03.20.19 HAB Community Survey Presentation2018
Community Survey
Results
RYAN HANSCHEN
ENGAGEMENT SPECIALIST
Introduction
•City conducts this survey roughly every two years
•Questions on quality of life, satisfaction with service delivery, priorities for government, confidence in
govt, communication and engagement, use of facilities and programs, etc.
•Surveys in 2016 and 2018 based on the National Citizen Survey, which 600 other communities in the
U.S. use; this allows us to benchmark ourselves
•Because nearly all questions asked in 2016 were also asked in 2018, this year’s results give us a chance
to observe trends in our own community’s perceptions
•Council received these reports, along with a summary memo from staff, on Friday. A discussion is
scheduled for the Jan. 22 Study Session
Why this survey matters
•Great opportunity for us to understand community perceptions about our organization as a whole
•“Treasure trove,” with at least one indicator to interest and inform nearly every work area
•Includes both service assessments and how much our community trusts us; data shows places where
we are going great and places we could do better
•Leveraging this resource is consistent with our desired city culture:
o Continuous learning and improvement
o Emphasis on using data to evaluate ourselves, as a performance management tool and as a way
to recognize successes and progress
o Commitment that if we ask our community for feedback, we will use it
Methodology
•Statistically valid survey conducted in September and October 2018
•6,000 households randomly selected to participate to ensure the results reflect a
representative cross-section of Boulder
•Half of households received paper survey, other half received invitation to take the
online survey
•Total of 1,260 residents responded (21% response rate)
Positive Indicators
•Boulder continues to score very well as a place to live –90%
•Residents who felt they would like to remain in Boulder for the next five years –80%
•Parks/Open Space and Libraries each received particularly high ratings –95%
•The city received very high marks for customer service –86%
•Higher ratings than benchmark cities
•Health, recreation, and fitness
•Culture and education
•Mobility options for cycling, walking, and public transit
Challenges/Opportunities for Improvement
•Housing and affordability, more generally
o Only 9% rated cost of living as excellent or good
o Only 8% gave availability of affordable housing positive marks
o Varied of housing options was considered excellent or good by fewer than 20%
o Cost stress is high
o Ratings related to affordable quality food decreased from 2016
Challenges/Opportunities for Improvement
•Tension over transportation goals/expectations
o Travel by bicycle and foot were rated as excellent or good by nearly 90%, path and
walking trails were rated positively by even more (95%)
o Public transportation ratings were significantly higher than national benchmarks
o But traffic flow, travel by car and public parking received positive ratings from
much lower percentages (30 to 40%); and ratings related to ease of travel by car
decreased since 2016
Challenges/Opportunities for Improvement
•Crime prevention and safety perceptions
o Positive ratings for “overall safety,” “safe neighborhood,” and “safe
downtown/commercial area” remained steady between 2016 and 2018, and
police service received an 82 percent positive rating
o However, satisfaction with crime prevention dropped by 5 percent (from 75 to 70)
o And there was a 10 percent increase in “household member was a victim of crime
in Boulder) and a 5 percent increase in “reported a crime to the police in
Boulder”)
Confidence in Government
•With the exception of customer service, some of these scores may seem low
•But NRC tells us they are similar to national benchmark
•And there are signs of improvement!
Indicator % positive in 2016 % positive in 2018
Overall direction of the city 46 percent 50 percent
Welcoming citizen involvement 55 percent 59 percent
Confidence in city government 50 percent 54 percent
City acting in best interest of community 50 percent 56 percent
Being honest 56 percent 60 percent
Gathering feedback from residents on new policies or
programs 50 percent 55 percent
Equity
Participants who designated themselves as Hispanic or another race gave a significant
lower percentage of positive marks than white respondents for a number of indicators:
•Opportunities to participate in community matters
•Government being honest
•Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds
•Neighborliness of residents in Boulder
•Overall customer service by Boulder employees
Equity
Participants who designated themselves as Hispanic or another race gave a significant
lower percentage of positive marks than white respondents for a number of indicators:
•Employment opportunities
•Shopping opportunities
•Ability to start or grow a business in Boulder
•Opportunities to participate in social events and activities
•Availability of affordable quality health care
•Availability of affordable quality mental health care
Equity
Hispanic or other races gave a significant lower percentage of positive marks than white
respondents to the following public safety services:
•Police/sheriff services
•Ambulance or emergency medical services
•Emergency preparedness
•Crime prevention
Equity
Lower-income residents ranked Boulder significantly lower:
•As a place to raise children
•In terms of ease of getting to places
•In overall confident in Boulder government
•In whether they have attended a city-sponsored event
•On their neighborhood as a place to live as compared to Boulder as a place to live
Questions and Group Discussion