SATISFACTION SURVEY OF SERVICE REQUESTS IN THE CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS MOSQUITO CONTROL PROJECT SERVICE AREA – 2012

 

TIMOTHY D. DESCHAMPS, Executive Director

Central Mass. Mosquito Control Project

111 Otis Street Northborough, Massachusetts 01532

(508) 393-3055 deschamps@cmmcp.org

 

ABSTRACT

 

Member residents request assistance from the menu of services offered to them by CMMCP. Requests for adulticiding (spraying) and larval control are the most common forms of service requests we receive. We accepts these requests through a variety of means, primarily by telephone, but increasing more by the online service request form from the CMMCP website. Additional methods include personal visits to our office, phone calls on behalf of residents from town and/or state officials, and direct requests to our field staff. The CMMCP Commission requested a survey of resident who received service in 2012 to determine if our staff was meeting acceptable levels of customer satisfaction. This is the same survey that was done in 2005-2011 (excluding 2006). After compiling these results, we find that a majority of residents in our service area were satisfied with our control efforts and methods, which mirrors our results from previous years.

 

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

 

In 2012 we received 13,850 requests for service, ranging from adulticiding to larval control, a 6% decrease in service requests from 2011. 7,730 adulticiding calls were filtered (multiples removed) and placed into a separate database. Service calls were sorted according to town, and each town was tabulated for total requests received in 2012. These towns were then graphed to show which towns had the most calls. Each town was assigned a percentage according to this data. This percentage would determine the number of postcards sent to each town from the overall total. The CMMCP Commission decided that 1,500 postcards would be a representative sample of the service calls received this year (this is an increase of 500 over the first 3 surveys but the same as 2009, 2010 & 2011). The survey was designed to be as easy as possible for residents to access and complete. An online survey was created through SurveyMonkey, and the postcards would include unique identifiers that the residents would use. The postcards contained a blind weblink to the survey so that uninvited users would not be able to participate in the survey. Information such as how they contacted us, were the office and field staff helpful and informative, how long did they wait for service, was the service provided effective, and their overall satisfaction was measured. This study uses the same methodology as all previous resident surveys.

 

SURVEY FINDINGS

 

From 1,500 postcards mailed, 274 responses were received (18.2%). The results are outlined in this report.

 

1). In your most recent experience, how did you contact the Central Mass. Mosquito Control Project?

 

 

Number

Percent

Telephone

139

49.8%

Website

120

44%

In person

3

1.1%

Other

14

5.1%

Total

273

 

 

 

 

Comments: the website compares closely to the phone system as the most popular method of reaching our staff.

 

 

2). If by telephone or in person at the CMMCP office, were your questions or concerns answered to your satisfaction?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

143

96.6%

No

5

3.4%

Total

148

 

Comments: communication from the operators of the telephone system is clear and effective.

 

3). If by telephone, did you experience difficulty reaching our staff?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

15

10.3%

No

131

89.7%

Total

146

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: nearly 90% of residents polled did not experience any problems reaching our staff through the current system.

 

4). If through the website or e-mail, did you find the information you needed in a satisfactory manner?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

169

96%

No

7

4%

Total

176

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: nearly all respondents found the information they required on the website without difficulty.

 

5). Please give the approximate time you waited for service from your initial request:

 

 

Number

Percent

1-3 days

89

33%

3-5 days

83

30.7%

1 week

72

26.7%

2 weeks+

26

9.6%

Total

273

 

Comments: 82.52% were serviced within one week or less.

 

6). Did you find our response from your initial request to when you received service within a reasonable amount of time?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

259

94.9%

No

14

5.1%

Total

273

 

Comments: a majority thought that the response time was reasonable.

 

7). When you received service, did our field representative appear knowledgeable and competent about his/her profession?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

234

92.5%

No

19

7.5%

Total

253

 

Comments: Our staff projects a positive and professional image to the public. Of the respondents that said no, many stated they did not speak to a rep. from CMMCP

 

8). Were your questions and concerns answered by the Technician to your satisfaction?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

231

93.5%

No

16

6.5%

Total

247

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: most residents polled thought our Technicians answered their questions to their satisfaction.

