CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY

Transcription

1 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY KENYA FOREST SERVICE June, 2014 FINAL REPORT CONSULTANT: E A K L Envag Associates (K) Limited Karen Plains Arcade, Off Karen Road Karen 3 rd Flr Wing C #6 P. O. Box Nairobi, Kenya Tel: , Cell: / Web: envagassociateskenya@gmail.com

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES... II LIST OF FIGURES... III LIST OF ACRONYMS/ ABBREVIATIONS... IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... V CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Background Objective of Satisfaction Survey Satisfaction Defined Determining Satisfaction Levels Significance of Satisfaction Surveys Rationale for the study... 3 CHAPTER TWO: APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY Activity Schedule and Timelines Sampling Sources of Information Work plan for the survey Data Collection Tools Data Collection, Entry and Analysis Deliverables... 8 CHAPTER THREE: SURVEY FINDINGS Introduction to Findings Overall Customer Satisfaction Index Customer Satisfaction Index (General Customers) Speed of Service Complaint Handling Courtesy of KFS Staff Feedback Service Delivery Charter Quality of Service Suppliers Satisfaction Index Complaint Handling Overall Communication Procurement Process Payment Process Student Satisfaction Index Academic Processes Learning Environment Cafeteria / Hostels and Security Facilities Admission Process and Fees Management and Leadership Extra Curricular Activities Relationship with staff CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS Conclusions Recommendations APPENDIX A1: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY (GENERAL CUSOMERS) APPENDIX A2: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY (SUPPLIERS) APPENDIX A3: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY (STUDENTS) i

3 LIST OF TABLES Table Description Page Number E1 Category of Respondents.iii E2 Summary of Findings.iv 2.1 Sample Size Time Schedule Structure of Data Collection Tools Overall Customer Satisfaction Index General Customer Satisfaction Results Speed of Service Complaint Handling Courtesy of KFS Staff Feedback Service Delivery Charter Quality of Services Suppliers Satisfaction Results Complaint Handling by Suppliers Overall Communication Procurement Process Payment Process Student Satisfaction Results Academic Process Learning Environment Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities Admission Process Management & Leadership Extra-Curricular Activities Relationship with Staff 30 ii

4 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Description Page Number 3.1 Overall Customer Satisfaction Index General Customer Satisfaction Results Speed of Service Complaint Handling Courtesy of KFS Staff Feedback Service Delivery Charter Quality of Services Suppliers Satisfaction Results Complaint Handling by Suppliers Overall Communication Procurement Process Payment Process Student Satisfaction Results Academic Process Learning Environment Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities Admission Process Management & Leadership Extra-Curricular Activities Relationship with Staff 31 iii

5 LIST OF ACRONYMS/ ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviation CD ROM Eq FGD SI SPSS KFS Description Compact Disk Read Only Memory Equation Focus Group Discussion Satisfaction Index Statistical Package for Social Scientists Kenya Forest Service iv

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Background Kenya Forest Service (KFS) is a State Corporation established in February 2007 under the Forest Act 2005 to conserve, develop and sustainably manage forest resources for Kenya's socialeconomic development. The KFS management structure comprises 10 conservancies that are ecologically demarcated, 76 Zonal Forest Offices, 150 forest Stations, and 250 divisional forest extension offices located countrywide, and critical in forest management and surveillance. To participate in forest management, forest adjacent communities have formed registered groups and are currently working with KFS to sustainably manage forest resources. In total, there are 325 community forest associations. The Customer Satisfaction Survey was done to assess the perceived level of satisfaction of KFS s customers with the services/products offered to them. The results of the survey are meant to provide the management of the Organization with the information on how to improve its efficiency and image and to identify priority areas that require specific interventions in an effort to improve its service delivery. This Report on Customer Satisfaction Survey presents the findings of the study conducted by Envag Associates Limited (the Consultant) with respect to satisfaction levels of customers. 2. Objectives The main objective was to assess the perceived level of satisfaction of the services offered by KFS to its customers It also included respondents suggestions on how service delivery could be improved. 3. Scope The following Table indicates the categories of customers and employees sampled during these surveys. Table E1: Category of Respondents CATEGORY TARGETED General Customers 150 Suppliers 50 Student 500 Total 700 v

