Memo- Hopkins Community SurveyADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES:
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the Cit ouncil
FROM: Rick Getschow, Hopkins City Manager '
MEETING DATE: April 10, 2007
SUBJECT: Hopkins Community Survey
Background:
The City has entered into an agreement with Decision Resources, Ltd. to conduct a
community-wide survey for 2007. Decision Resources has conducted surveys for most
local government organizations and school districts in the region. Representatives of the
firm will be in attendance at the Council meeting to discuss the community survey that
we will be conducting this spring in Hopkins.
They will provide a draft copy of the proposed survey for Council review and discussion.
They will also discuss their method of data collection and answer any questions that the
City Council may have.
Included in the packet is the original proposal from the firm describing their proposed
services.
Enclosures:
• Decision Resources January 2007 Proposal
City of Hopkins
Residential Survey Research Proposal
January 2007
DECISION RESOURCES, LTD.
3128 Dean Court
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416
612-920-2401
612-920-1069 (fax)
wmorris@drlmpls.com
January 11, 2007
Mr. Rick Getschow
City of Hopkins
1010 1St Street South
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
Dear Rick:
Decision Resources, Ltd., is pleased to present this survey research proposal to you for the City
of Hopkins. This prospectus is organized in three parts: a discussion of the goals of the research;
a potential design and schedule; and, estimated project costs. As you will see, I am certain that
DRL can provide Hopkins with the information it seeks inboth acost-effective and timely
manner.
GOALS OF THE RESEARCH:
The survey could assess the attitudes and opinions of residents of the City of Hopkins on four
separate, but interrelated issues:
1. Evaluation of City Programs and Services: How informed are residents about the current
services and programs provided by the City? How do they rate these services and programs?
What services and programs, if any, would they expand, modify, or terminate? Do they consider
city services a good value for the property taxes they pay? How do they rate the level of current
property taxes in comparison with other areas?
city of Hopkins
Residential Survey Research Proposal
January 2007
2. General Perceptions of the Quality of Life in the City of Hopkins: What do they like most
about living in the City? What do they consider to be the most serious issues facing the City?
How are residents viewing changes during the past few years? What attributes of the City would
residents prioritize for preservation? What changes would they welcome or at least accept? Do
residents see the City moving forward purposefully? What are the key components in the
concept of "high quality of life" which residents agree upon?
3. Issues facing the City: What are residential preferences about the ways to address current
issues? In particular, what are their perceptions about development and redevelopment? What
are their priorities for development and redevelopment? What types of housing opportunities
would they like to see available? What are the most desirable characteristics the city should
possess in the future? How connected are residents to the City? How effective are current
modes of communication with residents?
4. Demographic Changes and Issue Concerns: What are the demographic characteristics of
residents moving into the community? How do "newer" residents compare demographically and
issue-wise from residents who have lived in Hopkins for longer periods of time? Do the trends
in the demographic backgrounds of "new-comers" suggest future policy directions? Are there
demographic changes which residents would like to see the City encourage?
DESIGN AND SCHEDULE OF THE RESEARCH:
Decision Resources, Ltd., proposes to conduct a telephone survey of 400 randomly selected
households in the City of Hopkins. A sample of 400 residents would provide results projectable
to the entire city adult population within d 5.0 percent in 95 out of 100 cases. The sample is also
of sufficient size to permit the district to be divided into a maximum of four categories for more
detailed analysis, such as age, mobility, home ownership, location of residence, presence of
children, and other demographic characteristics.
To insure the integrity of the sample, DRL places the most exacting sampling standards in the
industry on our procedures. Before an alternate household is substituted for a designated target,
at least ten tries are made to contact the initial households during afive-day period. The
telephone calls take place during various times on weekday evenings and during the weekend.
Our interviewers are also instructed to seek convenient appointments with interviewees, cutting
our non-contact rate to less than five percent on average. An unbiased selection process is also
used to identify the adult member of the household to be interviewed. To validate the completed
sample, the latest United States Census updated population characteristics are utilized as a
standard of comparison.
The questionnaire would be administered by DRL trained and supervised personnel. The
computer analysis will be obtained from our in-house C-MENTOR and SPSS statistical analysis
systems, insuring both access to the most current analysis programs and confidentiality ofthe
data set.
City of Hopkins
Residential Survey Research Proposal
January 2007
` The City of Hopkins will be presented with two bound copies of the final report highlighting all
the major findings of the study. DRL will also speak to any major differences from and
similarities with the past study of the community, when applicable, in addition to other maturing
communities. A volume of all computer-generated cross tabulations and other multivariate
statistical techniques will also be included.
1. Planning with City Council Members, City Staff, and/or relevant individuals to establish the
topics to be covered in the survey. Based on these to is conce is DRL wo c
neutral questions. This activity can be comp eted by a meeting, telephone and/or fax, depending
on client wishes within two weeks of the initiation of the contract.
2. Structuring of questions and final approval of the survey instrument. These activities are
usually completed within three weeks of the planning session.
3. Final determination of the field dates for interviewing, this is to be determined by the amount
of time to receive sign-off on the survey instrument from the client.
4. Pre-testing and, if needed, approval of resulting revisions. This activity is usually completed
by the second day of fieldwork.
5. Completion of all fieldwork within athree-to-four week period.
6. Computer analysis and preparation of written report. All analytical tests and commentary will
be available within three weeks after completion of the fieldwork.
7. Delivery of the final written report to the City of Hopkins, including presentation graphics.
Afterwards, telephone consultation, as the need arises, will be provided about the study's
findings and implications.
PROJECT COSTS:
The cost of a survey is driven by two factors: sample size and questionnaire length. A study
whose parameters are a maximum of 50 question units administered to a 400 household random
sample of the City of Hopkins would cost $10,800.00. Each additional question unit beyond the
initial allotment would be $135.00. The cost range of recently conducted multi-issue quality of
life surveys is $15,000.00 - $21,000.00, reflecting the number of topics and depth of analysis
required for policy purposes.
As company policy, DRL requires one-half of the cost prior to the commencement of fieldwork;
the remainder is due upon delivery of the final written report. Unless otherwise arranged, DRL
invoices clients for the initial payment at the time of the initiation of the contract; the remainder
is due at the time of the receipt of the final written report.
City of Hopkins
Residential Survey Research Proposal
January 2007
If you require any further information from us, feel free to contact us. We look forward to the
opportunity to work with the City of Hopkins.
Sincerely,
Peter Leatherman
Peter Leatherman
Research Director
•