Okaloosa County Citizen Satisfaction Survey 2009

Similar documents
Community Survey Results

Health Insurance Coverage in the District of Columbia

Citizens Health Care Working Group. Greenville, Mississippi Listening Sessions. April 18, Final Report

CITIZEN PERSPECTIVE Citizen Survey. Survey conducted by Prairie Research Associates May 2017

Results from the 2009 Virgin Islands Health Insurance Survey

City of Alamosa Customer Satisfaction and Residents Priorities Survey October Final Descriptive Results

Kansas Speaks 2012 Statewide Public Opinion Survey

Raising the New Mexico Minimum Wage

Consumer Perceptions and Reactions to the CARD Act

Pulse of Southern Maryland Fall 2016 Presidential Outlook

THE STATE OF WORKING ALABAMA

COMMUNITY SURVEY FOR LAKE BLUFF SCHOOL DISTRICT 65

Boomers at Midlife. The AARP Life Stage Study. Wave 2

February 24, 2014 Media Contact: Joanna Norris, Associate Director Department of Public Relations (904)

2014 Citizen Survey. Prepared for: Prince William County. Prepared by: ORC International, Inc. September, PRIVATE complies with ISO 20252

Jamie Wagner Ph.D. Student University of Nebraska Lincoln

Population & Demographic Analysis

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS POLL CONDUCTED BY IPSOS-PUBLIC AFFAIRS RELEASE DATE: AUGUST 19, 2004 PROJECT # REGISTERED VOTERS/PARTY IDENTIFICATION

The Financial Capability of Young Adults A Generational View

2007 Minnesota Department of Revenue Taxpayer Satisfaction with the Filing Process

CITY OF DE PERE CITY SERVICES STUDY 2014 CONDUCTED BY THE ST. NORBERT COLLEGE STRATEGIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Results by Oversampled Audiences June 2014

California Dreaming or California Struggling?

Trends. o The take-up rate (the A T A. workers. Both the. of workers covered by percent. in Between cent to 56.5 percent.

City of San Rafael: 2011 City Satisfaction Survey Topline Report March 2011

Citizens Health Care Working Group. Hattiesburg, Mississippi Listening Session. March 30, Final Report

City of Sugar Land Community Survey. Prepared by:

UNEMPLOYMENT RATES IMPROVING IN THE DISTRICT By Caitlin Biegler

Technical Report Series

CENTER FOR APPLIED RURAL INNOVATION

Fact Sheet. Health Insurance Coverage in Minnesota, 2001 vs February Changes in Health Insurance Coverage and Uninsurance

QUALITY OF LIFE AND COMMUNITY

LiveWell Columbia Project Community Assessment Snapshot

Survey of Opinions of Alabama Citizens Related to Alabama Water Policy, Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM)

July Sub-group Audiences Report

Poverty in the United Way Service Area

TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 11 (5 TH EDITION) THE POPULATION OF SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN PRELIMINARY DRAFT SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

Health Insurance Coverage in Oklahoma: 2008

University of Minnesota

One Quarter Of Public Reports Having Problems Paying Medical Bills, Majority Have Delayed Care Due To Cost. Relied on home remedies or over thecounter

Annual Employee Survey

Enrollment Type. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Fox Valley

FULL-TIME PAID POSITIONS ONLY

La Plata County Ballot Measure Poll May 2015

New Braunfels, TX. Technical Appendices DRAFT 2017

Mid - City Industrial

Sarasota County. Citizen Opinion Survey

Enrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Marathon County. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type

Enrollment Type. UW Colleges Campus Profile: UW Manitowoc. Proportion of Non AAS Students by Enrollment Type

ASSOCIATED PRESS-LIFEGOESSTRONG.COM BOOMERS SURVEY CONDUCTED BY KNOWLEDGE NETWORKS March 16, 2011

INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT (IDA) APPLICATION. AGENCY INFORMATION Regional Communty Action Agency

Seek, Test, Treat and Retain for Vulnerable Populations: Data Harmonization Measure

Long-Term Carein Connecticut:ASurvey

KENTUCKY BOARD of EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

California Dreaming or California Struggling?

Office of Health Plan Policy and Research. Statewide Household Survey on Health Care. Summary Report

The Morning Call / Muhlenberg College Institute of Public Opinion THE 2009 LEHIGH VALLEY QUALITY OF LIFE SURVEY KEY FINDINGS REPORT

Survey In Brief. How Well Candidates Have Explained Their Plans for Strengthening Social Security (n=398) Strengthening Medicare (n=398)

2012 AARP Survey of New York CD 21 Registered Voters Ages 50+ on Retirement Security. Survey In Brief

2018 Major League Baseball Florida Spring Training Economic Impact Study. Joseph St. Germain, Ph.D. Phillip Downs, Ph.D.

What does your Community look like and how is it changing?

