Veterans Affairs Canada 2003 National Client Satisfaction Survey.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Performance Assessment Process: The Reviewer’s Perspective May 2014.
Advertisements

A Healthy Workplace Canadian HW Criteria & Implementation John Perry (
Strategic Value of the HR Function Presentation by
How a Services Unit Becomes a Learning Unit Julie K. Nothnagel, M.S. Director of Testing Services Indiana University Purdue University Fort Wayne.
Richmond Terrace Resident Satisfaction Survey April - June 2014 Report Results and Action Plans for Richmond Terrace April-June 2014.
Service User Survey 2011 Service User Survey Results 2011 Toni Martin – Senior Consultant Quality Health.
System Office Performance Management
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND APPRAISAL SYSTEM
Principles of Marketing
Taipei Water Park Explosion Service Report June 28 to July 18, 2015.
Veterans Affairs Canada A Client Centred Service Approach 2003.
Federal Consulting Group August 2004 Department of Labor Civil Rights Center 2004 Satisfaction Study - Recipients.
Achieving Continuous Improvement in Client Satisfaction
18/08/2015 Statistics Canada Statistique Canada Responsive Collection Design (RCD) for CATI Surveys and Total Survey Error (TSE) François Laflamme International.
Overview of the Environmental Immigrant Bridging Pilot Program.
2010 Annual Employee Survey Results
21 st Century Maricopa Review of Process Human Resources Projects Steering Team Meeting May 12, 2010.
Richard Philp New Zealand Inland Revenue Department Session No. 7 Conclusions for tax policy and revenue administration from compliance studies, perception.
Loss Control Program Compliance Audits An overview of the purpose and procedures of program auditing.
Aligning Academic Review and Performance Evaluation (AARPE)
Success Principles in Integrated Delivery System.
We Honor Veterans: Overview and Partner Commitment Enter presenter name here Enter organization name here Enter presenter here.
1 From E-Government to Connected Governance: Harnessing Information & Communication Technologies for Knowledge Acquisition and Sharing Michael G. Mimicopoulos.
Service Coordination Client Service Referral Process to Available EO Services.
1 RCTC Customer Service Study - Summary Presentation - Presented by: SNG Research Corporation Mayo High School April 28, 2010.
Do it pro bono. Strategic Scorecard Service Grant The Strategy Management Practice is presented by Wells Fargo. The design of the Strategic Scorecard Service.
Creating a Successful Customer Service Program James Malone Executive Director Ambulatory Services Kaiser Permanente.
Chase Bolds, M.Ed, Part C Coordinator, Babies Can’t Wait program Georgia’s Family Outcomes Indicator # 4 A Systems Approach Presentation to OSEP ECO/NECTAC.
Ryve Prekorogja 13 June VET Vocational Education and Training.
Committee of Practitioners ESEA Flexibility Waiver Review June 25, 2014.
Chapter © 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall.
Military Family Services Program Participant Survey Training Presentation.
TOBACCO CONTROL INITIATIVE HCSD Disease Management Program Quarterly Meeting April 26, 2005 Sarah Moody Thomas, PhD Statewide Clinical Lead.
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust W&C Division National Survey Outcomes & Staff Engagement, 2012 With comparison where applicable: Heart of England.
Your Ambulance Service Foundation Trust Consultation.
CHILDREN, YOUTH AND WOMEN’S HEALTH SERVICE New Executive Leadership Team 15 December 2004 Ms Heather Gray Chief Executive.
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust Facilities Division National Survey Outcomes & Staff Engagement, 2012 With comparison where applicable: Heart of.
Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene WB&A Market Research Executive Summary THE 2003 MARYLAND MEDICAID MANAGED CARE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY.
August 7, Market Participant Survey Action Plan Dale Goodman Director, Market Services.
For over 70 years, the Texas Commission for the Blind has assisted blind and visually impaired Texans in achieving independent and successful lives through.
Director of Evaluation and Accountability Manager, UW’s Grand Rapids, Michigan Robert McKown, CIRS Director of Evaluation and Accountability Sherri.
Prepared by Opinion Dynamics Corporation May 2006.
Sharing Session on Organizational Performance Jakarta, 3 September 2013.
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust GHH Divisional National Survey Outcomes & Staff Engagement, 2012 With comparison where applicable: Heart of England.
A Blueprint for Service Delivery
©Institute for Citizen-Centred Service Citizens First 3 Have Your Say Pubic Sector Service Delivery Council Public Sector CIO Council February 17, 2003.
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust Corporate Division National Survey Outcomes & Staff Engagement, 2012 With comparison where applicable: Heart of England.
Self Assessment Using EFQM Excellence MODEL Down Lisburn Trust’s Experience of Continuous Improvement John Simpson Down Lisburn Trust.
Reforming civil service in the Baltic States: the Case of Lithuania Jurgita Siugzdiniene, PhD Department of Public Administration, Kaunas University of.
6 Key Priorities A “scorecard” for each of the 5 above priorities with end of 2009 deliverables – with a space beside each for a check mark (i.e. complete)
COMPLIANCE WITH THE SIGNING AND FILING OF PERFORMANCE AGREEMENTS BY HEADS OF DEPARTMENT BRIEFING TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION.
Page 1 HRDC’S - SERVICE IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVE STRATEGY ALBERTA FEDERAL COUNCIL MEETING EDMONTON, ALBERTA Service Delivery Directorate Beth Wood February.
Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust CSS Division National Survey Outcomes & Staff Engagement, 2012 With comparison where applicable: Heart of England.
International Baccalaureate At Highland Secondary.
Slide 1 Customer Satisfaction Monitoring Rolling data 2014/15 –Waves 1-12 (April 14-March 15)
Healthy Futures Performance Measures Session. Session Overview Combination of presentation and interactive components Time at the end of the session for.
European Social Fund Promoting improvement Shirley Jones.
Catholic Charities Performance and Quality Improvement (PQI)
1 Planning and Programming for Effective Use of External Audit Resources Victor Rezendes Managing Director Strategic Issues U.S. General Accounting Office.
Making It Better Planning Employee & Patient Satisfaction November 2010.
DGS Town Hall with Director Fred Klass October 3, 2011.
Parent Satisfaction Surveys November What is the Parent Satisfaction Survey?  The survey consists of 18 questions that examine schools’ efforts.
COLORADO COLLEGE PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE  WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GOALS?  VALUE OF GOALS  DESIGNING SMART GOALS  EXAMPLES.
A Framework for Assessing Needs Across Multiple States, Stakeholders, and Topic Areas Stephanie Wilkerson & Mary Styers REL Appalachia American Evaluation.
Canadian Citizens: At the Centre of a Modern Transformed Government Christine Desloges Chief Strategist (Transformation) Chief Information Officer Branch.
Balanced Scorecard The University of Texas at El Paso Division of the Vice President for Business Affairs.
Simplified Reporting Initiative
RAPID RESPONSE program
Monitoring and Evaluation using the
Clear Language and Organizational Change
Presentation transcript:

