Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Have something to say but not sure where to post? Post any question or comment here which does not fit an existing sub-forum.

Moderator: Administrator

Re: Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Postby bill1443 » Wed Aug 30, 2017 9:20 am

Sarah, I think you are missing the point. I am happy to pay for the facilities and amenities we already have, I just don't want to pay for any more. When we moved to Anthem Ranch, our only choice was to accept the HOA fees that paid for a multitude of facilities and amenities. At the present time, we have a choice whether we want to pay for specific additional facilities and amenities or not pay for them. That is purpose of the Use & Needs Survey. From the previous posts on this topic, it seems that there are lots of variations of the survey and that some unknown computer program will analyze the data and make a decision. I would be much happier with a simple yes or no vote on each item and use old fashioned math to count the votes. In my humble opinion, it seems there is too much room for manipulation of the data to provide a pre-determined result.
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 8:30 am

Re: Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Postby Sarahblanche » Wed Aug 30, 2017 10:40 am

I think I understand. But there will never be progress if we don't pay for it.
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 4:26 pm

Re: Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Postby bill1443 » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:57 pm

I wonder when we will get to see the results of this survey? Seems like it is taking a long time, and I have not seen anything in the weekly updates or monthly newsletter.
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 8:30 am

Re: Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Postby Andy » Mon Oct 30, 2017 7:54 pm

Any feedback from today's (Oct 30) meeting?
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:25 pm

Re: Use & Needs Study Survey variations

Postby djm1021 » Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:40 pm

Here's my raw notes for those that weren't in attendance. Sorry for anything unintelligible or personal abbreviations.

]Subject: Raw notes AR Use/needs study presentation by ProMatura 171030

Gary Sherrer intro:

No decisions made re anything in the report. No money in 2018 for anything in the report, except small amount for planning purposes. No decisions on projects, no decisions on any financing.

Next step is report goes to BFC and ALCAC, they will reach out to everyone and ask for input. They will bring info/ideas to board. So a blank slate and we will fill in during 2018. Lots of exciting opportunities to look at. We may have ideas to change an item or reduce costs. Today is just formal culmination of ProMatura report, and beginning of a long process to bring all of your ideas together.

CEO of ProMatura Margaret Wilde:

Report of second survey, first was to get info to put together second survey. What homeowners want and what they will pay.

ProMatura partnered with KTGY (planning/arch firm), and Ipsum group (marketing, positioning, planning)
- company since 1984
- biggest provider of consumer research in 55+ sector
- does other stuff too but consumer research is the biggest
- 50+ employees, 40 projects at any one time, every US state, several countries
- several books and national reports (i.e. "Boomers on the Horizon")
- Process: Find Buyers + Conjoint Analysis (CA) -> Customer Defined Product and Price = Sales
- Research focuses on people who have "skin in the game"... we are prospective buyers of upgrades, what we want/pay for
- CA is powerful statistical tool "the motherlode", customer-defined product
- Survey: Educate on Decisions to be made + Assess perceptions on concepts + Involve in Planning -> CA
- traditional survey research compared to CA: Trad requires 1000 respondents to obtain error +/-3% at 95% confidence level
- roll all the data together, determine what is important, ultimately how much it costs
- without price, everyone wants it, adding costs/assessments makes it real
- Conjoint = Considered Jointly: Wanted AR to consider them all together, what we want and don't want
- Example: BYOB bar was a deal killer for many responders
- Survey: DId 15 choices; 649 started, 96% completed traditional questions, 85% completed entire survey
- Result error +/-1.2% 95% confidence, results from trad survey and CA are consistent
- Many complained was too complex, in 33 years is the most complex CA we've every done, and we do 50-60 every year
- List of 10 features/variables tested, obtained from first survey (office expansion, MP rooms, kitchen, storage, pool, parking, pickleball courts)
- KTGY is a CO firm and did rough pricing estimates
- Tested three different payment methods (HOA only, lower upfront + HOA, higher upfront +HOA)
- Majority support for al at various levels EXCEPT BYOB bar
- Rank order of pref scores: MP rooms 120, PB 100, Park 96, Pool storage 83, Basement 81, Office 71, Kitchen 64, BYOB 60)
- Reflects Fun vs Efficiency and Cost Savings: Deliberations need to consider both in keeping community "fresh"
- Chart showing % of responders voted for at least a min level of improvement... several have different levels of improvement (i.e. several kinds of kitchen)... Office 53% BYOB 37% PB 54% Parking 9%+26%+40%=75% MP 37%+41%=78% Basement storage 69% pool storage 68% Kitchen 16%+10%+24%+20%=~70%
- 92% who complete second survey, 64% did first survey -> use the aspen lodge or common areas
- Chart showing frequency of using amenities (too much data to type)
- Amenities are important: 67% strongly agree (93% agree), have an impact on value of my home 61% strongly agree (95% agree)
- 55% of Strongly Disagrees voted for at least one amenity package, 88% of Strongly Agrees voted for at least one
- Example of one amenity (office space), showing total cost and various funding combinations [more charts, lots of raw data]
- CA tells us what people want, what they don't want, what combinations
- Demographics: Compare age/healthiness/length of residents: No signif difference of demographics for voting for/against on any amenity
- Women slightly more likely to vote for stuff than men (55% vs 45%)
- Marital status, education, employment status, health: All no differences

Q: What is your assumption of how long to pay for? A: Assumed 15yrs 5% loan over 1333 homes
Q: How do we see results for all other choices? A: Full report is now on the website
Q: Independent of project size (high cost vs low)? A: Yes, priced everything separately
Q: Any conclusions? A: Not our job, we discover what is the appetite. Majority want to move forward, board to decide
Q: Re methods to finance, did you consider what our legal docs allow? A: Lots of discussions with staff, just doing a ballpark, staff/board didn't know yet Sue: Will be up to BFC to examine vs our docs and state law for compliance
Q: Received 549 of 1188 homes, so really talking about only respondents. A: Can't ever cover entire population, everyone had an opportunity we didn't just do a small sample. Actually 1897 residents (not homes)

Gary Sherrer wrapup:
If didn't want to fill it out, it's too late to tell me you are mad now :-) Can only work with the information we have. Also didn't anticipate having to follow the law :-) We will make it because people like you came out on a chilly night, want to know what's going on and what the facts are. YOU drive the things that happen. You care, you're engaged, have earned the right to make the decision. IN 2018, we need that kind of resident to move forward. Thanks for coming, thanks to staff.
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2015 9:55 am


Return to Just Chatting

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest