Sutton Residents Survey Report 040110
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Sutton Residents Survey Report 040110

on

  • 1,084 views

Results of the 2009 residents' survey

Results of the 2009 residents' survey

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,084
Views on SlideShare
1,079
Embed Views
5

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0

1 Embed 5

http://www.docshut.com 5

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title
  • Ipsos MORI: Report Title

Sutton Residents Survey Report 040110 Sutton Residents Survey Report 040110 Presentation Transcript

  • Title to go here Residents’ Survey 2009 London Borough of Sutton
  • Contents Background, methodology and technical notes……… slide 3 Executive summary……………………………………... slide 12 Key trends and areas of focus..……………………….. slide 15 1) Quality of life and the area………………………….. slide 22 2) Community safety……………………………………. slide 44 3) Local public services …. ……………………………. slide 53 4) Corporate Health …………………………………….. slide 62 5) Informing residents………………………………….... slide 77 6) Local democracy……………………………………... slide 88 7) Contacting the Council..………………..................... slide 95 8) Environmental issues ……………………………….. slide 103 9) Economic optimism………………………………….. slide 111 10) Safeguarding children……………………………… slide 117
  • Background
    • This report presents the findings from the 2009 Residents’ Survey conducted by Ipsos MORI on behalf of the London Borough of Sutton.
    • Having conducted several previous waves of residents’ research, this survey has an important role to play for the Council in terms of tracking residents’ satisfaction.
    • Specifically, the objectives of this survey were to:
      • measure residents’ satisfaction with the Council and the services it provides;
      • explore the attitudes of residents to the objectives of the Council; and
      • explore attitudes of residents to action taken by the Council.
  • Methodology
    • Ipsos MORI conducted interviews with 802 adults aged 16+ living in the London Borough of Sutton.
    • Interviews were conducted face-to-face using Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI).
    • Quotas were set on age, gender and work status to match the profile of the population of Sutton. Data are also weighted to these profiles.
    • Fieldwork took place between 5 th October and 19 th November 2009.
  • Technical note
    • Where results do not sum to 100, this may be due to multiple responses, computer rounding or the exclusion of don’t knows/not stated.
    • An asterisk (*) represents a value of less than one half or one percent, but not zero.
    • Throughout the questionnaire, local residents were asked to think about their local area when responding to questions - defined as the area within 15 to 20 minutes walking distance from the respondents’ home.
    • “Net” figures represent the balance of opinion on attitudinal questions and provides a useful means of comparing the data for a number of variables. (E.g. in the case of a “net agree” figure, this represents the percentage who agree about a particular issue, less the percentage who disagree. For example, if 38% of residents agree they can influence Council-run services, and 62% disagree, the “net agree” figure is -24.)
  • Guide to statistical reliability
    • The variation between the sample results and the “true” values (the findings that would have been obtained if everyone had been interviewed) can be predicted from knowledge of the sample sizes on which the results are based and the number of times that a particular answer is given.
    • For example, on a question where 50% of the people respond with a particular answer, the chances are 95 in 100 that this result would not vary, plus or minus, by more than 3.5 percentage points.
    • NB: Strictly speaking the tolerances shown here apply only to random samples; in practice good quality quota sampling has been found to be as accurate .
    Size of sample which survey result is based (802) 3.5 3.2 2.1    50% 30% or 70% 10% or 90% Approximate sampling tolerances applicable to percentages at or near these levels
  • Guide to statistical reliability 2
    • When results are compared between sub groups (e.g. males versus females), different results may be obtained. The difference may be “real”, or it may occur by chance (because not everyone was interviewed). To test if the difference is a real one - i.e. if it is “statistically significant” - we have to know the size of the samples, the percentage giving a certain answer and the degree of confidence chosen.
    • For example, if 50% of males (base size: 358) give a particular answer, and 53% of females (base size: 444) give the same answer, there is not a statistically significant difference between the responses of the two groups.
    • If however, 58% of females give the same answer, then this is a statistically significant difference (since there is more than a 7.0 percentage point difference between the two).
    11.0 10.1 6.6 709 White vs. 91 BME 7.0 6.4 4.2 358 males vs. 444 females    50% 30% or 70% 10% or 90% Differences required for significance at or near these levels
    • To inform our analysis, residents were placed into one of six Local Committee Areas based on the ward in which they lived. The breakdown used was as follows:
    • Beddington and Wallington:
      • Beddington North; Beddington South; Wallington North; Wallington South
    • Sutton:
      • Sutton Central; Sutton North; Sutton West
    • Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont:
      • Belmont; Cheam; Sutton South
    • Carshalton and Clockhouse:
      • Carshalton Central; Carlshalton South and Clockhouse
    • St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley:
      • St Helier; the Wrythe; Wandle Valley
    • Cheam North and Worcester Park:
      • Worcester Park; Nonsuch; Stonecut
    Area analysis
  • Sample Profile Women Sample Profile for Sutton: Key demographics Men 16-24 25-34 35-44 Residents’ Survey sample (unweighted) Population (Census 2008 mid-year estimates) 65+ Full-time Not full-time Gender Age Work status 55-64 Base: All valid responses. Source: Age and gender from 2008 Mid Year estimates. Work status from 2001 Census. 45-54 Base size 2009 358 444 60 127 146 161 136 172 338 464
  • Comparative data
    • Where possible, comparisons have been made between:
    • Sutton’s 2005 Residents’ Survey (based on 1,013 residents interviewed face-to-face between 20 th June and 12 th August 2005).
