The national results of the user satisfaction surveys ...

The national results of the user satisfaction surveys: topline report

On 5th May 2006 the responsibilities of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) transferred to the Department for Communities and Local Government. Department for Communities and Local Government Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone: 020 7944 4400 Website: www.communities.gov.uk Documents downloaded from the www.communities.gov.uk website areCrown Copyright unless otherwise stated, in which case copyright is assigned to Queens Printer and Controller of Her Majestys Stationery Office. Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication, excluding logos, may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium for research, private study or for internal circulation within an organisation. This is subject to it being reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. Any other use of the contents of this publication would require a copyright licence. Please apply for a Click-Use Licence for core material at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/system/online/pLogin.asp or by writing to the Office of Public Sector Information, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected]. This publication is only available online via the Communities and Local Government website: www.communities.gov.uk Alternative formats under Disability Discrimination Act (DDA):if you require this publication in an alternative format please email [email protected]

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Contents Topline Report Section 1: Introduction National results Reliability Key Findings General Survey Background to and Objectives of the User Satisfaction Surveys Data collected and included in the national data set for analysis Report Structure Further Information Topline Report Section 2: The General Survey Indicator Results Corporate Health Indicators Litter Indicator Waste Indicator Transport Cultural and Recreational Services Further Information Topline Report Section 3: The Tenants Survey

Indicator Results Further Information Topline Report Section 4: The Benefits Survey Indicator Results Further Information Topline Report Section 5: The Planning Survey Indicator Results Comparison to other national surveys: Further Information Topline Report Section 6: The Libraries Survey Indicator Results Further Information Topline Report Section 7: Demographic information Weights Further Information

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 1: Introduction

National results In 2000/01 every Local Authority (LA) in England undertook a series of surveys which asked citizens and users of specific services about their satisfaction with the services provided by their LA. Surveys were carried out either by post, face-to-face, by telephone or using citizens panels. This "Topline" report presents the levels of satisfaction for each of the indicators nationally and by LA type[ 1 ] collected in the General, Tenants, Benefits, Planning and Libraries surveys[ 2 ]. This introduction presents the headline figures. A more detailed report will be published in 2002. This will provide more commentary on the results, further analysis, will look at the findings of the questions around the indicators and will also discuss technical issues.

Reliability Sampling As the User Satisfaction surveys were based on a randomly selected sample it is possible to provide a measure of sampling tolerance (how accurate the results are). This is presented in this report, on the basis of the national results, for each of the indicators as a confidence interval figure (CI) measured at the 95% confidence level[ 3 ]. For example, if we look at the results for BV3 we can see that satisfaction nationally is 65% and that the CI is 0.4. This means that nationally we have 95% certainty in the satisfaction rating being between 64.6% and 65.4%. For the LA type averages the sampling error will generally be slightly higher as we are looking at a subset with a smaller base number of respondents[ 4 ]. The 'valid base' refers to the number of respondents to that particular question nationally rather than to the number who completed the survey as a whole (some of whom may not have answered certain questions) Response Rates The average response rate across the five surveys was 56%[ 5 ]. No minimum response rate was set for these surveys but a target of over 50% was recommended. For the average response rate across the surveys to be well over 50% is a fantastic achievement. But, however

high the response rate achieved, the bias introduced to the survey results due to non-response from certain sections of the surveyed population should be taken into account. Weighting Local Authorities were provided guidance on weighting the data to account for the boosting of sub-groups and non-response bias. The weights that LA's provided have been applied to the data that has been analysed in this report. From the data presented in Section 7 (Demographics) of this report we can see that in comparison to the mid-2000 population estimates that the age and gender of respondents to the surveys was reasonably representative although, as with most surveys, the under 25's are underrepresented. For each survey LA's calculated the number of surveys they issued on the basis of aiming to meet the required Confidence Interval[ 4 ] and the response rate they thought they would achieve based on local knowledge, past survey experience and a commitment to taking all reasonable steps to achieve as high a response rate as possible. For example if Local Authority x thought they could achieve a 50% response rate for the General survey they would have sent out 2,200 surveys (in order to achieve 1,100 completed surveys). As this was the first year of the user satisfaction surveys some LA's eared on the side of caution and underestimated the response rate they thought they would achieve in comparison to that they actually achieved. The result is larger samples from these LA's than was required. In order not to give extra weight to the results from LA's with larger samples, the data analysed within this report has been aggregated to LA level. This means that equal weight has been given to the results from each Local Authority in England in calculating the national and LA type results. Consideration of the data The analysis presented in this report is based on those LA's which had submitted their survey data to the DTLR by the end of September 2001 and which we had been able to confirm had met the primary methodological requirements of the surveys as set out in the guidance. The Government expects authorities to set improvement targets for the national BVs. For some indicators, the Government is requiring authorities to set targets that are consistent with reaching, over five years, the performance level of the top 25% of authorities at the time the targets were set. Those authorities which are already at the top will seek continuous improvement. For the user satisfaction indicators LA's are to seek continuos improvement. All these factors should be taken into account when considering the significance in the differences in satisfaction ratings between LA types and in comparing the results of an individual authority to those LA type and national averages[ 6 ].

Key Findings

General Survey Corporate health indicators

x 65% of citizens are satisfied with the overall service provided by their LA. Of those 10% are very satisfied. Dissatisfaction is very low with just 9% fairly dissatisfied and only 3% very dissatisfied. 23% of citizens expressed neither satisfaction nor dissatisfaction. x Of those citizens who made a complaint to their LA 40% were satisfied with the handling of the complaint. x 63% of citizens are satisfied with cleanliness standards - that their LA has fulfilled its duty to keep the public land which it controls clear of litter and refuse. x 86% of survey respondents were satisfied with household waste collection, 66% were satisfied with recycling facilities and 70% were satisfied with civic amenity sites.

Transport indicators

x 47% of residents were satisfied with local provision of public transport information whilst 14% were fairly dissatisfied and 31% were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. x 50% of residents were satisfied with local bus services. 11% of respondents were very dissatisfied whilst 25% were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

Culture indicators

x Satisfaction with the LA's cultural and recreational services amongst residents was 54%.

Tenants Survey x Satisfaction with the overall service provided by the landlord was 77% amongst council tenant households. x Of the council tenants who responded to the survey 61% stated they were very or fairly satisfied with the opportunities they have for participation in management and decision making in relation to the housing services provided.

