public officials’ survey: research follow-up to the vdot communications audit october 10, 2003

Public Officials’ Survey: Research Follow-up to the VDOT

Communications Audit

October 10, 2003

2

Table of Contents

Objectives ……………………………… 3

Methodology ……………………………… 5

Detailed Findings ……………………………… 8

Source of Transportation Information ….. 9

Evaluations of VDOT Communications

Efforts ………………………….…... 19

When and How to Communicate with

Public Officials ………………………………. 37

What Information to Communicate …... 52

Additional Comments ……………………………. 65

Conclusions and Implications ………………………. 67

Objectives

4

Objectives

In 2001, an audit of VDOT communications was conducted. A survey of public officials across Virginia was a component of that audit. The research reported in this document is a follow-up study to the survey conducted in 2001.

Specific objectives of this research are to:

Assess the extent to which perceptions and expectations of VDOT have changed among public officials since 2001 Determine how well public officials evaluate VDOT communications efforts today Identify how VDOT can continue to improve its communications efforts to public officials

Methodology

6

Methodology

A mail survey was conducted among public officials across Virginia. In order to be comparable to the 2001 research, the questionnaire utilized this year was similar to the one used in 2001. Minor modifications were made to the survey to delete some information that was not essential to the analysis and to include new areas of assessment.

The sample this year consists of two basic subsamples: members of the General Assembly and County Officials. County Officials are, for the most part, county executives and administrators. A few city officials and transportation planners are included as well. Nevertheless, the subsample is referred to as “County Officials” throughout this report.

The questionnaire was mailed to 235 possible respondents. The initial mailing to the General Assembly was sent on July 29, 2003. To encourage response from this group, a follow-up mailing was sent on September 8. The questionnaire was sent to County Officials on August 14, 2003.

In total, 115 responses were received:

General Assembly members n = 61

County Officials n = 54

Responses were received from the nine VDOT districts:

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericksburg

Hampton Roads

Lynchburg

Northern Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

7

Methodology

To the extent possible, this analysis compares results of this year to the study of 2001. General Assembly members comprised only 10% of the sample in 2001. This year, members of the General Assembly make up over one-half (53%) of the sample. Consequently, the total sample this year should not be compared to the total sample of 2001. Differences between the two points in time may be due to differences in composition of the samples, rather than changes that have occurred over the past two years. Hence, responses of members of the General Assembly are compared for 2001 and 2003. Comparisons are also made between County Officials in 2001 and 2003*. Comparisons are also made between General Assembly members and County Officials this year; and, comparisons are made across districts.

Sample sizes in this study are small and are, thus, too unstable to conduct strict significance testing. Instead, the analysis looks for trends, patterns and consistencies in the data that can help to understand the impact and role of VDOT communications.

Two respondents sent letters explaining their views rather than completing the questionnaire. These respondents cannot be included in the quantitative analysis. Nevertheless, their comments have been reviewed for the analysis to help understand responses and patterns in the data.

* The sample of “County Officials” in 2001 includes some public officials who are city officials rather than county officials. Nevertheless, the terminology “County Officials” is used to reflect the composition of this group in this year’s sample.

Detailed Findings

Source of Transportation Information

10

4%

2%

4%

3%

10%

8%

10%

32%

25%

10%

12%

11%

11%

24%

11%

12%

4%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

VDOT web site

Special interestgroups

Office of Secretaryof Trans.

Constituents

VDOT CentralOffice

Local governmentofficials

Conferences &meetings

Local VDOTengineers

Media

General Assembly

County Officials

Source of Transportation Information- General Assembly and County Officials -

Members of the General Assembly (24%) and County Officials (25%) are about equally likely to rely on the media for information about transportation issues. In contrast, however, members of the General Assembly are much less likely to rely on local VDOT engineers for information than are County Officials (11% compared to 32%). Members of the General Assembly are also more likely to rely on local government officials, constituents, the Office of the Secretary of Transportation and special interest groups than are County Officials in Virginia. Both groups are equally likely to rely on the VDOT Central Office for information.

Data from Q1: Where, typically, do you get most information about transportation issues in Virginia? For example, where do you get informaton about project plans, funding, traffic issues, or future transportation plans? Please choose no more than three of the following: (Answers listed.)

11

0%

0%

11%

22%

0%

22%

11%

33%

10%

12%

11%

11%

24%

11%

12%

4%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

VDOT web site



Constituents

VDOT CentralOffice



Local VDOTengineers

Media

2003

2001

Source of Transportation Information- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Although General Assembly reliance on the media has decreased since 2001 (going from 33% in 2001 to 24% today), the media is still the primary source of transportation information for members of the General Assembly. Just as in 2001, 11% of the General Assembly rely on local VDOT engineers for information. Reliance on both conferences/meetings and the VDOT Central Office have decreased and are now at about 10%. Reliance on local government has increased. None reported relying on local officials in 2001. Today, 12% rely on local officials for information. Eleven percent (11%) of the General Assembly report that they rely on the Office of the Secretary of Transportation for information about transportation.


NA

12

0%

5%

0%

9%

12%

1%

58%

15%

4%

2%

4%

3%

10%

8%

10%

32%

25%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

VDOT web site



Constituents

VDOT CentralOffice



Local VDOTengineers

Media

2003

2001

Source of Transportation Information- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Today, County Officials in Virginia are less likely to rely on local VDOT engineers for information about transportation issues than in 2001. Today, 32% report getting information from local engineers, compared to 58% in 2001. Reliance on the media has increased, however, going from 15% in 2001 to 25% today. There is also greater reliance today on conferences and meetings, 10% today as compared to 1% in 2001. Reliance on the Central Office has remained constant at about 10%. Usage of the web site is now 4%.


13

Source of Transportation Information- By District -

Some differences across districts are apparent in regard to their sources of transportation information. Hampton Roads relies slightly more often on the media, local government officials and the Office of the Secretary of Transportation than do most other districts. Northern Virginia relies more often on media and seems to have a close relationship with local VDOT engineers. Salem seems not to rely on local VDOT engineers in comparison to most other districts.

Note: Please see table on the following page.

14

Source of Transportation Information- By District -

232518-33Office of Sec. of Trans.

4135-5622VDOT Central Office

524429122Local gov’t. officials

333334325Conferences and meetings

nnnnnnnnn

232518-33VDOT web site

1113-1-21Special interest groups

532314331Constituents

10371077989Local VDOT engineers

108912513858Media

Staunton

Salem

Richmond

N. Virginia

Lynch-burg

Hampton Roads

Fredericks-burg

Culpeper

Bristol

Due to small sample sizes, frequencies (n) rather than percentages are reported.

15

13%

54%

24%

9%

2%

0%

24%

8%

53%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Excellent 5

4

3

2

Poor 1

General Assembly

County Officials

Helpfulness of Information- General Assembly and County Officials -

Members of the General Assembly and County Officials are remarkably similar in their views of the helpfulness of the transportation information that they receive. About two-thirds of each group (66% of General Assembly members and 67% of County Officials) rate the information as helpful (score of “4” or “5” on a 5-point scale.)

Data from Q2: How helpful is this information to you? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 for your answer where “1” is “Poor” and “5” is “Excellent.”

16

44%

44%

11%

2%

0%

0%

24%

8%

53%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Excellent 5

4

3

2

Poor 1

2003

2001

Helpfulness of Information- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The helpfulness of transportation information to General Assembly members has improved over the last two years. Today, two-thirds (66%) rate the helpfulness of the communications as either “4” or “5” on a 5-point scale, compared to 44% in 2001. In fact, 13% now rate the communications as “excellent” compared to none giving this high rating in 2001.


17

24%

42%

29%

5%

13%

54%

24%

9%

0%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Excellent 5

4

3

2

Poor 1

2003

2001

Helpfulness of Information- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Unlike members of the General Assembly, County Officials in Virginia do not perceive that the information about transportation that they receive today is more helpful than the information that they received in 2001. Top-2-box score in 2001 was 66% compared to 67% today. The proportion rating the information as “excellent” has decreased slightly today, going from 24% in 2001 to 13% today.


18

Helpfulness of Information- By District -

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - 1 - - - - -

2 2 2 2 - - 1 - 1 2

3 3 - 3 9 2 2 2 5 2

4 6 6 7 8 5 13 7 2 8

Excellent 5 - 2 - 1 1 3 2 2 3


As indicated by the table below, the ratings of officials regarding the helpfulness of the transportation information that they receive are quite consistent across districts.

