Residents’ Survey 2022 HTML version

1.1 Background

In summer 2022 Arun District Council commissioned BMG to undertake research in order to understand residents’ views on their local area and their perceptions of, and satisfaction with, Arun District Council.

The views of residents were collected via two methods: a randomly sampled postal survey and an open online survey only accessible to Arun residents. This research was conducted in July and August 2022.

1.2 Methodology

The approach adopted for the 2022 postal survey mirrored that used in 2021. Using the Royal Mail’s Postal Address File (the most complete source of residential addresses available), 3,000 addresses were selected at random across the district to receive a short questionnaire by post. This questionnaire included details of how the survey could be completed online. The distribution of the selected addresses was checked against ward population data and IMD quartiles to ensure that the sample selection was spatially representative. Mid way through the survey period, any address that had not returned a survey to BMG Research was sent a reminder letter and a fresh version of the questionnaire in order to maximise the response rate. Overall, 845 questionnaires were completed and returned to BMG, representing a total response rate of 28%. This is in line with the 28% response rate recorded in the equivalent residents’ survey completed in 2021.

A sample of 845 is subject to a maximum standard error of +-2.8% at the 95% confidence level on an observed statistic of 50%. Thus, we can be 95% confident that if a census of Arun residents had been conducted and the whole population had responded, the actual figure would lie between 47.2% and 52.8% respectively.

In order to ensure all Arun residents had the opportunity to provide their feedback an open version of the survey was provided.

The open online survey has been created using the same questionnaire as per the postal survey. An URL was set up by BMG which was advertised on Arun council’s website. Respondents were asked to enter their home postcodes prior to starting the survey. A postcode verification method ensured responses were from Arun residents. Overall, 522 surveys were completed via the open online survey.

BMG used information such as responses with identical postcodes as well as IP addresses and demographics information such as age and gender to identify and differentiate responses given by an individual who already answered the survey, or individuals using the same internet connection or device as another respondent.

None were suspected to be duplicated responses.

The data collected has been subsequently weighted by area and, within each area, by age and gender. The exact profile of the data prior to weighting and after weighting can be reviewed in the profile summary within the final section of this written report.

Upon inspection of the data BMG noted that the sample of those from the open online survey is a bias sample of those who are more likely to engage with Arun council. Therefore, BMG has decided to treat the two samples, of the open online survey and the postal survey, separately from each other and to report the results separately.

1.3 Report contents and analysis

This report outlines the findings from the research into experiences of living in Arun, and perceptions of the Council. Where possible these findings are contextualised within the Priority Themes contained within the Corporate Plan 2018-2022. The main body of the report shows the results from the closed survey, open survey results are noted at the end of the report.

Throughout the data report, area analysis has been used. Wards have been grouped together into the three areas shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Area definitions

Area definitions

Western	Eastern	Downland
Aldwick East	Beach	Angmering and Findon
Aldwick West	Brookfield	Arundel and Walberton
Bersted	Courtwick with Toddington	Barnham
Felpham East	East Preston	Yapton
Felpham West	Ferring
Hotham	River
Marine	Rustington East
Middleton-on-Sea	Rustington West
Orchard
Pagham
Pevensey

Throughout this report the word ‘significant’ is used to describe differences in the data. This indicates where the data has been tested for statistical significance. This testing identifies ‘real differences’ (i.e. differences that would occur if we were able to interview all residents in Arun rather than just a sample). Within tables in this report, all figures highlighted are significantly higher (green) or lower (red) compared to the total.

The data in the report is benchmarked against the Local Government Association’s national public polling on resident satisfaction with local councils. This benchmarking is included wherever consistent question wording was used to allow for the comparison with a national dataset. These surveys are conducted every four months, and the data used for benchmarking in this report is from the latest survey which took place in June 2022.

The Local Government Association June 2022 survey consists of data from a representative random sample of 1,002 British adults (aged 18 or over). It is important to note that the LGA polling was carried out by telephone, rather than the postal methodology used for this research. There may a difference in the findings produced by the self-completion methodology used in this research (i.e., postal or online) compared to an interview administered survey on the phone, as used by the Local Government Association. Self-completion surveys can produce less inhibited, more critical responses. The impact of this on the findings, if any, cannot be quantified, but should be considered when comparing the datasets. Throughout the report, data from the June wave 32 of the Local Government Association’s national public polls is referred to as the “LGA Benchmark.”

Where tables and graphics do not match exactly to the text in the report this occurs due to the way in which figures are rounded up (or down) when responses are combined. For example, in section 3.3, for the value for money metric, in the data 6.80% strongly agree, 41.67% tend to agree and combined 48.47% agree, however when rounded, this is shown in this report that 7% strongly agree, 42% tend to agree and combined 48% agree. Results that differ in this way should not have a variance which is any larger than 1%.

The responses are shown as a percentage out of the valid total for the question. The terminology ‘valid responses’ indicates the total number of responses after having removed responses of those who chose options such as “don’t know” and of those who did not respond to the question. Therefore, the sample sizes for the 2022 data might vary across different questions, and the responses may not always sum to 100%.

To understand the everyday experiences of residents in Arun, respondents were asked about their perceptions of their local area. Given perceptions of the local area tends to inform satisfaction with the Council, this is important context in which to view satisfaction. Understanding residents’ experiences of their local area can also be used to instruct Council decisions regarding services and resources. Therefore, Arun residents were asked, “Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?”