    • Sutton’s 2007 Residents’ Survey (based on 813 residents interviewed face-to-face between 12 th October and 19 th November 2007).
    • Sutton’s 2008/09 Place Survey (postal)
    • National and London-wide 2008/09 Place Survey (postal)
    • However, comparisons between the postal and face-to-face survey methodologies should be treated with caution due to the difference in collection methods, and the impact this has been shown to have on results. They should therefore be treated as indicative comparators only .
    • Please also note that where comparisons have been made between the 2009 Residents’ Survey and the 2008/09 Place Survey, the 2009 Residents’ Survey data has been re-based to include ‘all valid responses’ as prescribed by CLG for all Place Surveys.
    • For comparison, we have also included data from our normative database from other face-to-face surveys Ipsos MORI has carried out in London since 2006. This is anonymised, but we have shown on the charts which are inner London and which are outer London boroughs.
  • Acknowledgements and publication of data
    • Ipsos MORI would like to thank the 802 residents of Sutton who took part in the survey.
    • We would also like to thank Ben Unsworth from Sutton Council for his help in getting the questionnaire into field and for his input throughout the survey process.
    • As the London Borough of Sutton has engaged Ipsos MORI to undertake an objective programme of research, it is important to protect the organisation’s interests by ensuring that it is accurately reflected in any press release or publication of the findings. As part of our standard terms and conditions, the publication of the findings of this PowerPoint report is therefore subject to the advance approval of Ipsos MORI. Such approval will only be refused on the grounds of inaccuracy or misrepresentation.
  • Executive summary
  • Executive Summary: Local area and quality of life
    • The proportion of residents reporting satisfaction with the area remains at a high level (90%), and there has been an improvement in perceived safety after dark .
    • Cohesion also remains strong in Sutton, with more than eight in ten agreeing that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
    • Residents are most likely to cite activities for teenagers as most in need of improvement in the area, while crime is seen as the most important issue generally.
    • There have been some significant improvement in reported recycling behaviour, with more residents saying that they recycle a range of materials than in 2007.
  • Executive Summary: The Council and local services
    • The proportion of residents saying they are satisfied with Sutton Council remains broadly at the high level set in previous years (72%). This is particularly encouraging given the fall in satisfaction recorded nationally (and particularly in outer London) by the 2008/09 Place Surveys.
    • Furthermore satisfaction has also increased with some key Council-run services, such as street cleaning and secondary education, and parks and open spaces.
    • Despite this, the proportion of residents agreeing that the Council provides value for money has fallen since 2007 (from 44% to 40%) – this may be related to a drop in the proportion of residents saying that they feel informed by the services provided by the Council.
    • In line with 2007, around two in five residents feel that they can influence Council-run services. However, as in previous years, only one in five want to be more involved in doing do.
    • Of those who have contacted the Council, most are positive about their experience. There has been an increase in the proportion saying that they used the call centre to contact the Council from 2007, with fewer visiting Council offices in person.
  • Key trends and areas of focus
  • Key trends since 2005 – Quality of life
    • There has been little shift in the proportion saying the area is getting better since 2005, but fewer say the area has got worse than in previous years.
    • However, more residents feel safe walking alone in their local area after dark in 2009 than in 2007.
    • Sutton residents are as likely to agree in 2009 than in previous years that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
    84 82 81 Agree that residents from different backgrounds get on well 60 50 46 Feel safe after dark 2005 2007 2009 The area has got better to live in over the past two years 10 10 9
  • Key trends since 2005 – Sutton Council
    • The level of satisfaction with the Council overall has shown little change since 2005, but has maintained a relatively high level.
    • Likewise, the proportion of residents who do not see the Council as too remote and impersonal has not changed.
    • However, there has been a drop of four percentage points since 2007 in terms of perceived value for money.
    40 44 42 Council gives good value for money 35 36 36 Sutton Council is NOT remote and impersonal 72 69 67 Satisfaction with the way Sutton Council runs things 2005 2007 2009
  • Key trends since 2005 – Feeling informed and getting involved
    • The proportion of residents who want to get more involved is lower than in 2005, but has crept up slightly since 2007.
    • However, while there has been no change in residents’ perceived ability to influence Council-run services, the extent to which they feel informed by Sutton Council has dropped since 2007.
    38 35 35 Feel able to influence Council-run services 19 15 22 Would like to have more of a say in what the Council does 2005 2007 2009 Feel informed about the services and benefits provided by Sutton Council 61 58 45
  • Feeling informed and being engaged
    • Considering longer-term trends, residents’ views on whether they feel well informed, or would like to be more involved, may warrant particular attention:
    • One of the most significant falls in the 2009 survey is in the proportion of residents who feel informed about the services and benefits provided by Sutton Council : this has fallen from two-thirds (65%) of residents in 1999 to just under six in ten (58%) in 2007, and now sits at around two in five (45%). Furthermore, this compares slightly less favourably to other areas - half (49%) of those questioned in face-to-face surveys in Outer London Boroughs by Ipsos MORI in 2009 feel informed.
    • This is particularly important given that the majority of residents would like to know what the Council is doing, but are happy to let it get on with its job. Similar to 1999, six in ten agree with this statement (60% in 1999, compared to 62% in 2009).