 

9). Did you receive any written information (pamphlets, etc.) from our representative?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

215

80.5%

No

52

19.5%

Total

267

 

Comments: more residents are receiving our written information and this number has improved from year to year.

 

10). Did you find this information useful?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

212

95.9%

No

9

4.1%

Total

221

 

Comments: our written PR material is useful to residents when they receive it.

 

11). Did you request service more than once in 2012?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

125

46.1%

No

146

53.9%

Total

271

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: less than 1/2 of our service calls are repeat calls according to the residents polled.

 

12). If you requested additional service in 2012, was it because the original application was insufficient to meet your needs, or for a later re-treatment or follow up?

 

 

Number

Percent

Retreatment

113

82.5%

Insufficient

24

17.5%

Total

137

 

Comments: over 3/4 of our repeat calls are for additional service, not because the first application didn’t meet their needs.

 

13). Would you/did you recommend our service to others in the future?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

258

96.6%

No

9

3.4%

Total

267

 

Comments: nearly all residents polled would recommend our services to others.

 

14). In your opinion, did our application made your area better, worse, or had no effect?

 

 

Number

Percent

Better

234

88.6%

Worse

0

0%

No Effect

30

11.4%

Total

264

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: nearly all residents received relief from mosquitoes.

 

15). If you think your area improved, can you give an approximate length of time you experienced relief from mosquito annoyance?

 

 

Number

Percent

1-3 days

47

19.8%

3-5 days

36

15.2%

1 week

61

25.7%

2 weeks+

93

39.2%

Total

237

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments: nearly 2/3 of residents reported relief of 1 week or more, over a third report greater than 2 weeks of relief.

 

16). On average, our services cost $2.00 – $4.00 per person each year (withheld from local aid rec’d from the State). In your opinion, is this amount too high, too low, or sufficient?

 

 

Number

Percent

Sufficient

221

86.0%

Too Low

30

11.7%

Too High

6

2.3%

Total

257

 

Comments: most residents are satisfied with the assessments paid from local taxes for our services.

 

17). In which month or months do you recall receiving service?

 

 

Number

Percent

May

21

8%

June

59

22.5%

July

42

16%

August

53

20.2%

More than 1

87

33.2%

Total

262

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

18). Overall, are you happy with the service provided this year by CMMCP?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

246

91.1%

No

24

8.9%

Total

270

 

Comments: 9 out of 10 residents were happy with the services provided by CMMCP in 2012.

 

19). Do you plan on using our service again in the future?

 

 

Number

Percent

Yes

264

98.1%

No

5

1.9%

Total

269

 

 

Comments: nearly all residents that used our service will do so again in the future.

 

Please rate our performance for 2012 from 0 to 5, where 5 is the best rating, 0 is the worst rating:

 

QUESTION

POINTS

AVERAGE

The information you received over the phone was informative & helpful

629 points from 735

(147 respondents)

4.28 average from 5

The information on our website is easily available and helpful

761 points from 905

(181 respondents)

4.2 average from 5

The response time for service is reasonable

1,107 points out of 1,325 (265 respondents)

4.2 average from 5

Our field staff that responded is knowledgeable and competent

1,078 points out of 1,205 (241 respondents)

4.49 average from 5

The service provided was effective

971 points out of 1,290

(258 respondents)

3.83 average from 5

This service is reasonable compared to the cost

907 points out of 1,065

(213 respondents)

4.27 average from 5

Please rate your overall satisfaction with the service received in 2009

1,102 points out of 1,325 (265 respondents)

4.19 average from 5

 

Total satisfaction rating: 6,555 points out of 7,850 possible – 4.21 average

1,570 total responses

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

Overall satisfaction was 91.1%, and 98.1% would use our services again in the future. Answers to question #5 shows a 10% reduction in response time from 2011, and question #9 shows a steady result over past years in regards to residents receiving public relations materials. Overall this survey shows high satisfaction amongst the respondents, with some variability in some ratings than in past surveys.