2.1 Overall satisfaction

Overall satisfaction levels are high, with 80% percent of residents saying they are either very satisfied or fairly satisfied with their local area (15-20 minutes walking distance of their home) as a place to live. This result is in line with the results seen in 2021 (80% cf. 81%) and the LGA benchmark of 81%.

Figure 1: Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live? (All valid responses: 821)

• Very satisfied 30%
• Fairly satisfied 50%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 9%
• Fairly Dissatisfied 6%
• Very dissatisfied 5%

Summary:

• satisfied 80%
• dissatisfied 11%

Residents from Eastern areas are significantly more satisfied with the local area as a place to live (84%) than the average while those who live in Western are significantly less satisfied (75%). Although residents in Download have satisfaction levels in line with Eastern (84%), they are not significant compared to the total.

Residents who are over 65 are significantly more satisfied with their local area as a place to live (87%).

Unsurprisingly, satisfaction with the local area as a place to live and the cleanliness of the local area are highly correlated: of the residents who are satisfied with the local areas, 91% are satisfied with the cleanliness, this drops to 3% for those who are dissatisfied with their local area.

2.2 Key drivers’ analysis for satisfaction

The key driver analysis (KDA) helps to show and explain the elements that drive satisfaction among residents.

Reading the results:

• A – Weak Driver High Satisfaction: Focus on maintaining satisfaction levels here
• B – Weak Driver, Low Satisfaction: Focusing on improving position here will not have a significant impact on the overall Group score
• C – Strong Diver. High Satisfaction: Aim to improve satisfaction scores of questions in red box to here. And maintain position
• D – Strong Driver, Low Satisfaction: Focusing on improving satisfaction in these questions should result in an improvement in overall satisfaction score.

Figure 1.1: KDA analysis of satisfaction

A. Weak driver, high satisfaction:

• Satisfaction with waste collection and recycling
• Satisfaction with parks and open spaces

B. Weak driver, low satisfaction

• Satisfaction with the overall cleanliness of the district
• Cleanliness of public toilets

C. Strong driver, high satisfaction

• Satisfaction with local area as a place to live

D. Strong driver, low satisfaction

• Trust the council to make the right decision
• Provides value for money
• Acts on the concerns of local residents

For Arun residents, the “Satisfaction with local area as a place to live”, “Satisfaction with waste collection and recycling”, “Satisfaction with parks and open spaces” and “Satisfaction with the overall cleanliness of the district” are weak drivers of satisfactions. Satisfaction with the local area as a place to live is the only metric that borders on being a strong driver and whilst being high in satisfaction. Conversely, “Provides value for money”, “Trust Council to make the right decision” and “Acts on concerns of local residents” are strong drivers with low levels of satisfaction. As these three metrics have the highest relative importance on satisfaction levels, they are the three areas we would recommend the council to examine to increase positive perceptions.

When looking at the three strong drivers of low satisfaction “Provides value for money” has a higher relative importance when it comes to impact the levels of satisfaction compared to “Trust Council to make the right decision” and “Acts on the concerns of local residents”.

2.3 Community cohesion

To understand more about residents’ daily lives, they were asked whether they agree that their local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together. Just over half of the respondents (54%) agree, while 17% disagree. The majority of those who agree said they ‘tend to agree’, with just under 1 in 10 respondents agreeing strongly. A high proportion of respondents (30%) selected the neutral option for this question. As such, there may be an opportunity for the Council and its partners to improve the sense of community cohesion with future initiatives, as currently residents are fairly ambivalent on this issue. Results for this question are in line with those seen in 2021 for agreement, neither and disagreement (agree – 54% cf. 55%, neither – 30% cf. 29%, disagree – 17% cf. 16%).

It is interesting to note that both employed and unemployed, sick, disabled or a homemaker residents, both, significantly disagree that people from different backgrounds get on well together in Arun (21% and 35%). While the sample base size for the unemployed subgroup of respondents is just 35, the shared view point of both employed and unemployed residents suggest that a closer look is needed into why this is happening.

Figure 2: Q7. To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together? (All valid responses: 700)

• Strongly agree 7%
• Tend to agree 47%
• Neither agree nor disagree 30%
• Tend to disagree 12%
• Strongly disagree 5%

Summary:

• satisfied 54%
• dissatisfied 17%

Disagreement is higher among those aged under 45 (28% cf. 17% at a total respondent level and 7% among the over 65s), which is also similar to result seen in 2021. Disagreement is also significantly higher for residents living in the Western areas (22%) and tenants in council and housing association housing (41%).

2.4 Cleanliness of Arun District

Customer satisfaction with the cleanliness of the district is of crucial importance to the Council. As part of the Council’s Corporate Plan for 2018-2022 it has sought to improve satisfaction with the cleanliness of the district by delivering the best services possible in this regard. Residents were therefore asked about their levels of satisfaction with the cleanliness of the places that the Council has responsibility for.

Two thirds (66%) of respondents are satisfied with the cleanliness of the district, with majority being fairly satisfied (54%), whilst one in five (19%) are dissatisfied. This is in line with satisfaction seen in 2021 (66% cf. 63%).

By area, those who live in Downland are significantly more satisfied with cleanliness (77%) whilst those in Western are significantly less satisfied (59%).