Benefits Survey x The national figures indicate that 79% of the surveyed population are satisfied with the facilities to get in touch with the benefits office;

x 82% were satisfied with the staff in the benefits office; and x 68% were satisfied with the time it took to inform them of the outcome of their claim.

Planning Survey x Nationally 78% of planning applicants were very or fairly satisfied with the service they received. Only 13% were dissatisfied.

Libraries Survey x From the results of the 2000/01 Libraries User Satisfaction survey we can see that 60% of public library users found the books they wanted and 76% found the information they wanted. Background to and Objectives of the User Satisfaction Surveys Best Value is a key element of the Government's programme to modernise local government. Through Consulting, Comparing, Competing and Challenging, Best Value places authorities under a duty to secure continuous improvement in the way in which they exercise their functions. At the heart of Best Value is the Statutory Performance Management Framework. This provides a set of national performance indicators and standards set by the Government. There are fourteen user satisfaction Best Value Performance Indicators (BV's) which were designed to cover nine service delivery and cross cutting areas: Corporate Health; Litter; Waste; Transport; Culture; Housing; Benefits; Planning; and Social Services. The indicators were collected on the basis of statutory required questions so that the results could be compared to the national results and benchmarked against the results of other authorities. Many LA's took the opportunity to use the survey to collect supplementary data but were required to keep any additional questions clearly separated from the statutory questions. The aim of these 'quality' Performance Indicators (PI's) is to provide for a rounded view of performance, reflecting as far as possible service users' experience of service delivery. These user satisfaction indicators are to be set in the context of authorities performance on the other PI's. During the financial year 2000/01, each LA carried out surveys to collect data for each of the user satisfaction PI's relevant to the services they provide. In order to compare across LA's a standard methodology was put in place for their collection. The next year for collection of data on these indicators is scheduled to be 2003/04. Guidance and template surveys were issued by the Department for Transport, Local

Government and the Regions (DTLR) and LA's were asked to send a data filefor each of the indicators to the Local and Regional Government Research Unit (LRGRU) at the DTLR[ 7 ] so that the national results of the surveys could be published. This allows LA's and citizens to consider how an authority is performing in comparison to the national picture.

Data collected and included in the national data set for analysis LA's in England were required to undertake the surveys necessary to collect the PI's relating to the services they provide. For example as not all LA's are Housing Authorities they were not all required to collect the Housing indicators (BV's 74 & 75) in a Tenants survey. Although every LA in England was required to undertake appropriate surveys not all submitted the data to the DTLR[ 8 ] and not all surveys submitted met the methodological standards required for inclusion in the data presented here. Table 1.1 - Surveys sent to the DTLR

Survey General Benefits Libraries Housing Planning Total received 384 99% 310 88% 123 82% 240 92% 304 78% Not received 4 1% 44 12% 27 18% 21 8% 84 22% As this was the first year of the user satisfaction surveys the number and quality of surveys undertaken has been exceptionally high. This is a reflection of many months of hard work by LA's.

Report Structure This Topline report has seven specific sections which have been produced by the DTLR and other Government departments responsible for those service areas: 1. Introduction (this section); 2. General Survey; 3. Tenants Survey; 4. Benefits Survey; 5. Planning Survey; 6. Libraries Survey; and 7. Demographic Information.

These surveys have been published on the appropriate departmental web sites and have all been published centrally on the DTLR Best Value website at http://www.localregions.dtlr.gov.uk/bestvalue/indicators/indicatorsindex.htm As the Social Services PI's (BV's 57 & 60) were collected by the DOH the results for these have been collated and disseminated by DOH. The results were published by DOH in the Statistical Bulletin on w/c 12 November 2001. Details can be found at http://www.doh.gov.uk/public/stats1.htm

Further Information For further information on the 2000/01 User Satisfaction surveys please contact: Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] There are five types of LA - Counties, Districts, Metropolitans, London Boroughs and Unitaries. [ 2 ] Separate guidance and collection arrangements were made by the Department of Health (DOH) for the Personal Social Services indicators (BV's 57 & 60) due to the specialist nature of these indicators. The results were published by DOH in the Stattistical Bulletin on w/c 12 November 2001. Details can be found at http://www.doh.gov.uk/public/stats1.htm [ 3 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible. [ 4 ] Confidence interval measured at the 95% confidence level = square root (%split*%split)/base number * 1.96. For example for the general survey if we assume a 50/50 split an achieved sample of 1,100 is required in order to achieve a confidence interval of 3%. [ 5 ] Response rate based on methodological information supplied by authorities at the time of publication. Further details will be provided in the main report. [ 6 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 7 ] At the time the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). Guidance: http://www.local.dtlr.gov.uk/research/bvpi.htm [ 8 ] The reasons why some LA's did not submit data will be discussed in the Review report which will be published in Spring 2002.

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 2: The General Survey The 2000/01 General User Satisfaction survey was carried out by all Local Authorities (LA's) in England from a randomly selected sample of all their residents to a confidence interval (CI) of 3%. From the results of the survey wecan see that 65% of the public are satisfied with the overall serviceprovided by LA's whilst only 10% are fairly or very dissatisfied.

Indicator Results For each of the indicators collected in the General surveys this report presents a graph showing satisfaction by LA type together with a national satisfaction figure[ 1 ]. This is followed by a table which provides further breakdown into the ratings for each of the points on the satisfaction scale used to collect the indicator[ 2 ]. To provide context to the results, Table 2.1a provides comparative data from other recent surveys on "Satisfaction with the overall service provided by the local authority" and Table 2.2a provides comparative data from other recent surveys on "The Percentage of those making complaints satisfied with the handling of those complaints". Further commentary on and analysis of the General survey results will be provided in a report which will be published by the DTLR in 2002. The tables and charts in the Topline reports act as a reference for LA's and citizens to compare results in their LA to the national picture.