  • Feeling informed and being engaged cont…
    • Despite a small rise from 2007, the proportion of residents who would like more of a say in what the Council does and the services it provides remains lower than in 1999 (24% in 1999, 15% in 2007 and 19% in 2009). Those who would like more of a say are more likely to be dissatisfied with their local area and with Sutton Council overall; so it is worth noting the small increase in desire for involvement since 2007.
    • Feeling informed about Council services and benefits is strongly related to higher levels of satisfaction with the local area, Sutton Council and perceived value for money. While satisfaction with the authority has risen, perceptions of value for money have slipped, and this may be linked to falling levels in the proportion of residents feeling informed.
    • There may be an opportunity to reverse this falling trend by making better use of the direct information provided by Sutton Council (which is accessed by half (51%) of residents) and the Council website (which one in three (32%) access).
  • Roads, pavements, traffic and parking
    • Again, looking at longer-term trends, there also appears to be particular concern about the use and state of Sutton’s roads and pavements:
    • Having risen between 2003 and 2007, satisfaction with road and pavement maintenance has fallen considerably in 2009. Given this is a highly visible service closely associated with the Council, it may be appropriate to target action in areas where these concerns are most prominent.
    • Close to three in ten (28%) feel that traffic congestion is an area most in need of improvement within Sutton. Furthermore, around a quarter (23%) feel that road repairs are also an area of concern.
    • When it comes to environmental issues, Sutton residents are most likely to feel that parking is a problem in their area. A third (33%) of residents cite this as a particular concern compared to a quarter (25%) in 2007. Speeding traffic remains the second highest individual concern (27% cite it as an issue). Dog fouling has also risen as a general concern (from 11% in 2007 to 16% in 2009).
    54 54 2003 50 63 57 Pavement maintenance % satisfied with 2005 2007 2009 Road maintenance 59 63 54
  • Main Findings 1: Quality of life and the area
  • Summary
    • Nine in ten residents (90%) are satisfied with their local area.
    • Most residents (60%) think that their local area has not changed much in the last two years. Although one in four (25%) think that it has got worse, this has declined from three in ten (29%) in 2007 and close to four in ten (37%) in 2005.
    • The level of crime (46%) , public transport (40%) and clean streets (39%) are seen as the most important things in making an area a good place to live.
    • However, with the exception of level of crime (27% of residents cite this) , the things most in need of improvement tend to differ from those seen as more important: these being activities for teenagers (31%) , traffic congestions (28%).
    • Linked to this, tackling crime and anti-social behaviour is the service most residents think is important to invest in (65%).
    • In line with previous years, more than eight in ten (84%) agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
  • 9 in 10 residents are satisfied with their local area Neither/nor Very satisfied Fairly dissatisfied Fairly satisfied Very dissatisfied Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live? Net satisfaction score +84 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Satisfied 90% Don’t know
  • Sutton performs well compared with other Boroughs, particularly those in outer London % Satisfied with area Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
  • And this compares favourably to the 8 in 10 recorded in the 2008/09 Place survey – and greater than outer London Q Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live? % Satisfied % Dissatisfied **Sutton 08/09 Place Survey Inner Outer London * Sutton 2009 Residents’ survey *Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (800) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1205). Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only Place Survey data 2008/09
  • 55-64 year olds, C2DE and social renting residents are less likely to be satisfied with their local area Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live? Dissatisfied Satisfied Age Socio-economic group 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Tenure Social rented Owner occupier Private rented Proportion who are satisfied 16-34 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Residents from St. Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley are less likely to feel satisfied with their local area Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park % Satisfied 92 92 94 93 81 87 % Dissatisfied 5 3 2 0 13 8 Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live? Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Base 179 152 124 76 134 137
  • What impacts on satisfaction with local area?
    • Perceptions of cohesion and safety appear to be related to satisfaction with local area: those who believe that people from different backgrounds get on well together and those who feel safe when walking outside after dark are more likely to be satisfied with their local area as a place to live that those who do not (92% and 93% compared to 72% and 87% respectively ).
    • Residents who feel informed about Sutton Council overall are also more positive, with more than nine in ten of those who feel informed being satisfied with their local area (94% compared to 86% of those who not feel informed).
    • Attitudes towards Sutton Council are also important: eight in ten (81%) of those who disagree that the Council provides value for money and six in ten who are dissatisfied with the Council overall (61%) are satisfied with their local area, compared with nine in ten overall (90%).