Figure 3: Q10. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the overall cleanliness of the district? (All valid responses: 813)

• Strongly agree 12%
• Tend to agree 54%
• Neither agree nor disagree 15%
• Tend to disagree 14%
• Strongly disagree 5%

Summary:

• satisfied 66%
• dissatisfied 19%

2.5 Cleanliness with different places in Arun

In order to pinpoint particular areas for improvement, respondents were then asked how satisfied they were with the cleanliness of different facilities in the district. Notably, there are high levels of satisfaction with the cleanliness of parks (77%) and beaches/ promenades (75%). Satisfaction with the cleanliness of town and village shopping centres is 2% points higher than for out-of-town facilities (69% cf. 67%); however, dissatisfaction with town/village shopping centres is also higher (18%, cf. 10% for out-of-town facilities). 65% of residents are satisfied with car parks and 60% are satisfied with residential roads. The lowest levels of satisfaction are with public toilets (41%), with 31% of respondents being dissatisfied which is a significant increase of 19 percentage points in dissatisfaction since 2021.

Figure 4: Q11. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the level of cleanliness of the following places within the district? (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

Parks and open spaces (744)

• Very satisfied 18%
• Fairly satisfied 60%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 12%
• Fairly dissatisfied 8%
• Very dissatisfied 2%

Beaches and promenades (785)

• Very satisfied 19%
• Fairly satisfied 56%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 13%
• Fairly dissatisfied 8%
• Very dissatisfied 4%

Town/village centre shopping areas (805)

• Very satisfied 17%
• Fairly satisfied 53%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 12%
• Fairly dissatisfied 12%
• Very dissatisfied 6%

Out of town shopping areas (695)

• Very satisfied 13%
• Fairly satisfied 53%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 23%
• Fairly dissatisfied 8%
• Very dissatisfied 3%

Car parks (759)

• Very satisfied 12%
• Fairly satisfied 53%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 24%
• Fairly dissatisfied 8%
• Very dissatisfied 3%

Residential roads (805)

• Very satisfied 13%
• Fairly satisfied 47%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 18%
• Fairly dissatisfied 13%
• Very dissatisfied 9%

Public toilets (615)

• Very satisfied 9%
• Fairly satisfied 32%
• Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 28%
• Fairly dissatisfied 18%
• Very dissatisfied 13%

The 2020 iteration of this report noted the success of the Council’s plans to improve residents’ perceptions of the cleanliness of the district.

This success continues to be evident in certain places, with satisfaction levels remaining high and in line with the results seen in 2021.In the below table showing satisfaction with cleanliness over time, we can see there has not been a significant change is satisfaction for different places within Arun since 2021.

Table 2: Satisfaction with cleanliness over time (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

Proportion satisfied

Cleanliness of...	2013 (510)	2014 (515)	2015 (399)	2016 (574)	2017 (473)	2018 (585)	2019 (579)	2020 (611)	2021 (806)	2022 (805)
Parks and open spaces	75%	72%	76%	79%	73%	70%	74%	79%	79%	77%
Beaches and promenades	69%	70%	71%	68%	74%	67%	77%	78%	72%	75%
Town/village centre shopping areas	66%	63%	67%	68%	69%	62%	65%	69%	70%	69%
Out of town shopping areas	62%	62%	61%	65%	62%	62%	62%	59%	67%	67%
Car parks	58%	63%	62%	64%	60%	55%	58%	60%	63%	65%
Residential roads	54%	59%	57%	56%	54%	50%	57%	66%	59%	60%
Public toilets	34%	36%	34%	34%	29%	25%	36%	35%	43%	41%

Looking satisfaction with cleanliness in all of the listed places, the data evidences some variation in level of satisfaction across all areas. Residents in Downland are significantly more satisfied with the cleanliness of the town or village centre shopping (79% cf. 69%) along with those from Eastern areas (75% cf. 69%). Residents from Eastern areas are significantly more satisfied with the majority of spaces in Arum including parks (83% cf. 77%), out of town shopping (74% cf. 67%), car parks (73% cf. 65%) and public toilets (54% cf. 41%). Residents from the Western areas are significantly more dissatisfied with the cleanliness of all the listed spaces apart from parks and open spaces. As the Council prioritises the improvement of cleanliness, it may be worth allocating resources in Western areas to tackle these issues. However, it should be noted that residents were asked about their satisfaction with these places across Arun district as a whole, so respondents may be thinking of places outside of their immediate neighbourhoods.

Younger residents aged under 45 are significantly more dissatisfied with the town or village centre shopping (27% cf. 18%) and public toilets (41% cf. 31%). Residents aged 45 to 64 are significantly more dissatisfied with the cleanliness of parks and open spaces (17% cf. 11%) and beaches and promenades (18% cf. 12%).

Additionally, residents with children are less likely to be satisfied with parks (68% cf. 77%), public toilets (28% cf. 41%) and car parks (54% cf. 65%).

The below table shows satisfaction with cleanliness by area and age, green indicates a figure significantly higher than the total average for the sample, while red indicates a figure significantly lower

Table 3: Satisfaction with cleanliness by age and location (All valid responses: base size in parenthesis)

Table 3

	Total	18-44	45-64	65+	Downland area	Western area	Eastern area
Parks and open spaces (774)	77%	77%	70%	84%	75%	73%	83%
Beaches and promenades (785)	75%	79%	70%	77%	78%	71%	78%
Town/village centre shopping areas (805)	69%	60%	67%	78%	79%	61%	75%
Out of town shopping areas (695)	67%	66%	64%	71%	64%	62%	74%
Car parks (759)	65%	61%	61%	71%	66%	58%	73%
Residential roads (805)	60%	55%	60%	65%	66%	54%	65%
Public toilets (615)	41%	28%	40%	56%	45%	30%	54%

2.6 Problem behaviours in Arun

As well as being asked their views on the cleanliness of their local area, residents were asked whether any antisocial behaviours are a problem. The most prominent issues identified are people using or dealing drugs, and rubbish and litter, with at least two fifths of respondents identifying each as a problem (43% and 39%). A third (32%) noted drunkenness as a relatively common problem which has significantly increased since 2021 by 5 percentage points (32% cf. 27%), followed by graffiti and vandalism which has also seen an increase since 2021 (30% cf. 26%). There is little evidence of noisy neighbours or parties being an issue with just 15% respondents saying this is a problem.