Evaluations of VDOT Communications Efforts

20

3.36

3.63

3.62

3.85

3.83

3.87

4.06

4.27

3.72

3.78

3.49

3.54

1 2 3 4 5

Timeliness

Overalleffectiveness

Content

Relevance ofinformation

Ability to answerquestions

Responsiveness torequests

General Assembly

County Officials

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- General Assembly and County Officials -

Members of the General Assembly rate VDOT communications slightly more favorably than do County Officials, particularly on three dimensions: responsiveness, ability to answer questions and timeliness. They also rate VDOT marginally more favorably than County Officials on content of the information provided. Nevertheless, County Officials rate the overall effectiveness of VDOT communications marginally higher than do members of the General Assembly.

Data from Q3: What are your overall perceptions of the communications efforts of VDOT? On a scale of 1 to 5, where “1” is “poor” and “5” is “excellent,” please rate VDOT on the following: (Attributes listed.)

Values shown are mean scores on a 5-point scale where the higher the score, the more favorable the rating.

21

2.89

2.78

2.78

4.22

3.78

4.06

4.27

3.72

3.78

3.49

3.54

1 2 3 4 5

Timeliness


Content



Responsivenessto requests

2003

2001

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The perception of VDOT’s communications efforts has improved among members of the General Assembly since 2001. Marked improvements have occurred on measures of responsiveness, content, overall effectiveness and timeliness. There is still opportunity for VDOT to improve its performance, however. VDOT’s performance rating on “ability to answer questions” has decreased slightly since 2001.

VDOT should strive to receive a rating of at least 4.00 on all measures. In this regard, VDOT’s performance on overall effectiveness and timeliness, in particular, still fall quite below this 4.00 level. It can be hypothesized that the overall rating would improve if VDOT’s performance on the other measures -- particularly timeliness -- improved.


NA


22

3.37

3.53

3.51

3.82

3.36

3.63

3.62

3.85

3.83

3.87

3.80

1 2 3 4 5

Timeliness


Content



Responsivenessto requests

2003

2001

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Although VDOT’s performance ratings among County Officials have not improved since 2001, VDOT has not lost ground on any of the measures. As is true for the General Assembly, VDOT communications efforts should, in particular, strive to be more timely. (Note: Some slight improvements have occurred on some attributes, e.g., content. Due to the small sample size and the subsequent instability of the data, these changes are not meaningful.)


NA


23

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- By District -

Responsiveness to Requests

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - 2 - - - - -

2 2 1 2 2 - - - - 1

3 1 - - 3 1 4 1 1 3

4 5 2 7 7 2 7 6 5 5

Excellent 5 3 6 3 5 5 6 2 3 6


Although the numbers are quite small (due to the small sample size), the data suggest that officials in Hampton Roads, Bristol and Culpeper tend to rate VDOT’s communications efforts slightly less favorably than do other districts. (Note:

Refer to the tables on the following five pages for a comparison of districts on all attributes measured.)

24


Ability to Answer Questions

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 1 1 - 2 - 2 - - -

3 1 - 3 7 5 2 3 4 3

4 6 5 6 7 5 5 7 4 6

Excellent 5 3 3 3 2 3 5 - 2 5


25

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- By District -Relevance

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 2 1 - 2 2 1 - 1 -

3 2 1 4 5 2 4 - 1 3

4 5 2 8 10 4 6 5 5 7

Excellent 5 2 3 - 2 2 6 1 1 5


26


Content

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 2 2 1 2 - 1 - 2 -

3 2 1 3 7 3 3 2 3 2

4 6 4 7 10 5 10 7 4 11

Excellent 5 1 2 1 - - 3 1 - 2


27


Overall Effectiveness

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 2 2 1 3 - 1 1 1 1

3 3 2 4 7 3 8 2 5 2

4 5 3 5 8 4 9 6 4 10

Excellent 5 1 3 2 - 1 1 2 - 2


28

Ratings of VDOT Communications Efforts- By District -Timeliness

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Poor 1 - - - 1 - - - 1 -

2 2 1 1 4 - 2 - 1 2

3 3 4 6 4 1 6 4 4 3

4 6 4 5 8 7 8 5 3 8

Excellent 5 - - - 2 - 1 1 - 2


29

13%

17%

63%

72%

14%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

I get the run around

Difficult to receivesatisfactory reply

Info is helpful andbeneficial

General Assembly

County Officials

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT- General Assembly and County Officials -

Both members of the General Assembly and County Officials believe that information provided by VDOT is helpful and beneficial. Members of the General Assembly (72%) are slightly more likely to rate the information they receive from VDOT as helpful and beneficial than are County Officials in Virginia (63%). Neither group is likely to say that it is difficult to receive a satisfactory reply from VDOT or that they get the run around from VDOT.

