Oxford City Council Talkback
Survey 1 Report
March 2009
Executive Summary
Talkback 2009 Survey 1 December 2009
1.1Background
1.2The Panel
1.3Methodology
1.4 Data
1.5Areas
1.6The Survey
1.7The Results
2.0Customer Services
2:1Contact with OCC
2.2Reasons for Contact
2.3Areas of Interest
2.4Contacting OCC
2.5Preferred Method of Contact
2.6Resolution of Queries
2.7Staff Courtesy
2.8Waiting Time
2.9Overall Service
2.10Telephone Preferences
2.11Additional Services
2.12Conclusion on Customer Services
3.0Website
3.1Use of Website
3.2Website Ratings
3.3Reasons for not using the Website
3.4Additional Feature for the Website
3.5Conclusions on Website
4.0Communications
4.1Satisfaction on Information Accessibility
4.2How Well Informed do you Feel?
4.3Ease of Understanding
4.4Preferred methods for Consultations
4.5Focus Groups
4.6Conclusion on Communications
Appendix APanel Demographics
Appendix BSurvey
Appendix CFrequencies
Executive Summary
The Talkback Citizens Panel is a group of residents broadly representative of the City of Oxford, who complete surveys up to four times a year on a variety of local issues.
There are currently 924 members of the panel. The spring survey was sent in March to panel members by post or by email, according to the preferences of individual members. We received 463 responses by post and by email representing a response rate of 50%.
The spring 2009 Talkback survey asked panel members for their views on customer services, the OCC website and communications.
Results
Customer Services
- 75% of respondents had contacted OCC in the last 2 years.
- The top three reasons for this contact were to report a problem, get advice or information, or request a service.
- 34% of queries were about waste and recycling, far more than any other subject.
- 71% used the telephone to contact OCC.
- 65% rated the telephone as their preferred method of contacting OCC, whilst 28% preferred email.
- 68% of all queries were resolved with one call.
- 79% found the staff friendly and courteous.
- 71% were satisfied with the length time it took to see an advisor.
- 75% were satisfied overall with customer service they received.
- 55% of respondents would prefer separate telephone numbers for separate services.
- 65% of respondents felt there was no need for additional service outlets in OCC buildings.
Website
- 61% of respondents had used the website in the past year.
- The majority were satisfied with most elements of the website, although 31% were dissatisfied by the ease of navigation around the site.
- 66% of website users have not used the online payment options.
- Most respondents who hadn’t used the website preferred to use another method of contact or didn’t have a connection to the internet.
- The ability to do more things online, or search for information about their house or specific locality were the top rated suggested improvements to the website.
Communications
- Most respondents got their information about OCC through Council publications, Local newspapers and the OCC website.
- 86% of respondents were satisfied with the range of different communication methods open to them.
- 78% of respondents felt well informed about OCC services.
- 94% of responds found OCC communications easy to understand.
- 65% of respondents preferred postal survey communications.
- 145 respondents expressed an interest in participating in focus groups.
Talkback 2009 Survey 1 December 2009
1.1Background
The Talkback Citizens Panel is a group of residents broadly representative of the City of Oxford, who complete surveys up to four times a year on a variety of local issues.
Oxford City Council are referred to as OCC in this report.
1.2The Panel
There are currently 924 members on the panel.
The current demographic profile of the panel is show in appendix A.
1.3Methodology
The spring survey was sent in March to panel members by post or by email, according to the preferences of individual members. We received 463 responses by post and by email representing a response rate of 50%.
Demographics details of the response are shown in appendix A.
1.4 Data
Data have been analysed and cross tabulated by key demographic details including age group, ethnicity, disability, area, sex and employment.
Percentages displayed are valid percentages (i.e. the percentage calculated not including those who did not answer the question). Where differences by demographic profile are highlighted, these are statistically significant differences.
1.5Areas
References to the residential location of respondents corresponds to the area committees run by Oxford City Council. The wards in each area are listed in table 1.
