The state of the public services with facilities should be evaluated in consideration of the points as follows. 1. The life range of inhabitants consist of daily living area and extensive living area : We regard as the former corresponds to the "sprinkler facilities" which should be well located over the area for daily use, the latter to the "concentrated facilities" which should be stocked enough somewhere in the area in time of need. 2. The public services with facilities that inhabitants require have been extremely varied : We started to devide the social fields according not to classifying existing facilities but to setting up life functions, into 6 fields : "safety", "health", "welfare", "education", "convenience" and "confortableness". Each field is evaluated separately, and lastly put together. 3. Paid full attention to the quality of the services, indicaters should be selected : We took noctice the means of the services. And we regarded as they mainly consist of "Man", "Tool" and "Space". Then we made efforts to select proper indicators for every means as equally as possible. Based on the above mentioned points, 36 indicators were adopted, with which we have evaluated the state of the facilities in the three greatest metropolitan areas in Japan; Tokyo, Osaka and Nagoya area (Each of them is difined as the inside part of 30 kirometers geometrical circle around the metropolitan center : Nihonbashi, Yodoyabashi and Kanayamabashi were taken as the centers.) As the results of the evaluation : In Tokyo area, while the marks of the "sprinkled facilities" are low for "safety" and "welfare" compared with other fields, those of the "concentrated facilities" are high for "safety", "education" and "comfortableness". In particullar, the "sprinkled facilities" of the area with in the range of 10 kirometers get remarkablly high marks. In Osaka area, while the marks of the "sprinkled facilities" are high for "health", low for "safety". Those of "concent rated facilities" are high for "comfortableness", and average for the others. In Nagoya area, the marks of the "sprinkled facilities" are rather high for "safety" and "welfare". But those of the "concentrated facilities" are low especially for "safety", "convenience" and "education", and also inferior to Tokyo and Osaka area as a whole.
