HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES.2660.11-21-2011 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN
NATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC.
AND THE CITY OF CAPE GIRARDEAU, MISSOURI FOR
FY 2011-2012 CITIZEN SATISFACTION SURVEY
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of
December , 2011, by and between The City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri,
hereinafter referred to as "Client", and National Research Center, Inc., hereinafter
referred to as "Consultant," WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Client plans to undertake a survey of residents and businesses
in the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, and;
WHEREAS, the Client desires to retain the services of the Consultant to conduct
the project relative thereto and the planning and designing thereof as set forth in this
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements
herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Client hereby retains the Consultant for the project, to perForm the services
on the terms and conditions specified herein and the Consultant agrees so to
serve. The parties agree that the Consultant shall be an independent contractor
and shall not be an employee of the Client. The Consultant, as an independent
contractor, is not entitled to workers' compensation benefits and unemployment
insurance benefits, and the Consultant is obligated to pay federal and state
income tax on any moneys earned pursuant to the contract relationship.
2. The Agreement between the City and Contractor consists of the following
Documents:
(a) this Agreement
(b) Consultant's Proposal dated October 5, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit A,
except as modified by Exhibit B.
(c) Budget and work plan, attached hereto as Exhibit B
(d) City's RFP dated September 8, 2011, attached hereto as Exhibit C.
Consultant agrees to perform the work described in the attached Exhibits in
compliance with all provisions of this agreement. Consultant represents that it
has the requisite authority and capacity to perform all terms and conditions on
Consultant's part to be performed hereunder.
Should a postage increase by the United States Postal Service occur during the
project at such a point that project mailings are affected, the cost increase will be
passed through directly to the client. The budget in Exhibit B presumes that the
project activities will be completed within 180 days of the date this contract is
signed. The Client will be notified immediately of any potential cost increase due
to work that threatens to extend past that timeframe.
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 1 of 8 pages
3. The work will begin and be completed in accordance with the attached Exhibits.
4. The maximum amount the Client shall pay Consultant under this Contract shall
not exceed Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00).
5. The Client shall not have any financial obligations to the Consultant under this
Agreement until the Agreement is fully executed by both parties and the Client
issues a Purchase Order to Consultant. Consultant shall not provide any
services in excess of the dollar amount contained in any Purchase Order, and
Consultant shall not be entitled to any payment in excess of the dollar amount of
the Purchase Order from the Client, unless otherwise approved by Addendum to
this Agreement.
6. The Client agrees to pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this
agreement the sums set forth in the manner set forth as follows, as adjusted to
reflect the omission or addition of any of the tasks set forth therein, and as
approved by any future Addendum to this Agreement. One initial payment of
Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00) shall be made upon signing of the contract
and issuance of a Purchase Order. Further payments shall be made upon billing
by the Consultant, which billing shall occur not more frequently than finrice per
month, and which shall identify the tasks performed for each task. Payment will
be made to the Consultant within 30 calendar days. The final payment will not
be made by the Client to the Consultant until the final report has been received
and approved by the Client.
7. Consultant shall not subcontract, assign or transfer any part or all of Consultant's
obligations or interests without the Client's prior approval. If the Consultant shall
subcontract, assign, or transfer any part of Consultant's interests or obligations
under this Contract without the prior approval of the Client, it shall constitute a
material breach of this Contract.
8. The Client reserves the right to monitor and evaluate the progress and
performance of the Consultant to ensure that the terms of this agreement are
being satisfactorily met in accordance with the Client monitoring and evaluating
criteria and standards. Consultant shall cooperate with the Client relating to such
monitoring and evaluation.
9. Insurance Requirements.
(a) The Consultant shall procure and keep in force during the duration of this
agreement insurance policies with coverage not less than the types and amounts
specified herein. Consultant shall maintain:
(1) Comprehensive General Liability Insurance Policy, insuring the
Consultant against any liability for personal injury, bodily injury, or death
arising out of the performance of services hereunder and against liability
for property damage, with a combined single limit� of at least $1,000,000.
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 2 of 8 pages
(2) Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance Policy, insuring the
Consultant against any liability for personal injury, bodily injury, or death
arising from the use of motor vehicles and shall cover operations on or off
the site of all vehicles controlled by the Consultant whether they are
owned, non-owned, or hired with a combined single limit of at least
$1,000,000.
(3) Worker's Compensation Insurance and Employers Liability Policies as
required by any law, ordinance or governmental regulation.
(4) Professional Liability Insurance with limits per claim and annual
agg regate of$1,000,000.
(b) All policies described in (a) and (b) above shall be for the mutual and joint
benefit and protection of the Consultant and the Client.
(c) Prior to commencement of work, the Consultant shall furnish to the Client
certificates of insurance policies evidencing the required coverages as stated
above.
(d) The Client reserves the right to approve variations in the above
requirements upon request of Consultant if, in the Client's opinion, such
variations do not substantially affect the Client's interests.
(e) Regardless of any approval by the Client, the Consultant shall maintain
the required insurance coverage in force at all times during the term of this
Agreement. Consultant's failure to maintain the required insurance coverage will
not relieve the Consultants of its contractual obligation to indemnify the Client
pursuant to this section of this Agreement. In the event the Consultant fails to
maintain the required insurance coverage in effect, the Client may declare
Consultant in default.
10. Indemnification. The Consultant hereby covenants and agrees to indemnify,
defend, save, and hold the Client harmless from any and all liability, loss, costs,
charges, obligations, expenses, attorneys' fees, litigation, judgments, damages,
claims and demands of any kind whatsoever in connection with, or arising out of
Consultant's negligence, gross negligence, or willful or wanton misconduct, in the
performance of this Agreement, or any material violation of this Agreement or of
any law, ordinance or regulation by the Consultant, his agents, employees,
servants, subcontractors, business invitees; or by reason of any injury or
damage caused by Consultant's negligence, gross negligence, or willful or
wanton misconduct, occurring to any person or persons whomever (including the
Consultant, his agents, employees, servants, subcontractors or business
invitees) or to property of any kind whatsoever and to whomever belonging
(including the Consultant, his agents, employees, servants, subcontractors or
business invitees), in connection with or arising out of Consultant's performance
of this agreement.
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 3 of 8 pages
11. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon five (5) days' written
notice. In the event of termination by the Client, the Client shall be liable to pay to
Consultant fees for services and expenses incurred to date of termination.
12. If Consultant shall be in default or breach of any provision of this Agreement, the
Client may terminate this Agreement, suspend the Client's performance, withhold
payment or invoke any other legal or equitable remedy after giving the
Consultant ten (10) days written notice and opportunity to sure such default or
breach. If the Client shall be in default or breach of any provision of this
Agreement, the Consultant may terminate this contract or suspend the
Consultant's performance after giving the Client ten (10) days written notice and
opportunity to cure such default or breach.
13. This agreement shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the
parties hereto, their successors.and assigns.
14. All notices to be given hereunder shall be in writing and may be given, served or
made by depositing the same in the United States mail addressed to the party to
be notified, postpaid and registered or certified with return receipt requested or
by delivering the same in person to such person. Notice deposited in the mail in
accordance with the provisions hereof shall be effective unless otherwise stated
in such notice or in this Contract from and after the second day next following the
date postmarked on the envelope containing such notice. Notice given in any
other manner shall be effective only if and when received by the party to be
notified. All notices shall be sent to the following addresses:
If to the Client: City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri
Office of the City Clerk
401 Independence, P.O. Box 617
Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63702-0617
Attention: Gayle L. Conrad
Telephone: (573) 339-6320
Facsimile: (573) 339-6302
If to the Consultant: National Research Center, Inc.
3005 30th Street
Boulder, CO 8-3-1
Attention: Lee Tyson
Telephone (303) 444-7863
Facsimile: (303) 444-1145
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 4 of 8 pages
Executed by Client this � day of ��-7z�j,^,�) , 2011.
Executed by Consultant this 1 st day of December , 2011.
CITY OF CAPE RDEAU, MISSOURI
By:
Scott A. Meye , City anager
Date: /2�1� �li
Attest:
,
BY� ; � ' C.�K, `�
G e L. Conrad, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
�� �� L�/�iG�i� �
By �
. ri Cunningham, City Attorney
NATIONAL RESEA EH C , INC.
By:
Thomas I. Miller
Title: President
Date: 12/1/2011
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 5 of 8 pages
Exhibit A
National Research Center
Response to Request for Proposals
Submitted October 5, 2011
Citizen Satisfaction Survey
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 6 of 8 pages
Exhibit B
Following is the budget for a three to five page mailed survey to 1,800 randomly
selected households, expecting approximately 450-720 completed surveys, as well as a
mailed survey to 1,000 randomly selected businesses, expecting approximately 50 to
150 completed surveys.
This budget includes, but is not limited to, survey design methodology, survey
instrument development, sample design, three contacts per household (a postcard and
two waves of the survey packet), survey completion made available on the Web to
those that received the mailed survey, mail survey data entry, data analysis (including
weighting the data), reporting (including an executive summary, results displayed in
graphical and tabular form, interpretive text, Key Driver Analysis, and national and
custom benchmark comparisons), and a recorded presentation of the report and
attendance at a Council meeting via video or telephone conference for Q&A. In
addition, this budget includes a non-scientific web survey made available online for
open participation by the public after data collection for the scientific mailed survey, and
the provision of frequency tables of the results.
This budget assumes that meetings for survey design and survey results can be held
via telephone conference. Also included are national benchmarks, custom benchmarks,
a Web response option for the survey, and continuous support for six months following
the delivery of the report and Key Driver Analysis.
Tasks Cost
Task 1: Design Survey Methodology ................................................................................................. $500
Task 2: Develop the Survey Instrument .......................................................................................... $2,900
Task3: Conduct Survey .................................................................................................................�14,900'
Task 4: Benchmark Survey Information ................................................................................................. $0
Task 5: Recorded Presentation to Council ...................................................................................... $1,700""
Task 6: Non-scientific Web survey ..........................................................................................................$Ot
Task 7: Consulting and Continued Support.............................................................................................$0
TOTAL ........................................................................................................................................... $20,000
' Includes all costs related to survey printing($2,740),mailing prep($1,550),postage($3,000)and data entry($1,100)
**Pre-recorded presentation provided to Cape Girardeau in electronic format(e.g., .wmv or on DVD)for inclusion in Council
packet for viewing prior to meeting;NRC will attend Council meeting via video or te/ephone conference for Q&A.
r The survey will be made available online for open participation by the public after data collection for the scientific mailed
survey conc/udes. NRC will provide the URL, which Cape Girardeau will make available off the City's Web site. NRC will
provide frequency tab/es of the resu/ts;resu/ts will not be integrated into the scientifically administered mail survey.
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 7 of 8 pages
Exhibit C
City of Cape Girardeau
Request for Proposals
Issued September 8, 2011
2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey
2010-2011 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 8 of 8 pages
f �
CITY OF CAPE GIRARDEAU, MISSOURI
,�, G`IRAR�
4 �'.�
�4� �
k► ~ � �'
_,,, �►
o v�
� '� �_� o
��, � �, �,c
� THE UNION ~
* *
�EAL
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
FISCAL YEAR 2011-2012
CITIZEN SATISFACTION SURVEY
Proposals Due by October 5, 2011, 2:00 p.m.
..
A. Background
The City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, is a municipal Corporation located in Southeast Missouri.
Cape Girardeau is made up of approximately 12,000 residential households, 11,000 university
students, 1,400 businesses, with a population of approximately 39,000.
B. Proposed ProjectlPurpose
The City of Cape Girardeau is seeking Request for Proposals from qualified firms to perform a
customer satisfaction survey to identify citizen perceptions of the quality of major city services.
The successful proposer who executes a city contract shall prepare and conduct one survey in
early 2012, procure benchmark data, complete final reports and findings as outlined in this
Request for Proposals, and possibly present findings to City Council and/or Management Team.
C. General Information, Instructions and Conditions.
1. Due Date for Proposals:
Proposers shall submit proposals to the city contact person listed below by 2:00 p.m. on
October 5, 2011.
2. City Contact Person
Proposers shall submit their proposal and any questions or issues about any aspect of this
RFP to the following city contact person:
Gayle Conrad, City Clerk
City Hall
401 Independence, P. O. Box 617
Cape Girardeau, Missouri 63702-0617
Office: (573) 339-6320
Fax: (583) 339-6302
E-mail : qconrad citvofcapeqirardeau.orq
3. Estimated Schedule
The city has adopted the tentative schedule for the submission of proposals under this RFP,
which may be modified only upon written notice by the city to each potential proposer:
September 8, 2011 RFP issued
September 22, 2011, noon Deadline for written questions to city contact person
October 5, 2011, 2:00 p.m. Deadline for proposals
TBD Interviews, if deemed necessary
November 28, 2011 Estimated Contract start date
4. Questions and Clarifications About This RFP
Proposers may submit written questions, request clarifications or provide notice to the city
contact person listed in Section C.2 above of any ambiguities, conflicts, mistakes, errors or
discrepancies that proposer has discovered in the RFP, the proposed contract, scope of
services and any other solicitation document at any time until September 22, 2011. The city
will answer all inquiries by any proposer in writing. If any inquiry results in a change in the
RFP, the city will issue a written Addendum.
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 2 of 7
. �
5. Proposer Interview
Proposers may be required to attend one or more interviews with the city to discuss specific
issues related to the proposal. The city will determine dates and times as such interviews
and invited proposers will be given notice of such at the appropriate time.
6. Discussions and Negotiations
The City, in its sole discretion, may do any or all of the following:
(a) evaluate proposals and award a contract with or without discussions or negotiations
with any or all of the proposers;
(b) discuss and negotiate anything and everything with any proposer at any time;
(c) request additional information from any or all proposers;
(d) request a proposer or proposers to submit a new proposal;
(e) request one or more best and final offers from any or all proposers;
(fl accept any proposal in whole or in part;
(g) require a proposer to make modifications to their initial proposals;
(h) make a partial award to any or all proposers;
(i) make a multiple award to any or all of proposers;
(j) terminate this RFP, and reissue an amended RFP.
7. Execution of Agreement
Upon notification of selection by city and prior to submittal to City Council, the selected
proposer will fully execute and deliver to the city a professional services agreement agreed
upon by the city and the selected proposer. The agreement will include rate provisions of
this RFP and selected proposer's proposal.
8. City's Right to Cancel, Reject or Re-Issue RFP
The city reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and to invite new proposals or take
such other course of action as the city deems appropriate at the city's sole and absolute
discretion. The city reserves the right to waive any informality in any proposal or proposing
procedure, reject any or all proposals, reject any portion of a proposal, reissue the RFP with
or without modification, and negotiate all proposal elements.
9. Award and Rejections
It is the city's intent to award the agreement offered by this RFP to the qualified and
responsible proposer who provides the best overall proposal. The city is not required to
select the proposal with the lowest fee to be earned by a proposer. The submission of a
proposal will constitute a valid offer subject to acceptance by the city for a period of 90
calendar days following the due date.
10.Award subject to approval
Any award under this RFP is subject to the approval of the City Council.
D. Scope of Services
The following summarizes the scope and key terms of the offered agreement and will be
incorporated into the agreement. This summary is not intended to be a complete description of
the agreement. In the event of a conflict between this RFP in the agreement, the agreement
shall control.
1. Services Generally
The selected proposer will prepare and conduct a customer satisfaction survey for the City
of Cape Girardeau to identify citizen perceptions of the quality of major city services. The
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 3 of 7
. .
contractor shall report the results to the City Manager in the manner and form instructed by
the city. Dependent on cost, proposer may be requested to present the findings of the
survey to the City Council and/or the Management Team.
2. Required Services
(a) Design survey methodology to ensure appropriate sampling of the residential, business,
and university community, including different questions for various city services.
Sampling must ensure geographic coverage of the city in the six city council wards. A
draft report outlining the survey methodology shall be presented to and approved by the
City Manager before proceeding with the survey document.
(b) Develop survey instrument to capture citizen perceptions of the quality of major city
services. Draft questionnaire shall be submitted to and evaluated by the City Manager.
The final questionnaire shall be approved by the City Manager before survey is
conducted.