Camden Higher Education and Health Care Task Force Housing Survey Camden Higher Education and Health Care Task Force

DATA RELEASE 1 Biggest Divide Major Issues Facing Florida Today Most Desired Leadership Quality

Alabama Statewide Fuel Tax Poll 605 Completed Surveys Conducted February 8-12, 2019

City of Lethbridge 2014 Community Satisfaction Survey. Key Findings August 2014

Fact Sheet March, 2012

SANTA FE COMMUNITY SURVEY - PNM JANUARY 2015

Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014 Fall 2015

NORTHWEST AREA FOUNDATION SOCIAL INDICATORS SURVEY

June Quality of Life Survey. Comparing Survey Results From to 2017

2008 Cecil County Public Opinion Survey Results Summary

White Pine County. Economic and Demographic Profile, 1999

Camden Industrial. Minneapolis neighborhood profile. About this area. Trends in the area. Neighborhood in Minneapolis.

Last Name First Name Middle Name. Street Address City State Zip Code

HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE IN MAINE

Shingle Creek. Minneapolis neighborhood profile. About this area. Trends in the area. Neighborhood in Minneapolis. October 2011

Calgary Police Commission. Annual Citizen Satisfaction Survey Report

2012 Report on the Homeless Populations in Duval, Clay, and Nassau Counties

Morristown, TN Supplemental Online Survey Results

NEBRASKA RURAL POLL. A Research Report. Optimism in Nonmetropolitan Nebraska: Perceptions of Well-Being Nebraska Rural Poll Results

THE AP-GfK POLL July, 2014

Kansas Speaks Fall 2017 (Updated) Statewide Public Opinion Survey

How important to you is the issue of creating jobs here in the U.S.?

How will the Casino Impact the Springfield Area? Current Research on Gambling & Socioeconomic Status

Mailing Address (Street) (Apt) Telephone Numbers: Work: ( ) - Home: ( ) - (City) (State) (Zip Code) Other: ( ) -

Citizen Budget Budget Consultation Online Summary Report. November 25, Overview:

Dakota County CDA Homebuyer Counseling Program Application

2016 USF-Nielsen Sunshine State Survey Data Release 3

Occupational Projections for Low-Income Older Workers

Are Today s Young Workers Better Able to Save for Retirement?

Facts & Findings March 2018

Characteristics of Uninsured North Carolinians

CITY OF GRAIN VALLEY.

Donor Confidence Report Issue 9, February 2010

AMERICANS VIEWS OF HEALTHCARE COSTS, COVERAGE, AND POLICY

When comparing this study s results with the HMDA data to the results found in the previous 2001 report, small changes have been found.

Charlottesville, VA. Supplemental Online Survey Results

2016 Citizen Satisfaction Survey

Demographic and Economic Profile. Florida. Updated May 2006

The Impact of Hurricane Harvey Survey 2, Summer 2018

Transcription:

Okaloosa County Citizen Satisfaction Survey 2009 Data Analysis Prepared for delivery by researchers at The The University of West Florida For additional information please contact: Melissa Neal, Ph.D. Associate Director, Emerald Coast mneal@uwf.edu 850 833 9113 or Rod Lewis, Ph.D. Senior Research Analyst clewis2@uwf.edu 850 833 9111 The analysis presented in this document outlines the demographics of the Okaloosa County citizens who took part in the survey, then discusses their reactions to particular county services as well as the county as a whole. This document highlights only some of the many questions posed to the respondents. A comprehensive list of questions, along with the citizen responses, can be found in the Okaloosa County Survey documentation provided by TLG Marketing Research and the Haas Center. Most of the county services that respondents considered to be very important also ranked highly in terms of performance. Two services did not rank as highly in performance as they did in importance. Overall, however, survey respondents exhibit high levels of satisfaction with specific services as well as the county.

