priority - kcmo.govkcmo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/kcstathealthycommunities... · priority...

PRIORITY

Reduce Illegal Dumping

INDICATORS 1. % of citizens satisfied

with cleanliness of city streets and public areas

2. Citywide and Neighborhood Litter Index

3. Illegal Dumping tonnage

4. Neighborhood Cleanups

5. Recycling tonnage

2

ASSESSING PROGRESS ON ILLEGAL DUMPING

Outcome Indicators (How are we doing?)

Output Indicators (What are we doing?)

Citizen satisfaction with cleanliness

Illegal dumping prosecutions

Litter index Illegal dumping prosecution

disposition rates

Tonnage of illegal dumping cleaned

Neighborhood clean-up events

Adopt-A-Street participants

Recycling tonnage/revenue

Recycling participation

3

CITIZEN SATISFACTION WITH CLEANLINESS OF CITY STREETS AND PUBLIC AREAS

30% 36% 38% 33% 36% 38% 38%

46% 46%

32% 32% 32% 36% 34% 34% 34%

32% 33%

38% 32% 30% 31% 31% 28% 28%

22% 21%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2005 2006 2007 2008 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY2014Mid-Year

Satisfied/Very Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied/Very Dissatisfied

Positive Trend:

Source: Citizen Survey, 2005 through FY2014 Q2 4

2013 LITTER INDEX

1.69

1.47

1.59

1.47

1.50

1.50

1.39

1.46

1.47

1.44

1.45

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Target = <1.75

Positive Trend:

Source: Keep Kansas City Beautiful Litter Index 5

LITTER INDEX NEIGHBORHOOD BRIGHT SPOTS

Bridging the Gap Neighborhood

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Chouteau 1.66 1.38 1.38 1.06 1.62 1.53 1.36 1.38 1.50 1.07 1.21

Westside/ Downtown

1.66 1.59 1.46 1.55 1.73 1.27 1.36 1.26 1.59 1.40 1.40

Martin City 2.11 2.06 1.76 1.47 1.86 1.88 1.31 1.77 1.63 1.03 1.41


LITTER INDEX NEIGHBORHOODS TO MONITOR

Bridging the Gap Neighborhood

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Gashland 1.08 1.31 1.32 1.27 1.33 1.11 1.37 1.11 1.06 1.15 1.53

Birmingham Bottoms*

1.86 1.03 1.78 1.30 1.21 1.20 1.21 1.60 1.24 1.22 1.86

Old Northeast 1.90 1.87 2.26 1.43 1.58 1.23 1.57 1.67 2.09 2.10 1.82

CID/West Bottoms

2.20 1.93 1.82 1.62 1.98 1.34 1.53 1.58 1.82 1.88 1.74

Hickman Mills* 2.26 1.15 1.29 1.34 1.49 1.37 1.63 1.65 1.17 1.41 1.87

Blue Valley 2.52 2.38 2.45 2.67 1.93 1.42 1.45 1.67 1.58 1.87 2.09

* = Neighborhood was on “Bright Spot” list after 2012 results


CAMERA INVENTORY

Illegal Dumping Camera Status

19 Cameras currently installed

13 New cameras to be installed as replacements or at selective locations

16 Existing cameras stolen or vandalized since March 2013

8

ILLEGAL DUMPING INVESTIGATIONS BY EVIDENCE TYPE

6

29

59 58 2

30

52

2

5

11

4

3

6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2010 2011 2012 2013Calendar Year

Video

Eyewitness

Mail

Camera

Source: NHS Illegal Dumping Database

Positive Trend:

9

2013 ILLEGAL DUMPING DISPOSITIONS BY EVIDENCE TYPE

55% 29%

16%

Camera

Guilty or Bench Warrant

Not Guilty or Dismissed

Disposition Pending or Unknown

34%

10%

56%

Mail

47%

22%

34%

All Evidence Types

2012 Guilty Rates:

85% 80% 80%

Source: NHS Illegal Dumping Database 10

ILLEGAL DUMPING ABATEMENT AND NEIGHBORHOOD CLEAN-UPS

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Neighborhood Clean-ups

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Additional tonnage collected throughspecial projects*Tons of illegal dumping collected

* Note: in FY12, SW began tracking collection separately for other activities (i.e. sweeps)

Positive Trend:

