Urban scholars have engaged in a debate about whether citizen perceptions of service delivery are accurate and useful in assessing the performance of public agencies. This article examines this debate, presents a model of influences on citizen evaluations of service delivery, and analyzes the model using data on police response time gathered in Fort Worth, Texas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ANGRIST, S. (1976) "Subjective social indicators for urban areas: how useful for policy?"Soc. Forces9 (August): 217-230.
2.
BLAIR, L. and A. SCHWARTZ (1972) How Clean Is Our City?Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
3.
BROWN, K. and P. COULTER (1983) "Subjective and objective measures of police service delivery."Public Admin. Rev.43 (January/February): 50-58.
4.
BRUDNEY, J. and R. ENGLAND (1982) "Urban policy making and subjective service evaluations: are they compatible?"Public Admin. Rev.42 (March/April): 127-135.
5.
DANEKE, G. and P. KLOBUS (1979) "Survey research for public administrators."Public Admin. Rev.39 (September/October): 421-426.
6.
DEAN, D. (1980) "Citizen ratings of the police: the difference contact makes."Law and Policy Q.2 (October): 445-471.
7.
FITZGERALD, M. and R. DURANT (1980) "Citizen evaluations and urban management: service delivery in an era of protest."Public Admin. Rev.40 (November/December): 585-594.
8.
FURSTENBERG, F. and C. WELLFORD (1973) "Calling the police: the evaluation of police service."Law and Society Rev.6: 393-406.
9.
GOODSELL, C. T. (1980) "Citizen evaluation of three welfare programs."Admin. and Society12 (August): 123-136.
10.
HERO, R. E. and R. DURANT (1985) "Explaining citizen evaluations of urban services: a comparison of alternative models."Urban Affairs Q.20 (March): 344-354.
11.
Kansas City Police Department (1977) Response Time Analysis: Executive Summary and Volume II: Analysis Report. Kansas City, MO: Board of Police Commissioners.
12.
PARKS, R. (1976) "Police response to victimizations: effects on citizen attitudes and perceptions," pp. 89-104 in W. Skogan (ed.) Sample Surveys of Victims of Crime. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
13.
PARKS, R. (1981) "Comparing citizen and observer perceptions of police-citizen encounters." Presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Jackson, MS.
14.
PARKS, R. (1982) "Using citizen surveys for police performance measurement: some issues in their use."Urban Interest4 (Spring): 17-26.
15.
PARKS, R. (1984) "Linking objective and subjective measures of performance."Public Admin. Rev.44 (March/April): 118-127.
16.
PATE, T. , A. FERRARA, R. BAUERS, and J. LORENCE (1976) Police Response Time: Its Determinants and Effects. Washington, DC: Police Foundation.
17.
PERCY, S. (1980) "Response time and citizen evaluation of police."J. of Police Sci. and Admin.8 (March): 7546.
18.
PERCY, S. and E. SCOTT (1985) Demand Processing and Performance in Public Service Agencies. University: Univ. of Alabama Press.
19.
SCHNEIDER, A. , W. GRIFFITH, D. SUMI, and J. BURCART (1978) Portland Forward Records Check of Crime Victims. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
20.
STIPAK, B. (1979) "Citizen satisfaction with urban services: potential misuse as a performance indicator."Public Admin. Rev.39 (January/February): 46-52.
21.
STIPAK, B. (1982) "Using citizens to evaluate programs," pp. 585-602 in R. Houseet al. (eds.) Evaluation Studies Annual Review. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
22.
WEBB, K. and H. HATRY (1973) Obtaining Citizen Feedback: The Application of Citizen Surveys to Local Governments. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
23.
WHITAKER, G. , S. MASTROFSKI, E. OSTROM, R. PARKS, and S. PERCY. (1980) Basic Issues in Police Performance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