  • 1 in 4 (25%) think the area has got worse over the last 2 years, although this is fewer than in 2007 (29%) and 2005 (37%) Area has got better Area has not changed much Area has got worse Have lived here less than two years Q2 On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much? Don’t know/can’t remember -16 Net Better Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Got better % Not changed much % Got worse 2005 10 44 37 2007 10 49 29 2009 9 60 25
  • Although the proportion satisfied with the area is greater than elsewhere in London, in terms of perceived positive change, Sutton is performing worse than other London Boroughs % Believe the area has got better Q On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • Perceptions that the area has got worse increase with age; however male, BME and those renting privately are more positive Got worse Got better Age Gender Ethnicity 35-44 45-54 55-64 Male Female 65+ White BME Tenure Social rented Owner occupier Private rented Proportion who say ‘got worse’ 16-34 Q2 On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much? Not changed much Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Lived here less than 2 years / don’t know
  • Aspects of life that are seen as important are not necessarily the same as those that are seen as in need of improvement locally Q3 From the list, which four or five, if any, would you say are most important in making somewhere a good place to live? Q4 Thinking about this local area, which of the things below, if any, do you think most need improving ? The ‘Level of Crime’ is the most important issue (46%), activities for teenagers is the area most in need of improvement (31%) Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 The most important issues tend not to be those perceived as most in need of improvement
  • Level of crime is seen as the most important but activities for teenagers most in need of improving. Clean streets and housing are also priorities for residents % Most need improving locally % Important generally Cultural facilities Education Access to nature Public transport Community activities Sports & leisure Facilities for young children Parks and open spaces Wages/ cost of living Race relations Pollution Job prospects Health services Shopping Traffic congestion Road/pavement maintenance Affordable decent housing Clean streets Activities for teenagers Level of crime Mean: 21 Mean: 13 Most important Most needs improving Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • What needs improving locally – by Local Committee Area NB Residents in Carlshalton and Clockhouse, and Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont are more likely to say “none of these” (14% and 11% respectively, vs 5% overall) Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 28% Traffic congestion 24% Road and Pavement repairs 21% Affordable decent housing St. Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Activities for teenagers 41% Level of crime 30% 22% Level of crime 19% Road and Pavement repairs 15% Sports and leisure facilities Cheam North and Worcester Park Traffic congestion 39% Activities for teenagers 27% 18% Job prospects 17% Traffic congestion 15% Facilities for young children Carlshalton and Clockhouse Activities for teenagers 27% Road and Pavement repairs 24%
  • What needs improving locally – by Local Committee Area 19% Clean streets 17% Traffic congestion 14% Affordable decent housing Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Activities for teenagers 21% Level of crime 19% 25% Road and Pavement repairs 23% Clean streets 20% Affordable decent housing Sutton Level of crime 38% Activities for teenagers 28% 31% Road and Pavement repairs 31% Level of crime 24% The level of pollution Beddington and Wallington Traffic congestion 42% Activities for teenagers 36%
  • Tackling crime and anti-social behaviour is the top priority for residents in terms of investment priorities Q35. Which of these services do you think are the most important for the Council to invest in? Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Investment priorities differ by age Tackling crime and ASB is a particular concern for middle age groups; older residents are more likely to be concerned about support for the elderly; and younger age groups are more likely to be concerned about education and skills Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q35. Which of these services do you think are the most important for the Council to invest in?
  • In line with 2007, more than 8 in 10 agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together Definitely agree Tend to disagree Tend to agree Definitely disagree Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? Net agree score +76 Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Agree % Disagree Net agree 2005 81 7 +74 2007 82 10 +72 2009 84 8 +76
  • Cohesion appears to be a strength in Sutton, particularly when compared to outer London Boroughs % Agree Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • Perceptions of community cohesion are more positive than in the 2008/09 Place survey London Place Survey data 2008/09 Inner Outer Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? % Agree % Disagree **Sutton 08/09 Place Survey * Sutton 2009 Residents’ survey *Base: All excluding responses of “Don’t know”, “Too few people” and “All same backgrounds” (734) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (982). Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only
  • Carshalton and Clockhouse residents are the most likely to feel people from different backgrounds get on well together Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 +68 +71 +75 +77 +79 +93 Net agree 134 152 137 124 179 76 Base 8 85 7 82 10 81 % Agree % Disagree 96 3 85 6 81 13
  • White residents and those living in owner occupied homes are the most likely to agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? Disagree Agree Proportion who agree Ethnicity White BME Tenure Social rented Private rented Owner occupier Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Main Findings 2: Community safety
  • Summary
    • Almost all residents feel safe during the day (96%), although those living in social rented accommodation are less likely to say this.
    • Generally, levels of perceived safety after have improved since previous years. Around a third feel unsafe (32%) – this is highest in the Beddington/Wallington and St Helier areas.
    • Sutton compares well with other London Boroughs, both outer and inner, in terms of perceived safety.
    • In terms of being a victim of crime, residents are most likely to be worried about ASB (58%) – this is reflected in their priorities for policing in the area.
  • Around a third of residents feel unsafe at night, but more residents feel safe than in previous years Q68/69 How safe or unsafe do you feel when outside in your local area… % Never go out % Fairly safe % Fairly unsafe % Very unsafe During the day At night Women, BME residents, and social renters are more likely to feel unsafe in the day Women and those living in Beddington/Wallington and St Helier are more likely to feel unsafe after dark % Safe % Very safe % Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 2009 2007 2005 96 95 92 60 52 47
  • Perceived safety during the day is higher in Sutton than elsewhere in London % Safe Q How safe do you feel walking outside in this neighbourhood alone in the daytime? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • Sutton residents are also among the most likely to feel safe after dark in London, and much higher than other outer London Boroughs % Safe Q How safe do you feel walking outside in this neighbourhood alone after dark? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • Residents from the St. Helier, and Beddington /Wallington areas are more likely to feel unsafe after dark Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park % Unsafe 42 41 34 31 18 14 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q69 How safe or unsafe do you feel when outside in your local area alone after dark? Base 179 134 137 152 124 76
  • In line with 2007, around half say they feel safe on public transport after dark Very safe A bit unsafe Fairly safe Very unsafe Q70 How safe do you feel travelling on public transport in this area alone after dark? Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Never use Again, it is women and those living in Beddington/Wallington and St Helier who are more likely to feel unsafe % Safe % Unsafe 2005 35 31 2007 44 29 2009 48 28
  • Sutton residents are most concerned about anti-social behaviour, but around half are also concerned about burglary and vandalism % Not at all worried Q71-79 And now could you tell me how worried you are about being the victim of each of these crimes in the area? % Don’t know % Fairly worried % Not very worried % Worried % Very worried Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Burglary Anti-social behaviour Robbery in the street Vandalism Theft (incl contents of car) Theft of car Rape/sexual assault Attack (other than robbery or rape) Racist attacks 22 18 18 33 26 25 55 47 54 60 52 49 49 46 42 42 35 39 39 35 38 2009 2007 2005 58 64 71 35 37 42
  • This is reflected in preferred policing priorities Q80 Which two or three , if any, should be given the highest priority? Anti-social behaviour Drug related crime Town centre crime Sex offences Hate crimes Street robbery Vandalism Theft Disorder / disturbances Domestic violence Graffiti Other Don’t know (22) (26) (24) (13) (13) (7) (6) (2) (4) (18) (20) (37) (60) 2007 % Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Main Findings 3: Local Public Services
  • Summary
    • There is a high level of satisfaction with the majority of universal services in Sutton, but there appear to be concerns about road and pavement maintenance – while more are satisfied than dissatisfied, satisfaction has fallen since 2007.
    • In terms of leisure and cultural facilities, satisfaction is highest with libraries and parks and open spaces, and this has increased since 2007– this increases further among users.
    • Residents are also considerably more likely to be satisfied with education services than dissatisfied, particularly primary and secondary schools, and adult education.
    • Encouragingly, there is a high level of satisfaction with recycling and this has increased since 2007.
    • Parks and bus services are the most frequently used services, but others are also used often – two in five use libraries or sports facilities at least once a month, and a third use the local tip.
  • Universal services : residents are satisfied on balance, but there are some concerns over road and pavement maintenance, satisfaction with which has fallen since 2007. Significant increases in satisfaction since 2005 can be seen with street cleaning, and maintenance of grass verges and trees % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q5-12 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Street lighting Refuse collection Pavement maintenance Road maintenance Maintenance of trees Care of the environment Maintenance of grass verges Street cleaning (83) (88) (65) (57) (52) (62) (59) (57) (84) (81) (67) (62) (62) (60) (63) (63) 2007 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Education and care services : Satisfaction is highest with primary schools, with fewer residents expressing an opinion about childrens’ services and social services. A significant improvement can be seen in perceptions of secondary education. % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Primary schools Social services Adult education / SCOLA Services for under 5s* Secondary schools (29) (24) (45) (18) (n/a) (45) (38) (39) (28) (27) 2007 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 * Please note that, in 2007, the statement read “Borough services for the under 5s”
  • Leisure and cultural services : Residents are most satisfied with parks and open spaces – these have seen a significant rise in satisfaction since 2007. However, a decline in satisfaction can be seen with theatres, arts and events % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Parks and open spaces Theatres/arts/events Sports and swimming facilities Playgrounds Libraries (72) (69) (54) (40) (44) (75) (69) (55) (47) (48) 2007 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Users are more satisfied than the public at large % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Parks and open spaces (571) (76) (86) (81) (86) 2007 2005 Base: All users Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Libraries (320)
  • Environmental services : Levels of satisfaction with green garden waste are maintained from 2007, while satisfaction with recycling has increased % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Recycling Green garden waste (81) (69) (74) (56) 2007 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Other services : Again, levels of satisfaction are maintained from 2007 % Satisfied % Dissatisfied Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area? % Satisfied Register office Council housing / Sutton Partnership Housing* (31) (15) (39) (21) 2007 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 * Please note that, in 2005 and 2007, the statement read “Council housing”
  • Parks and local bus services are most likely to be frequently used, but around two in five also use sports facilities and libraries at least once a month Q27-34 Please indicate how frequently you have used the following public services provided or supported by Sutton Council Almost every day/At least once a week About once a month Within the last 6 months Within the last year Longer ago Never used/ don’t know Local tips/ household waste recycling centres Local bus services Parks/ open spaces Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % At least once a month Sports/leisure facilities Libraries Local transport info Theatres/concert halls Museums / galleries 32 63 73 39 39 34 6 5
  • Main Findings 4: Corporate health
  • Summary
    • Overall satisfaction with the Council is at a similarly high level to previous years (72%), and compares well with other London Boroughs. This is against a backdrop of decline in satisfaction with local authorities recorded in the 2008/09 Place Survey.
    • Although residents are less likely to speak highly of the Council, the balance is still positive – many would be neutral (49%).
    • Residents are more likely to disagree than agree that the Council is too remote and impersonal,
    • There has been a fall of four percentage points since 2007 in the proportion of residents agreeing that the Council provides value for money (from 44% to 40%).
    • There are some notable geographical differences, however, with those living in St Helier more likely to be negative about Sutton Council.
  • Around seven in ten residents are satisfied with the way the Council runs things Neither/nor Very satisfied Fairly dissatisfied Fairly satisfied Very dissatisfied Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things? Net satisfaction score +63 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Satisfied 2005 67 2007 69 2009 72
  • Sutton Council is outperforming other outer London Boroughs in this respect % Satisfied with the council Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • And satisfaction is higher than in the Place Survey % Satisfied % Dissatisfied **Sutton 08/09 Place Survey Inner Outer London Place Survey data 2008/9 * Sutton 2009 Residents’ survey National Average Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things? *Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (797) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205). Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only
  • C2DE and social renting residents are less likely to be satisfied with the Council Dissatisfied Satisfied Age Socio-economic group 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ ABC1 C2DE Tenure Social rented Owner occupier Private rented Proportion who are satisfied 16-34 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
  • Residents from St. Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley are least likely to feel satisfied with the Council Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things? % Satisfied 85 78 76 69 68 64 % Dissatisfied 4 7 7 5 13 17 Base 76 152 124 137 179 134
  • More residents would speak highly of the Council than negatively, but most would be neutral Be neutral if asked Speak highly without being asked Be critical if asked Speak highly if asked Be critical without being asked Q37 Which of the following statements comes closest to how you feel about Sutton Council? Net advocacy score +15 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Speak highly 33% ABC1 residents, and those living in the Carshalton and Clockhouse area, are more likely to be advocates of the Council (38% and 54% respectively compared to 33% overall).