Table 1: Area committee wards
Area / WardsNorth / Summertown, Wolvercote, St Margarets, North
North-East / Marston, Headington, Headington Hill & Northway, Barton and Sandhills, Quarry and Risinghurst, Churchill
East / St Clements, St Mary’s, Iffley Fields
South-East / Rose Hill and Iffley, Littlemore, Blackbird Leys, Northfield Brook
Central / Jericho and Osney, Carfax, Hollywell, Hinksey Park
Cowley / Cowley Marsh, Lye Valley, Cowley
1.6The Survey
The spring 2009 Talkback survey asked panel members for their views on customer services, the OCC website and communications.
1.7The Results
The results presented in this report are valid percentages - percentages calculated from the number of answers to individual questions, rather than according to the total number of respondents. Where significant differences exist in answers according to demographic profile, these have been indicated in the accompanying commentary.
2.0Customer Services
2:1Contact with OCC
Three quarters of the panel had contacted OCC in the past two years.
Table 2
2.2Reasons for Contact
Respondents generally contacted OCC to report a problem, get advice or information, or to ask for a service. 55% of respondents from the East of the City reported a problem compared to a 37% average.
Table 3
2.3Areas of Interest
The majority of respondents wanted to discuss matter relating to the OCC waste and recycling service. This differed according to sectors of the city: 48% of respondents in the South East had contacted OCC about their waste and recycling service compared to 22% in Cowley.
Table 3
2.4Contacting OCC
The majority of respondents used the telephone to contact OCC. This result did not differ significantly by demographic profile.
Table 4
2.5Preferred Method of Contact
Respondents were asked to rank their preferences for contacting OCC. Telephone was ranked 1 (most important) by 65% of respondents. Second and third preferences were email and via the OCC website respectively.
28% of respondents aged 65+ would prefer to visit a Council Building compared to 11% overall.
Only 46% of respondents from the East of the City compared to 65% overall.
A small number of respondents noted that they may use different methods depending on the concern.
“It depends what I'm getting in touch for. For payments I prefer online, for queries the telephone etc”
The full results are shown in Table 5.
Table 5
2.6Resolution of Queries
68% of queries were resolved by one contact with OCC.
83% of respondents from the South East had their queries resolved in one contact.
Table 6
Reasons for the non-resolution of queries varied. Some respondents complained that they received no response to their initial message:
“I was told someone would phone, no one did!”
“no response on email”
A second tranche of respondents were aware that their query was unlikely to be resolved in one call, particularly those relating to planning:
“Action promised but obviously difficult in getting it implemented”
A third section of respondents found difficulty in contacting the relevant person to deal with their query:
“I got put from one department to another”
“Phone message was not passed on to the right person”
2.7Staff Courtesy
79% respondents were satisfied that OCC staff were friendly and courteous when dealing with their enquiry.
49% of residents of the Central area were very satisfied with the manner of the staff compared with 34% overall.
Table 7
2.8Waiting Time
18% of respondents were dissatisfied with length of time they had to wait to see a member of staff.
Non White respondents were more likely than white respondent to be satisfied or very satisfied with the waiting time to speak to an advisor.
Table 8
2.9Overall Service
85% of respondents were satisfied with the overall service they received. There were no significant variations by demographic profile.
Table 9
2.10Telephone Preferences
A slight majority of respondents would prefer separate numbers for separate services.
Table 10
2.11Additional Services
The majority of respondents felt that there was no need for additional services such as Police or pensions services, to be provided in OCC buildings. This did not differ significantly by demographic profile.
Table 11
Additional qualitative comments showed some support for additional services, particularly the Citizens Advice Bureau:
“CAB would make sense”
“CAB. police surgeries and pensions services. It is easier to have one central phone number which then gives one the relevant number of the above. But more work for the council for course!”