Source: Public Works-Solid Waste 11

ADOPT-A-STREET LOCATIONS - NORTH

Source: Public Works-Solid Waste 12

ADOPT-A-STREET LOCATIONS - CENTRAL

13

ADOPT-A-STREET LOCATIONS - SOUTH

14

RECYCLING REVENUE AND TONNAGE TRENDS

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

$700,000

$800,000

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

FY11 FY12 FY13

Re

cycl

ing

Re

ve

nu

e (

Cu

rbsi

de

)

Re

cycl

ing

To

nn

ag

e

(Cu

rbsi

de

an

d R

ecy

cle

Ce

nte

rs)

Curbside Revenues Recycling Tonnage

FY14 YTD Recycling Tonnage = 10,272 Source: Public Works-Solid Waste

Watch Trend

15

RECYCLING REVENUE PER TON

$32

$18

$7

$61

$34 $31

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

$50

$60

$70

FY12 FY13 FY14 (To Date)

Revenue/Ton (Contracted Pick-up/Town & County)

Revenue/Ton (City Pick-up/Deffenbaugh)

Source: Public Works-Solid Waste

Watch Trend

16

RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING PROFILE – WHO RECYCLES IN KC?

Residents who recycle weekly are more likely to:

• Have household income in the range of $60,000-$100,000+

• Be between 25-54 years old

• Own their home

• Want to receive information via city website

Source: Citizen Survey, FY2013

80% of residents indicate they use curbside recycling weekly

Residents who never recycle are more likely to:

• Have household income below $60,000

• Rent their home

• Want to receive information via city magazine by mail

17

CASE STUDY: RAT CONTROL TREATMENT REQUESTS

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Jan

Fe

b

Ma

r

Ap

r

Ma

y

Jun

Jul

Au

g

Se

p

Oct

No

v

De

c

Jan

Fe

b

Ma

r

Ap

r

Ma

y

Jun

Jul

Au

g

Se

p

Oct

No

v

De

c

2012 2013

Average requests in 2012/2013 = 1,020 annually Peak season is June/July through November

Source: Peoplesoft CRM (311 Service Request Database)

Watch Trend

18

ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ILLEGAL DUMPING AND RAT CONTROL

Gregory and The Paseo Blue Hills

Points = Rat Control Treatment Requests, July-November 2012 and 2013 Heat Map = Illegal Dumping Service Requests 2012 and 2013

Source: KCMO Data Catalog (data.kcmo.org) 19

PRIORITY Emphasize the focus on

the customer across all City services; engage citizens in a meaningful dialogue about City services, processes, and priorities using strategic communication methods.

INDICATORS 1. % of citizens

satisfied with solid waste services

2. % of customers satisfied with 311 solid waste service request outcomes

20

CITIZEN SATISFACTION WITH SOLID WASTE SERVICES

82%

79%

61%

83%

81%

60%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Trash collection services

Curbside recycling

Bulky item pick-up service

FY2013 FY2014 Mid-Year

Source: Citizen Survey, FY13-14 21

SOLID WASTE 311 MATRIX – MAY-DECEMBER 2013

Bulky Validation

Bulky Miss

Dead Animal

Illegal Dumping

Trash & Recycling

City

Recycling & Trash North

Trash & Recycling

South

SW Admin

Leaf and Brush Miss (WSD)

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

40% 60% 80% 100%

% o

f C

ust

om

ers

Sa

tisf

ied

% of Cases Closed in Designated Timeframe

Av

era

ge

Tim

eli

ne

ss

Average Satisfaction

Source: Peoplesoft CRM (311 Service Request System) and 311 Customer Survey 22

PRIORITY Ensure that any City or

shared community animal shelters meet industry standards and work with the community to address issues of pet population and responsible pet ownership

INDICATORS 1. Live release rate

from City animal shelter

2. Pets with licenses, tags, chips

23

OUTCOMES FOR ANIMALS IMPOUNDED AT SHELTER

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Ma

y '1

1Ju

ne

'11

July

'11

Au

g '1

1S

ep

t '1

1O

ct '1

1N

ov

'11

De

c '1

1Ja

n '1

2F

eb

'12

Ma

r '1

2A

pr

'12

Ma

y '1

2Ju

ne

'12

July

'12

Au

g '1

2S

ep

t '1

2O

ct '1

2N

ov

'12

De

c '1

2Ja

n '1

3F

eb

'13

Ma

r '1

3A

pr

'13

Ma

y '1

3Ju

ne

'13

July

'13

Au

g '1

3S

ep

t '1

3O

ct '1

3N

ov

'13

De

c '1

3

Adopted Returned to Owner Transferred to Rescue Group Euthanized

90% live release = “no kill”