(c) Conduct mail, telephone and/or online survey to obtain survey responses, ensuring
geographic coverage in all six city council wards. A weekly progress report during the
survey period shall be submitted to the City Manager. Contractor shall print surveys,
cover letters, outbound and return-reply envelopes, and shall provide all necessary
postage for surveys and survey responses.
(d) Field, tabulate, cross-tabulate and provide benchmark survey information (results and
data) from cities of similar size in the Midwest United States, as well as cities of similar
size in the State of Missouri. Proposer shall recommend appropriate number and
comparable cities.
(e) Any additional survey scope requested by the City Manager.
(fl Final survey report shall include:
■ Summary of the methodology for administering the survey
Description of how the survey was administered/conducted
Start and end dates for surveys— mail, phone and/or e-mail
Source of addresses used for survey
Survey methodology
Sample size
Number of responses
Unaided response rate for mail surveys
Number responses by mail, phone and e-mail
Overall response rate
Margin of error
■ Description of the quality assurance program in place and used to ensure
accuracy of survey data and survey database
■ Charts depicting the overall results of the questions on the survey
■ Database of the results in electronic format compatible with Microsoft Excel
■ GIS maps that show results of selected questions on maps of the city based on
City Council Ward.
■ Benchmarking data that shows how the results for the City compare to other
cities
■ Tabular and cross-tabular data that shows the overall results of each question on
the survey
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 4 of 7
■ A copy of the survey instrument.
■ Proposer may offer additional services not specifically stated in this RFP that
proposer may feel is of interest to the City. These services shall be priced
separately.
3. Staffing
The selected proposer shall engage sufficient staff to be pro active in the preparation,
implementation and final reporting of the citizen satisfaction survey.
4. Fees for Services
In consideration of the services to be provided to the city, the selected proposer shall be
paid a fee payable in installments based upon phases of the project, the final payment upon
completion of the survey and appropriate reports presented to the City Manager.
5. City Responsibilities.
(a) The City shall provide the contractor with a cover letter for the survey.
(b) The City will issue press releases to provide information about the citizen satisfaction
survey and to encourage citizen responses.
E. Proposal Submittal
1. Submission of Proposals
(a) Where. Proposers shall submit their proposals to the appropriate city contact person
listed in Section C.2. Proposers shall address their proposal to the city contact person
and shall state on the outside of the sealed proposal envelope the RFP title.
(b) No. of Copies. Proposers shall submit one (1) signed original, four (4) copies of their
proposal and one (1) copy on a CD in Microsoft word format.
(c) Additional Materials. The proposal also may contain any narrative, charts, tables,
diagrams or other materials in addition to those called for herein; to the extent such
additions are useful for clarity or completeness of the proposal. Attachments should
clearly indicate on each page the paragraph in the proposal to which they pertain.
2. Content of Proposal
(a) Business/Firm Profile and Leqal Structure
• Legal Name, address, phone, fax, email, Federal ID#, and website address.
• Brief history of business/firm including date the business/firm was established under
the current name.
• List all services provided by the business/firm.
• Type of ownership, or legal structure of business/firm.
• Has the business/firm ever failed to complete work for which a contract was issued?
Has your business/firm ever been disqualified from working for the City or any other
public entity? Are there any current unresolved disputes/allegations? If yes, explain
the circumstance.
(b) Experience
• Include a list of the five (5) most relevant or comparable public contracts completed
by your business/firm during the past five (5) years. For each listed contract, provide
a narrative that includes:
a. the assigned project personnel
b. scope of services provided
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 5 of 7
c. the contracting entity's contact person, mailing address, e-mail address, and
telephone number
d. summary of how your business/firm delivered services
e. pricing and contractual compensation terms
• Provide three (3) client references for similar projects completed by your
business/firm during the past five (5) years.
• Provide a copy of your most recent relevant ongoing public contract.
(c) Personnel
• Please provide your staff capacity for meeting the city's requirements.
• Identify the Key Employees who are likely to be assigned to this contract if your
proposal is selected. [NOTE: Key Employee(s) must be committed to the contract
duration, and may not be removed or substituted without the city's prior written
consent.]
• For each of the Key Employee(s), provide a resume and/or summary with at least the
following background information:
a. Description of relevant experience
b. Years of employment with the business/firm
c. City and State of residence
d. State time commitment on other accounts
e. Applicable professional registrations, education, certifications, and credentials
• Please comment on the ability of your business/firm to sustain the loss of Key
Employee(s).
(d) Proiect Approach
• Discuss your understanding of the project scope and objectives.
• Discuss your approach to a project with specific references to the services requested
in the RFP.
• Describe how you will conduct the survey and the reasons. The city is willing to
discuss valid survey methods for achieving the required result.
• Describe your source of household addresses used for the survey.
• Discuss your survey methodologies. The written description of the survey
methodology and quality control review should, at a minimum, include the following
information:
■ Describe the quality assurance program in place and used to ensure accuracy of
the survey data and survey database.
■ Describe how you will maximize the response rate for mail survey, telephone
survey, and/or e-mail survey.
• Describe the steps or process you plan to use and results of comparisons to other
data sources (U.S. Census Bureau, demographics, prior surveys, etc.) to further
validate the survey data to ensure that proposer fairly represent citizens in the
gender and race categories.
• Highlight unique services and management tools and indicate the benefits of them to
the city. What makes your business/firm better than the competition?
• State approximate date your business/firm is available to begin work on the Project.
• State estimated time frame for completing the proposed scope of work, providing a
task plan and time line if necessary.
• Discuss your transition plan to begin providing services.
• Propose additional performance measures including why the performance measure
is important and how the City will measure and verify performance.
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 6 of 7
(e) Pricinq
• Proposer shall outline the proposed fees for professional services for all items
requested in this RFP.
• Proposer shall provide a full description of the standard survey package and identify
costs for different levels of services provided by proposer, including, but not limited
to: form of survey, number of benchmark cities, GIS compatibility, presentation to
City Council and/or Management Team, etc.
• Proposer shall indicate the anticipated fee structure and method of payment for
providing the professional services required for this proposal.
• Proposer shall indentify and define all "out of pocket" expenses to be billed in
addition to the negotiated fees, if any, and indicate on what basis they will be
charged. Proposal must clearly indicate what expenses, of any , are the
responsibility of the city.
• It is understood that the prices provided in response to this RFP will remain in effect
for 90 days from the date of deadline for proposals. Therefore, it is in the proposer's
best interest to provide pricing detail.
RFP 2011-2012 Citizen Satisfaction Survey Page 7 of 7
" ' Page 1 of 2
Conrad, Gayle
__ _ _ _ _ _
_ _
From: Lee Tyson [Lee@n-r-c.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 2:35 PM
To: Conrad, Gayle
Subject: RE: City of Cape Girardeau Citizen Satisfaction Survey
Attachments: Cape Girardeau Revised Cost Estimate-Nov16.pdf; NRC Standard Contract.doc
Hi, Gayle,
Great talking to you yesterday. I've gone over our cost estimate and have been able to accommodate
your requests for a (recorded) presentation and a non-scientific Web survey for pubiic input. Try as I
might, I was unable to squeeze in the costs for hard copies of the reports into your budget, but have
provided an estimate if NRC were to produce these reports. (You might be able to get a better price if you
sourced the printing locally.) I've aiso included a copy of NRC's standard contract for you to review.
I was able to reduce the costs for designing the survey methodology; since Council liked our approach of
1,800 surveys stratified by the 6 wards, we won't have to figure out a new plan. The costs for design
reflect geocoding and sampiing for the most part. The presentation wili be recorded by NRC and provided
to Cape Girardeau in an electronic format for inclusion in Council's packet. NRC will attend a Council
meeting via video or telephone conference for Q&A after Council has viewed the presentation. (I suggest
Council write down their questions as they view the recording prior to the meeting O).
You mentioned Council would like to include some open ended questions and we are prepared to include
up to three open ended questions. Generally, , the more directed the open-ended question is, the more
actionable the data will be for Council and staff. Below are some options other clients have asked to give
you an idea of what could be included on the survey.
1. What are the three biggest challenges or problems Cape Girardeau will have to face in the next 5
years?
2. What one thing do you like best about living in Cape Girardeau?
3. What do yau feel is the most serious issue facing Cape Girardeau at this time?
4. In order to improve the services in Cape Girardeau, I would like to see:
5. What do you think is one service that the City of Cape Gi�ardeau can afford to cut entirely or
substantialiy reduce?
One last thing, you mentioned you might be interested in The National Citizen SurveyT"' (The NCS), our
templatized survey product offered in associatian with ICMA. I have not included pricing for The NCS, as I
think we were abie to accommodate your requests through the fuily custom scope. If you would like
pricing for The NCS, I'm happy to provide that as well.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I'm stepping out for an appointment shortly, but will be
back in the office by 3:30 pm (Mountain).
Best,
-�.
Lee Tyson
Research Associate
Natianal Research Center,Inc.
3005 30th St.
Boulder,CO 80301
t:t3Q3}444-7883 x108
f:{3(33}444-1145
e:leena.n-r-c.com
vr:www.n-r-c.com
From: Conrad, Gayle Imailto:GConrad@citvofcapeqirardeau.or41
Sent: Monday, September 26, 2011 10:32 AM
To: Conrad, Gayle
Subject: City of Cape Girardeau Citizen Satisfaction Survey
11/16/2011
� ' Page 2 of 2
To Whom It May Concern:
On September 8, 2011, the City of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, issued a Request for Proposals for Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Citizen Satisfaction Survey, As stated in the RFP, vendors were allowed to submit written questions regarding the RFP
through September 22, 2011.
Attached is a Supplement to the issued RFP, stating each question submitted and the answer thereto. The deadline for
proposals is October 5, 2011, 2:00 p.m. as stated in the Request for Proposal.
Gayle L. Conrad
City Clerk
Gayle L. Conrad, CMC, MRCC
City Clerk
401 Independence, P.O. Box 617
Cape Girardeau, MO 63702-0617
573-339-6704
Qconrad .cityofcapegirardeau.org
11/16/2011
�`'�� CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 12/07/2011n
PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATION IS ISSUED AS A MAITER OF INFORMATION
JEFF OGBURN,STATE FARM INSURANCE ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE
6560 GUNPARK DRIVE�STE A HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR
aBOULDER,CO 80301 ALTER THE COVERACiE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BEIOW.
� INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC#
INSURED INSURER A State farm Fin and Caaualty Compa�y 26143 25143
NATIONAL RESEARCH CEN7ER INC. iNsuaeR s:
300T5 30TH ST. -
INSURER C:
BOULDER,CO 80301 INSURER D:
INSURER E:
COVERA(iE3
THE POIICiES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED.N0TIMTHSTANDING
ANY REQUIREMENT,TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR
MAY PERTAIN,THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS,EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH
POLICIES.A(3GREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.
INS AOD' TypE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER pA�M��T�VE p�Y�EX�RA710N ��M�
LTR INS
q X oeN�n�uneiurr 96-BU-3823-8 11/16/2011 11N612012 �CH OCCURRENCE s 1,000,000
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABI�IN PREMISES Ea ocwrtence S SOO�OOO
CIAIMS MADE �OCCUR MED EXP(My ona parson)_ S �O,OOO
X HIRED AUTO LIABILITY PERSONAlB ADV INJURY S
X NON-OWNEDAUTOS GENERALAGGREGATE $ Z,OOO,OOO
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COMPfOP AGG S
X POLICY PRa
JECT LOC $
AUroMOBILe UABIUrI 761-3304-E21-06 11/29f2011 11I28/2012 COMBINED SINGLE LIMR
ANY AUTO (Ea accidenl) S
ALl OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY
SCHE�uLEOAuroS �p�,�„a,� s 1,000,000
HIREDAUTOS BODILYINJURY a 1,000,000
NON-0WNED AUTOS (Per eccdBM)
PROPERTY DAMAGE f ��OOO�OOO
(P�accidenq
6ARA(3E LIABILITY AUTO ONLY-EA ACCIDENT $
ANV AUTO OTHER THAN �ACC S
AUTO ONLY: AGG S
pfCE38/UMBRELLA UABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE E
_ �OCCUR �CLAIMS MADE AGGREGATE S
a
DEDUCTIBLE _
RETENTION i S
VYORKERS COMPEN8ATION AND TORY LIMITS ER
EMPLOYERS'LIA8ILITY —
ANY PROPRIETORJPARTNERlEXECUTIVE Y� E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?
IMandetory in NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYE S
K yes,desaibe under E.L.DISEASE-POUCY LNu11T S
OTHER
BUSINESS PROPERTY 96-BU-3823-8 575,100
11116/2011 17l16/2012
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS!LOCATION8/VEHICLES/EXCLU810NS ADDEp BY ENDORSEMENT/BPECIAL PRUVI${ON8
RESEARCH
CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
8HOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCR.LED BEFORE THE E%PIRAiION
DATE THEREOF,THE ISSUING INSURER YVlll ENDFAVOR TO MAII �_ OAYS WRITTEN
NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE IEFT,BUT FAILURE TO DO 80 SHALL
IMPOSE NO OBUDAiION OR LJABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON TNE INSURER,ITS AGENTS OR
REpRESENTA71VE3.
AUTHORIZED REPREHENTATNE �
JEFF OGBURN
ACORO 25(2009101) �1988-2009 ACORD PO TION. All righffi reserved.
The ACORD name and logo are registered marka of ACORD 1001486 132849.3 04-06-2009
'"JMr� OP ID:MC1
'`���t' CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE(MM/DD/YYYY)
12/13/10
THiS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS
CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES
BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.
IMPORTANT: If the certi£cate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to
the terms and conditions of the policy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the
certi£cate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s).
PRODUCER 303-781-6776 CONTACT
NEISEN BORTH AGENCY NAME:
303-789-4409 PHONE FAX
www.nbinsure.com "� Ex : A/C No:
E-MAIL
333 W.Hampden Ave.Ste.410 ADDRESS:
PRODUCER NATI430
Englewood,CO 80110 CUSTOMERID#:
INSURER S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC#
INSURED National Research Center,Inc. �NsuReR a:Philadelphia lnsurance Company
3005 30th Street INSURER B:
Boulder,CO 80301
INSURER C:
INSURER D:
INSURER E:
INSURER P:
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: REVISION NUMBER:
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD
INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS
CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS,
EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES.LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS.
INSR 7ypE OF INSURANCE DD UBR POLICY EFF POLICY EXP
�TR POLICY NUMBER MM/DD MMIDD/YYW LIMRS
GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $
COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY PREMISES Ea occurtence 8
CLAIMS-MADE �OCCUR MED EXP(Any one person) $
PERSONAL 6 ADV INJURY $
GENERALAGGREGATE $
GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS-COMP/OP AGG $
POLICY PR� LOC $
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGIE LIM�T
ANY AUTO (Ea accident) $
BODILY INJURY(Per person) $
ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY(Per accident) $
SCHEDULED AUTOS PROPERTY DAMAGE
HIRED AUTOS (Per accidenl) $
NON-OWNED AUTOS $
$
UMBRELLA LIAB OCCUR EACH OCCURRENCE $
EXCESS LIAB CLAIMS-MADE AGGREGATE $
DEDUCTIBLE g
RETENTION $ g
WORKERS COMPENSATION WC STATU- OTH-
AND EMPLOYERS'LIABIIITY Y�N T R I
ANV PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCIUDED7 � N�A E.L.EACH ACCIDENT $
(Mandatory in NH) E.L.DISEASE-EA EMPLOYE $
If yes,describe under
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $
q Professional Liab PHSD581443 01/01/17 01/01/12 ProflE&O 2,000,00
Errors&Omissions Ded 5,00
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I LOCATIONS I VEHICLES (Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks ScAedule,if more space is required)
CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
NATIORE
SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE
National Research Center,�f1C THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.
3005 30th Street
Boulder,CO$030� AUTHORIZEDREVRESENTATIVE
�'���.�r.�. ��-
OO 1988-2009 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved.
ACORD 25(2009/09) The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD
DATE(MMIDDM()
`'�R"° CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 06�,��„
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMA710N ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS
CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES
BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTiTUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER,AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER.