Demographics of Survey Respondents and County Residents Figure 1: Age 1 30.0% In Figure 1, the blue line 25.0% represents the Census Bureau s estimates of the percentage of 20.0% the population that fall within 15.0% particular age categories. For 10.0% example, approximately 22% of 5.0% the population of Okaloosa County is between 35 and 44 0.0% years of age. The red line 20 24 25 34 35 444 45 54 55 64 65+ represents the age of the Age of Residents survey respondents. Looking County Residents Survey Respondents again at those between ages 35 and 44, we see that a bit less than 15% of those surveyed fall into that age category. However, while those that are 65 and older represent approximately 18% of the population, they represent nearly 30% of survey respondents. The red line below the blue line represents an undersampling of those groups, while the red line above the blue line represents an oversampling of those age groups. Ages 35 64 were the most undersampled groups, while those over 65 were the most oversampled. Figure 2: Race/Ethnicity 2 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% County Residents Survey Respondents The red bars in Figure 2 represent the race or ethnicity of the survey respondents, while the blue bars represent the race or ethnicity of the population of Okaloosa County. The survey respondents were overwhelmingly Caucasian/ White, and the survey undersampledd groups. other racial 1 The survey respondentss who refused to answer this question (1.4%) were dropped from the data presented in this figure. 2 The survey respondentss who refused to answer this question (2.3%) were dropped from the data presented in this figure. 2

Figure 3: Gender 3 56.0% Figure 3 compares the gender of the Okaloosa County population with the gender of the survey respondents. We see here an oversampling of female respondents, and an undersampling of male respondents. Figure 4 displays the annual household incomes of survey respondents and all county residents. We see an oversampling of those making between $25,000 and $49,999, and an undersampling of those making between $50,000 and $74,999. 54.0% 52.0% 50.0% 48.0% 46.0% 44.0% 42.0% 40.0% Female County Residents Male Survey Respondents Figure 4: Annual Household Incom e 4 45. 00% 40. 00% 35. 00% 30. 00% 25. 00% 20. 00% 15. 00% 10. 00% 5. 00% 0. 00% Annual Household Income County Residents Survey Respondents 3 The survey respondentss who refused to answer this question (1.9%) were dropped from the data presented in this figure. 4 The survey respondentss who did not know (3.3%) or refused to answer this question (13.5%) were dropped from the data presented in this figure. 3

Figure 5: Highest Level of Education Attained 5 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% Less than high school High school diploma or GED Some college or AA degree College degree or higher County Residents Survey Respondents Finally, Figure 5 displays the educational attainment of all county residents compared with those who were surveyed. Those surveyed are more educated than the general population, with nearly 80% having at least some college, while approximately 63% of the county s population has at least some college. Those with some high school or a high school diploma only were undersampled. 5 The survey respondentss who did not know (0.2%) or refused to answer this question (1.9%) were dropped from the data presented in this figure. 4

County Services Ranked by Importance, Performance, and Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes We asked respondents to rank nineteen county services by importance, performance, and their willingness to pay additional taxes for the services. For importance, respondents were asked to rank the service on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being very important, and 1 being not at all important. Performance was measured as citizen satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 is excellent and 1 is poor. For willingness to have the county levy additional taxes, respondents were asked to rank the service on a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being very willing and 1 being not at all willing. Tables 1, 2, and 3 on the following pages display the overall mean, or average, response to these questions. The services with the highest mean ranking for willingness to pay additional taxes are the same five services that respondents consider to be the most important. These services, in order of importance, are Ambulances/Emergency Medical Services, Emergency Management Services and Disaster Preparedness, Law Enforcement/Jail, Roads and Bridges, and Veterans Services. Happily, three of these 5 services are listed in the top five for performance. Ambulances/Emergency Medical Services is the number one performing county service, and Emergency Management Services and Disaster Preparedness is number two. Law Enforcement/Jail is the fifth highest performing service. This indicates that survey respondents feel that these services are very important and they are currently performing well. On the other hand, two of the services in the top five for importance and taxes are ranked fairly low in performance. Veterans Services, which ranks fifth in importance and third in willingness to pay additional taxes is ranked eleventh in overall performance. Roads and Bridges, which ranks fourth in importance and fourth in willingness to pay additional taxes ranks near the bottom of the list for performance at fourteenth out of nineteen services. Importantly, the mean response for willingness to pay taxes is fairly low. While citizens have expressed more willingness to pay taxes for some services than others, the highest ranking on the 1 to 5 scale is 3, meaning the citizens are fairly neutral toward raising taxes in that area. A score of less than 3 indicates that the respondent is somewhat unwilling to pay increased taxes for services. So, according to Table 3, survey respondents are neutral toward paying additional taxes only for Emergency Management Services and Disaster Preparedness. They are somewhat unwilling to pay additional taxes for the other services listed in the top five, and their willingness decreases for all additional services listed. 5