  • As in previous years, most residents do NOT agree that the Council is too remote and impersonal Neither/nor Strongly agree Tend to disagree Tend to agree Strongly disagree Net agree score -9 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 No opinion Q48 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council is too remote and impersonal Social renters, and those who live in St Helier, are more likely to agree with this statement (35% and 34%). % Agree 2005 30 2007 26 2009 26
  • Value for money: two in five agree that the Council provides it – a slight decline on previous years Neither/nor Strongly agree Tend to disagree Tend to agree Strongly disagree Net agree score +15 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 No opinion Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money % Agree 2005 42 2007 44 2009 40
  • But, Sutton compares favourably with other London Boroughs in terms of perceived Council VfM % Agree Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • The Residents’ Survey result also compares well with the Place Survey Q49 To what extent do you agree with following statement: Sutton council gives local residents good value for money? % Agree % Disagree **Sutton 08/09 Place Survey Inner Outer London Place Survey data 2008/9 * Sutton 2009 Residents’ survey National Average *Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (782) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205). Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only
  • White residents, those not working full-time, and those aged 65 or over are more likely to agree that the Council provides VfM Disagree Agree Age Ethnicity 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ White BME Work status Not working FT Working FT Proportion who agree 16-34 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money
  • Residents from St. Helier, and Beddington / Wallington are most likely to DISAGREE that the Council provides value for money Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Agree 51 47 41 39 38 32 % Disagree 12 19 20 38 22 30 Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money Base 76 124 152 134 137 179
  • What impacts on satisfaction with Sutton Council and perceptions of value for money?
    • Perceptions of value for money and satisfaction with Sutton Council appear to be related. Three in ten (29%) of those who disagree that Sutton Council provides value for money are dissatisfied with the Council overall compared to just two per cent of those who agree .
    • Satisfaction with the Council is also higher among those who feel informed about the benefits and services it provides (87% satisfied vs 60% of those who do not feel informed).
    • Ability to influence Council-run services is also important. Eight in ten of those who feel able to influence services are satisfied with Sutton Council compared to two in three of those who do not feel able to do so (81% vs 65%).
  • Main Findings 5: Informing residents
  • Summary
    • As in the Place Survey, residents are most likely to say they feel informed about how to vote. However, they are more likely in the Residents’ Survey to feel informed about how public services are performing, the standards they should expect, how to influence decisions, and how to complain. They are also more likely to feel informed overall.
    • However, the proportion of residents saying they feel informed by the Council has fallen steadily over time (from 58% in 2007 to 45% in 2009), and Sutton now lags behind other London Boroughs in this respect. This is important when we consider the association between levels of being informed and satisfaction with the Council.
    • Residents obtain most of their information about the Council from the local authority itself, through newspapers, magazines and leaflets (51% say they receive information this way).
  • Residents are highly informed about registering to vote; they are least informed about how to get involved in local decision-making Q38-44 How well informed do you feel about each of the following? How and where to register to vote How your council tax is spent How you can get involved in local decision-making What standard of service you should expect How well local public services are performing How to complain about local public services What to do in a large-scale emergency Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 37 % Informed 80 48 47 45 45 40
  • Residents are more likely to say they feel informed about the performance and expected standards of local services in the Residents’ Survey than the Place Survey % Informed (Sutton Residents’) % Informed (Place – Sutton) How and where to register to vote How your council tax is spent How you can get involved in local decision-making What standard of service you should expect How well local public services are performing How to complain about local public services What to do in the event of a large scale emergency, eg pandemic flu % Informed (Place – LBs) Q38-44 How well informed do you feel about each of the following? *Base: All excluding “Don’t know”. Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09. Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only 770 802 773 769 768 769 776 Base Sutton Residents’* 1,033 1,250 1,108 Base Sutton Place** 123 1,072 1,198 1,108
  • About the same proportion of residents do feel informed about local services as those who do not Very well informed Not very well informed Fairly well informed Not well informed at all Q45 Overall, how well informed do you feel about local public services? Net informed score +6 Younger residents (aged 16-24), and those living in St Helier and Cheam North / Worcester Park , are most likely to say they are not informed (59%, 56% and 56% respectively, compared to 52% overall) Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • This is a more positive picture than that painted by the Place Survey % Satisfied % Dissatisfied **Sutton 08/09 Place Survey London Place Survey data 2008/9 * Sutton 2009 Residents’ survey National Average Q45 Overall, how well informed do you feel about local public services? *Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (800) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205). Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only
  • The extent to which residents feel informed by the Council about its services has fallen over time. This is important because we know that how well informed people are is associated with how satisfied they are with the Council Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides? 2009 Very/Fairly well informed 2007 2005 2003 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • And Sutton residents feel less informed by their local authority than elsewhere in London % Informed about council services Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides? Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
  • Older residents and those of higher socio-economic status are more likely to feel informed about the Council Not informed Informed Proportion who are informed Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides? Age Socio-economic group 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+ ABC1 C2DE 16-34
  • Residents from St. Helier, and Cheam North / Worcester Park, are least likely to feel informed about Sutton Council Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Informed 69 56 51 44 30 27 % Not informed 29 44 40 55 69 67 Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides? Base 76 152 124 179 134 137
  • Most residents obtain information about the Council from the authority’s own information channels Information provided by the council (newspaper, magazine, leaflets) Local media (newspapers, TV, radio) Council website / Internet Word of mouth (e.g. family / friends) Direct contact with the Council From a local councillor None of these Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q47 From which of the following sources, if any, do you obtain most of your information about Sutton Council and the services it provides? Those aged 55 and over are more likely to use Council information (60%), while those under 35 are most likely to use the Internet (42%).
