Code Enforcement Process Improvement

Background: A mid-sized city needed to improve the quality of its rental housing, particularly for low-income residents. In 2017, more than 52% of the city’s housing units were renter occupied. Many of these units were receiving severe code violations, causing residents to need to move out of “unfit” units with no assistance to find other housing, or forcing them to live in unsafe and unhealthy conditions when a landlord wouldn’t make a fix. 

Process: Following a human-centered and data-driven process, the team analyzed areas of the city with the highest prevalence of code violations, conducted interviews and ride-alongs with code inspectors to understand their process and barriers, held ideation and solutioning sessions with code enforcement, community organizations, and city residents, and eventually launched a portfolio of solutions in the TOP Pilot Program.

Solution: The TOP Program consisted of seven different initiatives that used new strategies, data, and technology to enhance the relationships between code inspectors and the community, while improving housing conditions for some of the city’s most vulnerable citizens.

1.  Territories: Inspectors were assigned to a specific territory that they are responsible for. They walked and drove the neighborhood on a regular basis and proactively identified code violations.

2.  Block by block: Blocks received “score cards” which measure their health. Inspectors were asked to pay special attention to the blocks that have low scores and blocks that see negative change.

3. Technology:  The city provided inspectors with tablets to use during inspections in the field, allowing them to update case files in real-time and not need to spend hours in the office at the end of the day inputting their notes.

4.  Meet your inspector: Inspectors met with people and organizations in their neighborhood and offered their services. During these interactions, tenants could meet with inspectors about their living conditions, and property owners/managers could meet with inspectors for technical assistance.

5.  Health and safety priorities: Inspectors had a checklist of code violations related to health and safety that they reviewed during every interior inspection.

6.  Customer Service: After a case was closed, tenants and property owners received a survey allowing them to rate their experience.

7.  Property Owner Outreach: Inspectors called property owners to inquire and check on outstanding code violations.

Results: The inspectors identified 46% more health and safety violations, increased communication with tenants and landlords by 31%, proactively identified 115 new cases and increased their compliance rate from 39% to 58%.

Previous
Previous

Constituent Engagement Performance Management