7 4. Methodology The Customer Satisfaction questionnaire captured the level of satisfaction among suppliers and surrounding community. Data coding and entry was done concurrently with data collection in the field. After which the consultant embarked on analysis of the data, comments and observations obtained from field visits and secondary sources. The consultant carried out data coding, framework development for data entry and analysis of data using Ms Excel Platforms and SPSS. After data analysis, satisfaction index (SI) was obtained, which is a single number that measures the extent to which the respondents are satisfied. It is a weighted composite index that has values ranging from 0 to 100. It is used to measure the responses to one or more questions (factors) asked about the same idea. 5. Survey Findings The overall Customer Satisfaction Index was 72.51%. The Table below shows the summary of the survey findings. Table E2: Summary of the Findings of Customer Satisfactions in Kenya Forest Service Category of Customers Index (%) Suppliers General Customers Students Average ) Conclusion and Recommendations Conclusions The most satisfied category of customers were Suppliers (78.84%) followed by General Customers (71.72) and the Students (66.97) were the least satisfied. KFS can improve the satisfaction level if the below outlined recommendations are implemented. vi

8 Recommendations a. Speed of service Speed of service is a very important issue in every organization. At KFS it seems the importance of the speed of service has been realized by the staff members since most customers showed satisfaction in the way the speed of service is carried out. They were generally satisfied with the action on inquiries, customer service desk, waiting time before provision of service and the speed on the provision of service at KFS. Port Victoria seemed to score high in the speed of service since majority of the customers from port Victoria were happy with the speed of service at KFS. KFS can improve on this if they build more customer care desks in all centres. b. Courtesy of staff Generally the customers of the KFS were satisfied with the courtesy of the staff at Kenya Forest Service. They showed satisfaction with the way the clients were being handled, the way the employees at KFS conducted themselves and the prudent utilization of the resources. On the issue of corruption customers perceived that employees at KFS are zero tolerance to corruption, some of the comments from the customers which showed there is zero tolerance to corruption at KFS: Long ago they used to ask for tea but nowadays they don t ask- From Busia We therefore comment the KFS staff for the courtesy they are showing towards their customers. c. Feedback Most customers were satisfied with the feedback they got from KFS, they agreed that there is a timely, accurate and courteous response; some staff expressed how helpful the feedback at KFS is to them Helped a lot with water supply issues However some customers had some dissatisfaction on the clarity of guidelines and fairness in dealing with customers, they felt that there was no clarity on what is expected of the customers by the staff I am not sure if I have to replace a cut down tree since the guidelines of the KFS are not clear. We comment KFS for the good feedback they are giving to their customers and also we would like to recommend that they should make their guidelines clear to the customers by providing the customers with reading manuals. vii

9 d. Quality of Services Quality of Services at Kenya Forest Service is good according to the feedback from the Customer. They agreed that KFS consider persons with disability, minority and marginalized groups some of the comments which show the evidence of this include. KFS gave youth work of planting trees and nursery preparation Although customers perceived that KFS usually takes corrective measures, some customers feel that there are some areas which have not been corrected although it was spoilt long time ago. Others feel that there is no confidentiality. We recommend KFS to be taking corrective measures promptly so as to tackle customers problems urgently, also there should be confidentiality so as to enable the customers have confidence in KFS. e. Recommendations for the Students Satisfaction (Kenya Forest College Londiani) i. Relationship with the staff In any organization, relationship is very important since it contributes to quality work and service. At Kenya Forest College (KFC), the staff and students seem to understand this. Most students were satisfied with the relationship that existed between them and the staff. However there are some departments which most students showed dissatisfaction on the relationship between them. Students complains that their compliant are not handled in a timely manner When you raise a complain it takes long to be handled Also students complained that there is no appropriate channel of communication between management and the students. I even don t know where to channel my complains to We recommend KFC to try as much as possible to ensure that the students complains are handled appropriately and in a timely manner, also the institution should set a good channel of communication between and educate everybody on the channels to be followed. ii. Admission process and fees Generally students were dissatisfied with admission process and fees, according to them, the admission process at KFC is not transparent and also the registration process is not straightforward because of the many processes that one has to undergo. On the fee payment issue, they complained that the fee at KFC is not competitive as it does not favor the students from poor background. viii

10 We therefore recommend KFC to try and improve the admission process by introducing online registration system to enable students register from anywhere. On the issue of school fees, we urge KFC to review their fees so that all the students can afford. iii. Learning environment The learning environment at KFC satisfies many students, students are satisfied with the adequacy of the lecture theatres, laboratories and the furniture in the lecture rooms. Students are also satisfied with the conducive environment at KFC and the cleanness of the lecture rooms. However most students are dissatisfied with level of technology used in lecturing, they also claim there are no enough revision materials like books and journals. We comment KFC for the clean and conducive environment that they provide to their students, however, we recommend KFC to improve on the lecturing technology and they should ensure that there are enough revising materials. iv. Academic process Generally students showed some satisfaction with academic process, they agreed that there are no class clashes on the KFC timetable, also the time allocated is reasonable according to their response. They also showed satisfaction on the competency of the lectures. However the examination related issues showed dissatisfaction among the students. They claim the examination related issues are not promptly addressed hence making students miss some marks. They don t address exam issues promptly which affects the grading and results of the students I have missing marks but It seems they don t want to address even after I have raised the complain We urge KFC to address the examination issue promptly and also ensure that there are no missing marks. v. Extracurricular activities Generally the students were satisfied with the extracurricular activities at KFC but their dissatisfaction arises from the inadequacy of social amenities and their maintenance. The football pitch are not maintained and it looks bad We recommend KFC to try and build more social amenities and also they should maintain the current ones. ix