IMPORTANT: If the certtficate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED,the policy(ies)must be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED,subject to
the terms and conditions of the poiicy,certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to
the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). �
PRODUCER CONTACT Aon Risk Services,Inc of Florida
Aon Risk Services,Inc of Florida NAME:
1001 Brickell Bay Drive,Suite If1100 PHONE gp0-743-613o FAX g00-522-751
Miami,FL 33131-4937 (A/C No.Ext: A/C,No):
E-MAIL ADP.COI.Center@Aoncom
ADDRESS:
PRODUCER �0762287
CUSTOMER ID#:
INSURER(S)AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC#
INSURED INSURER A:New Hampshire Ins Co 23841
ADP TotalSource I,Inc. INSURER B:
10200 SunselUrrve
Miami,FL 33173 INSURER C:
ALTERNATE EMPLOYER INSURER D:
National Research Center Inc
3005 30th Street, INSURER E:
Boulder,CO 80301 INSURER F:
COVERAGES CERTIFICATE NUMBER: 297575 REVISION NUMBER:
THIS IS TO CERTIFY 7HAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD
INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS
CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL 7HE TERMS,
EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. LI��II'I:S SH01VN ARE:�\S REQl1F5lFD.
INSR 7ypE OF INSURANCE �DL SUBR pp�ICV NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS
LTR INSR WVD DATE(MMIDOfYYYY) DATE�MMIDDlVYYV)
GENERAL LIABILITY EACH OCCURRENCE $
�COMMERCIAL GENERAL UABILITY DAMAGE TO RENTED
O aniMs Mqpe �O oCCurt PREMISES(Ea occurrence) $
MED EXP(My one person) $
PERSONAL&ADV INJURY $
GENERALAGGREGATE � $
GEN'L AGGREGATE UMIT APPLIES PER� p{tQDUCTS—COMP/OP AGG $
O POl.ICV ❑PROJECT ❑LOC a
AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $
❑nrrv nuTo (Ea accidenl) _
❑ALL OWNED AU70S BODILY INJURY
(PBf person) $
❑SCHEDUIEDAUTOS
❑HIRFD AUTO$ BODILY INJURY $
(Per accident)
❑NOfJ OWNED AUTOS
' PROPERTYDAMAGE S
(Perecddenq
❑ UMBRELLALIAB UCCUH EAChIOC:;URReN�E $
❑ EXCESS LIAB CLAIIJIS-MADE AGGREGATE �
O DEDUGTIBLE $
❑ RE7EN'ION S
$
q WORKERS'COMPENSATION AND WC 012437064 CO 07/01(11 07101/12 X WC STATU- OTHEft
EMPLOYERS'LIABILITY TORV LIMI7S
ANY PRCPRIETORIPARTNERIEXECUTIVE E.L.EP':H ACCIDENT $ Z,OOO,OOO
OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED? NIA
(MandaloryinNH) E.L.D�SEASE—EAEMPLOYEE $ 2,000,000
II yea.dexriba unclar
DESCRIPTION OF OPEFATIONS below E.L.DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT $ 2,000,000
DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS I�OCATIONS I VEHICLES(Attach ACORD 101,Additional Remarks Schedule,if more space is required)
All worksite employees worki�g for the above named client company,paid under ADP TOTALSOURCE.INC's payroll,are covered under the above staled pdicy. The above nemed clienl Is en allernate
employer under lhis pdicy.
CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION
NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER INC. SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE
3005 30TH STREET - THEREOF,NOTICE W ILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE W ITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS.
BOULDER,CO 80301 AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
pgon p�i k�e�vice�, Qn.c o f�lotlda
Clt�/ Of Cdpe Giral'deal.l `; Citizen Satisfaction Survey
. A Response to a Request for Proposals by
•
NATIONAL
RESEARCH
C E N T E R iNc.
Date of Submittal:
October 5, 2.011
3005 3o`n Street • Boulder,CO 8o3oi • t:3�3-444-7863 ' f�303-444-��45 • �'�'WW•n-r-c.com
•
NATIONAL
RESEARCH
C E N T E R mc
Ms.Gayle Conrad,City Clerk
City of Cape Girardeau
4oi Independence, PO Box 6i7
�ape Girardeau,MO 637oz-o6i7
October 3,zoii
Dear Ms.Conrad and the evaluation team,
On behalf of National Research Center,Inc.(NRC), I am pleased to submit this proposal to the City of Cape
Girardeau to conduct the Fiscal Year zo�i-zoiz Citizen Satisfaction Survey.
NRC is proud to be among the few nationally recognized survey consultancies with staff that can assure the
strongest,most useful survey methods and results.We will continue to collaborate closely with Cape Girardeau
staff on each decision,from putting the finishing touch on the methodology to finalizing the report and
presenting the results.
Our team offers a depth of experience unparalleled by any competitor; NRC staff assigned to this project have
provided in-depth consultation to local government leaders across years of experience and hundreds of
jurisdictions. NRC's strong reputation,attention to methods and experience with survey results as
performance metrics in local government will serve you well.
Please feel free to contact me or Laurie Urban(laurie�a n-r-c.com),the project manager,with any questions
you may have.We look forward to speaking with you about this important project.
Kindest regards,
//
/i�i�
Thomas I Miller,PhD
President
tom�a n-r-c.com
3005 3oth Street • Boulder,CO 8o3oi • t:303-444-7863 • f�303-444-»45 • W�'�'W•n-r-c.com
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • i
Contents
A. Business Profile and Legal Structure........................................................................................i
B. Experience................................................................................................................................. 3
C. Personnel ....................................................................................................................................7
D. Project Approach.....................................................................................................................�o
Workingwith NRC...............................................................................................................................................io
Task z: Develop the Survey Instrument..............................................................................................................i3
Task3:Conduct Survey.......................................................................................................................................�4
Task 4:Benchmark Survey Information.............................................................................................................i9
Task5:Optional Services....................................................................................................................................zo
Timeline.........................................................................................................................................2�
E. Pricing........................................................................................................................................z.z
F. E-Verify......................................................................................................................................z3
Appendix: Relevant Public Contract.......................................................................................... 24
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
` Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey � �
� A. Business Profile and Legal Structure
National Research Center,Inc.(NRC)is the well-known and highly regarded citizen survey research firm that
operates across the U.S.and worldwide.With a focus on local government research,NRC principals have been
leading the strategic use of citizen surveys since i99�,when the principals of the company wrote the first
edition of what became the classic text on citizen surveying:Citizen Surveys:How to do them,how to use them,
what they mean.We have pioneered the citizen survey industry,creating new and innovative tools and
analyses that provide our clients with the most useful information so they can take action and implement new
policies or programs or modify existing ones.After a revision f our first book in zoo�,we wrote a second book
to help jurisdictions understand how to use survey results effectively:Citizen Surveys:A comprehensive guide to
making them matter(published by the International CityJCounty Management Association(ICMA)in January
zoo9):
Over the past i7 years,NRC has conducted more than i,000 surveys
of residents for local jurisdictions,ranging in population size from Nationai Research Center,Inc.
approximately i,5oo residents to over one million.Many of these at-a-glance
Incorporated: �994
surveys have been used extensively in performance measurement, Bouider County,
council goal setting and strategic planning.We have designed and coiorado
managed large and small samples and data collection and we have Address: 3005 30`�5t.
conducted focus groups and town hall meetings linked to survey Bou�der,co so3o,
Telep hone: 3 03-444-7863
findings and strategic planning.We know what it takes to do a Fax: 303-444-»45
citizen satisfaction survey project right and we commit to complete Email: nrc�a n-rvc.com
our survey projects with rigorous methods and accurate results. Federa�i�: sq-�zsb�zq
URL: www.n-r-c,com
Services: Surveys
We have in-house capability and expertise to meet all survey project Focus groups
development,analysis and reporting needs,and we manage project Needsassessments
resources responsibly.We assign dedicated project staff who have Peogr`am e�aluat�on
years of citizen surveying experience.We also are part of a larger P��a����e measureme�,ti:,
���apacity buitding
community that includes our local government clients,organizations
that support local government[ICMA,the American Society of
Public Administration(ASPA)and the American Evaluation Association(AEA)],survey research firms and
associations of professionals dedicated to innovative quality research methods[American Association of Public
Administration(AAPOR)and the Council of American Survey Research Organizations(CASRO)],and we take
seriously our responsibilities to these communities.
We understand the limitations of government resources,and we have vast experience working with
organizations operating with restricted research budgets. NRC purposefully has avoided the weight of carrying
a telephone call center as in-house because we do not want to be anchored by the financial pressure to
recommend telephone surveying when other methods—mail,Web or in-person—can yield better data,higher
response rates or lower costs. By avoiding ownership of a telephone field service,we are able to provide a
dispassionate perspective about the best data collection methods for our clients.
Because we have generated custom-crafted questions for more than�,000 survey projects,we have the
background and instinct to develop concise and effective questions for Cape Girardeau's unique concerns.
Some specific question areas that may be of use to the city in addition to those listed in the RFP include:
willingness to pay for new programs or facilities,support for new taxes or referendum items and interest in
specific new policies.We have an in-depth understanding of the time and logistical requirements for all steps
involved in the survey process.We are knowledgeable about the obstacles that can throw a project off course.
We have encountered and solved many problems over the years.When we commit to a study timeline and
costs we meet the established goals.We help keep our projects on budget and on time by detailing our survey
methods and assumptions in the proposal,working closely with the client throughout the process,and
discussing up-front the potential financial or time impact of a methodological change.
� Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • z
NRC provides a range of consultative services,including survey research,meeting,workshop and town hall
facilitation,qualitative approaches like focus groups and stakeholder interviews,as well as strategic planning
to connect all of the pieces to ensure that organizations understand their results and can make the survey
work for them.We work closely with ICMA's Center for Performance Management and train local government
staff on the uses of survey research in performance management systems.Last fall and again in September this
year,we conducted a training on survey research methods and uses(Citizen Survey Basics:Using Surveys to
Improve Performance:the people are speaking...can you hear them?)at the ICMA conference in San Jose
(zo�o)and then in Milwaukee(zoii),as well as a special session(both years),"STILL Using Citizen Surveys to
Make Tough Budget Decisions"that included a panel of city managers who discussed,with NRC as session
lead,how using resident surveys helped them balance budgets to conform to resident values.We also
facilitated a round table discussion in zoio among city managers,"How to Win Support and Influence Public
Opinion,"that focused on what jurisdictions can do to move public opinion and in zoii "Surveying for Action."
We do not approach citizen surveys naively.With years of experience as local government employees,
including our president's work as an interim communication director for a municipality,we are intimately
aware of the value and,frankly,even the challenges of resident survey results.This experience permits us to
give guidance to our clients.We continue to inform local government officials about important trends in citizen
surveying through our newsletter,Perspectives.There is no other firm with as strong a reputation,as long a
history and as great an ongoing contribution to citizen surveying as NRC.
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 3
B. Experience
Below we list five clients for whom we have performed work that is similar in scope to that desired by the City
of Cape Girardeau.These projects serve not only as references for NRC as a whole,but also for some or all of
the staff who will be assigned to your project.We have listed the client's main contact for the project(and
additional contacts,if applicable).
Fort Collins, CO Citizen Survey 2008, 2010
The City of Fort Collins,Colorado conducts residents surveys on a regular basis to provide residents the
opportunity to rate the quality of life in the city and their satisfaction with community amenities and local
government.The survey also allows residents to provide feedback to the City government on what was
working well and what was not,and their priorities for community planning and resource allocation.The initial
baseline Fort Collins Citizen Survey was conducted in zooi with subsequent iterations in zoo3,zoo6,zoo8 and
zoio.NRC was contracted to conduct the beginning zoo8.Our expertise enabled us to seamiessly integrate the
results compiled by a previous vendor with the results garnered by NRC and conveyed actionable results to City
staff through the benchmark comparisons.
For the zoio survey,�,80o residents within city boundaries and zoo Colorado State University(CSU)dormitory
students were randomly selected to receive survey mailings.Of the z,000 surveys mailed in April Zoio,about 8z
were returned because the housing unit was vacant or the postal service was unable to deliver the survey as
addressed.Of the i,9�8 households that received a survey,737 completed the survey,48 of which were CSU
dormitory students,providing an overall response rate of 389�.This is a good response rate;typical response
rates for a mailed resident survey range from z5�to 403�.It is customary to describe the precision of estimates
made from surveys by a"level of confidence"(or margin of error).The 95�confidence level is typically no
greater than plus or minus four percentage points around any given percent based on community-wide
estimates.
Comparisons were made between zoio responses and those from prior years,when available.The zoio results
also were compared by demographic characteristics and geographic area of residence.In addition,the City of
Fort Collins elected to have results compared to those of other jurisdictions around the nation and to Front
Range jurisdictions.These comparisons are made possible through National Research Center's(NRC's)national
benchmark database,which contains resident perspectives gathered in citizen surveys from approximately 500
jurisdictions,including cities and counties.
Contact: Kelly DiMartino
City of Fort Collins
30o LaPorte Ave.
Ft.Collins,CO 8o5zi
970-4�6-zoz8
kdimartino�a fcgov.com
Budget: Sz4,95o
Project manager: Laurie Urban, BA
Report: htt�:/Iwww.fcgoy.com�itizensurve pdf�Fort-Collins-zo.io-Re�ort-FINAL-o7-i�-zoio-z. f
Minnesota Counties Citizen Surveys 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011
Since zoo4,NRC has worked with a consortium of counties in Minnesota developing and administering their
resident surveys in a cost-effective manner.Scott and Dakota Counties first collaborated during the zoo4
Residential Survey administration,with Washington County joining for the first time during the zoo6
administration.Olmsted and Carver Counties joined the group administration for Zoo8.In zoi�,St. Louis County
partnered with Dakota and Scott Counties on the collaborative survey effort and worked together with NRC to
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 4
develop a survey instrument with a set of shared questions,as well as questions unique to each county.The
zo» Minnesota Counties project was a mailed survey of residents of Dakota,Scott and St. Louis Counties.The
surveys provided residents the opportunity to rate the quality of life in their county,as well as service delivery
and their satisfaction with local government.The survey also permitted residents to provide feedback to
government on what was working well and what was not and to share their priorities for community planning
and resource aliocation.
Through an iterative process,NRC staff worked in partnership with the three counties to develop surveys that
asked recipients about their perspectives on the quality of life in the county,use of County amenities,opinion
on policy issues facing the County,and assessment of County service delivery. Each county received a detailed
report of results,trend analysis,benchmark comparisons,key driver analysis,crosstabulations of results,and
head-to-head comparisons by county.The project culminated with a joint Dakota and Scott Counties
presentation of results,delivered by Tom Miller.
Project managers: Laurie Urban,Research Associate and Shannon Hayden,Senior Research Associate
Report:h t��www.co.dakota.mn.us�NRlydonl�[resJ000048e4J1¢juehuaucfqauibazjkketwvw__�qy�zo�oResidentSurvey.pdf
Contact: Jane Vandepoel
Dakota County
i590 Hwy 55
Hastings,MN 55033
65�-43$-4423
Jane.Vanderpoel�a co.dakota.mn.us
Budget: Sz4,79a
Linnea Betzler Mirsch
St.Louis County
ioo N.5th Avenue W.#zoz
Duluth,MN 55802
2i 8-733-z747
mirschl�a stlouiscountymn.gov
Budget: 52�,450
Contact: Lisa Kohner
Scott County Government Center
zoo Fourth Ave West �
Shakopee,MN 55379
95z-496-8780
Ikohner�a co.scott.mn.us
Budget: $i9,zoo
Shorewood, MN Community Survey 2011
The City of Shorewood,MN selected NRC through a competitive bidding process to conduct its first resident
survey.The zoii questionnaire was designed to gather resident perspectives about the pressing issues and
tradeoffs that the city is facing,as well as to assess the quality of life and community in Shorewood and ratings
of City services.Additionally,several questions on the survey were included as part of the State of Minnesota's
performance measurement system.The mailed survey will be sent to i,zoo randomly selected households in
Shorewood in mid-October zo�i and data will be collected over the following five to six weeks.Selected
households also will be able to complete the survey on the Web,if desired.At the start of data analysis,the
survey data will be weighted to reflect the demographic profile of the residents of Shorewood.Analyses
include basic descriptive statistics and full frequency distributions,a Key Driver Analysis,two sets of
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 5
benchmark comparisons(national and one custom set)and crosstabulations of select survey questions by
demographic characteristics.The report of results will consist of an executive summary that highlights the key
findings,a report body with data presented in tables and stylish,colorful graphics with interpretive and
meaningful text,and appendices including a detailed description of the survey methodologies.A presentation
of the survey results will be made to City Council once the report is finalized.We have included a copy of the
executed contract as an example of or most recent relevant ongoing public contract(see Appendix: Relevant
Public Contract).