  • Main Findings 6: Local democracy
  • Summary
    • Around two in five residents agree that they can influence Council-run services (38%) – this is in line with previous waves of the Residents’ Survey.
    • The majority of residents (62%) like to know what the Council is doing, but are happy to let it get on with its job. A relatively small proportion would actually like to be more involved (19%).
    • When considering how they would like to have a say in the running of services, the most popular means of doing so is to complete questionnaires (42%), although a similar proportion say they would attend public meetings (39%).
    • In terms of getting involved, two in five say that they would just like more information (42%). However, one in five would like more consultation (20%) and one quarter say they would like to get involved online (27%).
  • Residents are more likely to disagree that they can influence Council-run services than agree, with around one in six saying that they do not know Tend to disagree Tend to agree Definitely disagree Net agree score -7 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Don’t know Q66 To what extent do you agree or disagree that you can influence council run services within your local area? Definitely agree % Agree 2005 35 2007 35 2009 38
  • By local committee area, residents in the Carshalton / Clockhouse, Sutton South / Cheam /Belmont, and Sutton areas are most likely to agree that they can influence council services Beddington and Wallington Sutton Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Carshalton and Clockhouse St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley Cheam North and Worcester Park Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Agree 58 49 46 32 25 26 % Disagree 34 32 39 48 58 56 Q66 To what extent do you agree or disagree that you can influence council run services within your local area? Base 76 124 152 179 137 134
  • When it comes to the Council, although most want to be kept informed, few residents want to be involved Like to know what it’s doing but happy to let it get on with its job Already work for / involved with the Council Not interested in what it does or how it does its job Would like more of a say Not interested as long as it does its job Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 None/Don’t know Q64 Which of the following statements comes closest to your own attitudes towards Sutton Council? Although there are no differences by demographic sub groups, those living in the Carshalton / Clockhouse and St Helier areas are most likely to want to have more of a say (38% and 26% respectively compared to 19% overall). % Would like a say 2005 22 2007 15 2009 19
  • Two in five say they would like to have more of a say by completing questionnaires, with a similar proportion saying they would attend public meetings Completing questionnaires like this Attending local public meetings Meeting a local Councillor Contacting Sutton Council via email, website or text Phone call with a Councillor Other None of these Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q65 How would you personally prefer to have more of a say? White residents are more likely than BME residents to say that they would like either a meeting or phone call with a councillor (33% and 29%).
  • To be more involved, two in five say they would like more information, while a quarter would like to participate online By receiving more information about what the Council is doing Through the Council website / online Through more / better consultation By talking direct with Councillors Through talking direct with frontline Council staff None of these Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q67 And in which of the ways on this card, if any, would you like to get involved in the running of Council services within your local area?
    • Residents who are working full-time are more likely than those not doing so to want to get involved online
    • Those not working full-time are more likely to want to talk directly with Councillors
    • Residents from C2DE backgrounds are more likely than ABC1 residents to say they want to receive more information about what the Council’s doing.
  • Main findings 7: Contacting the Council
  • Summary
    • Of the 46% that have contacted the Council in the last two years, most have done so through the call centre (76%).
    • Those who have contacted the Council tend to be positive about staff – in particular, most report staff to have been helpful.
    • Residents are slightly less positive about the speed with which the council responded to their query (25% say that the authority was slow), and a similar proportion were dissatisfied the outcome of their contact (27%).
  • 46% of residents have contacted the council in the last two years. Of these, the majority used the telephone – significantly more than in 2007 % 2009 % 2007 Q51 How did you last get in contact with Sutton Council? % 2005 Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383) Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 * In 2007 and 2005, this option read ‘One Stop Shop’ +1 -2 -1 0 -4 -5 +2 -10 +11 % change from 2007
  • Of those who contacted the Council, three quarters say that they found staff to be helpful % Helpful % Unhelpful Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them… 2007 2005 2009 Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383). Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 472 330 383 Base: all who contacted the Council in the last two years
  • Seven in ten say that staff were interested in their problem % Interested in your problem % Uninterested in your problem 2007 2005 2009 Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them… Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383). Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 472 330 383 Base: all who contacted the Council in the last two years
  • Two thirds of those who have contacted the council say that staff were quick to respond, but a quarter say they were slow % Quick to respond % Slow to respond 2007 2005 2009 Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them… Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383). Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 472 330 383 Base: all who contacted the Council in the last two years
  • Seven in ten say that it was easy to get hold of the right person at the Council % Easy % Difficult 2007 2005 2009 Q53 Again, thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council, was getting hold of the right person easy? Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383). Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 472 330 383 Base: all who contacted the Council in the last two years
  • Two thirds were satisfied with the final outcome, although a quarter were dissatisfied % Satisfied % Dissatisfied 2007 2005 2009 Q54 And were you satisfied or dissatisfied with the final outcome? Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383). Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 472 330 383 Base: all who contacted the Council in the last two years
  • Main findings 8: Environmental issues
  • Summary
    • Residents are most concerned about parking (33%), and speeding traffic (27%) in their local area. Parking and dog fouling are seen as more problematic than in 2007.