Data from Q6: On a scale of 1 to 5 where “1” is “strongly disagree” and “5” is “strongly agree,” to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements?

Values shown are total proportion for scores 4 and 5 on a 5-point scale where “1” is “strongly disagree” and “5” is “strongly agree” with the statements about VDOT.

30

22%

33%

44%

72%

14%

11%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




2003

2001

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The opinions about VDOT communication have improved since 2001 among members of the General Assembly. Today, 72% say that the information they receive from VDOT is helpful and beneficial, compared to 44% in 2001. In 2001, 33% said that it is difficult to get a satisfactory reply from VDOT. Today, the proportion is only 14%. In 2001, 22% said that they got the “run around” from VDOT. Today, only 11% express that criticism of VDOT.



31

12%

21%

70%

13%

17%

63%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




2003

2001

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The opinions of County Officials regarding VDOT communications and response to requests have not improved since 2001.



32

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT- By District -

Information Is Helpful and Beneficial

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Strongly disagree 1

- - - 1 - - - - -

2 2 - - 1 - - - - -

3 3 1 4 7 3 8 2 1 5

4 3 6 8 9 4 8 8 9 6

Strongly agree 5

3 2 - 2 1 3 1 - 4


While officials in all districts tend to believe that the information they receive from VDOT is helpful and beneficial, some officials seem to have had problems with VDOT regarding getting a reply to their requests (most often in Fredericksburg, Hampton Roads, Northern Virginia and Staunton) and getting the “run around” (most often in

Bristol, Hampton Roads, Northern Virginia and Staunton).

33

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT- By District -

Difficult to Receive Satisfactory Reply

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Strongly disagree 1

1 1 2 2 3 3 1 1 1

2 6 5 7 8 3 9 6 7 5

3 3 2 - 4 1 4 2 2 7

4 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 - 2

Strongly agree 5

- - - 1 - 2 - - -


34

Agreement with Statements Describing VDOT: I Get the Run Around

- By District -

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Strongly disagree 1

2 1 3 2 4 3 2 3 5

2 5 7 5 8 2 10 7 5 6

3 2 1 3 6 1 2 - 2 2

4 2 - 1 3 1 2 1 - 2

Strongly agree 5

- - - - - 1 - - -


35

Information that Would Help

1Funding plans of General Assembly

3Plans / planning information

5Budget information (e.g., better info about VDOT budgets)

6Other

2How local areas can benefit from programs

2None

2Summary reports about VDOT activities

3Secondary road information

12Up-to-date information

16Local information and updates

n

Two additional types of information would most often help public officials in Virginia: local information and updates and the most up-to-date information.

Due to small sample size, frequencies (n) rather than percentages are reported.

Data from Q7: What, if any, information would you like VDOT to make available to you to help you with your official responsibilities?

When and How to Communicate with Public Officials

37

28%

33%

39%

52%

28%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Both

Public Official

VDOT

General Assembly

County Officials

Initiation of Contact- General Assembly and County Officials -

VDOT appears to be more proactive in initiating contact with General Assembly members than with other public officials. Over one-half (52%) of General Assembly members said that VDOT initiates contact with them, compared to 39% of County Officials. In contrast, 33% of County Officials said that they typically initiate contact with VDOT, compared to only 28% of General Assembly members.

Data from Q5: Normally, who initiates that contact?

38

44%

56%

52%

28%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Both

GA Member

VDOT

20032001

Initiation of Contact- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Today, General Assembly members are less likely to initiate contact with VDOT than in 2001. In 2001, 44% of General Assembly members indicated that they initiated contact with VDOT. Today, only 28% typically initiate contact.

Note: “Both” response was not measured in 2001.


NA

39

37%

63%

28%

33%

39%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Both

County Official

VDOT

20032001

Initiation of Contact- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Today, County Officials are less reliant upon VDOT to initiate contact than in 2001. Two years ago, 63% of County Officials relied upon VDOT to initiate contact. Today, 39% rely upon VDOT to initiate contact.