Project manager: Laurie Urban,Research Associate
Contact: Brian Heck
City of Shorewood
5575 Country�lub Road
Shorewood,MN 5533�
95z-96o-7905
bheck�a ci.shorewood.mn.us
Budget: $i8,800
Maple Grove, MN Community Survey 2008
A telephone survey instrument was created in an iterative process between the Citizen Advisory Council(CAC),
City staff and NRC staff that included in-person meetings and Web surveys to efficiently prioritize preferences
of survey questions and response options.The zoo8 Citizen Survey allowed residents to rate the quality of life
in the City of Maple Grove,as well as the service delivery and overall workings of local government. Residents
also shared their priorities for community planning and resource allocation.Because Maple Grove had
administered a resident survey before,some comparisons could be made between zoo8 responses and those
from zoo�.Maple Grove also elected to have its results compared to those of other jurisdictions around the
nation,using NRC's national benchmark database.
A total of 40�telephone interviews were completed with a random selection of resident households.The
response rate was 35q.Survey results were weighted so that respondent age,gender and housing tenure(rent
or own)were represented in proportions reflective of the entire city.The margin of error was plus or minus 4•9
percentage points around any given percentage point reported for the entire sample.
Project manager:Shannon Hayden,Senior Research Associate
Contact: Mike Opatz
iz800 Arbor Lakes Parkway
Maple Grove,MN 55369
763-494-6005
mopatz�a ci.maple-grove.mn.us
Budget: SZ4,495
City of 0'Fallon, IL Citizen Survey Z005, 2007, 2009, 2011
The National Citizen SurveyTM(The NCS),is a customizable survey developed by NRC to provide a statistically
valid estimate of resident opinions about community and services provided by local government.The NCST"^
service administers,analyzes and reports results about quality of life,quality of services,public engagement,
public trust and a set of demographic questions. In zoii,The NCST""was customized for the City of O'Fallon
through cooperation with local jurisdiction staff.O'Fallon staff selected items from a menu of questions about
services and community issues and provided the appropriate letterhead and signatures for mailings.City of
O'Fallon staff also augmented The NCST"'basic service through a variety of options including crosstabulations
of results by sociodemographics and geographic location,several custom questions,as well as comparisons of
zoi�data to previous survey data.The NCS was mailed to i,zoo households,and total of 40� surveys were
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 6
completed,providing a response rate of 359�.O'Fallon's results were compared to all jurisdictions in the
� benchmarking database.
Project manager: Damema Mann,Director of The National Citizen SurveyT""
Contact: Walter Denton,City Administrator
255 South Lincoln
O'Fallon,IL 6zz69
6i8-6z4-45o0
wdenton�a ofallon.org
Budget: 5��,900
Additional Midwestern Communities
NRC has conducted resident surveys for these Midwest cities,counties and organizations:
• Ankeny, IA • Kansas Department of • Roseville,MN
• Bettendorf,IA Wildlife and Parks • Scott County,MN
• Muscatine,IA • Salina,KS • Shorewood,MN
• Urbandale,IA • Wichita,KS • St.Cloud,MN
• Collinsville,IL • Ann Arbor,MI • St. Louis County,MN
• Crystal Lake, IL • Delhi Township,MI •.�Maryville,MO
• DeKalb, IL • Farmington Hills,MI • Richmond Heights,MO
• Evanston,IL • Howell,MI • ,�St.Charles, MO
• Highland Park, IL • Jackson County,MI • Wildwood,MO
• Homewood, IL • Kalamazoo County,MI • Grand Island,NE
• Lincolnwood, IL • Meridian Township,MI • La Vista,NE
• Oak Park, IL • Midland,MI • Delaware, OH
• O'Fallon, IL • Novi, MI • Dublin,OH
• Palatine,IL • Oakland Township,MI • Hamilton County,OH
• Park Ridge,IL • Petoskey,MI • Hudson,OH
• Peoria County, IL • Rochester,MI • Sandusky,OH
• Riverside, IL • South Haven,MI • Sylvania,OH
• Shorewood,IL • Troy,MI • UpperArlington,OH
• Skokie, IL • Beltrami County,MN • Post Falls,SD
• Sugar Grove, IL • Carver County,MN • Rapid City,SD
• Wilmington, IL • Chanhassen,MN • Sioux Falis,SD
• Brownsburg,IN • Dakota County,MN • Appleton,WI
• Fishers,IN • Duluth,MN • Eau Claire,WI
• Munster,IN • Hutchinson,MN • Merrill,WI
• Noblesville,IN • Maple Grove,MN • Milton,WI
• Northwest Indiana • Maplewood,MN • Whitewater,WI
CommunityAction,Crown • Medina,MN
Point, IN • Minneapolis,MN
• Arkansas City, KS • Olmsted County,MN
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� �ape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 7
C. Personnel
NRC employs a team of social scientists with years of management experience.Whether a survey research firm
has one staff member,five or zo,people take vacations,get sick,have family emergencies. If this happens,it
' will be especially useful to your project to have hired a firm in which there are many skilled research
professionals who also are experienced managers ready to take over a task to keep your project on time and of
high quality. ,
Our staff are not the kind you'll find in a market research firm.NRC is a team of professionals working in the
areas of research and evaluation.All of our senior staff members have PhDs or Masters'degrees in areas of
economics,public health or educational assessment with specialized training in public administration research.
Beyond training,our staff members have significant experience conducting research outside of academia,
providing a competence and grounding in the real world of survey research.We not only are strong
methodologists,we have a strong appreciation of the mission of city staff whose first allegiance is to their
constituents,not measurement.
The following organizational chart illustrates NRC's staff members assigned to the project. NRC has ii full-time
staff.Of these,eight are professionals with years of direct experience running and participating in survey
research for local government.Tom Miller will provide oversight and give the presentation, Laurie Urban will
serve as project manager,Sam Cole will provide assistance and back-up to Laurie and Tom throughout the
project and Shannon Hayden will be available as a technical resource for all team members. NRC has the
capacity to conduct this study with the highest quality.Tom,Laurie,Shannon and Sam have projects through
zoii and into zoiz that amount to between 509�and 759�of their scheduled hours,and will have sufficient
capacity to conduct the Cape Girardeau's Citizen Satisfaction Survey.
Figure 1: Key Emp�oyees
!i
�i V�I
ITom Miller PhD President
, ,
• Project oversight,quality assurance,council presentation
Laurie Urban,BA,Research Associate
• Project manager and day-to-day contact
• Instrument and sampling plan,analyses,reporting
Sam Cole,MA,Research Associate
• Secondary contact
• Instrument development and analysis assistance
Shannon Hayden,MA,Senior Research Associate
• Technical resource
• Samolin�and analvsis assistance
Thomas I Miller,PhD,earned a PhD in research and evaluation methods from the University of Colorado,
Boulder. He has worked in state and local government and as a consultant to government for more than
twenty years.With Michelle Kobayashi,he wrote,Citizen Surveys:How to do them,how to use them,what they
mean,published in z000 by the International City/County Management Association(ICMA),Washington,D.C.
and Citizen Surveys for Local Government:A comprehensive guide to making them matter,published in zoo9 by
ICMA. He has designed,overseen and written results of hundreds of research and evaluation projects and
presented his findings to a wide variety of audiences,both academic and lay. Has he written about survey
research in journals and books devoted to public management,including Public Administration Review,Journal
o f the American Planning Association,Journal o f Policy Analysis and Management,Planning Commissioners
Journal,American lournal o f Evaluation,The Ideas Quarterly Report,Management Science and Policy Analysis,
Handbook o f Practical Program Evaluation, Handbook o f Social Intervention,Performance Matters,Governing and
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 8
Perspectives. In addition to being a dynamic and engaging presenter,Tom has facilitated numerous focus
groups and town hall meetings and made presentations to elected officials and staff.Tom founded NRC in i994
in Boulder,CO,the same city in which he makes his home.
Laurie Urban,BA,has a degree,in Speech Communications with a focus in Public Relations from Miami
University.As a project manager at NRC, Laurie's excellent communication skills are used daily in interactions
with clients and have fostered strong customer satisfaction and long-term relationships.In her nine years with
NRC, Laurie has conducted numerous research projects,managing all facets of the projects. Laurie has
cultivated strong quantitative skilis,along with her body of qualitative work,conducting focus groups and
stakeholder interviews.Laurie has managed scores of citizen surveys,including Fort Coliins,CO;Centenniai,
CO;Parker,CO; Lone Tree,CO;Aspen,CO; Rockville,MD;Westminster,CO;Wheat Ridge,CO; Louisville,CO;
Arvada,CO; Dakota County,MN;Scott County,MN;St.Louis County,MN;Dublin,CA; Edmond,OK;
Montgomery County,MD;and Honolulu,HI.She has collaborated with other project managers on numerous
other survey projects,including the Lakewood,CO Citizen Survey,Carver.�ounty,MN;Washington County,
MN,Minneapolis,MN;San Francisco,CA;South Daytona,FL; Long Beach,CA.Currently, Laurie is analyzing the
results of Aspen's citizen survey.As the project manager,Laurie worked with City staff to develop the
instrument and devised an appropriate sampling plan.She conducted all of the analyses including generating
the benchmark comparisons and Key Driver Analysis(KDA).She will assume a similar role for Cape Girardeau's
Citizen Satisfaction Survey project. Laurie has worked for NRC since zooz and resides in Loveland,CO.
Sam Cole,MA,research associate,will defend his thesis on the development of science identity,an evaluation
of youth development programs at the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry,in zoiz to complete the
requirements for his PhD.In addition to research experience gained though his studies,Sam served as a
statistical and survey research consultant on survey design,experimental design and statistical analysis for the
American Dental Association(ADA)where he was responsible for consulting with ADA members,creating web-
based and mailed surveys,managing implementation,cleaning datasets,and preparing reports for
practitioners and dental education programs.At Loyola University Chicago he taught undergraduate classes in
Advanced Statistical Analysis and conducted a Social Psychology Lab. For the Mather Lifeways Institute on
Aging he designed,implemented,analyzed and reported on all in-house evaluations focusing on resident
satisfaction and quality of life,staff satisfaction,and project effectiveness.He prepared a variety of research
reports and papers for executive team members and contributed to obtaining grant funding by assisting in
writing/editing grant proposals.Since joining NRC,Sam has stepped into the role of project manager for an
eval�ation of county-wide Substance Abuse levels among adults and teenage youth living in the county.He is
also managing a number of other research projects.Sam has worked for NRC since zoii and lives in Lafayette,
CO.
Shannon Hayden,MA,senior research associate,Shannon earned her undergraduate degree in sociology
from The Colorado College and a master's degree in educational psychology(emphasis on research and
evaluation methodology)from the University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center.Shannon has
been involved in more than ioo survey,evaluation and research projects at NRC both in the role of project
manager and by providing oversight and guidance to other project managers.She guides projects from initial
conversations about the purpose,through study design,execution,analysis and report writing.She is well-
versed in the art and mechanics of research and has a unique talent for presenting results to audiences
whether novice or expert in evaluation techniques.Shannon helped to develop The National Citizen SurveyT"',a
templatized survey now used in more than z75 jurisdictions in 4i states to elicit regular feedback from
residents in a simple and cost efficient manner.Drawing from her expertise in public opinion research,she
recently co-authored the book,Citizen Surveys:A Comprehensive Guide to Making Them Matter,published in
zoo9 by the International City�County Management Association,Washington, D.C.Shannon has worked for
NRC since z000 and lives in Boulder,CO.
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • 9
It is not just our intention to offer the highest quality survey work.NRC regularly measures its own
performance and improves our services based on customer feedback.Our own measures of performance
sho�ld give Cape Girardeau comfort about the level of performance you can expect from us. For the most
recent 3i7 NRC clients,our perFormance measures,derived from anonymous surveys of our clients,are as
follows:
• 95�of clients would be likely to recommend NRC for similar work
• 93�of clients felt that staff spent the right amount of time collaborating with NRC on their project
• 989�of clients rated the professionalism of staff as excellent or good
• 96q of clients rated the flexibility of staff as excellent or good
Figure 2: NRC Client Recommendations and Perception of Time Spent on Project(N=317)
Recommend NRC
Amount of time spent by
your staff collaborating with
NRC
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Figure 3: NRC Client Perceptions of NRC Staff(N=319)
Staff professionalism
:�•
Staff flexibility
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • io
. D. Project Approach
Citizen surveys,arguably,are important in the best of times,but when the economy turns south,citizen
surveys become essential.As a city looks to the future,resident perspectives about the pressing issues and
tradeoffs that the city is forced to face can be tested in a high quality,credible survey.A high-quality citizen
survey will help Cape Girardeau to track the success of its policy,programs and personnel changes over time,
serving as a strong example of accountability and a valuable resource for targeting where improvements still
need to be made.As a city continues to focus on cost reductions to make ends meet,it is especially critical to
monitor how service reductions,fee increases,efficiency measures and budget reallocations affect resident
opinion about the quality of community life and city services.
Working with NRC
NRC supports an organizational and project management structure that creates clear lines of communication
and a single point of contact while encouraging our clients to contact any staff with questions at any time.We
propose for NRC to take the lead in each project task,soliciting input and feedback from the City.We will
prioritize regular,informative communication to ensure that broad and specific goals and timelines are
understood by all and are met.
We will use our survey research expertise to provide guidance,including pros,cons and recommendations to
Cape Girardeau staff to facilitate decision making.We are accustomed to making such technical information
accessible and clear in discussions and in writing.
We believe that it is our responsibility to be quick and thorough in our responses,whether to general project
questions or in producing a new survey draft,as examples.We find that our clients appreciate maximizing their
own time reviewing study materials and options,so we aim to respond as quickly as possible.
We will provide guidance to the City's internal survey team through a combination of in-person,email and
telephone communications,as best fits the City's preferences and needs.We will collaborate with the City to
establish and clarify project goals,objectives and clear indicators for project success.
Simply being experts in content or research methods does not guarantee that an organization can produce a
research or evaluation study that is useful to clients. NRC staff understand that planning for the best
deliverable will begin with close collaboration with the City.At the outset of our work,we will talk with you to
clarify the purposes of the project,identify the key contacts and stakeholders and learn the personnel, political
and geographic contingencies that may influence the work.Throughout any project,we check in with you to
test our direction,work on solving problems and plan for the final product.Collaboration vastly improves our
work and will help ensure that the City gets what is most helpful to its mission.
Specific items we anticipate we will require from Cape Girardeau staff are:
• Guidance on the questions you would like to ask in the surveys
• Copies of any previous surveys and accompanying data(if available)
• A map(or ESRI geodatabase or shapefile,if available)delineating the service area boundaries
• Letterhead,logo and signatures to include on the mailing materials
• Reviews of draft documents
• Approval of all documents
Task 1: Design Survey Methodology
Based on NRC's experience and that of other survey researchers,we have created a table that compares the
strengths of various survey administration modes(see Table i,p.��).NRC recommends a mailed survey for
Cape Girardeau.A mailed survey will maximize the amount of data that can be collected because the cost per
completed mailed survey is close to a third less than the cost of a properly completed phone survey.That
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • ��
means that for the same cost,more residents can participate in the survey and the margin of error will be
improved.A mail survey also can include more questions than are typically tolerated by respondents via phone.
Another reason to conduct the survey via mail is the geographic precision and associated coverage(or
inclusivity).We also are proposing to permit Web completion of the survey from those households that receive
the mailed survey.(Because mail and Web surveys are both"self-administered,"their results can be combined
without statistical adjustments.)NRC proposes a mailing of 30o surveys to each of the 6 Wards in Cape
Girardeau,for a total of i,800 mailed surveys.
