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%