Source: PetPoint (Animal Shelter Mgmt System), via KC Pet Project

Positive Trend:

24

TAG-LICENSE-CHIP CAMPAIGN OUTCOMES

Service

Units sold by Spay Neuter KC in 2012 w/o TLC Campaign

(January – December 2012)

Units sold by Spay Neuter KC during

2013 TLC Campaign (January –

December 2013)

City License

1,810 4,020

Rabies 5,686 8,542

Chips 976 6,405

Source: Animal Health and Public Safety

2013 Goal = 10,000 combined License, Rabies and Chips

25

FREE RIDE HOME

Number of Animals taking advantage of Free Ride Home since January 2013

Source: Animal Health and Public Safety 26

SNAPSHOT COUNT OF PETS WITH LICENSES

Publicity campaign

2004

Introduction of 3-year license

2006

Fee increase of $3/year

2007

Nationwide downturn in licensing and adoption

2008

Enforcement campaign

2010

TLC Campaign

2012/13

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Cats

Dogs

10% of pets

Watch Trend

Source: Pet Data 27

LICENSE SALES BY LOCATION

6912 6106

11050 10013 11241 9189 9618 9322 10782 9200 9836 10558

3439 2470

3874 2621

3228 3701 2625 2223

2679 2026 1788

2895

10913 10819

13803

13251 12500

11356 10287

9249 9156

8811 8581 7179

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013(thruNov)

PetData

Shelter

Clinic

Source: Pet Data

Watch Trend

28

PETSMART PITBULL GRANT

• PetSmart grant ($100,000) covers cost of spay/neuter, vaccination and licensing services for “pitbull” breeds

• Of the almost 4,900 dogs impounded in 2012, 19% (910) were pitbulls.

• Goal is to reach 850 pitbulls with grant

• KCMO is contracting with three vendors to provide these services under grant

• Efforts are targeted in zip codes 64130 and 64132

• 36% (324) of the impounded pitbulls came from these zip codes

Vaccination clinics coming to 64130 and 64132 this spring/summer!

29

PRIORITY Prevent threats to public

safety and animal welfare via efficient and effective animal control response and operations.

INDICATORS 1. Response time for

complaints

2. % of customers satisfied with 311 animal control service request outcomes

30

RESPONSE TIME FOR ANIMAL CONTROL Positive Trend:

14.9 14.1

15.7

13.4 13.7 14.0 13.0

13.9 14.5 14.6 14.5 14.7

15.3

13.7 14.2 14.6 15.2 14.7 15.0

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

Ma

y-1

2

Jun

-12

Jul-

12

Au

g-1

2

Se

p-1

2

Oct

-12

No

v-1

2

De

c-1

2

Jan

-13

Fe

b-1

3

Ma

r-1

3

Ap

r-1

3

Ma

y-1

3

Jun

-13

Jul-

13

Au

g-1

3

Se

p-1

3

Oct

-13

No

v-1

3

Median Response Time (Minutes - Dispatch to Arrival)

Target (<15 minutes)

Source: Tiberon System, KCPD 31

311 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION WITH ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICE REQUESTS

Positive Trend:

82% 84% 86% 87% 85% 85% 84% 86% 87% 86%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 Mid-Year

Quality of Service Timeliness of Service

Source: 311 Customer Survey 32

311 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION BY SERVICE REQUEST TYPE (MAY-DECEMBER 2013)

50%

79% 79% 86% 91% 93% 96% 100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Satisfaction with Quality of Service

Source: 311 Customer Survey

From May – December 2013, Animal At Large calls accounted for 41% of Animal Control service requests 33