There are a number of ways university students can be surveyed.The easiest and Methods Consideration
most cost efficient manner would be to include a question on the survey asking if Coilecting data by both
the respondent is a student at Southeast Missouri State University or another , phone and mail means
college or university.About z59�,or z,5oo undergraduates,live in Southeast ' that data cannot be
residence halls.Since the majority of Southeast students live off campus,there is combined without
a good chance we will be able to reach these students through our random ' statistical adjustments.
sampling. However,depending on the City's relationship with Southeast,we —
could determine if the schools would be willing to share either the mailing or email addresses of their student
so that we could include a sample of students in the study.The school could email their students the URL to
complete the survey online.Alternatively,we could take an approach similar to the one we used in Fort Collins,
Colorado.For the City of Fort Collins,NRC mailed ioo surveys to students in dormitories at Colorado State
University(CSU).Also,the addresses of several off-campus,University-owned residences were identified in the
geographically-coded sample,and these survey recipients were mailed a survey in a different color(so that we
could identify the returns as CSU students).If the City would like to take this approach to including Southeast
students,we would set aside a subset of the i,800 resident surveys for Southeast students.
Table 1: Comparison of administration methods for general population surveys
Issue Phone Mail Web'
Expense per completed survey Moderately Moderately Moderately
expensive inexpensive inexpensive
Speed of administration Moderately Moderately Moderately
fast slow fast
Typical response rate Fair Excellent Fair
Ability to obtaining candid responses Fair Excellent Excellent
Elimination of interviewer bias Fair Excellent Excellent
Ability to get at in-depth topics Good Good Fair
Use of visual aids Poor Good Good
Enforcement of question order Excellent Poor Good
Inclusion of illiterate respondents Good Poor Poor
Inclusion of young adults Poor Poor Fair
Inclusion of respondents of lower socioeconomic status Fair Fair Poor
Specifying sub-geographic locations Poor Excellent Poor
--
Comfort for older adults Fair Excellent Poor
O National Research Center,lnc.,zott
Finally, NRC recommends a Web-based survey be implemented to garner the opinions of business.The RFP did
not mention if email addresses would be part of the license database,thus businesses,like residents,will be
selected at random to participate in the survey through a mailed invitation that contains a URL for completing
the survey.Where email addresses are available in the City's business license database,an email campaign will
be used to augment the mailed invitations.The business survey will consist of a subset of the questions on the
'As a stand-alone data collection method with recruitment via mailed invitations with multiple contacts,the response rate for Web has improved
markedly in recent years.Depending on the features of the survey,like topic,length and target population,Web often remains more economical
when paired with a mailed survey(permitting responses via either method)or when a complete list of email addresses is available for the
population of interest,as often is the case for members of organizations.
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • �z
citizen survey so that comparisons can be made among residents,students and businesses,but NRC also will
include several questions designed specificaliy for these business owners.NRC already has developed a
business survey from which Cape Girardeau staff can begin to identify questions. NR�proposes to invite by
mail�,000 businesses with an additional number invited by email if email addresses exist.
Contact Strategy
Maximizing survey participation requires multiple contacts with residents. For Cape Girardeau,we propose
three contacts with each sampled household:
---------- - --___
Methods Highiight �) A prenotification announcement,informing the household members
Your response rate is an , that they have been selected to participate in the community survey,
important measure o f the ' W��I be sent to each sampled household.This announcement will
� quality o f your survey and ' arrive about a week before the survey packet.
I should always be reported for i 2� One week after mailing the prenotification,each household will be
transparency and credibility. sent a survey containing a cover letter(signed,as appropriate,either
'_ —___ __-------- ---
by Mayor Rediger or City Manager Meyer).The packet will contain a
postage-paid return envelope.The cover letter will include a Web address so that the survey can be taken
online instead.
3) A reminder letter and survey will be scheduled to arrive one week after the first survey.The second cover
letter asks those who have not completed the survey to do so and those who already have done so to
refrain from turning in a second survey.We mail the survey twice because anonymity is promised in the
cover letter to enhance honest responses.We take this implicit contract with respondents as a serious
principle of the survey trade,which,if violated,harms the survey research industry no less than the client
or respondent.
The survey of businesses will follow a similar contact strategy.We anticipate a better response by mail because
business respondents are less available by phone or willing to talk when approached during the work day.We
will mail a prenotification postcard announcing the survey,followed by a letter one week later from the City
with the survey URL.One week after this letter,we will send a reminder postcard.If email addresses are
available,we will contact business three times,one week apart,through our online system with a direct link to
the online survey.
Method for Sampling Survey Recipients
All households located within the boundaries that define the City of Cape Girardeau would be eligible for the
survey.We have tested list sources so know that those from the United States Postal Service(USPS)provide
the best representation of all households in a specific geographic location.The lists are updated every three
months.We will geocode the location of each address to assure it is within Cape Girardeau boundaries(as well
as by Ward).
- - -_ --. -- _ _---
We will use systematic sampling from the list of eligible households to Methods Highlight '
select the sample of i,800 households.Systematic sampling is a procedure Because o f cell phone-only
whereby a complete list of all possible addresses is culled,selecting every households and telephone '
Nth one until the appropriate number of households is sampled. Not only ' number portability, phone '
will NRC scientifically and randomly sample households,but we also will ' surveys cannot ef fectively
select without bias the household member to participate.This target precise geographic '
methodology helps ensure that the attitudes expressed by our respondent ' areas like cities and towns.
"sample"closely approximate the attitudes of all adult residents living in '------- ----
Cape Girardeau.Without this step in survey research,it is likely that results will be biased towards home
owners,those who are more sedentary and those without jobs(who may have different opinions about local
government services).
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • t3
NRC will use the City's business license database to sample�,000 businesses for the mailed invitations.NRC will
compare the address list for the resident survey to the addresses in the business license database and remove
� any duplicated addresses from the resident list.The letter invitations will request the business owner or
manager complete the survey.If email addresses are availabie, NRC will include these businesses in the email
campaign.Only those businesses that do not have a valid email address will be sampled for the mailed
invitations.Thus,while NRC has proposed mailing�,000 businesses,if the City has email addresses for most of
the registered businesses,the sample of businesses would be quite larger than the�,000 proposed.
Sample Size and Margin of Error
The relationship between sample size and precision of estimates or margin of error(at the 95q confidence
level)is shown in the adjacent table.We propose a mailing size of i,000 households.Through a rigorous multi-
contact strategy,we will maximize the number of completed surveys.
Number of Margin
Though response rates across the US have dipped in recent years,we �om�leted survevs of error
anticipate the response rate for the resident survey will range from z5� 75 ±��•3�
to 409�.This means an estimated margin of error at the 959�confidence �50 ±8.09�
level of plus or minus 4.6 to 3.7 percentage points(approximately 45o z5o ±6•29�
to 7zo completed surveys).Comparisons of results by geographic 450 ±4.6q
subarea or sociodemographic characteristics will have higher margins of 700 ±3•7�
error.For the business survey,we estimate a somewhat lower response
rate ranging between 59�and�5q,garnering about 5o to i5o responses for a margin of error between plus or
minus i3.9 to 8.o percentage points(assuming i,000 mailed invitations).
Task 2: Develop the Survey Instrument
A telephone meeting to discuss the survey instrument will provide an important opportunity to explore the
survey's intended uses and the City's objectives for individual survey questions.We recommend a three-to
five-page survey,which typically takes residents about�5-minutes to complete.We will provide draft question
wording to ensure that questions capture the intended meaning for Cape Girardeau.We will let you know
which q�estions are most commonly asked in other communities across the country to maximize the benefit of
benchmark comparisons,if you want them.We anticipate primarily fixed-response questions,because that
emphasis is chosen most commonly due to the ability to maximize the density of data on a survey and because
respondent burden is minimized.
Should the�ity wish to include one or more open-ended questions,we will help word the questions to
encourage the most useful resident input.The survey can include as many open ended questions as the City
desires and can fit on the allotted number of survey pages.However,we recommend keeping the number of
open ended questions to a minimum so as not to make the survey overly burdensome or feel like"homework"
for respondents.Overall,when including open ended questions on a survey,the more directed the open-ended
question is,the more actionable the data will be for Council and staff.For example,"Please provide any
additional comments in the space below"will elicit a wide-range of issues,many of which may not reside
within the City's sphere of influence.Whereas,"What do you think will be the biggest issue facing Cape
Girardeau in the next 5 years"will provide the City with more actionable feedback from the community.
We will work with you to ensure that the final survey includes all desired questions,with optimal question
wording.We will also keep a design eye on the formatting,so that the survey is inviting and easy to complete.
Attractive and appropriately condensed question formatting also will encourage the best response rate.
We will listen closely to help you define your specific needs,developing and prioritizing questians,but the
process will be low-burden for Cape Girardeau staff.Survey development is an iterative process that we will
lead,giving you questions and formats that you can react to.We focus on working quickly,yet thoughtfully,on
our own steps,leaving ample time for your review.For example,we seek to turn around a survey draft within a
half a day or day to ensure the maximum time for stakeholder reflection.
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • t4
Task 3: Conduct Survey
Data Collection
� NRC recommends that Cape Girardeau conduct public outreach in advance of the resident survey to boost
response among selected households,with the added benefit of boosting residents'trust in local officials.This
trust will accrue by conveying Cape Girardeau leaders'interest in listening to its residents. NRC will support the
communications effort by giving feedback on your plan,press releases and other publicity wording,if your
communication team so desires.We have samples of communications plans our clients have developed that
we can share with the City.
Mailing Preparation
The sample of addresses will be processed for certification and verification. NRC uses CASST"^/NCOA software
that relies on the USPS National Directory information to verify and standardize the address elements and
assign each a complete,nine-digit zip code where possible.In addition,the software used by NRC will sort and
barcode the addresses,allowing significant postage discounts. NRC carefully reviews proofs of survey
materials(i.e.,cover letters,instrument,postcards,mailing envelopes,etc.)as part of our quality assurance
process.
Survey Processing
Completed surveys will be returned via postage-paid business reply envelopes and reviewed and"cleaned"as
necessary.(For example,respondents selecting more categories than permitted will have their choices
randomly reduced to the appropriate number for entry into the dataset.)We have found that very little �
cleaning is needed on most surveys due to our expertise in question construction and survey formatting.
Returned questionnaires will be scanned electronically(and stored for later review,as needed)and entered
into an electronic dataset.This dataset will be subject to a data entry protocol of"key and verify,"in which
survey data are entered twice into an electronic dataset and then compared. Discrepancies are evaluated
against the original survey form and corrected. Range checks as well as other forms of quality control will be
performed.
Weighting the Data
The first step in preparing the data for analysis will be to weight the data to reflect the demographic profile of
the residents of Cape Girardeau.Weighting is an important method to adjust for potential non-response bias.
In general,residents with certain characteristics(for example:those who are older or home owners)are more
likely to participate in surveying.Weighting allows us to look at the demographic profile of residents who
returned the survey compared with the U.S.Census profile of Cape Girardeau.We consider these disparities
along with others and accordingly increase or decrease the weight of each respondent to mimic as closely as -
possible the demographic profile of Cape Girardeau as described by the U.S.
Census.The weighting variables to be considered will be all those Methods Highlight
demographics included on the survey,as well as any geographic variable Results must be weighted to
used for sampling. NRC has extensive experience with complex weighting match your overall population ,
schemes required with sampling by geographic subareas.Weighting is the pro file.Without this key step,
approach used by quality survey consultancies to ensure that the results are not correctly ',
demographic characteristics of the sample mirror the overall population. generalizable to your entire '
population.
Analyzing the Data
For quantitative analysis,we rely on IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences(SPSS).To maximize our
clients'flexibility in choosing any consultant in the future, NRC stores every label and command run in SPSS in a
syntax file available for audit and re-running,as necessary.
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
' Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • �5
We will code any open-ended responses using both an emergent approach,where themes are revealed
through the analysis,combined with a deductive approach,where a scheme or codes are predetermined and
applied to the data.We use various analysis techniques,suited to the project and question.
The data and report will undergo a thorough quality assurance review.We will audit the original data files and
our statistical syntax/analysis files,compare automatically generated output to the formatted output in the
report and data check all numbers and text prior to submitting the report.This will assure both that the data
analyses are correct and that staff,the media and the public will trust the results.
Reporting the Results
The analysis and reporting of the results occur concurrently and cyclically so that we are constantly exploring
meaningful ways to share your results,both in terms of the exact analysis chosen and also the way in which
that analysis is displayed in graphical or tabular form.We recognize that the report must serve staff and council
members,appointed boards and commissions as well as the lay public and it must be a document that the
media can understand and find robust should they wish to press its credibility.These are challenges we accept
enthusiastically.
NRC understands that most readers want to understand the broader patterns and --- ----- ---
interpretations of data,so our professionally designed graphics are engaging and Methods Highlight
pop with clear information.Our reports are comprehensive and include technical Be sure your report
and detailed numbers and information,but not at the expense of the day-to-day includes a detailed
usefulness of the documents(see links to examples in the section,Error!Reference description o f the
source not found.).We are careful about our communication.You will not need a study methodology.
degree in statistics to understand the survey results.All the technical details are in
_ . _ . _ -
appendices for those who wish to read them(and so that the survey can be repeated by any vendor you
choose),but we make sure the report body tells the story of the survey results in a stylish,colorful, informative
and simple manner.For further ease,we also include an executive summary that gives a quick overview of
results while highlighting key findings.We will prepare the report in Microsoft°Word(as well as convert
documents into a PDF format).We will provide you with your electronic numeric dataset in any preferred
format(such as SPSS or Excel).Verbatim responses to open-ended questions can be provided in document or
database form,as desired.Special features of the Cape Girardeau report of results are described in the
following sections.
Comparisons by Geographic and Demographic Groups
NRC will compare findings for any identified geographic subareas as well as provide comparisons of results by
select respondent demographics:such as age,income,length of residency and more.We will guide
interpretation by noting statistically significant differences among subgroups so that you are not drawn
inappropriately to small differences that only may be the result of random error.Because we recognize that,
over the course of time,Cape Girardeau staff or Council may identify new questions whose answers require
crosstabulations of the survey findings,NRC is available for added analysis up to six month following
conclusion of the project.
Innovative Importance-Performance Analysis
NRC has developed an approach to understanding what services drive resident opinion that augments the
standard method of cross-classifying residents'opinions abo�t the importance of services with resident ratings
of service quality.Our method,called key driver analysis(KDA),results in more meaningful and actionable
results when examining the broad categories of service delivery,and will be included in Cape Girardeau's
report of results.This research by NRC professionals offers more illuminating analyses to help focus service
improvement efforts on those services that most influence residents'perceptions about overall service quality.
When residents are asked to name the most important characteristics of a service,responses often are
expected or misleading. For example,air travelers often claim that safety is a primary consideration in their
choice of an airline,yet key driver analysis reveals that the frequent flier perks or in-flight entertainment
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� �ape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • �6
predicts their actual buying decisions.By using key driver analysis,our approach digs deep to identify the less
salient,but more influential services that are most related to residents'assessment of Cape Girardeau services
overall.
In local government,as mentioned Figure 4: Example Action Chart
above,core services-like police
services-invariably land at the top of Overall Quality of C ity Services
the list when residents are asked about
the most important jurisdiction services. �
But by using key driver analysis,our � � Transportation — —
approach uncovers the services that are Health and � ( Land Use and ,
Human Services '� i Planning
derived as important and more I ;
influential in residents'overall Senior ; ; Planning
assessment of jurisdiction services. services , and zoring '
�
• � �
NRC researchers have been working ' i ; ;
with local government officials long ' ' ' !
.. Streets
enough to understand that one barrier '
to the utility of citizen survey findings is ', Low-income Tratfic sgnal
services tim ing
the integration of resident evaluations '
of many different services.Sometimes Health seroices =_-______- comrd
inaction results from uncertainty about
where to start.A summary tool we use �------- Parks and , _-_______
Recreation
to help government best put to use Public Safety I Utilities
survey results is the Action ChartT"' Parks
(Figure 4). In this chart we combine ' �� �
three critical sets of information into a -. •
� .
single place-importance data, ,
performance data and trends.The Municipal Trash
importance data identifies,with key courts Knowledge and ' '
symbols(tir),services that are shown .� _ i Outreach
to have high derived importance;the ,
performance data shows,with color ', Traffic ' ��brary
codes,the relationship of each service ' enforcemer� pub�ic
rating to the ratings of residents in ______�' ' intormation �"
comparison jurisdictions and the trends, �
using arrows,show whether there has
c
been a change in resident ratings since � .� Similar to the �� � K� .' Ratng � Ratirg
the last survey when jurisdictions use J Nortn Driver uicrease decrease
surveys over time.(The absence of an
arrow indicates that no statistically
significant change occurred or trend data were not available for that particular service.)
