2011 CMPD Citizen Survey Presentation July 25, 2011 5500 Executive Center Drive, Suite 126 Charlotte, North Carolina 28212 704-332-8433 MW #4-11-01-1 (468) 1 Primary Research Objectives • Measure perceptions of the CMPD • Determine where citizens get information about crime trends and crime • Explore perceptions of crime and safety • Quantify perceptions of the effectiveness of the CMPD • Compare changes in perceptions from 2010 to 2011 on key measures 2 Rating Scales • To measure perceptions, respondents used rating scales from 1 to 10: 1=Very negative and 10=Very positive • -------Negative------ Mid-Scale 1 5 2 3 4 6 -------Positive------7 8 9 10 To simplify interpretation, data have been collapsed into categories and labeled. For example: 1,2,3,4=Total Negative 5,6=Mid-scale 7,8=Positive 9,10=Very positive • On a 10-point scale: – Ratings of 1 to 4 are low/ poor/ negative – Ratings of 5 or 6 are at the middle of the scale/ average/ neutral – Ratings of 7 to 10 are high/ good/ positive 3 Survey Results 4 Overall Impression of the CMPD – By Year Total Sample (Q6) Respondents Able to Rate Mean 2011 2010 43% 32% 2008 29% 2007 30% 0% 20% 9,10=Very Positive 14% 46% 34% 17% 44% 47% 40% 60% 7,8=Positive 5,6=Mid-scale 5 16% 15% 80% 7% 7.6 9% 7.5 10% 7.4 8% 7.5 100% 1-4=Negative Perceptions of the CMPD Total Sample (Q7-10) Respondents Able to Rate Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police . . . Mean Q7. Are courteous (n=618) 48% Q8. Are professional (n=629) 49% Q9. Perform job w/ integrity & honesty (n=616) 35% 40% Q10. Use good judgement in use of force (n=579) 40% 34% 0% 9,10=Strongly agree 33% 20% 7,8=Agree 6 37% 40% 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 12% 7% 7.9 9% 7% 8.0 12% 8% 7.7 17% 11% 80% 100% 1-4=Disagree 7.3 Perceptions of CMPD -- By Year Total Sample Respondents Able to Rate Mean Ratings on a 10-Point Scale 2010 2011 Q6. Overall impression 7.5 7.6 Q7. Are courteous 7.7 7.9 Q8. Are professional 7.8 8.0 Q9. Perform job with integrity & honesty 7.4 7.7 Q10. Use good judgment in use of force 7.0 7.3 . Means highlighted in red indicate a statistically significant change from 2010 to 2011. 7 Importance/Performance of CMPD in Reflecting Charlotte-Mecklenburg on Demographics Total Sample, n=650 Percent Responding “Yes” Q13a. Important to reflect in terms of gender? Q13b.Important to reflect in terms of race/ethnicity? 62% Q14a. Does CMPD reflect in terms of gender? Q14b. Does CMPD reflect in terms of race/ethnicity? 48% 0% 67% 100% 8 51% 0% 100% Perceptions of Need for Police Total Sample Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q11. CharlotteMecklenburg has an adequate number of police. (n=580) 23% Q12. The need for police has increased in past year. (n=607) 28% 27% 54% 0% 9,10=Strongly Agree 20% 7,8=Agree 26% 40% 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 9 6.4 21% 13% 7% 80% 8.1 Ratings have not changed significantly since 2010. 100% 1-4=Disagree Sources for Information About Crime Trends and Crime Occurring in Charlotte-Mecklenburg Unaided, Multiple Answers Allowed. Total Sample, n=650 TV 73% Newspaper 44% Internet 24% Friends/ neighbors 12% Radio 10% In Charlotte-Mecklenburg (Q15) Directly from CMPD 3% CMPD Website 3% CMPD Newsletter 2% Experience 2% Neighborhood /Community… 1% 0% 100% 10 Perceptions of Charlotte-Mecklenburg as a Safe Place to Live Total Sample, Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q17. In general, CharlotteMecklenburg is a safe place to live. (n=646) 28% 47% 19% 7.5 6% Ratings improved from 2010 to 2011. 