Other comments noted that occasionally found it difficult to contact the Police on non-urgent matters and felt that an outlet in the Council buildings may provide a more regular place of contact:
“Police. The police office near to us only operate 9-5 pm daily”
“Police/ community policing/ council combined surgeries especially for anti social behaviour”
2.12Conclusion on Customer Services
- 75% of respondents had contacted OCC in the last 2 years.
- The top three reasons for this contact were to report a problem, get advice or information, or request a service.
- 34% of queries were about waste and recycling, far more than any other subject.
- 71% used the telephone to contact OCC.
- 65% rated the telephone as their preferred method of contacting OCC, whilst 28% preferred email.
- 68% of all queries were resolved with one call.
- 79% found the staff friendly and courteous.
- 71% were satisfied with the length time it took to see an advisor.
- 75% were satisfied overall with customer service they received.
- 55% of respondents would prefer separate telephone numbers for separate services.
- 65% of respondents felt there was no need for additional service oulets in OCC buildings.
3.0Website
3.1Use of Website
61% of respondents had used the OCC website in the past two years.
Respondents from Cowley and the South East were less likely to have used the website than residents in the other parts of the City.
Table 12
3.2Website Ratings
The majority of website users from the panel had no experience of the payment/applications facilities. In most other cases users were satisfied or very satisfied. The highest levels of dissatisfaction related to the ease of navigation around the site and the timeliness of content. The full results can be seen in table 13.
Qualitative comments relating to areas were the site can be improved focused on several different areas.
Contacts:
“I had to phone the department I required as there was no way to contact them”
Finding information:
“Have found in the past that important information is 'hidden away' in pdfs. Holiday information (swimming times etc) is sometimes out of date or hard to find. Recycling info could be displayed in a clearer way.”
“It is so hard to navigate! I'm very web experienced (I'm 27) and the structure is not intuitive at all.”
Up to date information:
“Info not up to date. Not straight forward when contact info was needed. Needs to look fresher than it is now. Quite boring to browse through.”
Planning:
Access to planning matters impossible, not like old system of written records which were detailed and you could ask questions of staff
Table 13
3.3Reasons for not using the Website
Non-users of the OCC website generally preferred to use another method of communication. The low number of respondents to this question meant that cross tabulations by demographic profile were not possible.
Table 14
3.4Additional Feature for the Website
Table 15
Most respondents wanted to have the ability to do more things online, or search for information about their house or specific locality. These answers represented a response of 178 and 150 people respectively.
Other additional features requested included:
“A navigation system that represents areas that people, i.e. users group together rather than representing the council structure (hierarchy which is far less sensical! Also if it is not city council HAVE A PAGE on your site that explains that and who to contact- I'm fed up of going to county then city then county sites like a headless chicken- it isn't clear at all!”
“Don't waste our money with gimmicks on the website - keep it simple and factual, and most of all, easy to navigate.”
“Better information on planning- particularly in conservation areas and on used buildings.”
3.5Conclusions on Website
- 61% of respondents had used the website in the past year.
- The majority were satisfied with most elements of the website, although 31% were dissatisfied by the ease of navigation around the site.
- 66% of website users have not used the online payment options.
- Most respondents who hadn’t used the website preferred to use another method of contact or didn’t have a connection to the internet.
- Most respondents felt the ability to do more things online, or search for information about their house or specific locality would encourage them to use the website.
4.0 Communications
Table 16
OCC newspapers and leaflets were a key source of information for the majority of the panel, with local newspapers and the OCC website also figuring prominently.
Friends Family and Neighbours were most likely to be cited by residents in East Oxford (38%). This group was also the most likely to cite the OCC website as a source of information.
17-24 year olds were the most likely to cite television as a source of information.
Men were less likely than women to cite Council meetings as a source of information.
4.1Satisfaction on Information Accessibility
Less than 10% of respondents were dissatisfied with the number of information channels open to them. This did not differ significantly by demographic group.