Key driver results offer a huge return on investment by identifying where to aim limited community resources.
Those services that are below the benchmark but are key drivers of resident overall opinion about City services
should be the focus of improvement.Services that are neither core services(such as police, EMS,water,fire,
etc.)nor key drivers can be examined for possible resource reallocation.
In addition to KDA, NRC can provide the traditional importance by satisfaction matrices for services
representing the major department categories:fire services,ambulance�emergency medical services,public
library services,arts and cultural programs,solid waste services,sewer services,bus/transit services,drinking
water and health services as well as programs within services,such as,for police-speed of response,police
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • i7
attitude,police presence,etc.An example of our overall quality by important matrix across the major
department categories is shown in Figure 5.
� Figure 5: Quality by Importance Matrix
• _-, _ _. . ._ . _,__,
100 ,,� .. , ; _ _ ,, - , , . . ..
Storm Drainage
90 �
" Snow Removal
d 80 � : Fire
� H
� � �tre�! Repau � Garbage EMS �
� o Traffic signal timing � � �
�, 0 70 � ♦Water
� � ; ♦ Police
� c _.._ . . . .a... . ............ . ... . . . . . � . .,. . .
,,, . .. ,_ .,. .
� � �Animal Control � � �
a a 60 Code Enforcement� � i=arks
� E ♦ ;; :...t C!ea��;;�a Library
Preserve natural resources�Street Lighting
`0 50 Planning
a e
� Z � E�n Development �
'o' 40 Recreation facilities
30 -.,. .. . _ , _. _
30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Quality Average Rating(O=Poor,100=Excellent)
Mapping Results
We are able to link the subarea of residence(e.g.,Voting Ward)for each respondent,if desired—or even
include a specific I D on each survey and use the precise geographic location of each address—to group
residents by subareas to produce maps that display patterns of community experience and perspective.For
example,in the City of Tacoma,WA,NRC created maps of the city,separated into�4"zones"by overlaying the
boundaries of five"Councilmanic Districts"with the boundaries of eight"Neighborhood Council Districts."
NRC oversampled certain zones and types of households to ensure representation of all types of residents.
Additionally,The New York 7imes used NRC's geocoded survey results of the NYC Feedback Citywide Survey
(one of the largest citizen surveys ever conducted in the United States)to create a series of interactive maps:
h�:(�www.n�m s.com intera ive zoog o o7�n re ion�o0q0�oz-nvc-�oll.html).
NRC can provide a color-shaded map for up to zo questions or questions parts on the survey.We wili provide
interpretation of the maps so that readers are not left to make sense of the maps alone.Examples are shown
in the following fictionalized maps for"Anytown"USA. In the examples,we first graph all households selected
for the survey,being sure,for the sake of anonymity,that the level of specificity shown on the map does not
permit the identification of any household(Map�).In Map z,we overlay the boundaries of districts or wards
and,in this example,we show,with shading,the average ratings of safety for the different wards. In Map 3,we
show clusters of residents where ratings of street lighting are"poor,"and(in Map 4)we highlight those
clusters for possible jurisdiction action.Maps 5 and 6(created for Boulder County)show how demographic
information can be displayed geographically.
These geographic comparisons are more accurately executed when a mail survey(address based)
methodology is used.
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • �8
' Map 1:All Households Selected Map 2: Wards with Safety Ratings
r , a � l
�� . . �� "c- �_ � , } , � e
Anytown,:USA �. �` �, , � i, -�;, '�- Anytown,USA f�;� � ._��- '; �'` ,4 ' ` r >
i;.;yr,`I �r.�.1 ,�i "\ �i f'.�t � '] d " r�-z'�,l''�» ��.. �' �<:: t ..-a �y� �
vr,t� ,< 4 - �i '� � � ��-� k ��'y -�a � � .3�..%y �'�.''�r�� P
'� ' 2 �.:. �V'�. Ij � � -� , n,-e 3� �.� �j�
' �-� 'f` ��.l � : �`�. �,�� �_i .. � \..
� a� Y2� ' ,. *s..� �J ��Y � i :�":.��r '"+.�J� a� c� �.sE� ^T7�`.
� � t' F�,i4 j'� � FiT�� .: � ''� _ s ..,, r t'i,
� 7 ",�"� _�,. . � �\ . �,� 'r� � . y � �-;
u � f4 � 2_ � , ,� , x � � r ,55�,
� � aj} ��t �i w�ao '-�
.� J r-�. ' .� � � �
x? /t " ,d, � � ���,. �� y� ��z?c� ��a- ,�I
� 3� �
� �- Y °tr�*=,.�� ���`1 .- `k., S..- sa ., y��. s _,�_
��- p` .. �y . . \�a��-
� r'
;, j S �.,y \�.v1G "� 9-"�._ .�r ' .- N11RD �t� ��� ;
T , �' -� .+ �'r
r�7.� } �^.- ,l. �. ' �.� 1. RD4N� _�
z. ^ -�r.� ;,_ ,� `��,�� �,
•�� � ' � � '- c�
`t,,,z � � � � ;r, �,\ � .
'' 'I � i
� � �.� a ` �.y ; y �� �-�`; n;�� � �� ��� '�,�. � -
� . �G+. �,.. , �k.. �" G �{ � y:� U � YMRD 11�I �, .rv"- .
�-"f'� .l �. -w.l-. ,} 'J.._ 'r -,C bE'J -. 1...�" } `)
cv�i- �` � w "s -7`�-�-y. �' � .: 'u� I � - '�..c.�,� ��, c
� i H ,a � s 'i+� ��. r �J�� � ��,�,
���;.!�4i�Ck/r �� �` r.;� ,,.-s _ `�.�i1���,�f „ ��i��� Sefely Ratlngs by Area y
t�:2 lt- .- -.. \ t,,, �� Y�'.�,, :. ��reata then eo p�rst ,
�;/cr f,tr s�. y4�' t . �own usn (�f,,�,�j�r . 3 t_'�' { f �so ro eo verc�nt
. K f'Q_� � �'"++� i - �� f ti SLrver Respmden6 .�w"l;t� : < i' �t �;,� �,,� �ao m eo pacsM
� �r�.�a r\ ��� 1��a.:. 3 ���. 4 6tY UNMow� � .ia h�.n-+�..n;� /� } � �,; C:i _.';Less man 4o pelrEn[
• ,.a ,. `��� - s
y . ,�
ti�_... '� S- �-.: 7 . K ' � '- . .. .
�'� ...- ._. . ;'> ::.. . . ,3
l^ � u' :-t-.� ...�+_.. _ !
Map 3: "Poor" Ratings of Street Lighting Map 4: Targeted Areas for Improved Street Lighting*
,_ . _ - � . ,. ,� �_ { � � � :
_Anytown,�USA � � �'' � � ,'� r 1��=-;A '.� Anytown,USA ; �� 4 � . ' ' � ,7 = �e
^�p� � . �� � � �� �—t,- z`i 4 ��� x , �}�
i'Yr �^ � T .�µ -s �y �.,?�.�, �"�. �'r'��.j,�s:. i 4.c�" � _ t i`'^",`, 5„ ,y . ;y _ � '�``„ ���-�c�
--
� y� �T,.,c . � ,+ � r- ,9 ti b �'._ _ ! j >;� t �.
�i- �t __�y -> 'li 7 � �- A_ �. (- t\: ��.(.�.
. -.tr;-�." �, y.\(. y- _./ � �."1- �.J���, ^.z (�.-' � .
� -7 ��l i T C� �t � 1 � �' .�, fi"i
,{��� v�it! �� �k� �. i� f�}. , �}-.- �J.� j t ' � .�'�
. ` ��
'`.. r.tE V .�'i. ;�1�.`..� 'L„t .IF` � : !`
.l'�� -`,4 . 1� .t �'^ �'',e� �i:-! :-f�
J.' �
l t �,S ��p 1.:� . '�� � � "'!�
'�Y,�� i.��. . \ I [ ..
. '�.�f,_: �� �"�`�,l'. i 1"i'. 1`"���: �' . � ..L?� �.c� ; �-. .e r �.
� n ��„` v�. , F Y- �'. �- ..;s,J- •;.��v� �br-'�. �_t r�-,i .
��?. `� J.'u} d'y ,��J,>, ;�,,-�d'y! 1� '..'.�`r< � i. `� t ..
-.�.���:.,� R� \-i����`` �CJ: ,�.' M, L� S Y_��\ `\.3."�.
--f' ���t
�,.� ;, ���'�; �� _ r�'$ � -
�f d •: �' 7 '�
-� � ^r - r!
�.�'. y'. ��..: .: v1'� r:� -�--:
1 CL � .; 7 (. - V� � ' �::% l��r
� wY�'t
� E: �V.
,y�- _ ���, a�� , �: ; � _ <£ a _
� i -� -1-� 1, _ ��
�" .:iS 1N����'�.. _u.�:.,,�. k �?� 'i +� ���."^- , l.� ��'�
� � ,�
� �,y�}. ��. SN�Ratlnqs a•Poor L�h�a :. Y `� i�� .., Safw�/WtYigs R'Poor Lighl�g-
.. ,�fl$�„'3-��`- . �crearer ma�90 certM -�-J.i' � �'', r _ �ciea[cma�eo veraK
�fa3 t,! ,; � 4 �soweoaecen ,m?` � �' � �wrosoa�era
� � k.3�" � T r- ;� � �eoroeo�,uy► �ey�'� -r � �j� � '� iessn�a,ao
- � ��S'' ��r�:�'Cb}S / . �c'+�': � � � ..,��Ma�90�,�. �v � YZ, s - � � • Sreel�n9R�ed'Poor
\�-,�' .�. �,t � ��9 �:�, "�G' ,+-"..-. '� `�,�. .t N t.,..-
.�� ,'C y��_ i..A"t �S'.e _ t^., "
- �ca,xaaaaor.r�ee,�y.,ror.,�eeri�,e�ny �
Map 5: Example from Recent Client Report Map 6: Example from Recent Client Report
Boulder Counry,CO Boulder Counry,CO
srsn aarr coa� sdw vouar eoaes
7
wwx t0�02
F,�
, .��� � �.:m. +r�:s :. .
waei �.�.,.t+u .. � �OOxI
b� �
y, W030
___" " " :�OON.
Percentage of Popularion
Pereenfage of Householda with Children Ovn 63 Years ot Aye
O tes:m.ozsx ��sx.srR �ex.�x
- �zsx-:sx ��ox-ux ��-+ox
�aex-Hn �ux-sox ���x.ux
LProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • �9
Consulting and Continued Support
We know that an effective report will be reviewed and discussed by many people in Cape Girardeau after we
have completed any formal presentations and workshops,and that new questions may arise.We commit to
supporting these discussions by offering crosstabulations and other additional analyses of results when
needed at no cost to the City of Cape Girardeau during the six-months following the presentation to Councii.
And,though we will not abandon you with your data,we always will provide you with the electronic dataset of
your responses for your future reference and use.
Task 4: Benchmark Survey Information
NRC principals introduced the idea of benchmarking resident opinion and produced the first national norms for
citizen opinion in our�99� book.Because we continue to conduct and collect the most current citizen surveys
from jurisdictions across the country,NRC has the largest database of comparative resident opinion of any
firm.The database is comprised of resident perspectives gathered in citizen surveys from over 50o unique
jurisdictions whose residents evaluated local government services.Conducted with typically no fewer than 400
residents in each jurisdiction,opinions represent over 3o million Americans. Because NRC innovated a method
for quantitatively integrating the results of surveys that we have conducted and those that others have
conducted,we can create comparisons for more services,more jurisdictions and with less sampling error than
anyone.Our results are based on responses from more than ioo,000 residents.NRC has normative comparison
for z6o services that include police services,fire and EMS,garbage collection and recycling,utilities and utilities
billing,library services,street maintenance and repair,water quality,code enforcement,senior services,public
transportation,city employee ratings,job opportunities,public safety,historic preservation,economic
development,public trust and many others.We add virtually every new survey completed in communities
across the country so that our comparison data are fresh and complete.
NRC has the most recent survey data from dozens of Midwestern communities.Thus,a separate sample of
other communities will not be necessary.NRC already has done this work so Cape Girardeau does not have to
funnel its resources into an external research endeavor.There is significant overlap among the topics
measured on these surveys collected for our benchmarking database.We will provide a benchmark rating
against which Cape Girardeau findings can be compared.The lists below display the benchmarks comparisons
that Cape Girardeau may find desirable:All surveying communities in the state of Missouri,communities in the
Midwest with a population similar to Cape Girardeau and communities in Missouri with a population similar to
Cape Girardeau.All benchmarks are based on the most recent citizen surveys available,most of which were
conducted in the past one to two years.
Cities in the Midwest US with Populations between 20,000 and 50,000(N=38)
• Ankeny,IA • Highland Park,IL • Jefferson City,MO -
• Bettendorf,IA • O'Fallon,IL • Liberty,MO
• Cedar Falls,IA • Park Ridge,IL • Maryland Heights,MO
• Marion,IA • Garden City, KS • Wentzville,MO
• Muscatine, IA • Lenexa,KS • Grand Island,NE
• Urbandale,IA • Salina,KS • Delaware,OH
• Batavia,IL • Midland,MI • Dublin,OH
• Collinsville,IL • Port Huron,MI • Hudson,OH
• Crystal Lake,IL • Chanhassen,MN • Lebanon,OH
• DeKalb,IL • Fridley,MN • Sandusky,OH
• Downers Grove, IL • Prior Lake,MN • UpperArlington,OH
• Elmhurst, IL • Ballwin,MO • Westerville,OH
• Freeport, IL • Grandview,MO
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • Zo
All Missouri Communities(N=22)
• Ballwin,MO • Harrisonville,MO • Platte City,MO
• Blue Springs,MO • Jefferson City,MO • Raymore,MO
• Branson,MO • Joplin,MO • Richmond Heights, MO
• Clay County,MO • Lee's Summit,MO • Riverside,MO
• Clayton,MO • Liberty,MO • Rolla,MO
• Creve Coeur,MO • Maryland Heights,MO • Wentzville,MO
• Ellisville,MO • Maryville,MO ,
• Grandview,MO • O'Fallon,MO
Cities in Missouri with Populations between 20,000 and 50,000 (N=6)
• Ballwin,MO • Jefferson City,MO • Maryland Heights,MO
• Grandview,MO • Liberty,MO • Wentzville,MO
Task 5: Optional Services
Presentation to Council
We believe in making results interesting and straightforward in our presentations.Our Microsoft0 PowerPoint
presentations are attractive and visually intuitive.An example presentation can be found at
h�tp�ww.ci.westminster.co.us�io.htm.A typical PowerPoint supports a presentation of approximately zo-
3o minutes in length.We recommend having i5-3o minutes following the presentation for questions,
depending on your preferences.We will discuss these particulars as well as the survey results at the pre-
presentation to be held on December iz(eight days prior to the presentation to Council).An in-person
presentation by NRC adds a great degree of confidence in the independence and reliability of your findings.
Whether presenting to staff or council,the credibility of the presentation rests as much on the response to
questions from the audience as on the summary of the slides.This is where the benefit of the reputation,
education and experience of the NRC team will be especially helpful to providing you the consultation that top
level managers expect.
Two Follow-up Guided Discussions with Key Decision Makers
NRC staff have conducted hundreds of focus group discussions with a wide variety of participants,including
elected officials,executive staff and appointed board members.A post-survey discussion with key decision-
makers can help staff to chart the best next steps for acting on and integrating survey results into your
strategic planning efforts.Our guided discussions will focus on important issues raised in the survey and
identifying strategic priorities.We will ask such questions as,"What do you make of these results?""Are there
areas of concern that have come to light from the survey?""What findings are most important for the�ity of
Cape Girardeau to address?"The specific questions will grow out of the survey findings and discussion with City
of Cape Girardeau staff and answers can be linked to Cape Girardeau's performance measures and strategic
plan.