Corporate Health Indicators From the results of the 2000/01 Best Value User Satisfaction surveys we can see that satisfaction ratings from the general public with corporate health services provided by their Local Authority are high. Nationally overall satisfaction with the way the council runs things is 65%, whilst only 12% are either very or fairly dissatisfied. Across the different types of authority we can see that satisfaction is above 60% with the exception of London Boroughs who have a slightly lower satisfaction rating. Across all LA's around a quarter of all respondents state they are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the overall service provided by the authority. Satisfaction with the handling of complaints by those making a complaint is the only satisfaction indicator where dissatisfaction is actually higher than satisfaction and this is true

across all types of authority. There are also far fewer respondents who are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, suggesting a polarity of experience. However, as indicated in table 2.2a, these results are consistent with other data we have in this area and the comparatively low satisfaction ratings are to be expected given the fact that all the respondents are starting from the position of having a complaint. Graph 2.1 BV3 Satisfaction with overall service provided by their LA

Table 2.1

LA type (Bases)

BV3 - "Satisfaction with quality of local council/running an area/running things" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d National 10% 55% 23% 9% 3% Counties (no. Of 8% 55% 28% 8% 2% LA's 31) Districts (no. Of 11% 57% 22% 8% 3% LA's 222) London Boroughs 7% 47% 25% 15% 6% (no. Of LA's 32) Metropolitan 9% 54% 22% 12% 4% Boroughs (no. Of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 9% 53% 24% 10% 3% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 538,992 (366 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.1 Graph 2.2

BV4 The percentage of those making complaints satisfied with the handling of those complaints

Table 2.2

LA type (Bases)

BV4 - "Satisfaction of those making complaints with the handling of those complaints" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 18% 22% 9% 22% 29% 16% 21% 9% 24% 30%

National Counties (no. of LA's 31) Districts (no. of 20% 22% 9% 21% 27% LA's 216) London Boroughs 13% 19% 9% 23% 37% (no. of LA's 32) Metropolitan 16% 21% 9% 22% 32% Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 17% 22% 9% 22% 31% LA's 43) Base: All valid responses 103,630 (358 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.3 Comparison to other national surveys on the Corporate Health Indicators

The 2000/01 General user satisfaction survey is the single largest survey to have been undertaken on issues relating to LA service provision in England. Whilst the results are interesting in themselves it is also helpful to view the results in the context of other surveys that have been undertaken on this subject area. Table 2.1b illustrates that of comparable surveys only the 1999 National Centre survey found higher levels of satisfaction with LA services[ 3 ]. In comparison to the Best Value pilots surveys undertaken in 1998 and 2000 we can see that

satisfaction is over 10% higher, although it should be recognised that the BV pilots were focused on some of the most deprived areas of England where service provision is most difficult. Table 2.2b shows comparative data to BV4 on satisfaction with complaints handling taken from the 1998 Best Value survey and the 1997 Citizen's Charter Unit. The 1998 Best Value survey and the 2000/01 User Satisfaction surveys show very similar levels of satisfaction, 37% and 39% respectively. The CCU work showed that 33% of respondents were satisfied but looked at respondents whose complaint was within a formal procedure rather than being self-defined, as is the case with the other surveys. Table 2.1a Comparative data on satisfaction with the overall service provided by residents Local Authority

Survey (Bases)

Best Value Survey 2000/01(538,992) People's Panel 1998 England(4,380) People's Panel 2000 England tracking BV (923) People's Panel 2000 England (923) Best Value1998 Pilots (2,488) Best Value 2000 (2,515) National Centre 1999 England (2074) SEH 1999-2000 England (18,000) Table 2.2a

Percentage of citizens satisfied with the overall service provided by their authority[ 4 ] Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very Don't satisfie satisfie satisfied dissatisfie dissatisfie know d d nor d d dissatisfied 10% 55% 23% 9% 3% N/A

8%

44%

27%

12%

5%

3%

7%

43%

23%

16%

7%

4%

5%

50%

23%

14%

6%

2%

8%

46%

17%

17%

8%

4%

7%

45%

19%

17%

8%

4%

5%

67%

N/A

22%

4%

2%

9%

59%

N/A

17%

10%

6%

Comparative data on the Percentage of those making complaints satisfied with the

handling of those complaints

Survey (Bases)

"Satisfaction of those making complaints with the handling of those complaints" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very Don't satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfie dissatisfie know dissatisfied d d Best Value 18% 22% 9% 22% 29% N/A Survey 2000/01 (538,992) Best Value 16% 21% 5% 13% 43% 3% 1998 (327) CCU 1997 15% 18% 8% 14% 41% 5% (556) Litter Indicator From the results of BV89 we can see that satisfaction with cleanliness standards is as high as 68% and nationally the average is 63%. In Metropolitan and London Boroughs satisfaction is lower, as would be expected in urban areas. Across all types of authority around 15% of respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied whilst between 4% and 14% were very dissatisfied. Graph 2.3 BV89 Percentage of people satisfied with cleanliness standards

Table 2.3

LA type (Bases)

BV89 - "Satisfaction with cleanliness standards" (%)

Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d National 12% 51% 14% 15% 8% Counties (no. of 12% 56% 18% 10% 4% LA's 23) Districts (no. of 13% 54% 14% 13% 7% LA's 222) London Boroughs 9% 44% 14% 20% 13% (no. of LA's 32) Metropolitan 9% 45% 13% 19% 14% Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 11% 47% 15% 18% 10% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 447,106 (358 LA's) National SampleConfidence Interval 0.1 Waste Indicator From the three elements of BV90 on satisfaction with waste services provided by authorities we can see that satisfaction ratings are very high, suggesting that the majority of residents are happy with the service provided by their authority. BV90 Percentage of survey respondents expressing satisfaction with Household Waste Collection, Recycling Facilities and Civic Amenity Sites Graph 2.4 BV90a Household Waste Collection

Table 2.4

LA type (Bases)

BV90a - "Satisfaction with Household Waste Collection" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 40% 45% 9% 4% 2% 43% 45% 8% 3% 1%

National Districts (no. of LA's 219) London Boroughs 25% 48% 15% 9% 4% (no. of LA's 32) Metropolitan 39% 46% 9% 5% 2% Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 38% 46% 9% 4% 2% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 474,152 (332 LA's) National SampleConfidence Interval 0.1 Results of BV90a for LA's where service is non-statutory nationally[ 5 ]

Counties 40% 46% 8% 3% Base: All valid responses 3,286 (3 LA's) Confidence Interval 1 Graph 2.5 BV90b Recycling Facilities

2%

Table 2.5

LA type (Bases)

National

BV90b - "Satisfaction with Recycling Facilities" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 22% 43% 18% 10% 6%

Districts (no. of 24% 44% 17% 10% LA's 220) London Boroughs 16% 38% 22% 14% (no. of LA's 31) Metropolitan 19% 39% 22% 11% Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 23% 42% 19% 10% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 447,696 (332 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.1 Results of BV90b for LA's where service is non-statutory nationally[ 6 ]

Counties 22% 47% 16% 11% Base: All valid responses 5,402 (5 LA's)Confidence Interval 1 Graph 2.6 BV90c Civic Amenity Sites

5% 10% 9%

6%

5%

Table 2.6

LA type (Bases)