ANIMAL CONTROL 311 MATRIX – MAY-DECEMBER 2013

Animal At Large

Animal Bite

Animal Control Admin

Animal Investigation

Barking Dog

Injury or Cruelty

Stray Animal Confined Wildlife

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

40% 60% 80% 100%

% o

f C

ust

om

ers

Sa

tisf

ied


Av

era

ge

Tim

eli

ne

ss

Source: Peoplesoft CRM (311 Service Request System) and 311 Customer Survey


34



INDICATORS 1. Animal Control

Supervisor QA Survey Results

35

ANIMAL HEALTH SUPERVISOR QUALITY CONTROL

Satisfied 80%

Neutral 6%

Dissatisfied 10%

Don't Know/No Comment

4% Total of 285

cases randomly

reviewed by Animal Health

supervisors in 2013

Source: Animal Health notes in Peoplesoft CRM (311 Service Request System) 36

UPDATE ON STAFFING AND OFFICER TRAINING

• July 17 & 24, 2013: Animal Control Officers and Supervisors trained in evidence collection and report writing

• Summer 2013: Defensive driving training for Animal Control Officers

37

PRIORITY

Encourage active living and healthy eating via strategies in the KC Community Health Improvement Plan (KC CHIP)

INDICATORS 1. Citizen satisfaction

with City efforts toward active living

2. # of community gardens through Healthy Eating Active Living grant

3. Bike mode share

38

WHAT IS KC CHIP? • The Kansas City Community

Health Improvement Plan (KC CHIP) is a five-year community-wide strategic plan that focuses on the improvement of health in Kansas City

• Created though 10 interactive community meetings, engaging over 95 agencies (churches, neighborhoods, non-profits, hospitals, clinics and community health agencies)

Current Council Priority focuses on: Encouraging active living and healthy eating

KC CHIP targets six strategic issues: • Ensuring access to clinical

preventive services, illness care, and public health services/interventions

• Healthy equity and social determinants of health

• Ensuring a safe and healthy community environment

• Ensuring every child has a healthy start

• Encouraging active living and healthy eating

• Tobacco free living

39

CITIZEN SATISFACTION WITH ENCOURAGING HEALTHY EATING, EXERCISE AND NON-SMOKING

51% 55%

33% 31%

16% 14%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

FY2013 FY2014 Mid-Year

Dissatisfied

Neutral

Satisfied

Source: Citizen Survey, FY2013 - FY2014

Watch Trend

40

GOALS AND STRATEGIES FOR HEALTHY EATING AND ACTIVE LIVING (HEAL)

• Advance policy, environmental, and system changes promoting healthy eating and active living in our communities

• Identify and mobilize community resources to increase availability of supermarkets in underserved areas

• Improve availability of affordable healthier food options using activities such as farmers markets, urban agriculture

• Support creation and/or enhancement of places for physical activity

• Promote livable streets

• Advance policy, environmental, and system changes promoting healthy eating and active living in our organizations

• Work with employers, faith-based agencies and schools to implement policies/practices that promote access to healthy foods and beverages and physical activity

41

CORNER STORES INITIATIVE

• Working with two stores: Indiana Market (37th and Indiana) and Shayan’s EZ Shop (85th and Woodland) – stocking fresh produce

• Kickoff event was held in November, where neighbors could sample a recipe made from produce sold at the corner stores.

• Goal for 2014 is to add 2-3 stores through a neighborhood nomination process, which begins in January

42

COMMUNITY GARDENS THROUGH COMMUNITY TRANSFORMATION GRANT (HEALTH DEPT)

CTG Goal for KCMO: 6 new gardens by end September 2013; 25 for all of Jackson County by September 2016

https://data.kcmo.org/Food/Community-Gardens-and-Farmer-s-Markets/smcx-sth3

Source: Health Department 43














URBAN AGRICULTURE PROPOSED PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Health Economic • # pounds of food produced

by farm/garden • $ total value of food

produced

• # of CSAs linked to the farm/garden

• $ total value per sq ft of produce

• # of participants in CSAs linked to the farm/garden

• #, % total revenue generated from sale of food

• # of people engaged in farming/gardening on the farm/garden

• # hours of volunteer-time contributed to the farms/gardens

• # of total person-hours spent farming/gardening per year

44

URBAN AGRICULTURE PROPOSED PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Social Ecological • # of farmer’s markets farms/gardens sell in • # of school students participating in food

system ecology programs

• # of youth participating in farming/gardening

• Energy/Water consumption

• # of total youth person-hours spent working on farm/garden per year

• #, % sq ft of land/lots that could potentially grow food that are used for growing food

• #, % of youth farm/garden trains in job skills

• Pounds of food waste processed for compost/collected

• #, % youth participating in programs who graduate from high school

• Sq ft of permeable surface in farm/garden

• #, % youth participating who report having at least one good relationship with an adult other than parent

• Lead levels in farm/garden’s soil

• #, % youth indicating positive attitude change and/or aspirations related to participation

• Habitat improvement/biodiversity/ecological connectivity measures 45

URBAN AGRICULTURAL ZONES

Ordinance #130983 to create Urban Agricultural Zone Advisory Commission will be introduced January 8th

• Advises the City on policies for Urban Ag Zones authorized by 262.900 RSMo

• Consists of 9 members appointed by Mayor

• Recommendations introduced no later than April 10, 2014.