NA

40

7%

56%

37%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

48%

4%

48%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Daily

Once a week

Once a month

Once every 6months

Once a year

Less than once ayear

Never

General Assembly

County Officials

Frequency of Receiving Information from VDOT- General Assembly and County Officials -

County Officials receive information from VDOT more frequently than do members of the General Assembly. Two-thirds (63%) of County Officials receive information at least once a week, compared to 48% of General Assembly members. This more frequent contact by County Officials probably reflects the nature of their positions to some extent. That is, some County Officials may have direct or primary responsibilities that relate to transportation issues and therefore have specific, frequent need for information from VDOT.

Contact with local VDOT engineers is most frequent. That is, those who report that they receive information from local VDOT engineers are more likely to report receiving information once a week than once a month. (Note: Due to the way questions were asked, it is not possible to identify precisely with which sources contact is most frequent. The question about source of information accepts up to three answers per respondent. Thus, the categories are not mutually exclusive.)

Data from Q4: How frequently do you receive information from VDOT? (Answers listed.)

41

0%

56%

44%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

48%

4%

48%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Daily

Once a week

Once a month

Once every 6months

Once a year


Never

2003

2001

Frequency of Receiving Information from VDOT- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

General Assembly members receive information from VDOT slightly less often today than in 2001. In 2001, 56% of General Assembly members received information at least once a week. Today, only 48% receive information that often.


42

3%

34%

54%

7%

0%

1%

1%

7%

56%

37%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Daily

Once a week

Once a month

Once every 6months

Once a year


Never

2003

2001

Frequency of Receiving Information from VDOT- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The frequency with which County Officials receive information from VDOT has increased since 2001. Today, 63% of County Officials receive information at least once a week. In 2001, only 37% of County Officials received information this often.


43

Frequency of Receiving Information from VDOT- By District -

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n % n n n n

Never - - - - - - - - -

Less than once a year

- - - - - - - - -

Once a year - - - - - - - - -

Once every 6 months

8 3 6 7 1 6 5 4 6

Once a month 3 5 4 11 7 11 6 4 7

Once a week 3 5 4 11 7 11 6 4 7

Daily - - 2 - - - - - 2


Public officials in the Bristol district tend to receive information from VDOT less frequently than public officials in other districts.

44

4%

17%

80%

67%

0%

0%

11%

22%

0%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Annually

Semi-annually

Quarterly

Monthly

As necessary

General Assembly

County Officials

Desired Frequency of VDOT Communication- General Assembly and County Officials -

Generally, both members of the General Assembly and other public officials prefer to receive information from VDOT “as necessary” rather than according to a pre-determined schedule. Two-thirds (67%) of General Assembly members, compared to 80% of County Officials, prefer to receive information as necessary. Members of the General Assembly are more likely than other public officials to prefer receiving information according to a pre-determined schedule. Twenty-two percent (22%) of General Assembly members would like to receive information monthly, compared to 17% of County Officials. Eleven percent (11%) of the General Assembly prefer information quarterly, compared to 4% of County Officials.

Data from Q10: How frequently should VDOT regularly communicate with you? (Answers listed.)

45

33%

67%

67%

0%

0%

0%

11%

22%

0%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Annually

Semi-annually

Quarterly

Monthly

As necessary

2003

2001

Desired Frequency of VDOT Communication- General Assembly: 2003 compared to 2001 -

The preference among General Assembly members to receive information as necessary has not changed since 2001. It remains constant at 67%. However, the preference to receive information monthly has decreased, while the preference for quarterly information has increased.


46

1%

40%

59%

4%

17%

80%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Annually

Semi-annually

Quarterly

Monthly

As necessary

2003

2001

Desired Frequency of VDOT Communication- County Officials: 2003 compared to 2001 -

Preference to receive information from VDOT as necessary has increased among County Officials since 2001, going from 59% to 80%.


47

Desired Frequency of VDOT Communication- By District -

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n % n n n n

As necessary 8 5 11 13 7 13 7 2 14

Monthly 3 3 - 5 - 4 1 3 1

Quarterly - - 1 1 - - 2 4 -

Semi-annually - - - - - - - - -

Annually - - - - - - - - -


Regardless of the district, public officials tend to prefer to receive information from VDOT as necessary, rather than according to a pre-determined schedule.

