“Defining and Measuring Success for Safety and Hospitality SAMs”

Christine Chui, Gaurav Mallick, Julie Longpre, Joshua SorkinMPA Candidates

Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public AdministrationThe George Washington University

DowntownDC Business Improvement District

The Changing Role of the SAM

• Security Ambassadors

• No Current Research Exists on Safety/Hospitality Ambassadors

● Hospitality and Service Ambassadors

● Maintaining Relevance in a Smartphone World - Urban Concierge

Research Questions

1. What are the needs of the SAM Program?

2. How can the Downtown BID best establish goals, activities, and objectives for Safety and Hospitality SAMs?

3. What are the best data measures to gauge SAMs’ effectiveness and success?

4. How can the Downtown BID continuously improve the SAM program?

Methodology

● Expert Interviews

● Surveys

● Focus Groups

Expert Interviews

• Interviewees• Everett Scruggs – BID Director of Operations – “In Charge of

SAMs”• David Kamperin – BID Director of Public Space Management • Blake Holub – BID Quality Assurance Manager• Monica Leibovitz – Community Development Professional,

External Consultant to BID• Chris Leinberger – GWU Professor – Urban Land Use

Strategist, Developing Foggy Bottom BID

• Internal versus External Perspectives

Surveys

1. Development 2. Issued to entire population

a. Two sessions (4 shifts)

b. 28/34 Non-Supervisory SAMs

3. Response Rate

a. 82% of the Safety/Hospitality SAMs

4. Issues with Survey

a. Questions 13 and 14 Omitted

5. Scripted prompt and other safeguards against bias

Focus Groups

1. Focus Groupsa. 2 Groups of 6 SAMs

b. 1 Group of 4 Supervisors

2. Selection method

a. Random Sampling, Clustered (4 shifts)

3. Percentage of respondents measured in comparison to population a. 35% of the 34 Safety/Hospitality SAMs

b. 80% of the 5 SAM Supervisors

4. Scripted prompt and other safeguards against bias

Challenges

• Perception of Capstone Team by SAMs, Supervisors, BID Staff

• Development of Surveys

• Time Limitations

• Experimenter Bias

Key Findings

• Public Perception• Misunderstood

• SAM Deployment• Zones versus Stationary Posts

• Organizational Structure• Disconnect between BID Management,

SAM Supervisors, and SAMs

Key Findings (ctd)

• Training• Safety, Leadership, Local Area Knowledge

• Public Safety• Concerns for Personal Safety• Interagency Communication Issues

• SAM Logging & Data Collection• Inconsistent Logging Practices

Recommendations and Next Steps

1. Investing in People - Training

● Narrowing existing skills gap for SAMs and Supervisors

● Improve training in:○ Leadership○ Local Area Knowledge○ Security and Safety

● Allows for continued growth

2. Enhancing Communication

● Internal○ Formal Documentation

Procedures○ Personal Accountability○ Streamlined flow of

information● External

○ Utilize Feedback Loops to address community needs

3. Technology Integration and Data Driven Management

● Revise Data Collection Methodology

● Emphasis on Data Accuracy

● Data Driven Deployment to Gauge SAMs’ Effectiveness and Success

● Strategic Decision Making

4. The Urban Concierge

● Evolution of SAM program to meet changes in Downtown Landscape

● “Proactively Helpful”

● Well-trained, connected, knowledgeable, identifiable, independent and adaptable

Questions?