11 vi. Management and leadership There was a lot of dissatisfaction from the management and leadership at KFC, many students felt that KFC does not support the needy students and that the medical services are not satisfying. They also feel that the top management does respond promptly to important issues affecting the students. However they feel that students leadership is effective and that they are satisfied with the academic division of the college. vii. Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities Generally the students are satisfied with the quality of food served at the cafeteria/dining hall (s), they also claim the cost of food is reasonable and the cleanness of the dining all is satisfying, the security measures and the courtesy of the security staff is satisfying according to the students. However the dissatisfaction arose from hostels, The hostels are of poor quality The hostels are not clean as there are tall grass around the buildings Also the washrooms are not adequate and they are not clean. We recommend KFC to ensure that they build high quality/standard hostel and maintains their cleanness by slashing the grass to avoid diseases like malaria and typhoid. Also the number of washrooms must be increased and their cleanliness maintained to avoid communicable diseases like cholera. x

12 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Kenya Forest Service (KFS) is a State Corporation established in February 2007 under the Forest Act 2005 to conserve, develop and sustainably manage forest resources for Kenya's social-economic development. The KFS management structure comprises 10 conservancies that are ecologically demarcated, 76 Zonal Forest Offices, 150 forest Stations, and 250 divisional forest extension offices located countrywide, and critical in forest management and surveillance. To participate in forest management, forest adjacent communities have formed registered groups and are currently working with KFS to sustainably manage forest resources. In total, there are 325 community forest associations. The Customer Satisfaction Survey was done to assess the perceived level of satisfaction of KFS s customers with the services/products offered to them. The results of the survey are meant to provide the management of the Organization with the information on how to improve its efficiency and image and to identify priority areas that require specific interventions in an effort to improve its service delivery. This Report on Customer Satisfaction Survey presents the findings of the study conducted by Envag Associates Limited (the Consultant) with respect to satisfaction levels of customers. 1.2 Objective of Satisfaction Survey The objective was to assess the satisfaction levels to services offered by Kenya Forest Service to its customers. The survey determined the levels of satisfaction as perceived by these and also obtained their views on the challenges encountered in search of these services. It also included respondents suggestions on how service delivery could be improved. 1.3 Satisfaction Defined Satisfaction refers to the attitudes and feelings that customers have towards an institution that serves them, which in this case is KFS. It embodies a system of beliefs that may not have been articulated. These beliefs themselves are based on certain values and are the 1

13 foundation upon which attitude and behaviour are also based. Satisfaction is derived from the psychological contract and encompasses the actions customers believe are expected of them and what response they expect from their engagement relationships. Satisfaction is concerned with assumptions, expectations, promises and mutual obligations. It creates attitudes and emotions that govern behaviour. It is also implicit and dynamic as it develops over time with accumulation of experiences, changing engagement conditions and re-evaluation of expectations. Thus satisfaction may provide some indications of the answers to the two engagement relationship questions that individuals normally pose: What can I reasonably expect from the organization? And what should I reasonably be expected to contribute in return? Satisfaction and engagement relationships are never quite fully understood by either party that gives or provides the services. From the customer point of view, the engagement relationship and the associated satisfaction may be based on:- How they are treated in terms of fairness, equity and consistency Security of engagement Scope to demonstrate competence Involvement and influence Trust in the management of the organization to keep their promises From the engaging institution perspective, satisfaction may cover aspects of the engagement relationship such as: competence, effort and loyalty. 1.4 Determining Satisfaction Levels The degree to which customers are satisfied can be measured by attitude surveys by obtaining opinions on key matters about an organization. Such attitudes survey may be conducted using any set or all of the following: Structured questionnaires Open ended interpersonal interviews Combinations of questionnaires and interviews, and Use of Focus Group Discussions 1.5 Significance of Satisfaction Surveys Kenya Forest Service has increasingly become aware that the opinions of their customers, in particular, make the attainment of their goals more likely. It is noteworthy that through 2