Table 1: Mean Respondent Ranking of County Services by Performance Service Performance Importance Taxes Ambulances/Emergency Medical Services 4.5 4.8 2.8 Emergency Management Services & Disaster Preparedness 4.2 4.5 3.0 Libraries 4.2 4.1 2.6 Beach Safety Unit 4.1 3.9 2.4 Law Enforcement/Jail 4 4.5 2.9 Parks 4 4.2 2.6 Extension Services 3.9 3.6 2.0 Animal Control 3.8 3.8 2.1 Information Systems 3.8 3.8 2.1 Public Health Services 3.8 4.1 2.6 Veterans' Services 3.8 4.3 2.9 Mosquito Control 3.7 4.2 2.5 Public Assistance 3.7 3.8 2.4 Roads & Bridges 3.7 4.4 2.8 Storm Water & Flood Management 3.7 4.2 2.7 Code Enforcement 3.5 3.8 2.2 Museums 3.5 3.5 2.2 Public Transportation 3.3 3.5 2.3 Building, Planning & Zoning 3.2 3.8 2.2 6

Table 2: Mean Respondent Ranking of County Services by Importance Service Performance Importance Taxes Ambulances/Emergency Medical Services 4.5 4.8 2.8 Emergency Management Services & Disaster Preparedness 4.2 4.5 3.0 Law Enforcement/Jail 4 4.5 2.9 Roads & Bridges 3.7 4.4 2.8 Veterans' Services 3.8 4.3 2.9 Parks 4 4.2 2.6 Mosquito Control 3.7 4.2 2.5 Storm Water & Flood Management 3.7 4.2 2.7 Libraries 4.2 4.1 2.6 Public Health Services 3.8 4.1 2.6 Beach Safety Unit 4.1 3.9 2.4 Animal Control 3.8 3.8 2.1 Information Systems 3.8 3.8 2.1 Public Assistance 3.7 3.8 2.4 Code Enforcement 3.5 3.8 2.2 Building, Planning & Zoning 3.2 3.8 2.2 Extension Services 3.9 3.6 2.0 Museums 3.5 3.5 2.2 Public Transportation 3.3 3.5 2.3 7

Table 3: Mean Respondent Ranking of County Services by Willingness to Pay Additional Taxes Service Performance Importance Taxes Emergency Management Services & Disaster Preparedness 4.2 4.5 3.0 Law Enforcement/Jail 4 4.5 2.9 Veterans' Services 3.8 4.3 2.9 Ambulances/Emergency Medical Services 4.5 4.8 2.8 Roads & Bridges 3.7 4.4 2.8 Storm Water & Flood Management 3.7 4.2 2.7 Parks 4 4.2 2.6 Libraries 4.2 4.1 2.6 Public Health Services 3.8 4.1 2.6 Mosquito Control 3.7 4.2 2.5 Beach Safety Unit 4.1 3.9 2.4 Public Assistance 3.7 3.8 2.4 Public Transportation 3.3 3.5 2.3 Code Enforcement 3.5 3.8 2.2 Building, Planning & Zoning 3.2 3.8 2.2 Museums 3.5 3.5 2.2 Animal Control 3.8 3.8 2.1 Information Systems 3.8 3.8 2.1 Extension Services 3.9 3.6 2.0 8

Most Important Challenge Facing the County Table 4: Which of the following do you believe is the most important challenge facing Okaloosa? Challenge Response Rate Attracting Jobs & Economic Development 33.8% The largest percentage of survey respondents feel that attracting Managing Growth 20.9% jobs and economic development Good Relations with the Military 18.8% to the area is the greatest Affordable Housing 9.4% challenge facing Okaloosa Other Improving Transportation 8.0% 7.7% County. Managing growth and good relations with the military Promoting Tourism 1.4% are second and third, respectively. These three issues combine to account for 73.5% of the responses. Affordable housing, transportation, tourism, and other challenges were also chosen, but by a much smaller percentage of those surveyed. Thirty four respondents chose Other. Of those, 7 said all of the above choices are important, and 6 believed roads or traffic issues were the most important issues facing the county. Overall Satisfaction with the County Table 5: How satisfied are you with the overall quality of the job that the County is doing? Satisfaction Level Very Satisfied Somewhat Satisfied Neutral Somewhat Dissatisfied Response Rate 17.2% 49.8% 27.1% 5.2% Overall, the vast majority of those surveyed are satisfied with the quality of the job the County is doing. Of the 430 respondents, 284, or 67%, are very satisfied or somewhat satisfied. On the other hand, only 3 respondents chose very dissatisfied, and 22 chose dissatisfied. Only 5.9% of the respondents are dissatisfied with the County s performance. Very Dissatisfied 0.7% Generally, citizen satisfaction with the county and its services is quite high. While there is some room for improvement in specific areas of county service, the mean performance scores are high. In fact, none of the mean responses related to performance ranked a service as unsatisfactory. 9