BV90c - "Satisfaction with Civic Amenity Sites" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 24% 46% 22% 5% 3% 26% 49% 17% 5% 2%

National Counties (no. of LA's 30) London Boroughs 17% (no. of LA's 30) Metropolitan 28%

42%

30%

7%

5%

46%

19%

4%

2%

Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 25% 47% 21% 5% 2% LA's 44) Base: All valid responses 143,274 (140 LA's) National SampleConfidence Interval 0.2 Results of BV90c for LA's where service is non-statutory nationally[ 7 ]

Districts 27% 48% 17% 5% 2% Base: All valid responses 20,888 (27 LA's) Confidence Interval 1 Transport From the results of BV's 103 and 104 on the transport services provided by LA's we can see that across authority types roughly half of all citizens are satisfied with transport information and the local bus service. However, when considering these results, it should recognised that a nearly a third of citizens are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied and that less than a quarter of citizens are actually dissatisfied. The large percentage of citizens who answered this question as "Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied" (31% nationally) is almost certainly a reflection of the indicators being answered by both "users" and "non-users"[ 8 ] of these services. If we look at the Audit Commission estimated data on this issue we can see that for BV103 65% of users were actually satisfied with the provision of public transport information and that for BV104 57% of users were satisfied with the local bus service[ 9 ]. District Authorities do not have a statutory requirement to provide the transport services on which satisfaction was measured by this survey. However, some District Authorities collected the indicator information on the basis of local knowledge of the services provided by and associated with the authority. Table 2.8 shows the results of these LA's and provides a useful comparison to the other LA's. Graph 2.7 - BV103 Percentage of citizens satisfied with the provision of public transport information

Table 2.7 BV103 Percentage of respondents satisfied with provision of public transport information

LA type (Bases)

BV103 - "Satisfaction with provision of public transport information" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 11% 36% 31% 14% 8% 10% 34% 33% 14% 9%

National Counties (no. of LA's 30) London Boroughs 9% 37% 31% 15% 9% (no. of LA's 30) Metropolitan 13% 40% 27% 12% 7% Boroughs (no. of LA's 34) Unitaries (no. of 12% 34% 31% 14% 9% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 161,372 (134 LA's) National SampleConfidence Interval 0.2 Results of BV 103 for LA's where service is non-statutory nationally[ 10 ]

Districts 12% 33% 33% 13% 9% Base: All valid responses 19,359 (21 LA's) Confidence Interval 1 Graph 2.8 BV104 Percentage of respondents satisfied with local bus service

Table 2.8 BV104 Percentage of respondents satisfied with local bus services [ 11 ]

LA type (Bases)

BV104 - "Satisfaction with local bus services" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 13% 37% 25% 14% 11% 12% 34% 27% 15% 12%

National Counties (no. of LA's 29) London Boroughs 9% 39% 24% 18% (no. of LA's 30) Metropolitan 17% 41% 22% 12% Boroughs (no. of LA's 35) Unitaries (no. of 14% 36% 26% 14% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 172,574(139 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2 Results of BV 104 for LA's where service is non-statutory nationally

11% 8%

11%

Districts 13% 35% 27% 15% 11% Base: All valid responses 37,031(34 LA's) Confidence Interval 2 Cultural and Recreational Services The results of BV119 shows that the majority of citizens were satisfied with the cultural and recreational services provided by their authority. Across all authority types those fairly or very

dissatisfied was very low, at about 10%. A large percentage (over a third) of citizens expressed neither satisfaction nor dissatisfaction with these services. This is probably a reflection of the indicators being answered by both "users" and "non-users"[ 12 ] as non-users are more likely to offer a neutral opinion on satisfaction with the service[ 13 ]. Additional satisfaction questions were asked on the particular cultural and recreational services provided by that authority - sports/leisure facilities, libraries, museum/galleries, theatres/concert halls and parks[ 14 ]. Graph 2.9 - BV119 The percentage of residents satisfied with the local authorities cultural and recreational activities

Table 2.9 BV119 The percentage of residents satisfied with the local authorities cultural and recreational activities

LA type (Bases)

BV119 - "Satisfaction with local authorities cultural and recreational services" (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 12% 42% 37% 7% 2% 14% 44% 35% 5% 2%

National Counties (no. of LA's 28) Districts (no. of 12% LA's 211) London Boroughs 10% (no. of LA's 32) Metropolitan 13%

42%

37%

7%

2%

39%

38%

8%

3%

42%

36%

6%

2%

Boroughs (no. of LA's 36) Unitaries (no. of 15% 42% 35% LA's 45) Base: All valid responses 464,449 (352 LA's) National SampleConfidence Interval 0.1

6%

2%

Further Information For further information on the 2000/01 General User Satisfaction survey please contact: Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 2 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible. [ 3 ] Question wording varies slighty across certain surveys. Please note that some survey use different scales and this will impact ratings. [ 4 ] See footnote 3. [ 5 ] Depending on national statutory requirements LA's only collected the elements of this indicator that related to the services they provided. However, in some cases, LA's collected the indicator information on the basis of local knowledge of the services provided by and associated with the authority. The Department feels that it is important to report these results as an acknowledgement of the work undertaken. Given the small numbers of authorities who reported the results of nationally non-statutorily required indicators these results should not be taken as representative of the local authority type. These LA's have not been included in the reported "National" indicator results as the data does not significantly change the overall % figures. [ 6 ] See footnote 5

[ 7 ] see footnote 5 [ 8 ] BV103 "Users" defined as people who had seen transport information in the last 12 months. BV104 "Users" defined as those who have used the local bus service in the last 12 months. 9 The Audit Commission (AC) estimates are unaudited data and should be seen only as a rough guide to the probable approximate figures (available at www.localregions.dtlr.gov.uk/bestvalue/indicators/indicatorsindex.htm). The main report on the user satisfaction surveys, which will be published in 2002, will explore the indicators by "users" and "non-users" in more depth. AC figures are medians. [ 9 ] The Audit Commission (AC) estimates are unaudited data and should be seen only as a rough guide to the probable approximate figures (available at www.localregions.dtlr.gov.uk/bestvalue/indicators/indicatorsindex.htm). The main report on the user satisfaction surveys, which will be published in 2002, will explore the indicators by "users" and "non-users" in more depth. AC figures are medians. [ 10 ] See footnote 5 [ 11 ] See footnote 5 [ 12 ] BV119 "Users" defined as people who have used cultural and recreational services in the last 12 months. [ 13 ] The views of users and non-users will be explored in the main report on the surveys which will be published in 2002. [ 14 ] These will be explored in the main report on the surveys which will be published in 2002.