Next Step Workshop
In a half day workshop, Dr.Miller,author of Citizen Surveys:How to do them,how to use them,what they mean
and numerous articles on citizen surveying;faculty for many workshops on citizen surveys with top
government managers and adjunct associate professor at the University of Colorado, Denver,will work with up
to zo key staff,elected officials and�or resident decision-leaders to describe survey results and to plan for next
steps that the City of Cape Girardeau should take.The workshop will result in identification of key findings and
an action plan for moving forward with each.
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • z�
Timeline
Following is an example timeline,showing one approach to completing the project on a typical timeline while
taking into account the holiday season.Should Cape Girardeau prefer additional time for survey development
(which we see typically can take 4-6 weeks in many communities,depending on the internal
involvement/feedback plan)or shift the delivery of the draft or final reports—or any other revisions—we will
work with you to design the optimal project timeline for your needs.We will encourage you to"protect"the
five-week data collection interval in order to maximize your response rate.
Activity Date
Contractaward........................................................................................................................................ November z8
Finalize mailing materials(postcard,letters,and envelopes)............................................................by December iz
Finalize survey instrument(iterative process)...................................................................................by December ig
Print and prepare survey materials...........................................................................................week of December z6
Assemble survey packets................................................................................................................through January 9
Mail prenotification postcard........................................................................................................................January 9
Mailfirst wave survey...................................................................................................................................January i6
Mailsecond wave of surveys.......................................................................................................................January z3
Data collection,cleaning and coding of surveys.........................................................................through February zo
Electronic data entry....................................................................................................................week of February z7
Data analysis and report writing......................................................................................................through March i9
Draft report emailed to City of Cape Girardeau.............................................................................................March i9
Review of draft by City of Cape Girardeau staff.............................................................................through March 30
Report finalized by N RC and delivered via email to City of Cape Girardeau ....................................................April 9
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
' Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • zi
E. Pricing
On the following pages,we have provided budget estimates for a five-page mailed survey,expecting
approximately 450-7zo completed resident surveys and 5o to i5o business surveys.Should this proposed
budget exceed your resources or not meet your needs,NRC will work with you to develop a budget and work
plan that yield a better fit.It should be noted that our budget estimates assume that meeting for survey design
can be held via telephone conference.Additionally,as a first-time client,we have included a wide-range of
value-added services at no cost to the City including:benchmarks,a Web response option for the survey,
continuous support for six months following the delivery of the report and Key Driver Analysis.Together,these
services will provide Cape Girardeau with insight into how best to serve its diverse constituents.
Required Tasks Cost
Task i: Design Survey Methodology...................................................................................................................$i,000
Task z:Develop the Survey Instrument.............................................................................................................$z,9oo
Task Conduct Surve $i5,7oo*
3: y...................................................................................................................................
Task 4: Benchmark Survey Information....................................................................................................................$o
TOTAL.................................................................................................................................................................$ig,600
*Includes all costs related to survey printing($z,74o),mailing prep($�,550),postage(S3,000)and data entry($i,�oo)
Optional Tasks Cost
Presentationto�ouncil......................................................................................................................................$z,9i5*
Consultingand�ontinued Support...........................................................................................................................$o
Two Follow-up Guided Discussions with Key Decision Makers**...................................................................$i,800*
NextStep Workshop.........................................................................................................................................$�,800*
*Travel expenses not included and are expected to be approximately$7So for a single night's stay.
**Both guided discussions conducted on the same day.
IProposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • z3
� F. E-Verify
The foilowing pages contain the Work Authorization Certification and E-Verify Program for Employment
Verification Memorandum of Understanding.
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
VVORK AUT�0�7ATION CEkTITICATION
PURSUANT TO 285.530 RSM�
(FOR ALL,AG1tL+'EMEN'�S�l�i E7�CESS OF$5,000.00)
City of Boulder }
}ss
State of Colorado �
My name is Thomas Miller . I am ar►authorized agent of National
Research Center, Inc.(Bidder). This business is enrotled and participates in a€ederal work
autliorizatxon program far atl en�playees working in connectian with serviccs provided to the
Cily. This business does not knowingly employ any person tl�at is an unautharized alieri ic�
connection with the services being provided. Documentation of participation in a federal work
authorization program is attached hereto.
Furthermore,a11 subcor�tractars working on this conEract shall af�'irma�ively sEate in
wri.ting in th�ir contracts that they are not in violation of Section 285.534,1,shall nat thereafter
be in violation a�d submit a swan�affidavit under penalty of perjury that all employees are
lawfulEy present in the United States. �'"��
� �
-'' 10/3/11
/�ffiant Date
Thomas I Miller
Printeti Name
Subscribed and swom to before me this 3 day af October ,2011 .
LAURIE A DAY Notary Public
Notary Public
State of Colorado
My Commission Explres Septembsr 29,Z013
RFP 20i1-2Q12 Cit�zen Satisfaction Survey Page 9 of 12
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
ARTICLE I
PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) sets forth the terms by which the Social Security
Administration (SSA), and the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Service (DHS-USCIS) will provide information through E-Verify on behalf of
National Research Center, Inc (Employer) in order to confirm the employment eligibility of all
newly hired employees of National Research Center, Inc (Employer) following completion of
the Employment Eligibility Verification Form(Form I-9).
Authority for E-Verify is found in Title IV, Subtitle A, of the Illegal Immigration Reform and
Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), Pub. L. 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009
ARTICLE II
FUNCTIONS TO BE PERFORMED
A. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SSA
1. Upon completion of the Form I-9 by the employee and the Employer, and provided
the Employer complies with the requirements of this MOU, SSA agrees to provide
the Designated Agent on behalf of the Employer with available information that will
allow the Employer to confirm the accuracy of Social Security Numbers provided by
all newly hired employees and the employment authorization of some newly hired
employees.
2. The SSA agrees to provide to the Designated Agent appropriate assistance with
operational problems that may arise during the Employer's participation in E-Verify.
The SSA agrees to provide the Designated Agent with names, titles, addresses, and
telephone numbers of SSA representatives to be contacted during participation in E-
Verify.
3. The SSA agrees to safeguard the information provided by the Employer through E-
, Verify procedures, and to limit access to such information, as is appropriate by law,
to individuals responsible for the confirmation of Social Security Numbers and for
evaluation of E-Verify or such other persons or entities who may be authorized by
the SSA as governed by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a), the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1306(a)), and SSA regulations (20 CFR Part 401).
1
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760 '
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
4. SSA agrees to establish a means of automated confirmation that is designed (in
conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security's automated system if
necessary) to provide confirmation or tentative nonconfirtnation of employees'
employment eligibility within 3 Federal Government workdays of the initial inquiry.
5. SSA agrees to establish a means of secondary confirmation (including updating SSA
records as may be necessary) for employees who contest SSA tentative
nonconfirmations that is designed to provide �nal confirmation or nonconfirmation
of the employees' employment eligibility within 10 Federal Government work days
of the date of referral to SSA, unless it determines that more than 10 days may be
necessary. In such cases, SSA will provide additional confirmation instructions.
B. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DHS-USCIS
1. Upon completion of the Form I-9 by the employee and the Employer, and
completion by the Designated Agent of SSA confirmation procedures required prior
to initiation of DHS-USCIS confirmation procedures, DHS-USCIS agrees to provide
the Designated Agent on behalf of the Employer access to selected data from the
DHS-USCIS' database to enable the Designated Agent to conduct automated
confirmation checks on newly hired alien employees by electronic means.
2. DHS-USCIS agrees to provide to the Designated Agent appropriate assistance with
operational problems that may arise during the Employer's participation in E-Verify.
DHS-USCIS agrees to provide the Designated Agent names, titles, addresses, and
telephone numbers of DHS-USCIS representatives to be contacted during
participation in E-Verify, including one or more individuals in each DHS-USCIS
district office covering an area in which the Employer hires employees covered by
this MOU.
3. DHS-USCIS agrees to provide to the Employer, through the Designated Agent, E-
Verify and the Designated Agent E-Verify User Manual containing instructions on
E-Verify policies, procedures and requirements for both SSA and DHS-USCIS,
including restrictions on use of E-Verify procedures. DHS-USCIS agrees to provide
training materials on E-Verify.
4. DHS-USCIS agrees to provide to the Employer, through the Designated Agent, a
notice, which indicates the employer's participation in E-Verify. DHS-USCIS also
agrees to provide to the Employer, through the Designated Agent, anti-
discrimination notices issued by the Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-
2
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
Related Unfair Employment Practices (OSC), Civil Rights Division, U.S.
Department of Justice.
5. DHS-USCIS agrees to issue the Designated Agent a user identification number and
password that will be used exclusively to access the confirmation system for the
Employer. This user identification number and password will permit the Designated
Agent, on behalf of the Employer, to verify information provided by newly hired
employees.
6. � DHS-USCIS agrees to safeguard the information provided to DHS-USCIS by the
Employer, and to limit access to such information to individuals responsible for the
confirmation of alien employrnent eligibility and for evaluation of E-Verify, or to
such other persons or entities as may be authorized by applicable law. Information
will be used only to verify the accuracy of Social Security Numbers and employment
eligibility, to enforce the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and federal
criminal laws, and to ensure accurate wage reports to the SSA.
7. DHS-USCIS agrees to establish a means of automated verification that is designed
(in eonjunction with SSA verification procedures) to provide confirmation or
tentative nonconfirmation of employees' employment eligibility within 3 Federal
Government workdays of the initial inquiry.
8. DHS-USCIS agrees to establish a means of secondary confirmation (including
updating DHS-USCIS records as may be necessary) for employees who contest
DHS-USCIS tentative nonconfirmations that is designed to provide final
confirmation or nonconfirmation of the employees' employment eligibility within 10
Federal Government work days of the date of referral to DHS-USCIS, unless it
determines that more than 10 days may be necessary. In such cases, DHS-USCIS
will provide additional confirmation instructions.
C. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EMPLOYER
1. The Employer agrees to display the notices, described in paragraph B.4 above, and
provided by the Designated Agent and displays them in a prominent place that is
clearly visible to prospective employees.
3
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
� DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
2. The Employer agrees to provide to the SSA and the DHS-USCIS the names, titles,
addresses, and telephone numbers of the Employer representatives to be contacted
regarding E-Verify.
3. The Employer agrees to obtain the E-Verify Manual from the Designated Agent and
become familiar with such manual.
4. The Employer agrees to comply with established Form I-9 procedures, with one
exception: When an employee presents a "List B" identity document, the Employer
agrees that it will only accept "List B" documents that contain a photograph. (List B
documents identified in 8 C.F.R. § 274a.2(b)(1)(B)) can be presented during the
Form I-9 process to establish identity.)
5. The Employer understands that participation in E-Verify does not exempt the
Employer from the responsibility to complete, retain, and make available for
inspection Forms I-9 that relate to its employees, or from other requirements of
applicable regulations or laws, except for the following modified requirements
applicable by reason of the Employer's participation in E-Verify: (1) identity
documents must have photographs, as described in paragraph 5 above; (2) a
rebuttable presumption is established by section 403(b) of IIRIRA that the Employer
has not violated section 274A(a)(1)(A) of the INA with respect to the hiring of any
individual if it obtains confirmation of the identity and employment eligibility of the
individual in compliance with the terms and conditions of E-Verify; (3) the
Employer must notify the Department of Homeland Security if it continues to
employ any employee after receiving a final nonconfirmation, and is subject to a
civil money penalty between $500 and $1,000 for each failure to notify the
Department of Homeland Security of continued employment following a final
nonconfirmation; (4) the Employer is subject to a rebuttable presumption that it has
knowingly employed an unauthorized alien in violation of section 274A(a)(1)(A) if
the Employer continues to employ any employee after receiving a final
nonconfirmation; and(5) no person or entity participating in E-Verify shall be civilly
or criminally liable under any law for any action taken in good faith on information
provided through the confirmation system. The Department of Homeland Security
reserves the right to conduct Form I-9 compliance inspections during participation
in E-Verify, as well as to conduct any other enforcement activity authorized by law.
4
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
6. The Employer agrees to initiate E-Verify procedures within 3 Employer business
days after each employee has been hired (but after both sections 1 and 2 of the Form
I-9 have been completed) and to complete as many steps (but only as many) of the
E-Verify process as are necessary according to the E-Verify Manual. The Employer
is prohibited from initiating verification procedures before the employee has been
hired and the Form I-9 completed. If the automated system to be queried is
temporarily unavailable, the 3-day time period is extended until it is again
operational in order to accommodate the Employer's attempting, in good faith, to
make inquiries during the period of unavailability. In all cases, the Employer,
through the Designated Agent, will use the SSA verification procedures first, and
will use DHS-USCIS verification procedures only as directed by the SSA
verification response.
7. The Employer agrees not to use E-Verify procedures for pre-employment screening
of job applicants, support for any unlawful employment practice, or any other use
not authorized by this MOU. The Employer will not verify selectively; it agrees to
use E-Verify procedures for all new hires as long as this MOU is in effect. The
Employer agrees not to use E-Verify procedures for reverification, or for employees
hired before the date this MOU is in effect. The Employer understands that should
the Employer use E-Verify procedures for any purpose other than as authorized by
this MOU and by law, the Employer may be subject to appropriate legal action and
the immediate termination of its access to SSA and DHS-USCIS information
pursuant to this MOU.
8. The Employer agrees not to take any adverse action against an employee based upon
the employee's employment eligibility status while SSA or DHS-USCIS is
processing the verification request unless the Employer obtains knowledge (as
defined in 8 C.F.R. § 274a.1(1)) that the employee is not work authorized. The
Employer understands that an initial inability of the SSA or DHS-USCIS automated
verification to verify work authorization, or a tentative nonconfirmation, does not
mean and should not be interpreted as an indication that the employee is not work
authorized.
9. The Employer agrees to comply with section 274B of the INA by not discriminating
unlawfully against any individual in hiring, firing, or recruitment practices because
of his or her national origin or, in the case of a protected individual as defined in
section 274B(a)(3) of the INA, because of his or her citizenship status. The
Employer understands that such illegal practices can include discharging or refusing
5
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
to hire eligible employees because of their foreign appearance or language, and that
any violation of the unfair immigration-related employment practices provisions of
the INA could subject the Employer to civil penalties pursuant to section 274B of the
INA and the termination of its participation in E-Verify. If the Employer has any
questions relating to the anti-discrimination provision, it should contact the Office of
the Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices, Civil
Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice at 1-800-255-7688 or 1-800-237-2515
(TDD).
10. The Employer agrees to record the case verification number on the employee's Form
I-9 or to attach a printout of the screen containing the case verification number to the •
employee's Form I-9.
11. The Employer will refer individuals to SSA field offices only as directed by the
--- --------—�u ma e sys e basec�on a�entativ�nor��i�fl;-�rr�ority af�er the mp yer
records the case verification number, reviews the input to detect any transaction
errors, and determines that the employee contests the tentative nonconfirmation. The
Employer will resubmit the Social Security Number to SSA for verification again if
this review indicates a need to do so. The Employer will determine whether the
employee contests the tentative nonconfirmation as soon as possible after the
Employer receives it.
12. If the employee contests an SSA tentative nonconfirmation, the Employer will
provide the employee with a referral letter and instruct the employee to visit an SSA
office to resolve the discrepancy within 8 Federal Government work days. The
Employer, through the Designated Agent, will make a second inquiry to the SSA
database using E-Verify procedures within 10 Federal Government workdays after
the date of the refenal in order to obtain confirmation, or final nonconfirmation.
13. The Employer agrees that it will use the information it receives from the SSA or
DHS-USCIS through its Designated Agent pursuant to E-Verify and this MOU only
to confirm the employment eligibility of newly-hired employees after completion of
the Form I-9. The Employer agrees that it will safeguard this information, and means
of access to it (such as User ID and passwords) to ensure that it is not used for any
other purpose and as necessary to protect its confidentiality, including ensuring that
it is not disseminated to any person other than employees of the Employer who need
it to perform the Employer's responsibilities under this MOU.
6
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
14. The Employer acknowledges that the information which it receives from SSA
� through its Designated Agent is governed by the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a(i)(1)
and (3)) and the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1306(a)), and that any person who
obtains this information under false pretenses or uses it for any purpose other than as
provided for in this MOU may be subject to civil or criminal penalties.
