2017 Customer satisfaction
About this measure: Customer service is a cornerstone of good performance. DNRP uses customer feedback mechanisms to:
- Understand changes in customer preferences, priorities and price sensitivities
- Assess program strengths and weaknesses and perceptions of service levels
- Guide program adjustments based on finding
Many of our larger programs have had customer feedback mechanisms in place for several years. The customer survey findings are used to steer program adjustments and ensure that changes produce the intended results.
For the most part, DNRP divisions have selected specific groups of customers or neighboring business and residents to survey about services and programs. Some of our customer service questionnaires are self-administered and others involve the use of consumer research firms.
Solid Waste Division (SWD)
Transfer station customers
2014 Results: 4.64
2014 Target: 4.50
2015 Target: NA, no survey in 2015
Influencing Factors: Since the last transfer station customer satisfaction survey was conducted in 2008, SWD has built some larger, more modern and efficient transfer stations and has expanded and improved its recycling services at some of its facilities. This may have contributed to this measure exceeding its target in 2014. In 2008, SWD opened the new Shoreline Recycling and Transfer Station. In 2012, SWD opened the new Bow Lake Recycling and Transfer Station and added enhanced recycling services to this station in 2013.
Strategy Going Forward: Monitor customer satisfaction on 3-4 year schedule.
Technical Notes: Customers respond using a 1-5 scale where 5 is excellent.
Household hazardous waste facility customers
About this Performance Measure: The Local Hazardous Waste Management Program in King County (LHWMP) operates household hazardous waste (HHW) facilities at three sites, located in North Seattle, South Seattle and Bellevue. The LHWMP also conducts Wastemobile collection events in cities around the county. In 2012, the Wastemobile had 15,203 customers and collected 541 tons of hazardous waste. Customers at the hazardous collection sites are periodically surveyed to measure customer satisfaction with the service and to gather demographic information.
2012 Results: 2.80
2012 Target: 2.70
2013 Target: N/A - as no survey is planned for 2013.
Influencing Factors: Satisfaction with days and hours of operation also appeared to have increased at the roving Wastemobile sites, and the share of respondents rating the wait time as Excellent appeared to have increased at the Factoria facility. Responses to the questions on residence type and ownership and on respondent demographics did not appear to have substantially changed between the two study years.
Strategy Going Forward: In 2012, The Solid Waste Division, as part of the LHWMP, explored several options for increasing hazardous waste disposal service to South King County residents. An on-site customer service survey was conducted in 2012 at the fixed HHW facilities and at selected roving and Auburn SuperMall Wastemobile events. This survey used to be conducted every other year; however, the results were not changing much between years so the length of time between surveys was extended. At this time it is unknown when the next surveys will be conducted.
Technical Notes: Surveys are ranked on a 1-3 scale where 3 is excellent. There were three areas measured for customer satisfaction: hours, days of operation and wait time. The result is the average of the total number of responses in each category. In 2012, the HHW facility at Factoria had 13,083 customers and collected 360 tons of hazardous waste. Two other fixed facilities are run by the city of Seattle.
Solid waste education programs
About this Performance Measure: In the 2015-2016 school year, the King County Solid Waste Division (SWD) reached 22,856 elementary school students through an assembly program and over 19,727 elementary and secondary school students through classroom workshops. Teachers find the assembly and workshops to be highly effective in educating students about how reducing waste and recycling benefit the environment. Teachers are surveyed on whether they think the assembly program and elementary and secondary school workshops enhance student understanding of resource conservation.
2015 - 2016 Results: 4.62
2015 - 2016 Target: 4.60
2016 - 2017 Target: 4.60
Influencing Factors: The overall rating in 2015-2016 was 4.62, slightly lower than the 4.63 for the two previous years.. The rating combines the results of three program elements: the assembly show, the elementary workshops, and the secondary workshops. The survey measures the effectiveness in enhancing student understanding of resource conservation for each element. Also measured is the extent to which both elementary and secondary school teachers regard the appropriateness of the workshop to grade level. The program works hard to maintain a consistent level of performance.
Strategy Going Forward: The program will work to ensure a continued level of clarity and quality in its classroom presentations by being attentive to the survey results and making program adjustments as needed.
Technical Notes: Surveys are ranked on a 1-5 scale where 5 is excellent. Results are reported for the school year, not the calendar year. For example, the results reported for 2016 are the results for the 2015-2016 school year.