0% 9,10=Strongly agree 20% 40% 7,8=Agree 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 11 80% 100% 1-4=Disagree Effectiveness of CMPD in Making Charlotte-Mecklenburg Safer Total Sample, Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q18. How effective do you believe the CMPD have been in making CharlotteMecklenburg safer? (n=636) 31% 0% 9,10=Very effective 20% 47% 40% 7,8=Effective 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 12 17% 5% 80% 7.6 100% 1-4=Not effective Perceptions of Being Safe in Charlotte-Mecklenburg Total Sample, n=650 (Q19) Safer than a year ago 24% As safe as a year ago 53% Less safe than a year ago 19% Don't know 4% 0% 70% 13 Top Concerns about Crime and Safety for Charlotte-Mecklenburg Overall Unaided, Multiple Answers Allowed. Total Sample, n=650 (Q20) Break-ins, burglary 38% Assault, rape, robbery 37% Gangs, gang activety 16% Auto theft, break-ins 13% Drug crimes 13% Murder, homicide 11% Crimes against children 9% Home invasions 9% Traffic violations, drunk drivers 8% Need more police 8% Don't feel safe walking around alone Mentions by fewer than 6% are not shown. 6% 0% 14 50% Sources for Information About Crime Trends and Crime Occurring in Neighborhoods Unaided, Multiple Answers Allowed. Total Sample, n=650 TV 39% Newspaper 26% Friends/ neighbors 24% Neighborhood meetings 21% Internet 11% Radio 3% Directly from CMPD 3% CMPD Website 3% CMPD Newsletter 3% Neighborhood newsletter 3% Experience In your neighborhood (Q16) 1% 0% 100% 15 Perceptions of Being Safe in Neighborhood Total Sample Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q21. I am safe in the neighborhood where I live. (n=645) 51% 0% 9,10=Strongly agree 20% 7,8=Agree 35% 40% 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 16 10%4% 80% 100% 1-4=Disagree 8.2 Effectiveness of Crime Fighting and Crime Prevention Strategies in Neighborhoods Total Sample, Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q22. How effective have the CMPD crime fighting and prevention strategies been in your neighborhood? (n=596) 44% 33% 15% 7.7 8% Ratings improved from 2010 to 2011. 0% 9,10=Very effective 20% 40% 7,8=Effective 60% 5,6=Mid-scale 17 80% 100% 1-4=Not effective Perceptions of Being Safe in Neighborhood Total Sample, n=650 (Q23) Safer now than a year ago 21% As safe as a year ago 62% 2011 Less safe than a year ago 14% Don't know 4% 0% 70% 18 Top Concerns about Neighborhood Crime and Safety Unaided, Multiple Answers Allowed. Total Sample, n=650 (Q24) Break-ins, burglary 46% Assault, rape, robbery 17% Auto theft, break-in 15% None, no concerns 15% Vandalism/ property crimes 11% Drug crimes 7% Home invasions 7% Traffic violations, drunk drivers 7% Vagrants, homeless 6% Need enforced curfew laws 5% Crimes against children 5% 0% Mentions by fewer than 5% are not shown. 50% 19 Police Visibility Total Sample Respondents Able to Rate Mean Q30. Visibility of police in my neighborhood has increased since last year. (n=599) 27% 0% 9,10=Strongly agree 20% 20% 27% 40% 7,8=Agree 60% 80% 5,6=Mid-scale 20 6.0 27% 100% 1-4=Disagree Over the past year, have you seen police patrolling in your neighborhood? Total Sample, n=650 (Q31) Yes 76% No 23% Don't know 1% 21 Attendance of Neighborhood Meetings Total Sample, n=650 (Q28 & Q29 combined) No meetings but definitely would attend No meetings but probably would attend 2011 9% 18% 11% 20% 41% No meetings but would not attend Currently attend meetings Available but do not attend 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 22 100% Awareness of Police Divisions Total Sample, n=650 Percent Responding “Yes” Q32. Know where police division office is located? 