Veterans Affairs Canada 2003 National Client Satisfaction Survey

Service Improvement Initiative Global Objectives Achieve a minimum 10% increase in client satisfaction on specific service elements by 2005; Develop a multi-year Service Improvement Plan based on survey results and service priorities defined by clients; Strengthen accountability for service improvement results; and Instill a culture of continuous service improvement.

VAC’s Approach to Continuous Service Improvement Conducted a National Client Satisfaction Survey in June 2001 Examined 23 service elements on Access to Service, Communications, and Services Offered by Staff Using Survey Results, identified Primary and Secondary Opportunities for Service Improvement Developed and Implemented a Departmental Service Improvement Plan (200+ Initiatives) Conducted a follow-up Survey in May 2003 Continue to monitor progress and modify the Service Improvement Plan as required.

VAC National Client Satisfaction Survey 2003 Measured client satisfaction on the same service elements as the 2001 survey –2003 Survey also contained extra questions on BPA Services, Commemoration, and GOL Clients having contact with VAC 6 months prior to the survey –559 Veterans from WWI, WWII & the Korean War –401 Survivors –487 Canadian Forces Members Conducted between April and May ,447 telephone interviews (4% completed by proxy) Clients disbursed geographically across five regions

Preferred Means for Contacting VAC Most PreferredLeast Preferred Posted Mail In Person Telephone Internet

Preferred Sources for Obtaining Information on Programs and Services Most PreferredLeast Preferred Media Ads Pamphlets Internet Newsletters Group Sessions Vet Organization Other

Future Implications for VAC On-line 2001 Survey 26% of total respondents had access to the Internet: –Canadian Forces (67%) –Survivors (21%) –War Veterans (17%) 4% of respondents indicated they intend to obtain Internet access 2003 Survey 35% of total respondents have access to the Internet: –Canadian Forces (77%) –Survivors (20%) –War Veterans (21%) 4% of respondents indicated they intend to obtain Internet access Total Respondents Access to the Internet

Percentage of Respondents Who Visited VAC’s Website in the Six Month Period Preceding the Survey Total Respondents Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients 2% 3% 9% 28% 2001 Survey2003 Survey (This was the highest growth area in terms of methods of contact with VAC).

Would you use the Internet to: Total Respondents with Access to the Internet (604) Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients with Access to the Internet (382) YES % Who Deem Service Important YES Obtain Information About VAC Benefits and Services 72%53%80%64% To Apply for Benefits and Services 50%43%56%49% To Inquire about the Status of your Application 63%56%74%68% Projected Client Interest in On-Line Services

Overall Level of Satisfaction 2001 Survey2003 Survey Total Clients War Veterans Survivors Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients Margin of Error is +/- 2.8 percentage points, 95% of the time. Margin of Error is +/- 2.6 percentage points, 95% of the time. 2% ↑ 1% ↑ 2% ↑ 8% ↑ Due to rounding of figures, some results do not yield a total of 100%.

Overall Level of Satisfaction Regional Perspective 2001 Survey2003 Survey VAC Pacific Prairie Ontario Quebec Atlantic 2% ↑ 1% ↓ 2%↑ 9%↑ 3%↓ 6%↑ * The margin of error increases when groups of clients are separated from the total sample (i.e. for the regional perspective, the margin of error increases to +/- 5.8%, 95% of the time).

23 Service Drivers by Category Level of Satisfaction 2003

Highest Satisfaction Ratings (87%>) Official language of choice (97%) (97%) = Courtesy of staff (96%) (96%) = Respect and dignity given to clients (95%) (95%) = Clarity of verbal communication (95%) (96%) 1%↑ Protection of privacy/confidentiality (94%) (95%) 1%↑ of information Hours of service (93%) (90%) 3%↓ Ease of access to buildings (92%) (89%) 3%↓ Clarity of written communications (92%) (89%) 3%↓ Variance

Highest Satisfaction Ratings (87%>) Location (91%) (89%) 2%↓ Methods of contact available (90%) (89%) 1%↓ Helpfulness & willingness to (90%) (91%) 1%↑ go the extra mile Fair and equitable treatment (89%) (90%) 1%↑ Staff knowledge on programs (83%) (89%) 6%↑ and services Sensitivity of staff to issues (86%) (87%) 1%↑ facing Canadian Forces Members Variance