48

21%

2%

44%

33%

38%

38%

9%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

During thelegislative session

In fall, prior tolegislative session

In summer, prior tolegislative session

General Assembly

County Officials

Most Effective Time for VDOT Communication - General Assembly and County Officials -

Just as in 2001, members of the General Assembly prefer to receive information from VDOT prior to the legislative session – either in the summer (38%) or fall (38%). County Officials prefer (slightly) to receive information in the fall.

Data from Q11: When is the most effective time to communicate important transportation issues to you? (Answers listed.)

49

22%

0%

44%

33%

38%

38%

9%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Other

During thelegislative session

In fall, prior tolegislative session

In summer, prior tolegislative session

2003

2001

Most Effective Time for VDOT Communication - General Assembly and County Officials -

While in 2001 General Assembly members reported a slight preference for information in the fall, today they are equally divided between receiving information in the summer (38%) and the fall (38%)

Note: This question was not asked of County Officials in 2001.

Data from Q11: When is the most effective time to communicate important transportation issues to you? (Answers listed.)

50

Desired Frequency of VDOT Communication- By District -

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n % n n n n

In summer, prior to legislative session

3 3 5 8 5 6 3 4 4

In fall, prior to legislative session

4 2 3 7 1 7 3 2 9

During the legislative session

- 1 - - - - 1 2 1

Other 2 1 4 2 1 4 3 1 1


Lynchburg officials prefer information in the summer. Staunton officials prefer information in the fall. In other districts, public officials are fairly equally divided between the fall and the summer.

51

11%

9%

5%

3%

8%

12%

33%

20%

7%

7%

8%

9%

27%

29%

0%

0%

4%

6%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Newsletter by fax

Web site

In-person meetings

Newsletter by mail

Newsletter by e-mail

Letter by fax

Phone call

Regular briefings

Letter by e-mail

Letter by mail

General Assembly

County Officials

Desired Means of Communication- General Assembly and County Officials -

Both members of the General Assembly and County Officials across Virginia prefer to receive information from VDOT by letter – either by mail or by e-mail. Fifty-six percent (56%) of the General Assembly prefer letters by mail or e-mail, compared to 53% of County Officials. County Officials are slightly more likely than General Assembly members to prefer information from the web site, 11% compared to 2%.

Note: Due to the way in which this question is asked this year, it is not possible to compare results to 2001.

Data from Q9: How would you prefer for VDOT to communicate with you? Please choose the two most preferred methods by placing a “1” and a “2” next to those. (Answers listed.)

What Information to Communicate

53

26%

39% 49%

63%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly

Second box Top box (of critical importance)

Important that Information Come Directly from VDOT- General Assembly and County Officials -

Transportation Funding

Members of the General Assembly are more likely to believe it is important that information about transportation funding come directly from VDOT than are County Officials. While the top-2-box scores of the two groups do not differ, members of the General Assembly are more likely to say that it is of critical importance (39%) than are other public officials (26%).

Among the six types of information tested in this research, it is most important that information about transportation funding come directly from VDOT. See the following five pages for more specific results.

Data from Q8: Please rate the following categories as to the importance that information about it come directly from VDOT. (Scale: 1 (unimportant) to 5 (critical))

89%

88%

Values shown are total proportion for scores “4” and “5” on a 5-point scale where “1” means “unimportant” and “5” means “critical.”

54

32%

38% 41%

54%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly



Status of Current Construction

Members of the General Assembly and County Officials are about equal in their preference that information about the status of current construction projects come directly from VDOT. Seventy-nine percent (79%) of the General Assembly and 86% of County Officials believe it is important that construction information come directly from VDOT.


86%

79%


55

32%

39% 41%

43%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly



Long-range Plans

About 75% to 80% of public officials in Virginia believe that information about long-range plans should come directly from VDOT.


75%

80%


56

43%

41% 31%

37%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly



Transportation Proposals / Studies

Both General Assembly members and County Officials believe information about transportation proposals and studies should come from VDOT. Slightly less than three-fourths (72%) of the General Assembly believe that information about transportation proposals and studies should come from VDOT, compared to 80% of County Officials.


80%

72%


57

37%

36% 36%

39%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly



Traffic Issues

About three-fourths of the General Assembly (72%) and County Officials (76%) believe it is important that information about traffic issues should come directly from VDOT.