Levels of problematic behaviour have mainly stayed in line with results seen in 2021, apart from the significant increase in people being drunk and rowdy.

It is worth noting that the prevalence of all of these issues has increased since the 2020 iteration of this survey, significantly so for people using and dealing drugs (43% cf. 21%), rubbish and litter (39% cf. 21%), vandalism (30% cf. 13%) and drunkenness (32% cf. 18%). The proportion of respondents citing noisy neighbours as a problem has also increased by 10% points since 2020 (15% cf. 5%).

However, it should be taken into consideration that the 2020 research was carried out from April to March 2020 during the coronavirus national lockdown imposed by the UK Government which limited residents interacting with people outside of their household. Although it is not possible to ascertain to what extent, if at all, the responses of residents were influenced by the unique circumstances that the lockdown period produced, this would have also limited the frequency of problems residents faced with anti-social behaviour.

Figure 5: Q8. Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are? (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

People using or dealing drugs (636)

• A very big problem 17%
• A fairly big problem 26%
• Not a very big problem 26%
• Not a problem at all 31%
• Total problem 43%

Rubbish or litter lying around (796)

• A very big problem 14%
• A fairly big problem 25%
• Not a very big problem 44%
• Not a problem at all 16%
• Total problem 39%

People being drunk or rowdy in public places (729)

• A very big problem 14%
• A fairly big problem 18%
• Not a very big problem 32%
• Not a problem at all 36%
• Total problem 32%

Vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles (781)

• A very big problem 11%
• A fairly big problem 19%
• Not a very big problem 43%
• Not a problem at all 27%
• Total problem 30%

Noisy neighbours or loud parties (798)

• A very big problem 4%
• A fairly big problem 11%
• Not a very big problem 40%
• Not a problem at all 45%
• Total problem 15%

Overall, there are few significant differences in prevalence of these issues by area. However, residents in the Western areas are significantly more likely to note a significant increase in several problems since 2021:

• 45% of respondents from the Western areas see rubbish and litter as a problem, compared to 39% of the total sample. 18% of these respondents describe rubbish and litter as a very big problem, this is higher when compared to just 14% of the total sample.
• Additionally, 55% of respondents from the Western areas view the using and dealing of drugs in their area as a problem, this is higher compared to 43% of the total sample. 34% of these respondents describe using and dealing drugs as a fairly big problem in their area, which again, it is higher when compared to just 26% of the total sample.
• 40% of the Western area said drunkenness is a problem (cf. 32% of total respondents), with most (23%) saying that it is a fairly big problem which is higher than the 18% of the total sample.

The significant increase in problematic behaviour in the western areas since 2021 compared to the average indicate that more attention is needed to tackle the issues residents are facing which will ultimately increase overall satisfaction of residents from Western areas.

Within the broader context outlined above, the rest of this report explores residents’ perceptions of the Council and its services. Initially, residents were asked about their overall satisfaction with Arun District Council. It should be noted that the wording of this question has changed since 2019, where residents were asked ‘Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Arun District Council runs the things they are responsible for?’, as opposed to ‘How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the overall quality of the Council’s services?’ in the current iteration.

3.1 Satisfaction with quality of service

63% of respondents are satisfied with the quality of service provided by Arun District Council. This is a significant decrease from last year’s findings (-5% points). One in five (20%) of respondents are dissatisfied against this metric.

Figure 6: Q2. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the overall quality of the Council’s services? (All valid responses: 803)

• Strongly agree 14%
• Tend to agree 49%
• Neither agree nor disagree 17%
• Tend to disagree 14%
• Strongly disagree 6%

Summary:

• satisfied 63%
• dissatisfied 20%

Those aged 65+ are significantly more likely to be satisfied with the local Council when compared to the total average (79% cf. 63%), as are those who are satisfied with the cleanliness of their local area (79%), and who agree that the Council provides value for money (86%). Residents who rent from the council are significantly less satisfied (46% cf. 63%) with the overall quality of the council services.

3.2 Satisfaction with specific Council services

To understand what is driving satisfaction with the Council, residents were asked about specific services that the Council offers.

Satisfaction across services is high, especially for waste collection and recycling, a facet of the Your Future priority. Half of respondents (50%) are very satisfied with waste collection and recycling, and 83% are satisfied overall. Although not directly comparable due to differences in the wording, the closet LGA comparison, satisfaction with waste collection, is 81%, putting satisfaction with the service provided by Arun District Council in line with the national average while satisfaction with parks and open spaces for the LGA benchmark is 82% which puts Arun slightly behind. Council-owned leisure centres have lower levels of satisfaction (66%) staying in line with 2021 (64%). Overall, the level of satisfaction with Council services continues to evidence successful implementation of high-quality services against the of the corporate Plan 2018-2022.