    • More residents claim to recycle in 2009 than in 2007 – this increase applies to several items, particularly glass and garden waste. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the proportion saying that they compost garden waste since 2007.
    • This is reflected in the proportions saying they separate recyclables at the roadside – more so than in 2007.
    • There are mixed views over incentivising, but more residents say that this would encourage them to separate waste than do not (57% compared to 41%, in line with 2007 levels).
  • Parking and speeding traffic are the largest concerns for residents % Of most concern % Problems in your area Speeding traffic Fly tipping Noise pollution Dog fouling Parking Weeds Litter Vandalism Graffiti Congestion Mean: 20 Mean: 11 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Abandoned vehicles Air pollution Q55 Which of the following, if any, are problems in your area? Q56 Which one or two are of most concern to you?
  • Concern about parking, dog fouling and congestion have increased since 2007 % 2009 % 2007 Q56 Which one or two are of most concern to you? % 2005 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 -1 -2 +3 +5 -2 0 +8 Percentage point change from 2007
  • The proportion claiming to recycle has increased since 2007 in the case of all materials asked about, especially glass and garden waste Q57 Which of the following, if any, do you currently regularly recycle? Paper Cardboard Plastics Glass Steel & Aluminium Cans Textiles Green garden waste* Food waste Electrical items Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 2009 2007 2005 * Please note that, in 2007 and 2005, this statement read “Doorstep collection of green garden waste” +21 +7 +7 +1 +21 +17 +11 +16 +9 Percentage point change from 2007
  • Encouragingly, significantly more residents now say they already separate items for collection than in 2007, with most of the reminder willing to do so in future Q59-61 How willing, if at all, would you be to separate the following for collection at the kerbside? Food waste Glass Textiles +12 +28 +6 Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 % Change 2007-9 (Already do)
  • In line with 2007, residents appear receptive to being incentivised,– particularly younger residents and those in social rented accommodation Q62 To what extent would a financial incentive for separating those items for collection from your kerbside, encourage you to do so? Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Not very much A fair amount A great deal Not at all % A great deal/fair amount % Not very much / not at all Net great deal/fair amount 2007 57 40 +17 2009 57 41 +16
  • There has been an increase in the proportion of residents who compost. Older residents and those in owner occupied accommodation are more likely to do so Q63 Do you currently compost items such as vegetable peelings, grass cutting and prunings? Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 2007 2009
  • Main findings 9: Economic optimism
  • Summary
    • Residents are divided as to whether the economic condition of the country will improve over the next 12 months: three in ten believe it will improve (30%), a similar number feel the economy will get worse (29%), though residents are most likely to believe that things will stay the same (34%).
    • Sutton residents appear less positive than the national average where more than four in ten (44% October 2009 and 46% November 2009) believe that the economic condition of the country will improve compared to three in ten of Sutton residents (30%). However it should be noted that 2009 has been a particularly volatile year for measuring economic optimism.
    • Optimism about the economy is highest among male residents and those from BME backgrounds, those in full-time employment and who line in private rented or owner occupied accommodation.
  • Opinion is divided as to whether or not the economy will improve over the next 12 months Get worse Improve Stay the same Don’t know Q82 Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months? Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009
  • Sutton residents appear less positive than the national average recorded during fieldwork Ipsos MORI Political Monitor Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months? *EOI: Economic Optimism Index (improve minus get worse) in percentage points ** Oct Base : 996 British adults 18+, 16th-18th Oct ’09; *** Nov Base: 1,006 British adults 18+, 13th-15th Nov ’09 Sutton Residents’ Survey. Sutton residents 16+ (802), 5th October to 19th November 2009 Sutton Residents’ survey EOI* +1 Oct 2009** Nov 2009*** EOI* +23 EOI* +21 Improve Stay the same Get worse Don’t know
  • However, it should be noted that national economic optimism has been turbulent throughout 2009 Source: Ipsos MORI Political Affairs Monitor Jan ’09 – Dec ’09: c1,000 adults aged 18+ Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months? %
  • Those working full-time, males, BME residents and those not living in social housing are more likely to be optimistic Get worse Improve Proportion who think the economy will improve Working full-time Stay the same Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q82 Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months? Don’t know Work status Gender Ethnicity Not working full-time Male Female White BME Tenure Social rented Owner occupier Private rented
  • Main findings 10: Safeguarding children
  • The police and social services/the Council are seen as the most suitable organisations to contact if residents are concerned about the wellbeing of a vulnerable adult/child The police Social service/the Council Friends/neighbour/family of the vulnerable adult/child Healthcare services School/college Other (specify) I would not contact anyone Don’t know Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Q83 I would like you to imagine you were concerned about the wellbeing of a vulnerable adult or child you knew in your area. If you wanted to alert someone to the situation, who would you contact, if anyone?
  • By subgroup – gender, ethnicity and social group appear to impact on who residents would contact Males and those from BME backgrounds are more likely to contact the Police Male Female Male Female % the police % social services/the Council White BME ABC1 C2DE Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19 th November 2009 Females and those from ABC1 households are more likely to contact social services/the Council
  • © 2009 Ipsos MORI – all rights reserved