Water and Land Resources Division (WLRD) Customer Satisfaction
2017 Target: Complete some form of customer satisfaction survey for major products.
2017 Results: WLRD conducted surveys in the following product lines:
- Local Hazardous Waste Management Program: Through LHWMP, the regional interagency program, WLRD administered seven surveys of 126 people or businesses. These include in-home interviews, telephone surveys, and other contacts for project planning, customer feedback or evaluation. Nine in-home inventories of cleaning products were conducted in Spanish. The other surveys included up to 25% people of color and 75% white.
- WRIA Survey: The 2017 surveys have been distributed to all three WRIAs. Results for 2017 should be available during the Second Quarter of 2017. Results from 2013-2016 are on file with the Rural and Regional Services section of WLRD.
- Forestry: WSU Extension has completed outcome and impact assessments for King and Snohomish forest stewardship classes for 2017. A total of three workshops were held (located in Preston and online) with 42 participants total. WSU Extension also conducted follow-up surveys of participants in the workshops to track how well the information is actually applied. They did a One-year follow-up assessments for the 2016 Online, Vashon and Preston classes, a three-year follow-up assessments for the 2014 Online and Preston classes and a eight-year follow-up assessment of the 2009 Preston class. Executive Summary Reports are available for each class from the Agriculture, Forestry and Incentives Unit of the Water and Land Resources Division.
2017 Objective: Meet the intent and purpose of Lean (continuous improvement and delivering more value to our customers). Learn more about Lean.
Strategy going forward: Continue to focus on customer satisfaction and increase standardization in customer satisfaction methods. In partnership with the Equity and Social Justice program, strengthen approaches that help identify customer preferences, especially for harder-to-reach customer types.
2017 KINGSTAT Lean Report for LHWMP
Public Disclosure Requests (PDRs): The HW Unit completed our review of our Unit’s PDR response process and methods, continuously improving our performance. We benefitted from support provided by KCIT (database enhancement) and records management experts (RALS, DNRP, and WLRD). Here’s the difference:
|Performance Measurement (Year) and Improvements||Average time per request||At the end of the year, how long did it take to complete all PDRs?||Example: One requestor listed many addresses and our search found 47 sites in our records. We produced 246 pages of records for the customer.|
|Before Lean (2016)||40 minutes each||4 months: all PDRs received in 2016 were completed by April 2017||Before Lean, producing these records would take most of an 8 hour day.|
|After Lean (2017)||15 minutes each||‹1 month: all PDRs received in 2017 were completed before the end of January 2018*||After Lean, producing the records was completed in 1.25 hours.|
|Improvements||63% reduction in labor||Customers received records three months earlier||84% reduction in labor|
*We received more requests in 2017 than in 2016, and still finished faster.
Wastewater Treatment Division (WTD)
Wastewater Treatment Plant Neighbors
About this measure: This is a measure of the percent of business and residential neighbors who consider wastewater treatment plants in their area to be a good neighbor. The survey results below represent data from the most recent survey conducted in 2013. This survey will completed next in the fourth quarter of 2015. The results from the future survey will be reported at that time.
2013 results: 75.7% consider WTD plants to be good neighbors
2013 target: > 75%
2014 target: > 75%
Influencing factors: Overall, both wastewater treatment plants, West Point and South Plant, have good relationships with their neighbors. The most common reasons residents and businesses say that King County has been a good neighbor continues to be the lack of noticeable impacts of the treatment plants, considering factors such as visibility of the facilities, odor, truck trips, landscaping, environmental impact and responsiveness to community concerns.
"Bad smell" remains the most common negative impact that residents experience. Strategies going forward: The top two priorities continue to be exploring new methods of odor control and responding to complaints within 24 hours.
WTD Customer Service Satisfaction by Local Sewer Agencies
About this measure: This measure tracks the degree of local sewer agency satisfaction with the customer service they receive from WTD staff, as rated in the annual Customer Feedback Survey. The survey results below represent data from the most recent survey conducted in 2013. This survey will be completed in the fourth quarter of 2015. The results from the latest survey are still being tabulated at this time.
2012 results: 4.16
2013 target: > 4.0 on a 1-5 scale
2014 target: > 4.0 on a 1-5 scale
Influencing factors: The overall rating of customer service satisfaction surpassed the target for the second time in 2013, which demonstrates the effectiveness of the overall strategy to continuously identify and address issues, maintain regular meeting schedules to ensure direct communication with customers and applying a customer centric viewpoint.
The highest rated factors making up the total customer satisfaction score were professionalism and courteousness of WTD staff, technical knowledge of staff, and staffs' knowledge of administrative procedures and requirements.
Strategies going forward: WTD will evaluate the complete results from the 2013 customer feedback survey, and evaluate any areas where needs for improvement are indicated. Through follow up with the customer agencies, WTD will identify actions to be implemented to make improvements and further increase customer satisfaction with WTD overall.