76%

72%


58

40%

39% 19%

14%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

OtherOfficials

GeneralAssembly



Environmental Issues

Compared to the other types of information tested, public officials are less likely to believe that it is important that information about the environment come directly from VDOT. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of the General Assembly and 54% of County Officials believe it is important that environmental information come from VDOT.


54%

58%


59

Important that Information Come Directly from VDOT- By District -

Transportation Funding

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 - - - - - 1 - - -

2 - 1 1 - - - - - -

3 1 1 2 1 - - 2 - 3

4 4 3 4 6 5 7 2 3

Critical 5 6 5 5 11 3 11 6 7


Response patterns do not vary across districts in regard to the importance of receiving information directly from VDOT. Generally, public officials prefer to receive information directly from VDOT. They are most receptive to the idea that information about the environment does not have to come directly from VDOT. Please refer to the

tables on the following five pages for more detailed information.

60


Status of Current Construction

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 - - 2 - - - 1 - -

3 1 1 2 3 2 4 - 1 2

4 6 6 4 5 3 4 2 4 5

Critical 5 4 3 4 10 3 11 7 5 8


61


Long-range Plans

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 - 1 - - - - - - -

3 1 - 4 3 2 5 5 3 2

4 4 3 2 6 3 7 1 6 8

Critical 5 6 6 6 9 3 7 4 1 5


62


Transportation Proposals / Studies

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 - - - - 1 1 1 - -

3 3 2 3 3 2 5 2 3 1

4 5 4 3 9 4 7 1 5 8

Critical 5 3 4 6 6 1 6 6 2 5


63

Important that Information Come Directly from VDOT- By District -Traffic Issues

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 - - - - - - - - -

2 - - 1 - 1 - - 2 -

3 - 2 3 6 2 2 3 3 3

4 6 4 5 5 3 7 2 3 5

Critical 5 4 4 3 7 2 9 5 2 7


64


Environmental Issues

Bristol

Culpeper

Fredericks-burg

Hampton Roads

Lynch-burg

N. Virginia

Richmond

Salem

Staunton

n n n n n n n n n

Unimportant 1 1 - - - - - 1 - 1

2 -- 1 2 1 1 2 - 3 -

3 2 2 6 5 5 7 4 4 2

4 7 4 1 7 2 6 1 3 10

Critical 5 1 3 3 5 - 4 4 - 2


Additional Comments

66

Additional Comments for VDOT

4Other

1Improvement with new administration

2Receive too much information / too much mail

2VDOT communications has improved

2Need a contact person

3Contact as necessary

6Positive comments about communications (e.g., “excellent communications”)

9Positive comments about specific individuals / offices

10Requests for specific information (e.g., specific projects)

n

Given the opportunity to provide additional comments, a few respondents provided additional input for VDOT. Most often, additional comments related to the need for specific information, for example information about specific projects related to their area. Additionally, positive comments about the helpfulness of

specific individuals and offices were common. A few noted that VDOT communications are improving or have improved.

Due to small sample size, frequencies (n) rather than proportions are reported.

Data from Q12: Do you have any additional comments about VDOT’s communications with you?

Conclusions and Implications

68


Conclusion: Public officials in Virginia continue to rely upon the media for information about transportation issues. About a fourth of public officials -- both General Assembly members and County Officials -- rely on the media. Since 2001, reliance on the media has decreased among General Assembly members and increased among other officials. General Assembly members are also less likely to get information from VDOT’s Central Office than they were in 2001. Members of the General Assembly are more likely today than in 2001 to rely upon local government officials for transportation information.

Implication: VDOT cannot control directly transportation information distributed through the media (at least in the form of news). Consequently, the media should not be viewed as the primary means of communicating with public officials. VDOT should continue to work directly with “information sources” to communicate with public officials -- particularly in regard to issues that cannot be entrusted to the media in general. In particular, there is a growing dependence on local government officials by members of the General Assembly. Therefore, it is particularly important that VDOT communicate frequently and consistently with local public officials. Enlist these officials as VDOT “champions” to be communicators for VDOT.

69


Conclusion: VDOT’s performance on some key measures of the effectiveness of its communications has improved since 2001. Its strongest performance is on being responsive to requests, its ability to answer questions and the relevance of the information it provides. Although some improvement is noted on the measure of timeliness since last assessed in 2001, VDOT still seems to be criticized by some public officials for not being timely.