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 3: The Tenants Survey The 2000/01 Tenants User Satisfaction survey was carried out by all Local Authorities (LA's) with responsibility for council owned housing stock from a randomly selected sample of people on the LA council tenant houses addresses[ 1 ] to a confidence interval (CI) of 4%. From the results of the 2000/01 Tenants User Satisfaction survey we can see that the majority (77%) of council tenants are satisfied with the services provided by local authorities whilst only 12% are dissatisfied. However, council tenant satisfaction with opportunities to participate in management and decision making in relation to housing services is lower at 61%. This does not mean that there was higher tenant dissatisfaction for this indicator because over a quarter of respondents were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.

Indicator Results For each of the indicators collected in the Tenants surveys this report presents a graph showing average[ 2 ] satisfaction by LA together with a national average. This is followed by a table which provides further breakdown into the ratings for each of the points on the satisfaction scale used[ 3 ] . To provide context to the results tables 3.3 and 3.4, following the results of BV's 74 & 75, provide comparative data from the Survey of English Housing (SEH) 1999/2000. Graph 3.1 - BV74 Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with the overall service provided by their landlord

Table 3.1

LA type (Bases) BV74 - Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with the overall service provided by their landlord Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied National Results 33% 44% 12% 7% 5% Districts (no. of 38% 43% 11% 7% 5% LA's 116) London 20% 43% 15% 13% 10% Boroughs (no. of LA's 24) Metropolitan 27% 46% 12% 8% 6% Boroughs (no. of LA's 28) Unitaries (no. of 32% 45% 12% 7% 4% LA's 31) Base: All valid responses 257,592 (198 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2% The Figure for BV74 shows that council tenants' satisfaction with the overall service provided by their landlord in District councils is slightly higher then the national average of 77%. However, Tenants' satisfaction in Metropolitan authorities is slightly lower at 74% and those in London Boroughs are the least satisfied at 63%. Also, the table showing BV74 responses indicates that tenants from London Boroughs have the highest level of dissatisfaction at 23% which is twice the national average. In addition, the findings show that over 40% of tenants across all authority types are fairly satisfied. However, a higher proportion of tenants from District and Unitary authorities are very satisfied. BV75 Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with opportunities for participation in management and decision making in relation to housing services provided by their

landlord The Figure for BV75 shows that the trend for overall satisfaction across authority types is similar to that for BV74 responses, with tenants from district authorities being the most satisfied at 66% and those from London Boroughs the least satisfied at 51%. However, overall satisfaction is lower across all authority types than for BV74 responses. The table for BV75 responses shows that this is affected by the fact that over a quarter of tenants from each authority type are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with opportunities for participation in management and decision making. Also, similar to responses for BV74 nearly 40% of tenants across all authority types are fairly satisfied. However, a higher proportion of tenants from district authorities are very satisfied at 25% than those from other authority types. Graph 3.2 - BV75 Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with opportunities for participation in management and decision making in relation to housing services provided by their landlord

Table 3.2

LA type (Bases)

BV75 - Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with opportunities for participation in management and decision making in relation to housing services provided by their landlord Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied 22% 39% 27% 7% 5%

National Results Districts (no. 25% of LA's 116) London 15% Boroughs (no. of LA's

41%

26%

5%

4%

36%

29%

12%

9%

24) Metropolitan 17% 39% 30% 9% Boroughs (no. of LA's 28) Unitaries (no. 21% 38% 28% 8% of LA's 31) Base: All valid responses 212540 (199 LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2 Comparison to the Survey of English Housing 1999/2000:

6%

6%

Table 3.3

LA type (Bases)

Council Tenant satisfaction with Landlord (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfie dissatisfie dissatisfied d d 31% 47% 8% 9% 5%

Districts (no. Of responses-904) London Boroughs 12% 48% 14% 12% 13% (no. Of responses394) Metropolitan 17% 50% 12% 14% 7% Boroughs (no. Of responses-803) Unitaries (no. Of 27% 47% 10% 8% 8% responses-423) Base: 2524 Overall Confidence Interval 2%* * The confidence intervals by authority type are: District (4%); London Borough (6%); Metropolitan Area (4%): Unitaries (5%). Table 3.4

LA type (Bases) Satisfaction of tenants of council housing with the opportunity to be involved in the management of their home (%) Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied Districts (no. Of 16% 37% 33% 8% 5% responses-936) London 7% 35% 34% 12% 12% Boroughs (no. Of responses-403) Metropolitan 11% 36% 31% 12% 10%

Boroughs (no. Of responses-854) Unitaries (no. Of 15% 38% 29% 9% 10% responses445) Base: 2638 Overall Confidence Interval 2%[ 4 ] Findings from the Survey of English housing 1999/00 (presented as percentages) are broadly consistent with those from the User Satisfaction Surveys. Firstly, the trend for Council tenant satisfaction with their Landlord is similar to findings for BV74, with district authorities being the most satisfied at 78% and London Boroughs the least satisfied at 60%. However, SEH council tenant responses for those who are very satisfied with their landlord are lower across all authority types than those for BV74. Also, overall dissatisfaction is higher across all authority types than figures for BV74, with London Borough tenants being the most dissatisfied at 25%. Similarly, SEH findings for tenant satisfaction with the opportunity to be involved in the management of their home follows a similar trend to the BV75 figures with overall satisfaction being significantly lower (53%) than that for satisfaction with landlord. This can be mainly explained by the fact that over a third of respondents are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. However, the overall satisfaction figure of 53% is lower than that for BV75 (61%) because the proportion of respondents who are dissatisfied and also neither satisfied nor dissatisfied is higher across all authority types.

Further Information For further information on the 2000/01 Tenants User Satisfaction survey please contact: Christine Gough RAE DTLR 2/A1 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 3103 or Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected]

Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] LA's with a housing stock of less than 200 dwellings were not required to undertake the survey. Housing Associations and other Registered Social Landlords are not Best Value authorities so were not required to undertake the survey. [ 2 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 3 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible. [ 4 ] The confidence intervals by authority type are: District(4%), London Borough (6%), Metropolitan Area (4%) Unitary (6%)

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 4: The Benefits Survey The 2000/01 Benefits User Satisfaction survey was carried out by all LA's with responsibility for housing and council tax benefit from a randomly selected sample of people who perused a new or renewal claim for housing/council tax benefit to a confidence interval (CI) of 4%. The results of the 2000/01 Benefits User Satisfaction Survey indicate that majorities of the public are satisfied with the level of service and assistance provided by Local Authorities whilst only small minorities are dissatisfied.

