Case Study Methodology

In order to address my two central questions, I needed to create a case study in which
I could measure the effectiveness of a certain communications technique. For my first
central question, I needed to evaluate a communication that would go directly to property owners and inform them of their responsibilities for garbage management on their properties. For my second central question, I needed a communication that would reach all residents and use an integrated approach to tell them about good garbage management.

In order to measure their effectiveness, I needed a before and after survey, or assessment of behavior, to gauge any changes as a result of the communications.
I first created a scoring protocol to help me analyze the results of the street assessment.

DPW Letter

*Unfortunately, due to last-minute resistance in city hall and time constraints on my thesis, this portion of my study could not be completed. I include a description of it in order to illustrate where this study could be carried in the future.

The new garbage ordinance, passed by the Providence City Council on February 7, 2002, provided a perfect opportunity to address my first central question - whether direct communication to property owners regarding garbage management responsibilities could be effective. The new ordinance would directly impact Providence property owners and increase their responsibilities to their tenants.

By informing property owners directly of the new ordinance, I could test whether they would comply with the changes and enforce the changes on to their tenants. Together with the Director of the Department of Public Works (DPW), I drafted a letter that would go from the DPW, the enforcement agency for the ordinance, to all property owners in the city. The language of the letter was direct, warning property owners of increased enforcement. To read a copy of the draft letter, click on the miniature letter, above left. I planned to then use my case study area street assessment to measure the response in compliance with the ordinance.

Since the DPW letter was not sent in time for my study project, I had to move to my second central question, creating a communication for all residents, but especially directed at tenants.

Educational Flyer

Second central question: Whether an integrated garbage management message targeted to urban core residents would affect actual garbage management?
In order to test this, I created an educational flyer and delivered it to a portion of residents in my case study area. I used the ongoing street assessment to monitor the response.

The tone of the flyer is friendly and informative. The language is simple and non-technical, and is aimed at a literate/ low-literate audience. The flyer attempts to carry an integrated garbage management message. This means that various aspects of garbage management are addressed together, and one suggestion is built around another. For example, because rats are a priority concern for residents, the other messages, inlcuding those encouraging recycling, are presented in relationship to the rat problem. They flyer does not say, "Recycle because it's good for the environment." It says, "Recycle so that you have less trash to put in the garbage can, and it will not spill out for the rats to get to." The flyer also offered free recycling bins to Smith Hill residents. The bins could be picked up at the local library.
To read a copy of the flyer, click on the miniature, above left. Spanish version, above right.

The flyer was delivered five weeks into my case study street assessment. Out of 426 properties in the street assessment, the flyer was delivered to 168, or 40% of properties in the assessment. The streets chosen for delivery were located within close proximity to the library where free recycling bins were available. Several of the chosen streets had shown fairly poor garbage management practices thus far.

Case Study Street Assessment

The purpose of the street assessment was to establish garbage management baseline data within my case study area and measure any change as a result of communication efforts. The street assessment was conducted the night before garbage and recycling pickup, between the hours of 12:30am and 5am. By conducting the assessment between these hours, I insured that most garbage and recycling would already be placed on the curb, but not yet retrieved by the garbage trucks, which begin pickup around 4:00am.
To view a map of Smith Hill and the street assessment area, click here.

The criteria for the assessment were the following:
- Containment of trash
- Consistency by week
- Recycling participation

These factors were chosen based on the known garbage-related problems in urban core communities, as well as on the rat abatement goals of the new garbage ordinance.

More specifically, the factors assessed were:
- # of garbage cans
- if cans are covered
- presence of loose trash bags or litter
- # of recycling bins
- visible rat presence

The same factors were assessed each week for seven consecutive weeks (February 28th - April 18th), skipping the week of March 28th. It is important to note that these criteria were assessed by property (plat-lot), not by household or apartment. For example, 16-18 Osborn St. might have two or three apartments in it, but the property itself has only one plat-lot number, and therefore received one assessment score, not two or three. This allows the results to be mapped on a parcel or plat-lot level using GIS. Additionally, there is no way to link the garbage on the curb in front of a parcel to the particular unit within that parcel.

The data were entered into an Excel spreadsheet and analyzed based on a scoring protocol.

Return to top

Scoring Protocol

I created a simple scoring protocol to evaluate each property's garbage management and recycling, based on the assessment observations. Each property was assigned a garbage score on a numeric scale of 1-5. Recycling scores were assigned on a letter scale of A-C. Scores were calculated for each property after each assessment. A simple "R" was assigned as a marker for rats.

Garbage Scale 1-5 (1=best, 5=worst)	Recycling (A=best, C=worst)
1 = Covered trash can(s), no bags or litter 2 = Uncovered trash can(s), no bags or litter 3 = Covered trash can(s), yes bags or litter 4 = Uncovered trash can(s), yes bags or litter 5 = No cans, yes bags or litter	A = 2 or more recycle bins in use B = 1 recycle bin in use C = 0 recycle bins

(For visual examples of how a property would be scored, click here.)

Scoring Analysis for Results

After assigning a score to all of the case study properties for each assessment night, the data were divided into those dates prior to and post flyer delivery. The scores were calculated using logic functions in Excel.

Recycling and garbage score averages were calculated for the following sets of data.

- Overall averages for entire case study area
- Pre and post flyer averages for entire case study area
- Pre and post flyer averages for flyered area
- Pre and post flyer averages for control (not flyered) area
- Number of properties sighted with rats
- Averages of properties with rats and without rats

The data were also mapped using Geographic Information System (GIS). GIS allows demographic and descriptive information to be combined with geographic features on the map.

Return to top