40% Q33. Within the past year, visited police division office? 14% Q34. Know names of any officers in police division? 12% Q35. Aware that police division publishes electronic Response Area Newsletter that has crime info. related to your area? 22% Q36. Subscribe to police division's electronic Response Area Newsletter? 8% 0% 23 100% Calls to 911 in Past 12 Months Total Sample, n=650 Percent Responding “Yes” Q46. Within the past 12 months, have you called the 911 Emergency Call Center to report a crime or suspected crime? 18% Q47. Within the past 12 months, have you called the 911 Emergency Call Center for an emergency not related to a crime? 20% 0% 100% 24 Satisfaction with 911 Service Respondents Who Called 911 in Past 12 Months Mean Q50. Treating you courteously and respectfully (n=196) 73% 19% 4% 4% 9.0 Q52. Overall satisfaction with 911 operator who took your call (n=196) 69% 22% 6% 3% 8.8 Q49. Asking appropriate questions (n=195) 68% 25% 4%4% 8.9 Q48. Length of time it took to answer your call (n=194) 62% Q51. Informing you when officers will be dispatched (n=185) 9,10=Very satisfied 7,8=Satisfied 20% 40% 5,6=Midpoints 25 6% 6% 24% 10%11% 56% 0% 26% 60% 80% 100% 1-4=Not satisfied 8.6 8.1 Satisfaction with 911 Service – By Year Respondents Who Called 911 in Past 12 Months Mean Ratings on a 10-Point Scale 1= Not Satisfied, 10=Very Satisfied 2010 8.2 2011 8.6 Q49. Asking appropriate questions 8.5 8.9 Q50. Treating you courteously and respectfully 8.7 9.0 Q51. Informing you when officers will be dispatched n/a 8.1 Q52. Overall satisfaction with 911 operator who took your call 8.4 8.8 Q48. Length of time it took to answer your call . Means highlighted in red indicate a statistically significant change from 2010 to 2011. 26 How Would You Contact The CMPD For A Non-Emergency Total Sample, n=650 (Q53) Call 311 39% Call 911 26% By phone, but don't know number 14% Internet/Website 4% Direct call to Division 3% Call 411 2% Other 2% Don't know 10% 0% 100% 27 Satisfaction with Non-Emergency Crime Reporting Unit Respondents Who Used CRU in Past 12 Months Mean Q57. Asking appropriate questions (n=78) 65% 21% 8%6% 8.4 Q58. Treating you courteously/respectfully (n=79) 63% 22% 9%6% 8.5 Q56. Length of time to answer call (n=79) 58% 16% 10% 15% 7.8 Q60. Overall satisfaction with service (n=79) 56% 22% 10% 13% 7.8 Q59. Setting correct expectations (n=77) 55% 21% 10% 14% 7.7 0% 9,10=Very satisfied 20% 7,8=Somewhat satisfied 28 40% 60% 5,6=Midpoints 80% 100% 1-4=Not satisfied Satisfaction with Non-Emergency Crime Reporting Unit Respondents Who Used CRU in Past 12 Months Mean Ratings on a 10-Point Scale 1= Strongly Disagree, 10=Strongly Agree 2010 7.5 2011 7.8 Q57. Asking appropriate questions 7.5 8.4 Q58. Treating you courteously and respectfully 8.0 8.5 Q59. Setting correct expectations for what would happen next 7.5 7.7 Q60. Overall satisfaction with the service provided by the CRU 7.4 7.8 Q56. Length of time it took to answer your call . Means highlighted in red indicate a statistically significant change from 2010 to 2011. 29 Perception of CMPD Website Among Respondents Who Have Been to Site & Are Able to Rate It, (Q63) Mean 2011 (n=215) 35% 2010 (n=179) 42% 32% 37% 17% 22% 6% 8% 0% 9,10=Very Good 100% 7,8=Good 5,6=Midpoints 30 1-4=Poor 7.7 7.4 Recommendations for Ways to Improve CMPD Total Sample (Q64) No recommendations 48% More patrols, be more visible 25% Interact, work more with the community 5% Improve response time 5% Some officers have a bad attitude 4% Do a great job 4% Reduce crime 3% Pay officers more money 3% 0% 31 Mentions by fewer than 3% are not shown. 100%