Indicator Results For the indicator collected in the Benefits surveys this report presents a graph showing the average satisfaction by LA together with a national average[ 1 ]. This is followed by a table, which provides further breakdown into the ratings for each of the points on the satisfaction scale used[ 2 ]. BV80 consists of six modules which measure various aspects of satisfaction with the benefits service. This report will concentrate on 3 of those modules. All six modules will be discussed in further depth in the main report which will be published in 2002. BV 80 User Satisfaction survey covering issues of Accessibility, Staffing and Communications Graph 4.1 Satisfaction with contact facilities at the benefits office

Table 4.1

LA type (Bases)

Satisfaction with contact facilities at the benefits office Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 18% 61% 11% 6% 4% 19% 63% 10% 5% 3%

National Districts (no. of LA's 180) London Boroughs 15% 54% 13% 11% 7% (no. of LA's 29) Metropolitan 17% 60% 11% 7% 4% Boroughs (no. of LA's 31) Unitaries (no. of 17% 60% 12% 7% 4% LA's 38) Base: All Valid responses 158850 (278 La's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2 In general, local authorities recorded high levels of satisfaction across areas of service provision related to contact facilities at the benefits office. On average, approximately four-fifths of service users expressed satisfaction within this indicator. However a relatively higher proportion of users (one-sixth) expressed dissatisfaction with contact facilities in London Boroughs. Graph 4.2 - BV80 User Satisfaction Survey - Satisfaction with Staff in Benefits Office

Table 4.2

LA type (Bases)

Satisfaction with Staff in the Benefits Office Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 23% 59% 10% 5% 2% 25% 60% 10% 4% 2%

National Districts (no. of LA's 180) London Boroughs 19% 54% 14% 8% 5% (no. of LA's 29) Metropolitan 22% 60% 11% 5% 2% Boroughs (no. of LA's 31) Unitaries (no. of 22% 59% 11% 5% 3% LA's 38) Base: All Valid responses 148896 (276 La's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2 An average of approximately four-fifths of users across all types of local authorities expressed satisfaction with the service received from staff in Benefits Offices. Service users in London Boroughs expressed the highest ratio (one in twelve) of overall dissatisfaction with the service received from staff in Benefits Offices. Graph 4.3 - Satisfaction with time taken to make a decision

Table 4.3

LA type (Bases)

Satisfaction with time taken to make a decision Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfie dissatisfied d 14% 54% 11% 12% 10% 14% 56% 10% 11% 9%

National Districts (no. of LA's 179) London Boroughs 12% 47% 12% 17% 14% (no. of LA's 29) Metropolitan 14% 53% 12% 12% 9% Boroughs (no. of LA's 31) Unitaries (no. of 13% 53% 11% 14% 10% LA's 37) Base: All Valid responses 159081 (276 La's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.2 Large majorities of service users (68%) across all types of local authorities expressed satisfaction with the speed with which local authorities were processing claims. A relatively high proportion (but still less than one-third) of service users in London Boroughs expressed some dissatisfaction with the speed in which claims were processed.

Further Information For further information on the 2000/01 Benefits User Satisfaction survey please contact either of the following: Simon Franklin Department of Work & Pensions The Adelphi John Adam Street

London WC2N 6HT [email protected]. Tel: 020 7962 8510 or Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 2 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible.

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 5: The Planning Survey The 2000/01 Planning User Satisfaction survey was carried out by all Local Authorities with responsibility for planning services from a randomly selected sample of people on a list of planning applicants in the year who have received a decision letter to a confidence interval (CI) of 5%. From the results of the 2000/01 Planning User Satisfaction survey we can see that the majority (78%) of the public are satisfied with the services provided by local authorities whilst only 13% are dissatisfied.

Indicator Results For the indicator collected in the Planning surveys this report presents a graph showing the satisfaction rating by LA type together with a national average[ 1 ]. This is followed by a table which provides further breakdown into the ratings for each of the points on the satisfaction scale used[ 2 ]. In total local authorities receive over half a million planning applications a year ranging from householder extensions to major commercial applications. From graph 5.1 it is clear to see that there is generally a high level of satisfaction with the handling of applications across authority types. In comparing the satisfaction of different types of authorities it is important to remember that County Council's only deal with minerals and waste applications and thus deal with a relatively small caseload in comparison to other types of authority. Graph 5.1 BV111 Satisfaction of applicants with the service provided by the local authority in processing the application

Table 5.1

LA type (Bases BV111 - Satisfaction of applicants with the service provided by the local authority in processing the application Very Fairly Neither Fairly Very satisfied satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied dissatisfied dissatisfied National 39% 38% 10% 7% 6% Counties (no. of 42% 40% 9% 14% 13% LA's 13 ) Districts (no. of 40% 38% 9% 7% 5% LA's 157) London 28% 39% 12% 11% 10% Boroughs (no. of LA's 19) Metropolitan 39% 38% 11% 7% 5% Boroughs (no. of LA's 25) Unitaries (no. of 37% 39% 10% 8% 6% LA's 28) Base: All Valid responses: 93211 (242LA's) National Sample Confidence Interval 0.3% Comparison to other national surveys: BV111 represents the first time that a national survey of user satisfaction has been undertaken in relation to the planning application service provided by local authorities. We therefore do not have any comparative data.

Further Information For further information on the 2000/01 Planning User Satisfaction survey please contact: Nigel Nuttall Planning Directorate 4/J2 Eland House DTLR Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 3954 or Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 2 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible.

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 6: The Libraries Survey The 2000/01 Libraries User Satisfaction survey was carried out by all Libraries Authorities in all their static libraries. Surveys were administered to a minimum of 1,000 library users to a random sample of visitors. From the results of the 2000/01 Libraries User Satisfaction survey we can see that 60% of public library users found the books they wanted and 77% found the information they wanted.

