Download the full report (2.7MB PDF)
The Worcester Regional Research Bureau's Center for Community Performance Measurement has released its third report, Benchmarking Municipal and Neighborhood Services in Worcester. It presents data related to a variety of services including those provided by the Department of Public Works; the Department of Parks, Recreation, and Cemetery; and the Worcester Public Library.
The first two indicators present information about funding levels for public works, parks and recreation, and library services in Worcester. These expenditures are also compared to those of similar municipalities in New England. Indicators 3 and 4 present the outcomes of these expenditures, including the impact that these services have on the physical condition of four specific neighborhoods in Worcester, and citizens' satisfaction with a variety of municipal services. The final indicator describes the overall level of citizen involvement in municipal decision-making in Worcester.
These indicators can be used to inform future policy decisions, especially during the development of the City's budget. Because the City will be facing significant funding challenges in the upcoming months, this information can help prioritize the needs of various neighborhoods as well as the entire city. Citizens can use the report to identify those conditions in their neighborhoods, such as overgrown vegetation on private property, that they can address with the help of neighborhood associations and other community institutions.
Selected Findings:
Worcester spends less than comparable communities for the following services:
-Road rehabilitation - 58% less per lane mile than Hartford ($2,156 compared to $5,169 in Hartford);
-Reinvestment in parks and playgrounds - 89% less per acre than Springfield ($1,192 compared to $11,111 in Springfield);
-Fleet maintenance - 67% less per vehicle than Springfield ($1,289 compared to $3,991 in Springfield); and
-Library services - 49% less per capita than Providence ($24.65 compared to $48.36 in Providence).
There are two possible explanations for these lower expenditures. First, the City may be providing these services in a more efficient and cost-effective manner than comparable cities in New England. Alternatively, Worcester could be providing a lower level of service than other cities do. Determining the reasons for the discrepancies might highlight how to provide the highest level of service with the resources that are available.
For more on this discussion, see Indicators 1 & 2 on pages 3-8.
According to ComNET (Computerized Neighborhood Environment Tracking) surveys conducted in four of Worcester's neighborhoods during 2001, significant improvements are needed in the following areas:
-Sidewalk improvements: over 1,000 broken and hazardous sidewalks were recorded;
-Litter cleanup: over 600 instances of litter on sidewalks, streets, and vacant lots were identified; and
-Overgrown vegetation: over 500 instances of overgrown vegetation on sidewalks, private property, and public space were recorded.
These neighborhoods are being re-surveyed this spring. If the City has improved the conditions in these neighborhoods, the changes will be reflected in the data that are collected. As well, an additional four neighborhoods will begin participating in the project in 2002.
For more on this discussion, see Indicator 3 on pages 9-12.
Involvement on municipal boards and commissions by citizens residing in the east and southeast areas of the city is critically low. An analysis of applications to the various boards and commissions revealed that the ratio of applicants to available positions in these areas of the city was 0.50 for the east area (District 2) and 0.20 for the southeast area (District 3). A ratio below 1.00 indicates that on average there is less than one applicantion per available position. As a consequence of the low interest in these positions, many positions are vacant for significant periods of time.
For more on this discussion, see Indicator 5 on pages 15-17.
The percent of the voting age population that voted in the 2000 election is substantially below the statewide rate. Just 41% of the total voting age population in Worcester cast a ballot, compared to the statewide rate of 57.6%. For the last municipal election (2001), the turnout in Worcester was substantially lower with only a 19% turnout among those of voting age.
For more on this discussion, see Indicator 5 on pages 15-17.
Download the full report (2.7MB PDF)
For more information or to receive a full copy of the report by mail contact:
Rick Beaman, CCPM Manager
508/799-7169