Figure 7: Q9. The following services are provided by Arun District Council. Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are overall with Arun District Council’s performance for each of them (All valid responses: basis in parenthesis)

Waste collection and recycling (819)

• Strongly agree 50%
• Tend to agree 33%
• Neither agree nor disagree 9%
• Tend to disagree 6%
• Strongly disagree 2%

Parks, open spaces and play areas (772)

• Strongly agree 25%
• Tend to agree 53%
• Neither agree nor disagree 14%
• Tend to disagree 6%
• Strongly disagree 1%

Council owned Leisure centres (519)

• Strongly agree 25%
• Tend to agree 41%
• Neither agree nor disagree 23%
• Tend to disagree 7%
• Strongly disagree 3%

Looking at the long-term, the data shows that satisfaction with refuse collection has remained consistently high, and this year it returned to the levels recorded in 2019, in line with 2021. Satisfaction with parks, open spaces and play areas, and council owned leisure centres has remained in line with 2021.

Figure 8: Q9. The following services are provided by Arun District Council. Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are overall with Arun District Council’s performance for each of them (All responses: base sizes vary)

Waste collection and recycling

• 2013 85%
• 2014 85%
• 2015 92%
• 2016 86%
• 2017 89%
• 2018 90%
• 2019 85%
• 2020 91%
• 2021 84%
• 2022 83%

Parks, open spaces and play areas

• 2013 65%
• 2014 71%
• 2015 71%
• 2016 71%
• 2017 71%
• 2018 66%
• 2019 77%
• 2020 80%
• 2021 76%
• 2022 78%

Council owned leisure centres

• 2019 50%
• 2020 49%
• 2021 64%
• 2022 66%

Those aged 65 and over and residents aged 45 to 64 are significantly more likely to be satisfied with waste collection and recycling services (92%, cf. 83% of the total sample and 89% cf. 83% respectively), while those aged 18-44 are significantly less likely to be satisfied (65%). Residents aged over 65 also show a higher satisfaction level with parks and open spaces (86% cf. 78%). Residents in Western areas are significantly more likely to be less satisfied with all three council services while those in Eastern areas are significantly more likely to be more satisfied with these measures. In the below table, showing satisfaction with Council services by age and area, green indicates a figure significantly higher than the total average for the sample, while red indicates a figure significantly lower.

Table 4: Satisfaction with Council services by age and area (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

Waste collection and recycling (819)

• Total 83%
• Age 18-44 65%
• Age 45-64 89%
• Age 65+ 92%
• Downland area 86%
• Western area 78%
• Eastern area 87%

Parks, open spaces and play areas (772)

• Total 78%
• Age 18-44 77%
• Age 45-64 77%
• Age 65+ 86%
• Downland area 76%
• Western area 75%
• Eastern area 84%

Council owned Leisure centres (519)

• Total 66%
• Age 18-44 63%
• Age 45-64 70%
• Age 65+ 70%
• Downland area 71%
• Western area 54%
• Eastern area 76%

3.3 Value for money

In order to gain a greater depth of understanding of residents’ perceptions of Council services, respondents were asked to consider whether they feel the Council provides value for money. To frame responses to this question, all respondents were reminded that Arun’s 2022/23 Council Tax is £3.78 per week for a Band D dwelling.

48% of respondents agree that the Council provides value for money, with most (42%) tending to agree. Agreement levels are in line with 2021. This compares favourably with the LGA benchmark figure as satisfaction levels are in line (48% cf. 45% agreement). A quarter (24%) of respondents disagree with this statement, which has dropped slightly since 2021.

As demonstrated in figure 10, both agreement and disagreement that Arun Council provides value for money have remained stable since 2021. Still, 28% neither agree nor disagree with this statement, indicating that there is still a certain level of ambiguity about this statement.

Figure 9: Q3. To what extent do you agree or disagree that Arun District Council provides value for money? (All valid responses: 779)

• Strongly agree 7%
• Tend to agree 42%
• Neither agree nor disagree 28%
• Tend to disagree 19%
• Strongly disagree 5%

Summary:

• satisfied 48%
• dissatisfied 24%

Figure 10: Q3. To what extent do you agree or disagree that Arun District Council provides value for money? - Over time (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

2013 (510)

• Agree 58%
• Disagree 20%

2014 (515)

• Agree 56%
• Disagree 16%

2015 (399)

• Agree 61%
• Disagree 16%

2016 (574)

• Agree 49%
• Disagree 15%

2017 (473)

• Agree 54%
• Disagree 17%

2018 (585)

• Agree 45%
• Disagree 28%

2019 (579)

• Agree 44%
• Disagree 20%

2020 (611)

• Agree 54%
• Disagree 14%

2021 (798)

• Agree 46%
• Disagree 26%

2022 (779)

• Agree 48%
• Disagree 24%

Mirroring their higher levels of satisfaction with the Council, residents aged 65 or over also tend to have higher positivity regarding value for money (62% agreement, cf. 48% from the total sample). By area, agreement levels are more or less in line across all three areas when compared to the average for the dataset.

3.4 Trust in the Council to make the right decision

58% of respondents say that they trust the Council to make the right decision with the majority (53%) of residents saying they trust the Council a fair amount. The closest question to this in the LGA benchmark is ‘How much do you trust your local council?’ with the LGA average score being 67% putting Arun Council 9 percentage points behind, although the difference in question wording could account for this.