Indicator Results This report presents results showing the proportion of users who were successful in finding the book or the information which they wanted. Satisfaction with the reservation system has not been included as not all LA's had sufficient time to amend the survey instrument to include this question. For the two modules of the indicator BV118, collected in the Libraries surveys, this report presents a graph showing satisfaction by LA type together with a national satisfaction figure[ 1,2 ] . Graph 6.1 - BV118 module 1 The percentage of libraries users who found the books they wanted

Base: All valid responses 59,594 National Sample Confidence Interval 0.4 No. of LA's - Counties 21, Unitaries 31, Metropolitan Boroughs

26, London Boroughs 19. Graph 6.2 - BV118 module 2 The percentage of libraries users who found the information they wanted

Comparison to other national surveys: Comparative data on satisfaction with library services are currently being compiled by the DCMS and will supplement the results of BV118 in the main 2000/01 User Satisfaction Survey report which will be published by DTLR in 2002. Base: All valid responses 92,835 National Sample Confidence Interval 0.3 No. of LA's - Counties 22, Unitaries 32, Metropolitan Boroughs 26, London Boroughs 20. Further Information For further information on any issues relating to the Libraries survey please contact: Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] Please note that all the figures presented in these topline reports are 'mean' averages and are rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. This has resulted in some of the tables presenting very satisfied to very dissatisfied figures not always adding up to exactly 100%. For the actual "Indicator" results readers should always refer to the graphs. [ 2 ] The data presented in this report is aggregated and merged. It therefore presents the results from different surveys with different sampling probabilities as well as different modes of data collection. In order to measure the sampling tolerance a rule of thumb has been applied to

calculate the CI for a simple random sample. To accurately calculate the CI for the merged data set would otherwise not have been possible.

Although this report was commissioned by the Office, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Topline Report

Section 7: Demographic information In addition to the questions about LA services the BV user satisfaction surveys collected background information on the respondents[ 1 ]. This is important as it allows LA's to see if they are failing certain sections of the local population or excelling in provision of services to all citizens[ 2 ]. Tables 7.1 - 7.5 provide summary demographic data for the national user satisfaction survey data sets[ 3 ]. Table 7.6 presents the Office for National Statistics (ONS) mid-2000 population estimates to allow comparison between those surveyed within the user satisfaction surveys and the actual population[ 4 ].

Weights All data is presented in the weighted and unweighted versions - that is the numbers and percentages for all the data collected and the numbers and percentages once the weights calculated by LA's have been applied to the data. The weights that LA's provided have been applied to the data that has been analysed in the Topline reports[ 5 ]. Guidance was issued on sampling and boosting subgroups and on weighting data. The guidance did not prescribe a method but presented the underlying principles and a step by step guide. Whether the LA carried out a census or used a sample they were advised to check that the distribution of responses was representative of the target population as a whole. If the responses were not representative they were advised to weight. It was stressed that weighting is not an alternative to making every effort to maximise response rate. A poor response rate cannot be fully-compensated for by weighting. When weighting it is the target population that you want the results to be representative of. The target population varies from survey to survey: housing and council tax benefit claimants; planning applicants; library users; all of the residents in the authority; and, so on. This is important, as planning applicants, benefit claimants and library users are not necessarily representative of the population of the authority as a whole. Weighting is used in two main ways in the analysis of this type of survey:

1. To adjust for the effects of boosting sub-groups (or differential probabilities of selection). If the LA didn't sample using differential probabilities of selection this was not necessary. 2. To help correct some of the bias which may be introduced by a low response rate. Some types of respondents may be more (or less) likely to respond than others, and consequently, their views would be over (or under) represented. To correct for this LA's were advised to weight these responses to make them more representative

The impact on the sample that the weights had on the sample can be assessed by considering the demographic information presented in this report. Table 7.1a Gender (Unweighted) "Are you male or female?"

General Tenants Benefits Plannin g Librarie s Table 7.1b Gender (Weighted)

Male No. & % 241,928 44% 99,232 42.2% 112,654 41.1% 73448 80.1% 94,861 36.6%

Male No. & % 247,709 General 45.4% 102,349 Tenants 42.4% 112,343 Benefits 41.1% 71566 Planning 80% Libraries N/A Table 7.2a Age (Unweighted)

Female No. & % 306,793 56% 135,858 57.8% 161,162 58.9% 18293 19.9% 164,122 63.4%

Female No. & % 297,473 54.6% 139,246 57.6% 160,716 58.9% 17900 20%

"What was your age last birthday?"

Number & Percentage (%) < 18 18 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44

45 - 54

55-64

65 - 74

75+

6768 1.3%

22862 4.3%

61154 11.5%

N/A

7214[ 6 ] 3.4%

22912 10.9%

4110 1.6%

10757 4.1%

29871 11.5%

902 1%

1740 2%

13564 15.8%

12544 9131 28413 4.9% 3.5% 11% Table 7.2b Age (Weighted)

General Survey 94402 100451 17.7% 18.8% Tenants Survey 27794 25799 13.2% 12.2% Benefits Survey 34901 30087 13.4% 11.6% Planning Survey 23584 23726 27.4% 27.6% Libraries Survey[ 7 ] 43363 38551 16.8% 14.9%

96597 18.1%

90582 17.0%

60804 11.4%

31355 14.9%

41961 19.9%

53767 25.5%

35070 13.5%

47449 18.3%

67660 26%

15602 18.2%

5711 6.6%

1095 1.3%

41133 15.9%

52272 20.2%

32862 12.7%

"What was your age last birthday?"

Number & Percentage (%) < 18 18 - 24 25 - 34 35 - 44 45 - 54 55-64 General Survey 7176 35128 72826 92949 96521 88458 1.4% 6.6% 13.7% 17.5% 18.2% 16.7% Tenants Survey N/A 7580 23724 28802 26806 32551 3.5% 10.9% 13.3% 12.3% 15% Benefits Survey 4112 10793 29887 34889 29981 34916 1.6% 4.2% 11.5% 13.5% 11.6% 13.5% Planning Survey 902 1700 13161 23087 23015 15248 1.1% 2.0% 15.7% 27.6% 27.5% 18.2% Libraries Survey not applicable [8] Table 7.3a Ethnicity (Unweighted)

65 - 74

75+

82120 15.5%

55387 10.4%

43249 19.9%

54634 25.1%

47270 18.2%

67327 26%

5551 6.6%

1075 1.3%

"To which of these groups do you consider you belong?"

Number & Percentage (%) A. White B. Mixed C. Asian D. Black General Survey 528794 2102 7563 3494 97.3% 0.4% 1.4% 0.6% Tenants Survey

E. Chinese

F. Other

719 0.1%

1070 0.2%

235053 95.1%

1889 0.7%

3652 5242 1.5% 2.1% Benefits Survey 251310 2498 5564 4576 94.7% 0.9% 2% 1.8% Planning Survey 85019 137 2567 363 96% 0.1% 2.9% 0.4% Libraries Survey 176021 N/A 13992 9951 86.4% 6.8% 2.7% Table 7.3b Ethnicity[ 9 ] (Weighted)

252 0.1%

108 0.4%

452 0.2%

1053 0.4%

224 0.3%

308 0.3%

1218 0.6%

7036 3.5%

"To which of these groups do you consider you belong?"