Lowest Satisfaction Ratings (< 87%) Waiting time to receive a written decision (70%) (70%) = Waiting time on the telephone (79%) (81%)2%↑ Parking (79%) (70%)9%↓ Ease in finding information (78%) (80%)2%↑ on programs and services Information on applying for/ or accessing (82%) (84%)2%↑ a benefit or service Time to wait for an appointment (85%) (83%)2%↓ Ease of access by telephone (89%) (84%)5%↓ Questions being answered (85%) (86%)1%↑ Signs and directions to office locations (87%) (86%)1%↓ Variance

Level of Satisfaction Access to Services (Total Respondents) * Level of importance/priority ascribed by Respondents to the service element

Level of Satisfaction Communications (Total Respondents) * Level of importance/priority ascribed by Respondents to the service element

(Total Respondents) Level of Satisfaction Service Offered by Staff * Level of importance/priority ascribed by Respondents to the service element

Examples of Service Improvement Level of Satisfaction Improvement Ease in finding information on programs and services 64 % 72 % 8 %↑ Information on applying for/ or accessing a benefit or service 56 % 71 % 15 %↑ Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients Action taken to achieve results: Integrated Service Delivery Framework - Strong VAC presence at 17 CF locations across the country - Interdisciplinary Client Service Teams Seniors Canada On-line “Salute” - Quarterly Newsletter reaching more than 200,000 clients

Examples of Service Improvement Level of Satisfaction Improvement Total Respondents 83 % 89 % 6 %↑ Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients 76 % 83 % 7 %↑ Staff Knowledge of Programs and Services Action taken to achieve results: National Training Programs and structured Orientation for new staff, and as well as for employees changing positions Specialized training offered in the following areas: -Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder -Dementia Care -Vocational Rehabilitation -Crisis Management

Overall, to what extent do VAC programs and services meet your needs? Total Respondents Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients Entirely 39%38%22%25% For the most part 33%39%37%44% Only in part 19%16%27%19% Not at all 5% 4% 6% Can’t say 4% 3% 8% 6% (72) (59)(77)(69)

Overall, would you say that over the last 12 months the quality of service provided by Veterans Affairs has : Total Respondents Canadian Forces Veterans/Clients Improved 22%28%21%26% Stayed the Same 55%50%54%48% Deteriorated 5% 4% 9% 5% Can’t Say 18% 16%20%

Primary Service Improvement Opportunities 1.Waiting time for a written response√√ 2.Ease in finding information on programs and services√ 3.Information on applying for/ or assessing a √√ benefit or service 4.Staff knowledge on programs and services √ 5.Questions being answered√√ 6.Staff sensitivity to issues facing Members√√ of the Canadian Forces 7.Waiting time for an appointment √√ Service Elements

Secondary Service Improvement Opportunities Service Elements Fair and equitable treatment √ √ 2.Helpfulness and willingness to go √ √ the extra mile 3.Clear written communication (letters, √ √ forms, etc.) 4.Respect and dignity given √ 5.Staff knowledge on programs and services √

VAC’s Philosophy Service Improvement is Everyone’s Responsibility! Service Improvement is Everyone’s Responsibility! Deputy Minister Management Accountability Framework Departmental Managers Performance Contracts Departmental Employees Performance Appraisals Clear Accountability is a critical component to continuous service improvement. Through

VAC’s Quality of Service 49% of respondents rate VAC’s service superior to other government departments; 3% say service is inferior. 55% of respondents rate VAC’s service superior to other government departments; 3% say service is inferior.

Next Steps 1. Evaluate the 2003 Survey Results relative to where we are now and where we want to be in 2005; 2.Reaffirm and/or adjust the focus of VAC’s Service Improvement activities; 3.Revise VAC’s published Service Standards; 4. Monitor and report performance relative to Service Improvement activities – linking Performance to Performance Contracts; 5.Communicate progress to Parliament via Report on Plans and Priorities and the Departmental Performance Report; and 6.Continue to make Service Improvement a priority within Veterans Affairs Canada.

For Further Information Contact: Marlene Zalewski Manager, Strategic Priorities and Planning Corporate Planning Division phone: (902) fax: (902)