Figure 11: Q6. How much do you trust Arun District Council to make the right decision? (All valid responses: 716)

• A great deal 4%
• A fair amount 53%
• Not very much 32%
• Not at all 10%

Summary:

• A great deal / A fair amount 58%
• Not very much / Not at all 42%

By area, in Western areas there is more of an equal split in the level of trust with the Council with 51% (cf. 58% of total sample) saying they trust the Council, which is significantly lower than the average from the dataset, and 49% (cf. 42% of total sample) saying they distrust the Council, which is significantly higher than the average from the dataset.

Eastern areas are significantly more likely to say that they trust the Council to make the right decisions (65% cf.58%). Just 35% of residents in Eastern areas say that they do not trust the Council.

In the below table, showing levels of trust by area, green indicates a figure significantly higher than the total average for the sample, while pink indicates a figure significantly lower.

Table 5: Trust by area (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

Trust (A great deal/ a fair amount)

• Total 58%
• Downland (144) 61%
• Western (286) 51%
• Eastern (286) 65%

Distrust (Not much/ not at all)

• Total 42%
• Downland (144) 39%
• Western (286) 49%
• Eastern (286) 35%

3.5 Acting on concerns

Respondents were asked whether they think the Council acts on residents’ concerns. Just under two fifths of respondents think the council acts on a great deal or fair amount on concerns (39%) and just over two fifths think they don’t act very much or at all (42%). Most (35%) agree that the Council acts on their concerns a fair amount, with just 4% agreeing that it does so a great deal. 11% believe that the Council doesn’t act on the concerns of residents at all.

As shown in the chart overleaf, the number of respondent who do think the council does act on resident concerns has decreased by 3 percentage points (39% cf. 42%) respondents noting that they think the council doesn’t act on resident concerns has also increased by 3 percentage points since 2021 (42% cf. 39%) overtaking the number of residents who believe the council does act. This indicates a need for further investigation as to why this has occurred this year and how to demonstrate to residents of Arun District Council the council does act on resident concerns. However, agreement is still significantly lower than the LGA benchmark figure of 60%.

Figure 12: Q4. To what extent do you think Arun District Council acts on the concerns of local residents? (All responses: 828)

• A great deal 4%
• A fair amount 35%
• Not very much 30%
• Not at all 11%
• Don't know 18%

Summary:

• A great deal / A fair amount 39%
• Not very much / Not at all 42%

Figure 13: Q4. To what extent do you think Arun District Council acts on the concerns of local residents? - Over time (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

2013 (510)

• A great deal / a fair amount 41%
• Not very much / not at all 42%

2014 (515)

• A great deal / a fair amount 44%
• Not very much / not at all 39%

2015 (399)

• A great deal / a fair amount 36%
• Not very much / not at all 42%

2016 (574)

• A great deal / a fair amount 45%
• Not very much / not at all 36%

2017 (473)

• A great deal / a fair amount 41%
• Not very much / not at all 34%

2018 (585)

• A great deal / a fair amount 34%
• Not very much / not at all 41%

2019 (510)

• A great deal / a fair amount 41%
• Not very much / not at all 39%

2020 (611)

• A great deal / a fair amount 50%
• Not very much / not at all 29%

2021 (839)

• A great deal / a fair amount 42%
• Not very much / not at all 39%

2022 (828)

• A great deal / a fair amount 39%
• Not very much / not at all 41%

Residents aged 65+ are significantly more likely to feel that the Council acts on their concerns a great deal or fair amount (47%, cf. 39% of the total sample) whilst those aged 45 to 64 are significantly less likely to think the same (32% cf. 39%).

By location, respondents in Eastern areas are significantly more likely to feel that the council acts on their concerns (45% cf. 39%). In the below table, showing agreement with this statement by area, green indicates a figure significantly higher than the total average for the sample, while pink indicates a figure significantly lower.

Table 6: Acting on concerns by area (All valid responses: Sample bases in parenthesis)

Agree (A great deal/ a fair amount)

• Total 41%
• Downland (163) 33%
• Western (327) 36%
• Eastern (338) 45%

Disagree (Not very much/ not at all)

• Total 39%
• Downland (163) 45%
• Western (327) 46%
• Eastern (338) 33%

3.6 Residents’ preferred channels to be kept informed

A key component of building a trusted relationship between council and residents is whether the residents feel that they are kept informed. Residents were therefore asked how they would prefer to be kept informed by the Council, in order to help the Council understand which channels of communication may work hardest for them.

Nearly three in five (57%), prefer to keep informed via the council website. The Council magazine or newsletter and printed information are indicated as preferred options by around one in three residents or more (34% and 30%). Around three in ten (29%) prefer digital communication from the Council more generally, for example through texts, emails and e-newsletters, followed by council notice broads and local media like newspapers, TV and radio (27%). One in five note and electronic council magazine or newsletter (21%) or the council’s social media sites (20%).

Encouragingly, only 1% of residents said they did not want to find out any information, which suggests an appetite for communication.

Figure 14: Q5. How would you like the Council to keep you informed? (All valid responses: 828)

• Council website 57%
• Council's magazine or newsletter (hard copy) 34%
• Printed information provided by the council (e.g. leaflets, flyers, public notices) 30%
• Council texts, emails and e-newsletters 29%
• Council noticeboards in council buildings 27%
• Local media (e.g., newspapers, TV radio) 27%
• Council's magazine or newsletter (e-version) 21%
• Council's social media sites (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Nextdoor) 20%
• Social media outside the Council (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) 13%
• From your local Councillor 10%
• Direct contact with the council (e.g. contact with staff, public meetings/events) 9%
• Word of mouth (e.g. friends, neighbours, relations) 7%
• Advertising on billboards/buses etc. 6%
• Other 2%
• Do not want to find out any information 1%

There are some variations by demographics, primarily by age. Those over 65 are significantly less likely to want to receive information via council texts, emails and e-newsletters (25% cf. 29%) and social media outside the council (4% cf. 13%), whilst significantly more likely to want to receive hard copies of the council’s magazine or newsletter (39% cf. 34%).