Number & Percentage (%) A. White B. Mixed C. Asian D. Black E. Chinese F. Other General Survey 523861 2043 8615 3918 876 1012 97% 0.4% 1.6% 0.7% 0.2% 0.2% Tenants Survey 241665 1913 3655 8327 257 1084 95.3% 0.6% 1.5% 2.0% 0.1% 0.4% Benefits Survey 250572 2504 5532 4587 446 1049 94.7% 0.9% 2% 1.8% 0.2% 0.4% Planning Survey 82883 135 2511 357 222 303 96% 0.1% 2.9% 0.4% 0.3% 0.4% Libraries Survey Not applicable Table 7.4a Employment status (unweighted) "Which of these best describes what you are doing at present?"

Number & Percentage (%) Employment status Full time employee

Part time employee Self employed On a Government training

Gener al 17178 1 32.9% 60199 11.5% 40174 7.7% 2431

Tenant s 31376 14.3%

Benefi ts 10361 4.1%

Plannin g 42282 46.7%

Librarie s 47979 18.6%

16324 7.4% 3073 1.4% 716

18224 7.2% 4887 .9% 2245

4005 4.4% 32285 35.6% 192

34263 13.3% 13303 5.2% -

programme In full time education

0.5% 9196 1.8% Unemployed 12020 2.3% Sick or disabled 26092 5% Retired 13603 8 26% Looking after home 57605 11% Doing something else 6707 1.3% Table 7.4b Employment status (weighted)

0.3% 3175 1.4% 13446 6.1% 31984 14.6% 88397 40.2%

0.9% 1920 0.8 22351 8.9% 49955 19.9% 87535 4.8%

0.2% 637 0.7% 477 0.5% 1218 1.3% 6281 6.9%

27668 12.6% 3506 1.6%

45383 17.3% 10437 4.1%

2334 2.6% 919 1.0%

16694 6.5% 6959 2.7% 101667 39.5% 29350 10.8% 7161 2.8%

"Which of these best describes what you are doing at present?"

Number & Percentage (% Employment status Gener Tenan Benefi Plannin Libraries al ts ts g Full time employee 18079 32294 10350 41252 Not 6 14.3% 4.1% 46.7% Applicable 34.8% Part time employee 59365 16912 18195 3919 11.4% 7.5% 7.3% 4.4% Self employed 39931 3187 4875 31349 7.7% 1.4% 1.9% 35.5% On a Government training 2669 733 2232 191 programme 0.5% 0.3% 0.9% 0.2% In full time education 12737 3221 1920 636 2.5% 1.4% 0.8% 0.7% Unemployed 12644 13939 22304 471 2.4% 6.2% 8.9% 0.5% Sick or disabled 24959 32950 49747 1161 4.8% 14.6% 19.8% 1.3% Retired 12391 89810 87225 6079 1 39.9% 34.8% 7.0% 23.9% Looking after home 55338 28424 43491 2291 10.7% 12.7% 17.3% 2.6% Doing something else 6617 3553 10435 909 1.3% 1.6% 4.2% 1.0% "Do you have any long standing illness, disability or infirmity?" Table 7.5a Disability (Unweighted)

General Tenants Benefits Planning

No. & % Yes 138138: 26.2% 116501: 51.6% 141159 53.4% 8029 9%

No 390077: 73.8% 109101: 48.4% 122980 46.6% 81487 91%

Table 7.5b Disability (Weighted)

No. & % Yes 130512 General 24.9% 119526 Tenants 51.5% 140693 Benefits 53.4% 7845 Planning 9% Table 7.5c Disability (Libraries survey)

No 394653: 75.1% 112418 48.5% 122713 46.6% 79422 91.0%

No. & percentage with specified disability (unweighted) Libraries a. Hearing difficulty b. Physical difficulty c. Learning difficulty 4384 2544 735 1.6% 0.9% 0.3% Table 7.6 Comparison to national profile (England): Estimated resident population at mid-2000 by sex and age[ 10 ]

ONS Mid-200 population estimates Age Population & % 49,997,089 All ages 100.0% 4,177,260 18-24 8.4% 7,505,983 25-34 15.0% 14,122,170 35-54 28.2% 5,112,077 55-64 10.2%

Males 24,697,022 49% 2,145,787 51% 3,858,976 51% 7,124,369 50% 2,524,875 49%

Females 25,300,067 51% 2,031,473 49% 3,647,007 49% 6,997,801 50% 2,587,202 51%

65+

7,800,025 15.6%

3,255,523 42%

4,544,502 58%

Further Information For further information on any demographic issues in relation to the 2000/01 BV user satisfaction surveys please contact: Adrian Laughton LRGRU DTLR 5/C5 Bressenden Place London, SW1E 5DU [email protected] Tel: 020 7944 4114 [ 1 ] All data was collected on the basis of absolute confidentiality and anonymised before being sent to the DTLR [ 2 ] All demographic information is based on the data used within the analysis and excludes surveys which had not been supplied to the DTLR by 31st September 2001 or where we were unable to confirm that the survey had met the primary methodological standards. [ 3 ] The Library survey demographic data was collected using slightly different categories as most LA's utilised the PLUS standardised questionnaire. Details are provided in footnotes. [ 4 ] It should be remembered that with the exception of the General survey the surveyed population is specific users and is therefore not a reflection of the overall population. [ 5 ] No weights were applied by LA's to the Libraries survey data. [ 6 ] 16-24 age category used with Tenants survey [ 7 ] Library survey age info collected in different categories and therefore presented as: 14-19, 20-24, 25-34, 25-44,45-54,55-64,65-74, 75+ [ 8 ] A. White, British, Irish, Any other white background. B. Mixed, White and Black Caribbean, White and Black African, White and Asian, any other mixed background. C. Asian or Asian British, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, any other Asian background. D. Black or Black British, Caribbean, African, Any other Black background. E. Chinese or other ethnic group. F. Other. Lib survey: Bangladeshi, Indian & Pakistani presented as "Asian", Black African, Black Caribbean & Black Other presented as "Black", no "Mixed" category. [ 9 ] See footnote 8. [ 10 ] Source: Population Estimates Unit, ONS. Crown Copyright. Note: It is ONS policy to publish estimates to the nearest hundred persons. Rounded (and particularly unit) estimates cannot be precisely accurate.