Table Of ContentSANFRANCISCOPUBLICLIBRARY
3 1223 08679 6704
PARK STANDARDS
S-MONTH REPORT FY 2009-10
5/S
3ark scores citywide increased
hrough the first half of FY 2009-10
San Francisco PublicLibrary
Government Information Center
San Francisco Public Library
100 Larkin Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102
REFERENCE BOOK
Nottobetakenfrom thelibrary
GOVERNMENT
DOCUMENTS DEPT
MAR 1 7 2010 March 16, 2010
SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC LIBRARY
PARK STANDARDS
6-MONTH REPORT FY 2009-10
Park scores citywide increased
through the first half of FY 2009-10
GOVERNMENT
DOCUMENTS DEPT
MAR 1 7 2010 March 16, 2010
SAN FRANCISCO
PUBLIC LIBRARY
CONTROLLER'S OFFICE
CITY SERVICES AUDITOR
The City Services Auditor was created within the Controller's Office through an amendment to the
City Charter that was approved byvoters in November 2003. Under Appendix F to the CityCharter,
the City Services Auditor has broad authorityfor:
• Reporting on the level and effectiveness ofSan Francisco's public services and
benchmarking the city to other public agencies and jurisdictions.
• Conducting financial and performance audits ofcity departments, contractors, and functions
to assess efficiency and effectiveness of processes and services.
• Operating a whistleblower hotline and website and investigating reports ofwaste, fraud, and
abuse of city resources.
• Ensuring the financial integrity and improving the overall performance and efficiencyofcity
government.
The audits unit conducts financial audits, attestation engagements, and performance audits.
Financial audits address the financial integrity of both city departments and contractors and provide
reasonable assurance about whetherfinancial statements are presented fairly in all material aspects
in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Attestation engagements examine,
review, or perform procedures on a broad range ofsubjects such as internal controls; compliance
with requirements of specified laws, regulations, rules, contracts, orgrants; and the reliabilityof
performance measures. Performance audits focus primarilyon assessment ofcity services and
processes, providing recommendations to improve department operations.
We conduct our audits in accordance with the GovernmentAuditing Standards published bythe U.S.
GovernmentAccountability Office (GAO). These standards require:
• Independence ofaudit staffand the audit organization.
• Objectivity ofthe auditors performing the work.
• Competent staff, including continuing professional education.
• Quality control procedures to provide reasonable assurance ofcompliance with the auditing
standards.
Project Team: Peg Stevenson, Director
Andrew Murray, Deputy Director
Natasha Mihal, Project Manager
Nikhila Pai, Performance Analyst
CSA City Performance and Audit Staff
3 1223 08679 6704
City and County of San Francisco
Office of the Controller - City Services Auditor
Park Standards 6-Month Report FY 2009-10 March 16, 2010
Park scores citywide increased through the first half of FY 2009-10
Purpose ofthe Report
The City Services Auditor CharterAmendment requires that standards be established for park maintenance,
and that the City Services Auditor (CSA) issue an annual report on performance under these standards.
This mid-year report provides the results from evaluations ofall open City parks in the first six months of
fiscal year (FY) 2009-10.
Highlights
Park evaluation results improved through the first two quarters of FY 2009-10 (July 1 to December
31, 2009). The citywide average for park scores increased over the previous year from 87.3
percent to 90.8 percent. All open City parks were rated by the Controller's Office's City Services
Auditor (CSA) and Recreation and Park Department (Rec Park) staff using the San Francisco Park
Maintenance Standards Manual. A score above 85 percent would generally indicate that the park
is well maintained and that its features are in good condition.
Districtresults
• All district averages improved through the first two quarters of FY 2009-10
• The difference in district averages was slightly lower at 12.2 percent compared to 12.5
percent last year
• District 2 scored highest at 95.3 percent and District 10 lowest at 83.1 percent
Individualparkresults
• Parks generally scored higher halfway through FY 2009-10 compared to FY 2008-09
• More parks scored higher - 1 12 of 168 parks scored over 90 percent in the first half of FY
2009-10 compared to 77 of 171 last year
• Nineteen parks scored lower than 80 percent in the first half of FY 2009-10, ten ofwhich
scored higher than 80 percent last year and are new to the low-scoring group
Otherresults
• Average scores for park features continued to improve through the first half of FY 2009-10
with all features improving, except OutdoorAthletic Courts which scored just 0.1 point lower
• Compliance to staff schedules still received mixed results - Rec Park's scores were 73
percent in this first quarter (July to September 2009) and 67 percent in the second quarter
(October to December 2009). CSA's scores were lower, at 51 and 43 percent, respectively.
However, Rec Park and CSA use different methodology for measuring compliance to staff
schedules so a direct comparison is not applicable.
And finally, the City and County of San Francisco has been selected as a 2009 California Park &
Recreation Society (CPRS) Award ofExcellence recipient in the awards category of Maintenance
Management and Operations for San Francisco Park Maintenance Standards Projects in the
population category of 100,001 and up.