15. The Employer agrees not to ask the employee to obtain a printout from the Social
Security Number database (the Numident) or other written verification af the Social
Security Number from the SSA other than the Social Security Number Card.
16. The Employer agrees to refer individuals to the DHS only when the response
received from the DHS automated confirmation process indicates a tentative
nonconfirmation, and the employee contests the tentative nonconfirmation. The
Employer will determine whether the employee contests the tentative
nonconfirmation as soon as possible after the Employer receives it.
17. If the Employer receives a tentative nonconfirmation from the DHS-USCIS, the
Employer will record the case verification number and date on the Form I-9 or print
the screen showing the case verification number and attach the printout to the Form
I-9, determine whether the employee contests the tentative nonconfirmation, and
instruct an employee who contests to contact the DHS-USCIS to resolve the
discrepancy within 8 Federal Government work days, using E-Verify procedures.
The DHS-USCIS will electronically transmit the result of the referral to the
Employer within 10 Federal Government workdays of the referral.
18. The Employer agrees to allow DHS and SSA, or their authorized agents or
designees, to make periodic visits to the Employer for the purpose of reviewing E-
Verify-related records, i.e., Forms I-9, SSA and DHS confirmation records, which
were created during the Employer's participation in E-Verify. In addition, for the
purpose of evaluating E-Verify, the Employer agrees to allow DHS and SSA or their
authorized agents or designees, to interview the Employer, employees handling the
program, and employees hired during participation in E-Verify concerning their
experience with the pilot, and to make employment and E-Verify-related records
available to DHS and the SSA, or their designated agents or designees.
. 7
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMI1vISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
D. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DESIGNATED AGENT
1. The Designated Agent agrees to provide to the SSA and the DHS-USCIS the names,
titles, addresses, and telephone numbers of the Designated Agent representatives
who will be accessing information under E-Verify.
2. The Designated Agent agrees to become familiar with and comply with the E-Verify
Manual and provide a copy of the manual to the Employer so that the Employer can
become familiar with and comply with E-Verify policy and procedures.
3. The Designated Agent agrees that all Designated Agent Representatives performing
employment verification queries will complete the E-Verify Web-Based Tutorial.
4. The Designated Agent agrees to obtain the necessary equipment to utilize E-Verify.
5. The Designated Agent agrees to provide the Employer with the notices described in
paragraph B.4. above.
6. The Designated Agent agrees to initiate E-Verify procedures on behalf of the
Employer in accordance with the E-Verify Manual and E-Verify Web-Based
Tutorial. The Designated Agent will query the automated system using information
provided by the Employer and will immediately communicate the response back to
the Employer. If the automated system to be queried is temporarily unavailable, the
3-day time period is extended until it is again operational in order to accommodate
the Designated Agent's attempting, in good faith, to make inquiries on behalf of the
Employer during the period of unavailability. In all cases, the Designated Agent will
use the SSA confirmation procedures first, and will use DHS-USCIS confirmation
procedures only as directed by the SSA confirmation response.
7. The Designated Agent agrees to allow DHS and SSA, or their authorized agents or
designees, to make periodic visits to the Designated Agent for the purpose of
reviewing E-Verify -related records, i.e., Forms I-9, and DHS confirmation records,
that were created during the Designated Agent's participation in E-Verify. In
addition, for the purpose of evaluating E-Verify, the Designated Agent agrees to
allow DHS and SSA or their authorized agents or designees, to interview the
Designated Agent and employees handling the program concerning their experience
with the pilot, and to make E-Verify -related records available to DHS and the SSA,
or their designated agents or designees.
8
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
E. POINTS OF CONTACT:
You may call E-Verify toll free at 1-888-464-4218, or write to:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
Verification Division
470 L'Enfant Plaza, SW
Washington, DC 20024
F. OTHER PROVISIONS.
1. Nothing in this agreement shall be construed to supersede, conflict, or modify the
employer's responsibilities under section 274A of the INA not to employ
unauthorized aliens or to hire individuals without verifying identity and employment
eligibility on Form I-9.
2. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to conflict with current law or regulation or
the directives of the DHS-USCIS or SSA. If a term of this agreement is inconsistent
with such authority, then that term shall be invalid, but the remaining terms and
conditions of this agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
3. Each party shall be solely responsible for defending any claim or action against it
arising out of or related to E-Verify or this MOU, whether civil or criminal, and for
any liability there from, including, but not limited to, any dispute between the
Employer and any other person or entity regarding the applicability of Section
403(d) of IIRIRA to any action taken or allegedly taken by the Employer.
4. Each party understands that some or all SSA and DHS-USCIS responsibilities under
this MOU may be performed by contractor(s).
9
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
5. Each party understands that the fact of its participation in E-Verify is not
confidential information and may be disclosed as authorized or required by law and
USCIS or SSA policy, including but not limited to, Congressional oversight, E-
Verify publicity and media inquiries, and responses to inquiries under the Freedom
of Information Act(FOIA).
G. EFFECTIVE DATE. The terms of this agreement will become effective upon the
signature of all parties, and shall continue in effect for as long as the SSA and the DHS-USCIS
administer E-Verify.
H. MODIFICATION. This agreement may be modified upon the mutual written consent
of all parties.
I. TERMINATION. This agreement may be terminated by any party upon 30 days prior
written notice to the others. Termination by any party shall terminate the MOU as to all parties.
The SSA or the DHS-USCIS may terminate this MOU without prior notice if deemed necessary
because of the requirements of law or policy, or upon a determination by SSA or the DHS-
USCIS that there has been a breach of system integrity or security by National Research
Center, Inc (Employer), or ADP TotalSource, Inc. (Designated Agent) or a failure on the part
of National Research Center, Inc (Employer) or ADP TotalSource, Inc. (Designated Agent)
to comply with established procedures or legal requirements.
The foregoing constitutes the sole and complete agreement on this subject between the SSA, the
DHS-USCIS, the Employer, and the Designated Agent.
National Research Center, Inc (Employer) hereby designates and appoints ADP TotalSource,
Inc. (Designated Agent), including its officers and employees, as the Designated Agent for the
purpose of carrying out National Research Center, Inc (Employer) responsibilities under the
MOU between the Employer, the Designated Agent, the Social Security Administration and the
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.
10
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REGARDING E-VERIFY
The individuals whose signatures appear below represent that they are authorized to enter into
this MOU on behalf of the Employer, the Designated Agent and the DHS-USCIS respectively.
APPROVED BY:
Employer National Research Center, Inc
Thomas I Miller President
Name (Pleas or print) . Title
July 29, 2008
Signature Date
Designated Agent ADP TotalSource,Inc.
Magin Perez
Name (Please type or print) Title
Electronica[ly Signed 07/29/2008
Signature Date
Department of Homeland Security-Verification Division
Name (Please type or print) Title
Signature Date
11
Revised: July 18, 2007
Client Company ID Number: 140039 ,
Company ID Number: 72760
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
EMPLOYER,AND DESIGNATED AGENT
REG?iRDING E-VERIFY
INFORMATION REQUIRED
FOR THE E-VERIFY DESIGNATED AGENT PROGRAM
Information relating to Employer's Company:
Company Name: National Research Center,Inc
Company Facility Address: 3005 30th Street
Boulder,CO 80301
County or Parish: BOULDER
Employer ldentification Number: 841286124
North American Industry
Classification Systems Code: 541
Pazent Company:
Number of Employees: 10 to 19
12
Revised: July 18, 2007
Cape Girardeau,MO Citizen Satisfaction Survey • z4
Appendix: Relevant Public Contract
The following pages contain the executed contract for the City of Cape Girardeau,MN zoii Resident Survey.
I Proposal submitted by National Research Center,Inc.
� AGREEMENT BETWEEN NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER, INC. AND
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this � day of `�fp+�m�, 2011 by
and between The City of Shorewood hereinafter referred to as "The Client°, and
National Research Center, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Consultant,"WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Client plans to undertake a survey of residents in Shorewood,
and;
WHEREAS, the Client desires to retain the services of the Consultant to conduct
the project relative thereto and the planning and designing thereof as set forth in this
agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements
herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. The Client hereby retains the Consultant for the project, to perform the
services on the terms and conditions specified herein and the Consultant
agrees so to serve. The parties agree that the Consultant shall be an
independent contractor and shall not be an employee of the Client. The
Consultant, as an independent contractor, is not entitled to workers'
compensation benefits and unemplovment insurance benefits and the
Consultant is obliqated to pay federal and state income tax on any monevs
earned pursuant to the contract relationshi�
2. The budget and work plan are attached hereto as Exhibit A and made a part of
this agreement. Consultant agrees to perform the work described in Exhibit A
in compliance with all provisions of this agreement. Consultant represents that
it has the requisite authority and capacity to perform all terms and conditions
on Consultant's part to be performed hereunder.
Consultant adjusts its rates in response to the cost of doing business. On an
annual basis, the rates for staff time are evaluated. Other rates, including
postage, are increased by consultant as soon as they are increased by the
vendor/supplier. Should a postage increase by the United States Postal
Service occur during the project at such a point that project mailings are
affected; the cost increase will be passed through directly to the client. The
budget in Exhibit A presumes that the project activities will be completed within
180 days of the date this contract is signed. The client will be notified
immediately of any potential cost increase due to work that threatens to extend
past that timeframe.
3. The work will begin and be completed in accordance with Exhibit A.
4. The Client agrees to pay Consultant for senrices rendered pursuant to this
agreement the sums set forth in the manner set forth as follows, as adjusted to
reflect the omission or addition of any of the tasks set forth therein. One initial
payment of $9,440.00 shall be made upon signing of the contract. Further
payments shall be made upon billing by the Consultant, which billing shall
Page 1
occur not more frequently than twice per month, and which shall identify the
tasks performed for each task. Payment wili be made to the Consultant within
30 calendar days.
5. The Client reserves the right to monitor and evaluate the progress and
performance of the Consultant to ensure that the terms of this agreement are
being satisfactorily met in accordance with the Client monitoring and evaluating
. criteria and standards. Consultant shall cooperate with the Client relating to
such monitoring and evaluation.
6. Insurance Requirements
(a) Comprehensive General Liabilitv, The Consultant shall procure and keep
in force during the duration of this contract a policy of Comprehensive
General Liability insurance insuring the Consultant against any liability
for personal injury, bodily injury, or death arising out of the perFormance
of services hereunder and against liability for property damage with a
combined singfe limit of at least $1,000,000.
(b) Comprehensive Automobile Liability, The Consultant shail procure and
keep in force during the duration of this contract a policy of
Comprehensive Automobile Liability insurance insuring the Consultant
against any IiabiliEy for personal injury, bodily injury, or death arising from
the use of motor vehicles and shall cover operations on or off the site of
all vehicles controlled by the Consultant whether they are owned, non-
owned, or hired with a combined single limit of at least $1,000,000.
Policies described in (a) and (b) above shall be for the mutual and joint
benefit and protection of the Consultant and The Client.
(c) Other Insurance, The Consultant shall procure and keep in force during
the term of the contract Workmen's Compensation and such other
insurance as may be required by any law, ordinance or governmental
regulation.
(d) Prior to commencement of work, the Consultant shall f�rnish to The
Client certificates of insurance policies evidencing the required
coverages if the Client so desires.
The Client reserves the right to approve variations in the above requirements
upon request of Consultant if, in the Client's opinion, such variations do not
substantially affect the Client's interests.
7. Indemnification, The Consultant hereby covenants and agrees to indemnify,
defend, save, and hold the Client harmless from any and all liability, loss,
costs, charges, obligations, expenses, attorneys' fees, litigation, judgments,
damages, claims and demands of any kind whatsoever in connection with,
arising out of Consultant's negligence or any material violation of the contract
or of any law, ordinance or regulation by the Consultant, his agents,
employees, servants, subcontractors, business invitees; or by reason of any
Page Z
injury or damage caused by Consultant's negligence occurring to any person
or persons whomever (including the Consultant, his agents, employees,
. servants, subcontractors or business invitees) or to property of any kind
whatsoever and to whomever belonging (incfuding the Consultant, his agents,
employees, servants, subcontractor or business invitees).
8. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon five (5) days' written
notice. In the event of termination by the Client, the Client shall be liable to
pay to Consultant fees for services and expenses incurred to date of
termination.
9. This agreement shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of, the
parties hereto, their successors and assigns.
1 Q. Arbitration, All disputes and controversies of every kind and nalure between
the parties to this Agreement arising out of or in connection witli this
Agreement shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the following
procedure:
(a) Either party desiring arbitration shall submit such demand in writing,
� which demand shall include the name of the arbitrator appointed by the
party demanding arbitration, together with a statement of the matter in
controversy.
(b) Within fifteen (15) days after such demand, the other party shall name
an arbitrator, or in default of such naming, such arbitrator shall be named
by the Arbitration Committee of the American Arbitration Association,
and the two arbitrators so selected shall name a third arbitrator within
fifteen (15) days, or in lieu of such agreement on a third arbitrator by the
two arbitrators so appointed, a third arbitrator shall be appointed by the
Arbitration Committee of the American Arbitration Association.
(c) The arbitrators may award to the successful party in the arbitration a
reasonable sum for the successful party's attorney's fees, together with
the costs of the arbitration.
(d) The arbitration hearing shall be held at the offices of NRC, 3005 30tn
Street, Bou{der, Colorado, on thirty (30) days' notice to the parties.
(e) The arbitration rules and procedures of the American Arbitration
Association shall be utilized in the arbitration hearing and the law of the
evidence of the State of Colorado shall govern the presentation of
evidence of such hearing.
(fl An award rendered by a majority of the arbitrators appointed under and
pursuant to this Agreement shall be final and binding on alf parties to the
proceeding during the period of this Agreement, and judgment on such
award my be entered by either party in the highest court, state or federal,
having jurisdiction.
Page 3
THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
Signature: - -
Print: �j���v� 1�}�'Gl�
Date: �-ts- t+
Title: �.;''� A�����S���fZ �
(State of Minnesota)
(County of Hennepin) �
NATIONAL RESEARCH CENTER, INC -'
��
Signature: ,%
Print: Thomas Miller
Date: ���/� I
Title: President
� (State of Colorado)
(County of Boulder)
Page 4
Exhibit A
We have provided budget estimates for a ftve-page mailed survey to 1,200 randomly selected
households,expectirig approximately 300-450 completed surveys. This includes instrument
development, sample design, three contacts per household(a postcard and two waves of the �
survey packet), the survey made available on the Web, mail survey data entry,data analysis
(including weighting the data), reporting (includes an executive summary, results displayed in
graphical and tabular form, interpretive text, Key Driver Analysis, national and custom
benchmark comparisons) and one in-person presentation.
Our budget estimates assume that meetings for survey design and survey results can be held via
telephone conference, but that the presentation will be done in-person. Additionally, we have
included the national benchmarks, custom benchmarks, a Web response option for the survey,
continuous support for six months following the delivery of the report and Key Driver Analysis
for free in the 2011 budget(a cost savings of$5,000).
i � � 1 � i� i : � •
' � � • i • i � • II � 11 I � � �
Tasks and Staff Cost
_ . . � _.
Survey Management : $1,250
_ .. _ _ . _. . ....... .
Instrument Design $2,350
_
Data Analysis and Report of Results $6,785
_ . __ _ _ _ _ _
Presentation $2,915
_
_
National Benchmark Comparisons No charge
_.....
Custom Benchmark Comparisons No charge
_ . ._...... . ._.._ .. _
_ . .
Key Driver Analysis No charge
_..
Web Response Option No charge
_
Six months of continuous support No charge
Subtotal,NRC Staff Costs $13,300
Hard Costs Cost
_.....__....---....__... _ _. . _
Survey Printing _ $1,670
_ _
Postage $1,450
Mail Preparation/Sample $885 �
.. _ __....
Data cleaning and entry $865
Travel $710
Subtotal,Hard Costs $5,580
1 i . � i u II � I � � � : :; I
Note:On occosion,a client moy decide during the project that the original scope of work is insufficien[and request additional work.NItC will not
exceed this budget unless the scope of the p�oject is revised,ond an additiona!budget is creoted to cover the odditional cosfs.We encouroge
questions Jf you are uncertain obou[wha[rs and is not included in this budget.
Page 5