROTATE Much Swt (DON'T Swt Much(DON'T More More READ) Less Less READ) Likely Likely No Eff. Likely Likely DK/NA ( )A. There would be more seats in the library 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )B. There would be more parking spaces 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )C. There would be more computers -1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )D. There would be a larger collection of non-English books 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )E. There would be a larger Community Room 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )F. There would be more programs for teens 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )G. There would be more programs for children 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( )H. There would be a larger collection of music CD's and videos to borrow 1 2 3 4 5 6 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8.8 PROPRIETARY 17. Now I would like to talk more specifically about law enforcement services in Cupertino. As you know, the city contracts with the Sheriff for law enforcement. Except for traffic violations, have you or anyone in your household had reason to contact a Deputy Sheriff in the past year? Yes 1 (ASK 18-A) N o 2 (GO TO 19) (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3 (GO TO 19) 18. I'd like you to consider the overall quality and effectiveness of a few areas of law enforcement services in Cupertino. Here's the (first/next) one: (READ CHECKED ITEM FIRST). Would you say the Cupertino Deputy Sheriffs are doing an excellent, good, poor or very poor job in this area? (DON'T Very READ) Excel. Good Poor Poor DK/NA ( )A. The DARE and other school -based programs 1 2 3 4 5 ()B. Traffic enforcement 1 2 3 4 5 ( )C. Overall response time 1 2 3 4 5 ( )D. Juvenile Early Intervention Programs 1 2 3 4 5 ()E. Sheriff City Hall Service Center---1 2 3 4 5 ()F. Courtesy towards citizens 1 2 3 4 5 ( )G. Improving race relations 1 2 3 4 5 ( )H. Neighborhood safety 1 2 3 4 5 19. In general, do you feel crime in the City of Cupertino has increased, decreased or stayed about the same in the past five years? Increased 1 Decreased 2 Stayed about same 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page B-9 PROPRIETARY 20. In general, how would you rate race and ethnic relations in the City of Cupertino? Would you say they are excellent, good, poor or very poor'? Excellent 1 Good 2 Poor 3 Very poor 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 (DON'T READ) Refused 6 21. Approximately 30 percent of Cupertino residents are members of ethnic minority groups. How has this increase in diversity in Cupertino affected the feelings you have toward people of other races? Has the diversity made you more resentful and closed or more sympathetic and open? More resentful/closed 1 More sympathetic/open 2 (DON'T READ) No change in how I feel 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 (DON'T READ) Refused 5 22. As I read the following statement, please tell me if you agree or disagree: "The City of Cupertino is doing enough to ensure that members of all ethnic groups feel welcome in Cupertino." (GET ANSWER, THEN ASK:) Would that be strongly (agree/disagree) or somewhat (agree/disagree)? Strongly agree 1 Somewhat agree 2 Somewhat disagree 3 Strongly disagree 4 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 5 23. The next few questions focus on economic development in and around Cupertino. First, do you think there is too much commercial growth, about the right amount or not enough commercial growth in Cupertino? Too much growth 1 About the right amount 2 Not enough growth 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-10 PROPRIETARY 24. What about residential growth? Do you think there is too much residential growth, about the right amount or not enough residential growth in Cupertino? Too much growth 1 About the right amount 2 Not enough growth 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 25. What information sources do you use to find out about City news, information and programming? (DON'T READ LIST, RECORD FIRST TWO RESPONSES). Cupertino Courier 1 Cupertino Scene 2 Cupertino Website 3 Flyers or posters around town 4 Internet 5 Local cable station 6 Non -English media 7 Radio 8 San Francisco Chronicle 9 San Jose Mercury News 10 Television 11 'The Profile' 12 Other (Do not specify) 13 None 14 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 15 26. Do you or anyone in your household have access to the Internet? Yes 1 No 2 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3 27. Have you or anyone in your household ever visited the City of Cupertino website? Yes 1 No 2 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page 8-11 PROPRIETARY Now for some background questions for comparison purposes. A. In what year were you bom? 1974 and after 1 1969 to 1973 2 1964 to 1968 3 1959 to 1963 4 1954 to 1958 5 1949 to 1953 6 1944 to 1948 7 1939 to 1943 8 1934 to 1938 9 1933 and before 10 (DON'T READ) Refused 11 B. Do you own or rent your home? Own 1 Rent 2 (DON'T READ) Refused 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 C. What ethnic group do you consider yourself a part of or feel closest to? (IF HESITATE, READ): Asian Indian 1 African American or Black 2 Cambodian 3 Chinese 4 Filipino 5 Japanese 6 Korean 7 Latino or Hispanic 8 Laotian 9 Pacific Islander 10 Thai 11 Vietnamese 12 White 13 Other 14 (DON'T READ) Refused 15 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 199E Page 8-12 PROPRIETARY D. Does anyone in your household not speak English as their primary language? Yes 1 No 2 (DON'T READ) Refused 3 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 4 E. Do you live east or west of De Anza Boulevard? East of De Anza 1 West of De Anza 2 (DON'T READ) DK/NA 3 F. RESPONDENT'S ZIP CODE OF RESIDENCE NAME PHONE ADDRESS DATE OF INTERVIEW VALIDATED BY INTERVIEWER: NUMBER: Thank you so much for participating! G. Respondent's Sex: Male 1 Female 2 City of Cupertino Resident Satisfaction Survey Godbe Research and Analysis January 1998 Page B-13 e