46

OAK WOLF GARAGE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

Update on restaurant spaces under Wolf Garage: Request for Proposal has been issued that gives preference to purveyors of healthy food options

47









48

HEALTHY VENDING IN CITY OF KCMO AND BEYOND City of Kansas City – Internal Efforts Toward Healthy Vending

The Health Care Trust voted unanimously in favor of including these criteria in a draft resolution being prepared by Health Department staff

Healthy Vending Sourcing Committee will begin meeting late January 2014

Efforts Toward Employer Healthy Vending

• Assisted Children’s Mercy Hospital with assessments of vending machines, a survey and development of criteria for new snack vending contract

• Goal for 2013 was 5 employers signed up; did not meet target. Goal for 2016 is 12.

• 2014: Changing strategies and updating toolkit to recruit more employers!

49









50

PROPOSED PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR BIKING

Output Outcome

Infrastructure Development • Miles of facilities by type • Number of bike-friendly projects • Number of existing and new

bicycle parking spaces

Citizen perception • Safety in riding • Amount and connectivity of network • Quality of facility design and

maintenance • Number of bike parking spaces • KC as a bike-friendly city

Bike Traffic • Intersection counts (PW) • Other volume counts (Volunteers) • As share of commuters (ACS)

Safety outcomes • Crashes (MARC) • Fatalities (MARC) • Children receiving bicycling

education

Other Areas (Potential Case Studies) • Economic Impact • Health Impact • Tourism • Children and Youth

51

STREET OVERLAY 2013

• +3.4 lane miles of sharrows/11.4 lane miles total

• +3.6 lane miles of bike lanes/29.6 lane miles total

• 33% of 600 mile on-street system constructed

• 28% of 230 mile trail system constructed

Source: Public Works Department 52

BIKE MODE SHARE (ACS CENSUS) Positive Trend:

Source: ACS Census, via Public Works Department

1990 - 2000 2005 2010 – 2011 2012

.1% share of bicycle commuters 0.0% share of bicycle commuters .3% share of bicycle commuters .4% share of bicycle commuters

2011 2012

KC ranked #59 out of 70 largest cities in the US for share of bicycle commuters KC ranked #49 out of 70 largest cities in the US for share of bicycle commuters

2005 – 2012 2011 – 2012

1761.4% increase in bicycle commuting in KC 42.4% increase in bicycle commuting in KC

53

GREEN LANE PROJECT 2.0 APPLICATION

What is GLP?

• National initiative to help six US cities make their streets work better for everyone by engaging a multi-disciplinary network of leading cities to build better bike lanes.

What services will GLP provide KC?

• Technical, financial and strategic resources and opportunities to network with peers and international experts on study tours and gain national recognition as a leader in a rapidly evolving field.

What is the Focus City Selection Criteria?

• High profile protected bike lane project constructed 2014-15

• Strong political support

• Supportive and engaged city transportation staff

• Evidence of strong community support

• Evidence of support from business community

• Recent successes that demonstrate momentum 54

GREEN LANE PROJECT 2.0 APPLICATION

What is required of KC if selected as GLP city?

• Participate in monthly conference calls

• Recruit members for participation in study tours

• Produce report at end of 2014 and 2015

• Cover airfare for international study tours

What are the benefits of a focus city?

• At least 2 visits from GLP team experts to assess conditions and engage leaders

• Professional peer exchange on best practices for protected bike lanes

• Collaboration with country’s leading innovators

• Participation and travel scholarships to GLP domestic workshops

• Participation in international study tours to Netherlands and Denmark

• Access to modest grant funds

• Role in developing research priorities and projects

• National publicity and recognition as a leading city

55

BIKE KC SURVEY: 3 WORDS TO DESCRIBE CYCLING IN KANSAS CITY

Bike KC Survey

respondents = 589

56 Source: Bike KC Survey

yes, 500

no, 70

yes, 544

no, 26

BIKE KC SURVEY: BIKE OWNERSHIP/ABILITY

D O Y O U

O W N A B I K E ?