Table 17
4.2How Well Informed do you Feel?
78% of respondents felt fairly or very well informed about OCC news and events. This did not differ significantly by demographic profile.
Table 17
4.3Ease of Understanding
Only 6% of respondents found OCC publications difficult to understand.
Table 18
Suggestions for improvements in OCC publications were generally centred on the amount of bulletins. Some respondents questioned whether all the publications were needed:
“If I want information I will go seek it, and then expect it to be clearly presented when I enquire.”
Conversely some respondents felt that not enough information is provided:
“Although I have answered yes (because the information is clear) it is not detailed enough.”
4.4Preferred methods for Consultations
The majority of respondents favoured a postal survey. The majority of those favouring an email survey already complete Talkback surveys online, but 30% of current postal applicants also stated they would be willing to participate.
Table 19
4.5Focus Groups
145 members of the panels expressed an interest in participating in focus groups and provided contact details. SRA will pass these to OCC.
4.6Conclusion on Communications
- Most respondents got their information about OCC through Council publications, Local newspapers and the OCC website.
- 86% of respondents were satisfied with the range of different communication methods open to them.
- 78% of respondents felt well informed about their services.
- 94% of responds found OCC communications easy to understand.
- 68% of respondents preferred postal survey communications.
- 145 respondents expressed an interest in participating in focus groups.
Appendix APanel Demographics
Age Range / Panel % / Target % / Survey 1 2009 %17-24 / 9 / 26 / 8
25-34 / 17 / 21 / 17
35-44 / 22 / 16 / 19
45-54 / 16 / 12 / 19
55-64 / 19 / 9 / 19
65+ / 16 / 16 / 18
TOTAL / 100 / 100
Area / Panel % / Target % / Survey 1 2009%
Central / 15 / 17 / 11
Cowley / 12 / 12 / 11
East / 12 / 13 / 10
North / 19 / 17 / 22
North East / 28 / 25 / 31
South East / 14 / 16 / 14
TOTAL / 100 / 100
Sex / Panel % / Target % / Survey 1 2009 %
Male / 43 / 49 / 45
Female / 57 / 51 / 54
TOTAL / 100 / 100
Ethnicity / Panel % / Target % / Survey 1 2009 %
White / 90 / 87 / 89
Other Ethnic Origin / 10 / 13 / 11
TOTAL / 100 / 100
NB. Different ethnic groups have been banded together to provide a meaningful statistical comparison.
Appendix BSurvey
Appendix CFrequencies
Have you contacted us in the last two years?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / Yes / 343 / 74.1 / 74.6 / 74.6
No / 117 / 25.3 / 25.4 / 100.0
Total / 460 / 99.4 / 100.0
Missing / System / 3 / .6
Total / 463 / 100.0
If you have contacted us over the last two years, thinking about the last time you contacted us... What was the reason?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / Make a payment / 25 / 5.4 / 7.2 / 7.2
Make a booking / 7 / 1.5 / 2.0 / 9.2
Report a problem / 130 / 28.1 / 37.2 / 46.4
Request a service / 80 / 17.3 / 22.9 / 69.3
Make an application / 15 / 3.2 / 4.3 / 73.6
Get information/advice / 92 / 19.9 / 26.4 / 100.0