By contrast, 37% of respondents aged under 44 would prefer to receive information from the council texts, emails and e-newsletters. There is also a strong appetite for direct digital communications amongst this age group and those aged 45 to 64, with a third (31% and 27%) stating that they would like to be kept informed by the Council’s social media sites and social media outside the council (24% and 17%).

Interestingly, residents with children in the house also express a preference for digital communication methods: 37% would prefer the Council’s social media sites and then 30% would prefer social media outside the Council. This may be influenced by the fact that respondents with young children are more likely to fall into the younger age category. The time constraints of work and family life may also make digital communication more convenient for these respondents, since it can be accessed at any time.

As the open survey was available for any Arun residents to complete, the sample of this survey is made of a bias sample of those who are more likely to engage with the council and of those willing to share their feedback.

To compare the satisfaction levels between the open survey and the closed survey this section presents gap analysis between the two survey results as well as presenting the differences in the key drivers for satisfaction.

4.1 Comparison of key indicators

The following gap analysis charts showcase the difference in perceptions between the two samples, this will help to identify the largest difference in scores between the open and closed sample. In all instances, residents in the closed survey report more positive perceptions than the open survey, suggesting that residents have engaged with the open survey because they are unhappy with a certain issue or service.

As shown in Figure 15 overleaf, the biggest differences in general perceptions between the open and closed survey is trust for Arun Council to make the right decision, with 29 points differences, satisfaction with the cleanliness of the district, with 23 points difference and overall satisfaction with the local area as a place to live with 22 points of difference between the two surveys.

Figure 15: Gap analysis chart

Q1. Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?

• Closed 80%
• Open 58%
• +/-22%

Q2. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the overall quality of the Council's services?

• Closed 63%
• Open 44%
• +/-19%

Q3. To what extent do you agree or disagree that Arun District Council provides value for money?

• Closed 48%
• Open 33%
• +/-15%

Q4. Acts on the concerns of local residents

• Closed 39%
• Open 24%
• +/-15%

Q6. How much do you trust Arun District Council to make the right decision?

• Closed 58%
• Open 29%
• +/-29%

Q7. To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?

• Closed 54%
• Open 42%
• +/-12%

Q10. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the overall cleanliness of the district?

• Closed 66%
• Open 43%
• +/-23%

*This chart is showcasing satisfaction levels, unless otherwise stated

Looking at neighbourhood problems, in both surveys rubbish or litter lying around (61%), vandalism and graffiti (61%) and people using or dealing drugs (64%) are the top three problems in the open survey mirroring the closed survey. Notably, the smallest difference in the proportion indicating a problem between the open and closed survey is for noisy neighbours (5% difference), which may suggest that residents engaging with the Council via the open survey may be due to the other problems listed. The largest discrepancy between the open and closed survey to for vandalism and graffiti which has a 31-percentage point difference.

Figure 16: Gap analysis chart (continued) - Q8. Thinking about this local area, how much of a problem do you think each of the following are?

Q8/1. Noisy neighbours or loud parties

• Closed 20%
• Open 15%
• +/-5%

Q8/2. Rubbish or litter lying around

• Closed 61%
• Open 39%
• +/-21%

Q8/3. Vandalism and graffiti

• Closed 61%
• Open 30%
• +/-31%

Q8/4. People using or dealing drugs

• Closed 64%
• Open 43%
• +/-21%

Q8/5. People being drunk or rowdy in public places

• Closed 48%
• Open 32%
• +/-16%

Residents were also asked about their levels of satisfaction with the services provided from the Council. The difference in satisfaction levels for waste collection is in line for the open and closed survey (81% cf. 83%) which indicates that Arun Council does a very good job with waste collection within the district. The difference in satisfaction for parks and open spaces and council run leisure centres between the open and closed survey is in line with one another (15 percentage point difference for parks and open spaces and 16 percentage point difference for council run leisure centres.)

Figure 17: Gap analysis chart (continued) - Q9. Please indicate how satisfied or dissatisfied you are overall with Arun District Council's performance

Q9/1. Waste collection and recycling

• Closed 83%
• Open 81%
• +/-2%

Q9/2. Parks, open spaces and play areas

• Closed 78%
• Open 63%
• +/-15%

Q9/3. Council owned Leisure centres

• Closed 66%
• Open 50%
• +/-16%

*This chart is showcasing satisfaction levels

When looking at the satisfaction with the level of cleanliness, the biggest difference in level of satisfaction is with town or village centre shopping areas (+/-28% points), out of town shopping areas and residential roads (-/+21% points for both).

Figure 18: Gap analysis chart (continued) - Q11. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the level of cleanliness of the following places within the district?