The perception of VDOT by members of the General Assembly has improved considerably since 2001, particularly in regard to its responsiveness, the content of the information VDOT provides, timeliness and the overall effectiveness of the communications. County Officials are less likely to report improvements in VDOT communications. In fact, little improvement is posted among the evaluations by County Officials.

Implication: VDOT’s efforts to better meet the information needs of members of the General Assembly are paying off. Continue to work to communicate with the General Assembly. Use and develop ways to communicate with them directly so that VDOT controls the message. Do not overlook other public officials -- who are also a source of transportation information for the General Assembly. Continue to respond in a timely manner -- working to exceed expectations of the requestor. Expect improvement in ratings of overall effectiveness with improvements in timeliness -- along with improvements on the other dimensions measured.

70


Conclusion: Officials in Hampton Roads, Bristol and Culpeper tend to rate VDOT communications less favorably than do officials in other districts. Hampton Roads is more likely to be critical of VDOT’s responsiveness (or lack of), inability to answer questions, relevance of the information provided and timeliness. Bristol is particularly concerned about responsiveness, relevance, content and timeliness. Culpeper tends to be most critical in regard to the content of VDOT’s responses to their inquiries.

Implication: Work to improve experiences with VDOT and perceptions of VDOT in Hampton Roads, Bristol and Culpeper by addressing specific problematic areas. In Hampton Roads, VDOT should work to improve its response time and ensure that its response is exactly in line with the request. In Bristol, responsiveness and content of the response should also be emphasized. In regard to Culpeper, VDOT must work to ensure that it communicates to officials that it is sensitive to and understands Culpeper’s specific needs.

71


Conclusion: The information provided by VDOT is more likely to be evaluated favorably by members of the General Assembly than by County Officials. In regard to sources of information that comes from VDOT, members of the General Assembly are more likely to rely on the Office of the Secretary of Transportation than are County Officials. County Officials are more likely to rely on local VDOT engineers than are members of the General Assembly. The two groups are equally likely to rely on the VDOT Central Office for information.

Implication: Recognize the important role of local VDOT engineers as communicators, particularly communicators to County Officials. Continue to work to improve their communication skills. Help them understand and embrace their roles as communicators.

Recognize, also, that public officials may have a lesser need to rely upon local VDOT engineers for information if the Central Office can provide necessary information in advance of specific questions that public officials might direct to local engineers. The Central Office can work to anticipate information needs of public officials by proactively providing information either to the public official or to the local engineer. Proactive responses by the Central Office will demonstrate sensitivity to and appreciation of local issues.

72


Conclusion: General Assembly members are more likely to have VDOT initiate contact than are County Officials. County Officials are more likely than members of the General Assembly to initiate contact with VDOT.

Implication: VDOT is more proactive with members of the General Assembly than with County Officials. VDOT is more likely to wait for County Officials to make contact, perhaps in the form of a specific request for information. In that members of the General Assembly tend to rate VDOT communications more positively, proactive communications work. VDOT should take the initiative whenever possible to communicate with public officials -- whether they are General Assembly members or not. Seek out opportunities to communicate with public officials, both on a regular and occasional basis. Do not wait for public officials to request information.

73


Conclusion: Members of both the General Assembly and County Officials prefer to receive information from VDOT “as necessary.”

Implication: Communicate with public officials when there is pertinent, useful and relevant information, whether communication is according to a pre-determined schedule or not. Do not abandon “regularly” scheduled communication, such as newsletters. But, work to ensure that the information is useful, informative and of value.

74


Conclusion: Public officials tend to prefer that information about transportation funding, status of current construction, long-range plans and transportation proposals / studies come directly from VDOT. They are less concerned that information about environmental issues come from VDOT.

Implication: VDOT should be selective in the types of information it distributes. Information that comes from VDOT may have a kind of “credibility.” This credibility should be reserved for topics that matter most, such as funding, planning and project status. When VDOT distributes information about topics that are either not as “important” or outside its area of expertise, it may be seen as waste of resources or lack of good judgment by VDOT.

public officials’ survey: research follow-up to the vdot communications audit october 10, 2003

Documents

public officials survey

survey of public officials

county officials n

city officials

general assembly members

audit of vdot communications

vdot districts

responses of members