Laserfiche WebLink
Least Satisfaction: Services with which respondents were least <br />satisfied (i.e., that were rated -as "excellent" or "good" by the <br />smallest proportion of those responding) were: <br />. Weed control (45%) <br />. Animal control (59%) <br />. Crime prevention programs (65%) <br />. Snow removal (67%) <br />It should be noted that nearly half of all respondents did not <br />evaluate crime prevention programs (46%), while almost one in <br />five were unable to rate animal control (18%). <br />Differences by Ward: There was no consistent pattern by ward in <br />the evaluation of services; respondents in no one ward were more <br />or less likely than those in other wards to rate services <br />favorably. However, there were five areas in which there were <br />statistically significant differences among wards. <br />Respondents in ward 2 were more likely (49%) than respondents in <br />wards 1 (46%) or 3 (40%) to rate the quality of weed control in <br />Louisville as "excellent" or "good." In contrast, four -fifths <br />(82%) of respondents in ward 3, versus only 70% of those in ward <br />1, felt that the quality of street repairs and patching was <br />"excellent" or "good." <br />Respondents in ward 1 were significantly more likely (83%) than <br />those in ward 3 (76%) or ward 2 (70%) to favorably evaluate the <br />quality of recreation programs. Respondents in ward 1 also had <br />the highest proportion rating quality of park maintenance (91%) <br />as "excellent" or "good," and those in ward 2, the lowest (84%). <br />Finally, respondents in ward 1 were significantly more likely <br />(94%) than other respondents to favorably evaluate senior <br />programs. As stated above, a substantial proportion of all <br />survey respondents (64%) did not evaluate the quality of senior <br />programs, so these results should be interpreted with caution. <br />4 <br />