Q11/1. Parks and open spaces

• Closed 77%
• Open 62%
• +/-15%

Q11/2. Town/village centre shopping areas

• Closed 69%
• Open 41%
• +/-28%

Q11/3. Out of town shopping areas

• Closed 67%
• Open 46%
• +/-21%

Q11/4. Public toilets

• Closed 41%
• Open 26%
• +/-15%

Q11/5. Car parks

• Closed 65%
• Open 45%
• +/-20%

Q11/6. Residential roads

• Closed 60%
• Open 39%
• +/-21%

Q11/7. Beaches and promenades

• Closed 75%
• Open 57%
• +/-18%

*This chart is showcasing satisfaction levels

4.2 Comparison of Key drivers for satisfaction across open and closed survey

The relative importance of the key drivers of satisfaction differs between the open and closed surveys. The two metrics of satisfaction with the local area as a place to live and satisfaction with parks, open spaces and play areas have a bigger importance for respondents in the open survey than for those in the closed survey (24% cf. 18% and 18% cf. 17% respectively).

Key drivers’ relative importance for closed and opened survey

Satisfaction with local area as a place to live

• Closed survey 15%
• Open survey 19%
• Difference +/-4%

Provides value for money

• Closed survey 25%
• Open survey 22%
• Difference +/-3%

Satisfaction with waste collection and recycling

• Closed survey 5%
• Open survey 3%
• Difference +/-2%

Satisfaction with parks, open spaces and play areas

• Closed survey 5%
• Open survey 10%
• Difference +/-5%

Satisfaction with the overall cleanliness of the district

• Closed survey 10%
• Open survey 9%
• Difference +/-1%

Cleanliness of public toilets

• Closed survey 6%
• Open survey 5%
• Difference +/-1%

Acts on the concerns of local residents

• Closed survey 16%
• Open survey 16%
• Difference +/-0%

Trust Council to make the right decision

• Closed survey 19%
• Open survey 17%
• Difference +/-2%

Gender

Male

• Weighted closed 43%
• Unweighted closed 43%
• Weighted open 44%
• Unweighted open 30%

Female

• Weighted closed 51%
• Unweighted closed 53%
• Weighted open 51%
• Unweighted open 66%

Age

18-44

• Weighted closed 26%
• Unweighted closed 10%
• Weighted open 29%
• Unweighted open 23%

45-64

• Weighted closed 30%
• Unweighted closed 29%
• Weighted open 30%
• Unweighted open 47%

65+

• Weighted closed 34%
• Unweighted closed 56%
• Weighted open 34%
• Unweighted open 25%

Housing tenure

Own outright (freehold or leasehold)

• Weighted closed 51%
• Unweighted closed 67%
• Weighted open 48%
• Unweighted open 46%

Buying on a mortgage

• Weighted closed 23%
• Unweighted closed 16%
• Weighted open 27%
• Unweighted open 30%

Rent from Arun District Council or from a Housing Association / Trust

• Weighted closed 6%
• Unweighted closed 5%
• Weighted open 7%
• Unweighted open 7%

Rent from a private landlord

• Weighted closed 14%
• Unweighted closed 8%
• Weighted open 11%
• Unweighted open 10%

Time in district

Less than 1 year

• Weighted closed 3%
• Unweighted closed 3%
• Weighted open 3%
• Unweighted open 4%

Between 1 and 2 years

• Weighted closed 6%
• Unweighted closed 6%
• Weighted open 4%
• Unweighted open 4%

Between 3 and 5 years

• Weighted closed 8%
• Unweighted closed 8%
• Weighted open 8%
• Unweighted open 10%

Between 6 and 10 years

• Weighted closed 15%
• Unweighted closed 13%
• Weighted open 14%
• Unweighted open 13%

Between 11 and 20 years

• Weighted closed 17%
• Unweighted closed 19%
• Weighted open 17%
• Unweighted open 19%

More than 20 years

• Weighted closed 47%
• Unweighted closed 20%
• Weighted open 51%
• Unweighted open 49%

Children

Yes

• Weighted closed 19%
• Unweighted closed 11%
• Weighted open 20%
• Unweighted open 20%

No

• Weighted closed 74%
• Unweighted closed 85%
• Weighted open 73%
• Unweighted open 75%

Area

Western

• Weighted closed 46%
• Unweighted closed 40%
• Weighted open 44%
• Unweighted open 38%

Eastern

• Weighted closed 36%
• Unweighted closed 41%
• Weighted open 34%
• Unweighted open 43%

Downland

• Weighted closed 20%
• Unweighted closed 19%
• Weighted open 20%
• Unweighted open 18%

Employment status

Employed

• Weighted closed 20%
• Unweighted closed 19%
• Weighted open 20%
• Unweighted open 18%

Unemployed/Sick/Disabled/Homemaker

• Weighted closed 5%
• Unweighted closed 5%
• Weighted open 5%
• Unweighted open 5%

Retired

• Weighted closed 37%
• Unweighted closed 54%
• Weighted open 29%
• Unweighted open 25%

Produced by BMG Research
© BMG Research Ltd, 2022
www.bmgresearch.co.uk

Registered in England No. 2841970
Registered office:
BMG Research
Beech House
Greenfield Crescent
Edgbaston
Birmingham
B15 3BE UK

Tel: +44 (0) 121 3336006

UK VAT Registration No. 580 6606 32
Birmingham Chamber of Commerce Member No. B4626
Market Research Society Company Partner
The provision of Market Research Services in accordance with ISO 20252:2019
The provision of Market Research Services in accordance with ISO 9001:2015
The International Standard for Information Security Management ISO 27001:2013
Interviewer Quality Control Scheme (IQCS) Member Company
Registered under the Data Protection Act - Registration No. Z5081943
A Fair Data organisation
Cyber Essentials Plus Certification

The BMG Research logo is a trade mark of BMG Research Ltd.