Total / 349 / 75.4 / 100.0
Missing / System / 114 / 24.6
Total / 463 / 100.0
What was the main area that you were interested in?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / Planning / 40 / 8.6 / 11.0 / 11.0
Building Control / 11 / 2.4 / 3.0 / 14.1
Council Business / 7 / 1.5 / 1.9 / 16.0
Housing Benefit / 8 / 1.7 / 2.2 / 18.2
Council Tax / 26 / 5.6 / 7.2 / 25.4
Electoral Register / 1 / .2 / .3 / 25.7
Housing / 16 / 3.5 / 4.4 / 30.1
Parks / 8 / 1.7 / 2.2 / 32.3
Job Vacancies / 3 / .6 / .8 / 33.1
Environmental Health / 39 / 8.4 / 10.8 / 43.9
Leisure Centres / 5 / 1.1 / 1.4 / 45.3
Concessionary Bus Pass Scheme / 8 / 1.7 / 2.2 / 47.5
Parking / 24 / 5.2 / 6.6 / 54.1
Waste & Recycling / 122 / 26.3 / 33.7 / 87.8
Council Tax Benefit / 7 / 1.5 / 1.9 / 89.8
Other (please state) / 37 / 8.0 / 10.2 / 100.0
Total / 362 / 78.2 / 100.0
Missing / System / 101 / 21.8
Total / 463 / 100.0
How did you contact the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / By visiting a Council building / 48 / 10.4 / 13.4 / 13.4
By telephone / 255 / 55.1 / 71.2 / 84.6
By letter / 13 / 2.8 / 3.6 / 88.3
By email / 24 / 5.2 / 6.7 / 95.0
Via the City Council website / 14 / 3.0 / 3.9 / 98.9
Other (please specify) / 4 / .9 / 1.1 / 100.0
Total / 358 / 77.3 / 100.0
Missing / System / 105 / 22.7
Total / 463 / 100.0
By visiting a Council building General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / 1 Most / 38 / 8.2 / 11.4 / 11.4
2 / 50 / 10.8 / 15.0 / 26.4
3 / 59 / 12.7 / 17.7 / 44.1
4 / 63 / 13.6 / 18.9 / 63.1
5 / 86 / 18.6 / 25.8 / 88.9
6 Least / 37 / 8.0 / 11.1 / 100.0
Total / 333 / 71.9 / 100.0
Missing / System / 130 / 28.1
Total / 463 / 100.0
By telephone General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / 1 Most / 265 / 57.2 / 65.0 / 65.0
2 / 62 / 13.4 / 15.2 / 80.1
3 / 61 / 13.2 / 15.0 / 95.1
4 / 15 / 3.2 / 3.7 / 98.8
5 / 4 / .9 / 1.0 / 99.8
6 Least / 1 / .2 / .2 / 100.0
Total / 408 / 88.1 / 100.0
Missing / System / 55 / 11.9
Total / 463 / 100.0
By letter General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / 1 Most / 14 / 3.0 / 4.2 / 4.2
2 / 58 / 12.5 / 17.3 / 21.4
3 / 69 / 14.9 / 20.5 / 42.0
4 / 93 / 20.1 / 27.7 / 69.6
5 / 85 / 18.4 / 25.3 / 94.9
6 Least / 17 / 3.7 / 5.1 / 100.0
Total / 336 / 72.6 / 100.0
Missing / System / 127 / 27.4
Total / 463 / 100.0
By email General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / 1 Most / 90 / 19.4 / 27.6 / 27.6
2 / 125 / 27.0 / 38.3 / 66.0
3 / 54 / 11.7 / 16.6 / 82.5
4 / 39 / 8.4 / 12.0 / 94.5
5 / 15 / 3.2 / 4.6 / 99.1
6 Least / 3 / .6 / .9 / 100.0
Total / 326 / 70.4 / 100.0
Missing / System / 137 / 29.6
Total / 463 / 100.0
Via the City Council website General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?
Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative PercentValid / 1 Most / 55 / 11.9 / 18.3 / 18.3
2 / 55 / 11.9 / 18.3 / 36.5
3 / 78 / 16.8 / 25.9 / 62.5
4 / 49 / 10.6 / 16.3 / 78.7
5 / 57 / 12.3 / 18.9 / 97.7
6 Least / 7 / 1.5 / 2.3 / 100.0
Total / 301 / 65.0 / 100.0
Missing / System / 162 / 35.0
Total / 463 / 100.0
Other (please specify below) General Question: What would be your preferred method of contacting the Council?