Copiesofthefullreportmaybeobtainedat:
Controller's Office CityHall, Room316 • 1 Dr. Carlton B. GoodlettPlace • SanFrancisco, CA 94102 415.554.7500
orontheInternetathttp://www.sfgov.pro/controller
Page intentionallyleft blank.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 -Introduction 1
Background
1
Mid-Year Methodology 1
Chapter 2 - Mid-year Park Evaluation Results 5
Citywide Results 5
District Results 5
Neighborhood Service Areas Results 6
Individual Park Results 7
Features Results 11
Cleanliness Ratings 12
Staff Schedule Compliance 13
Appendix A - Detailed Methodology A-1
Appendix B - Individual Park Results B-1
Appendix C - District Results C-1
Appendix D - Neighborhood Service Areas D-1
Appendix E - FY 2008-09 Recommendations E-1
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CSA City Services Auditor
NSA Neighborhood Service Area
Prop C Proposition C
Rec Park Recreation and Park Department
Office ofthe Controller, CityServices Auditor
FY 2009-10 Parks 6-Month Report
CHAPTER -
Introduction
1
Background In November 2003, San Francisco voters passed
Proposition C establishing the City Services Auditor (CSA)
in the Controller's Office. City Charter Appendix F, Section
102, mandates that CSA develop and review standards for
park maintenance in consultation with the Recreation and
Park Department (Rec Park) and establishes the following
objectives:
• Establish regular maintenance schedules for
parks and make them available to the public
• Publish compliance reports regularly showing
the extent to which the Department has met its
published schedules
• Develop quantifiable, measurable, objective
standards for park maintenance in cooperation
and consultation with Rec Park
• Issue an annual report ofthe City's performance
to those standards, with geographic detail
Since April 2004, CSA and Rec Park have worked together
to design and implement Proposition C's requirement for
schedules, standards, evaluations, and reporting.
This report on the condition of the City's parks provides
results from first and second quarter evaluations in fiscal
year (FY) 2009-10, July 1 to December 31, 2009 to provide
more timely results to Rec Park.
Methodology Park scores are based on standards that identify desired
park conditions and cover 14 features such as lawns, trees,
children's play areas and benches and tables. Generally, a
score above 85 percent would likely indicate that the park is
well-maintained and that its features are in good condition.
The San Francisco Park Maintenance Standards Manual,
created in FY 2004-05, defines these desired conditions of
park features and is used to assess and evaluate
conditions in parks in all 1 1 supervisorial districts. See
Exhibit 1 for more detail.
Office ofthe Controller, City Services Auditor
FY 2009-10 Parks 6-Month Report
EXHIBIT Park Maintenance Standards Overview
1
Park feature Elements examined under each park feature
1. Lawns <> Cleanliness • Edged
Color • Height/mowed
1 • Densityand spots • Holes
~o n • Drainage/floodedarea
2. Ornamental Gardens, Shrubs, and «> Cleanliness • Pruned
Ground Covers »> Planthealth • Weediness
mo ora. 3. Trees «• Limbs • Vines
1"CO]T</J> 4. Hardscapes and Trails <•» PCllaenatnlhienaelstsh • Surfacequality
» Drainage/flooded area • Weediness
Graffiti
5. Open Space «> Cleanliness
6. TurfAthletic Fields > Cleanliness • Functionalityofstructures
(E.g., ballfields, soccerpitches) «. Color • Graffiti
» Drainage/floodedarea • Height/mowed
• Fencing • Holes
« 7. OutdoorAthleticCourts <> Cleanliness • Graffiti
£ (E.g.. tennisand basketball courts) «» Drainage/floodedarea • Painting/striping
** » Fencing • Surfacequality
> Functionalityofstructures
O 8. Children's PlayAreas •> Cleanliness • Integrityofequipment
1 > Fencing • Painting
o > Functionalityofequipment • Signage
(X . Graffiti • Surfacequality
9. Dog PlayAreas «> Bagdispenser • Signage
> Cleanliness • Surfacequality
» Drainage/flooded area • WasteReceptacles
> Height/mowed
10. Restrooms <> Cleanliness • Painting
Graffiti • Signage
> Functionalityofstructures • Supplyinventory
> Lighting • Wastereceptacles
Odor
£ >
I 11. Parking Lotsand Roads <» ADAparkingspaces • Graffiti
w2 > Cleanliness • Painting/striping
o > Curbs • Signage
c • Drainage/floodedareas • Surfacequality
12.Wasteand Recycling Receptacles «> Cleanlinessofreceptacles • Painting
1 > Fullness • Structural integrityand
C functionality
3
13. Benches,Tables,andGrills «• Cleanliness • Structural integrityand
1
Graffiti functionality
» Painting
14. Amenities&Structures <> Exteriorofbuildings • Retainingwalls
> Drinkingfountains • Signage
> Fencing • Stairways
» Gates/locks
Source: San FranciscoParkStandards Manual and Evaluation Form