D O Y O U C U R R E N T L Y

R I D E ?

15

75

235

243

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Not confident

Somewhat confident

Confident

Very confident

Number of Respondents

How would you describe your bicycling abilities?


BIKE KC SURVEY: CYCLISTS LOCATIONS AND COMMUTES

64111, 79

64110, 53

64113, 47

64108, 30

64114, 29 64105,

25 64112,

21

All Other,

296

Respondents Home Zip

64108, 82

64111, 73

64106, 49

64105, 32

64116, 21

64110, 18 64112, 16

All Other, 265

Respondents Work Zip

71

137

169

182

0 50 100 150 200

1 mile or less

5-10 miles

10 plus miles

1-5 miles

Number of respondents

How far is your one-way commute to work/school?


BIKE KC SURVEY: ROUTE FACTORS

0 100 200 300 400 500

Someone to ride with

Low posted speed limits

Signed bike routes

Access to shared use trails

Most direct route

Wide driving lanes

Bike lanes and/or sharrow markings

Low traffic streets

What helps you determine a route for your bike trip? (select all that apply)

Source: Bike KC Survey 59

BIKE KC SURVEY: RIDERSHIP FACTORS

4

7

15

26

78

93

105

116

129

138

241

435

0 200 400 600

I understood the rules of the road better

There was a bike shop near me

I owned a bike

There was training for how to ride in traffic

I felt more confident riding on city streets

Police enforced traffic laws more

Cars slowed down

Destinations were closer to where I live

There were more bike racks to lock my bike

Intersections were safer

There were more shared use trails

There were more bike lanes and sharrows

I would ride my bike more often if: (select three)


BIKE KC SURVEY: KC POLICY PRIORITIES

60

172

251

255

313

391

487

0 200 400 600

Emergency access marking system on trails

Collect data on bicycle usage on regular basis

City sponsored encouragement events like Ride the Fountains…etc.

Roadway safety enforcement by KC PoliceDepartment

Public awareness and education efforts about newbicycle facilities and how to use them

Apply for federal/state grant programs to leveragelocal funds to construct new bike facilities

Include bike facilities in roadway improvementprojects

What should be KC’s policy priorities to support a bicycle friendly community? (select all that apply)


37% 40% 40%

36% 36%

44% 46% 53% 54%

32% 31% 30% 33% 33%

33% 31% 30% 28%

31% 29% 31% 31% 30%

23% 23% 18% 18%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Dissatisfied

Neutral

Satisfied

CITIZEN SATISFACTION WITH BIKING/WALKING TRAILS

62

Source: Citizen Survey, 2005 – FY2014 Mid-Year

Positive Trend:



INDICATORS 1. % of citizens

satisfied with Health Dept services

2. % of customers satisfied with 311 service request outcomes for Health Dept

63

CITIZEN SATISFACTION: HEALTH DEPARTMENT SERVICES

50%

51%

56%

56%

57%

59%

52%

55%

64%

59%

62%

67%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Protecting the public from exposure toenvironmental risks (air pollution,

lead)

Encouraging healthy eating and activeliving

Protecting the public from new orunusual health threats

Guarding against food poisoning

Communicating about public healthconcerns

Preventing the spread of infectiousdiseases

FY2013

FY2014Mid-Year

Source: Citizen Survey, FY2013- FY2014 Mid-Year 64

311 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: HEALTH SERVICES (MAY-DECEMBER 2013)

8 9 88

1 1 6

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Noise Control Food Protection Rat Control

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Source: Citizen Survey, 2005 – FY2014 Mid-Year 65

HEALTH DEPT 311 MATRIX – MAY-DECEMBER 2013

Food Protection

Noise Control

Rat Control

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

% o

f C

ust

om

ers

Sa

tisf

ied


Av

era

ge

Tim

eli

ne

ss


Source: Peoplesoft CRM (311 Service Request System) and 311 Customer Survey 66

Final Thoughts or Questions?

priority - kcmo.govkcmo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/kcstathealthycommunities... · priority...

Documents