14 Performance Contracting, organizations are required to state in advance what they tend to achieve in a given year and they are evaluated on these set targets. Organizations also use service charters to tell the public what they stand for and how they will provide their services. The extent to which the service charter has been implemented normally provides some perception about satisfaction levels. It must always be remembered that room should be created for continuous improvement and the bases for these are the independent feedback systems from stakeholder s attitude surveys. 1.6 Rationale for the study The Kenya Forest Service is actively participating in the implementation of the wider Government of Kenya development policies that embrace, among other things, the Civil Service Reform Programmes. In this regard therefore, Kenya Forest Service has set up internal structures to manage the reform initiatives necessary for enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in management. Kenya Forest Service has developed specific management tools, such as the strategic plan and service charter, which enable it to specify the results it seeks to realize within given time frames and relevant strategies to achieve these results. In its endeavour to be an effective and efficient institution, Kenya Forest Service is desirous to know the current satisfaction levels of their customers. It is in this light that a consultant (Envag Associates Limited) was contracted through a competitive tendering process to conduct the Customer satisfaction survey. 3

15 CHAPTER TWO: APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY 2.1 Activity Schedule and Timelines The preliminary activities for the survey were under taken in a logical sequence as shown below: 1. Mobilization and planning which involved resource mobilization. 2. Familiarization with KFS and assignment kick off. 3. Determination of the level of participation of identified KFS stakeholder. 4. Discussion and agreement on the scope and duration of work. 5. Confirmed understanding of the objectives of the assignment. 6. Agreed on proposed approach and methodology. 7. Agreed on documents to be reviewed by the consultant. 8. Agreed on expected outputs and set deadlines for their submission. 9. Agreed on the report timelines. 2.2 Sampling The sampling frame used was that respondents were drawn from every stations surveyed. It also included targeted respondents lists obtained from Kenya Forest Service for the survey. Respondents were given equal opportunity to participate in the survey. Generic distribution equation with correction for finite population was used to arrive at a representative sample of customers of KFS. Other respondents were identified based on the list provided by the Organization. The sample size formula (The generic distribution equation with correction for finite population) used is provided in Equations 1 and 2. n 0 Where: n o 2 Z pq Equation 1 2 e = Non-corrected sample size. Z p q = Level of confidence set at 1.96 for 95% confidence level. = Percentage picking a choice, expressed as decimal (0.5 used for sample needed). = population proportion (1-p) 2 e = Margin error of the study set at 5% Correction for finite population provides the valid sample size as in Equation 2. 4

16 n 1 no no 1 N Equation 2 Where: N = Population size taken. n sample size All the respondents were given equal opportunity to participate in the survey within the survey data collection timeframe. In order to effectively capture the differences by category from the study population, stratified random sampling technique was adopted in the survey design. The benefit of stratification was that it allowed the sampler to control the stratum and ensured a defined level of statistical precision and comparability. Table 2.1: Sample Size CATEGORY TARGETED General Customers 150 Suppliers 50 Student 500 Total 700 The consultants had the respective questionnaire self-administered by respondents, under close supervision by consultants, enumerators. A brief sensitization of respondents was held before administration of questionnaires. In order to achieve the desired target, a total of 20 respondents from all conservancies were interviewed. 2.3 Sources of Information The consultant was aware that information on KFS services was of specific importance to its Customer Satisfaction Improvement. Primary data were collected using questionnaires and guideline/checklist attached in appendices and secondary data was obtained from the following sources as a minimum: Previous reports on Customer satisfaction done in Work plan for the survey Table 2.2 below shows the work plan for the survey. 5

17 Table 2.2: Time Schedule for Performance of the Service No MAIN ACTIVITY/STEP WEEKS Preliminary Activities: 2 Literature Review 3 Developing Draft Survey Instruments 4. Inception Report Submission 5. Incorporating Client s comments and suggestions in the Inception Report and Survey Instruments 6 Recruitment and training of enumerators 7 Pretesting of Survey tools 8 Field Work and actual primary data collection 9 Data Analysis, interpretations and Reporting 10. Draft Survey Report 11 Incorporating Client s Comments in Final Report 12. Final Report submission 2.5 Data Collection Tools The main tools for capturing primary data during the survey were questionnaires. The tools are attached in Appendices and their description and content shown in Table 2.5: Table 2.3: Structure of Data Collection Tools No. Name of Tool Contents 1. Customer Survey Section A: Customer Satisfaction questionnaire (General) -Speed of Service -Quality of Service -Courtesy -Complaint Handling -Feedback -Service Delivery Charter Section B: Suggestions 2. Suppliers Satisfaction questionnaire 3 Students Satisfaction Learning Environment Section C: Demography and Personal Information Section A: Suppliers Satisfaction -Communication -Procurement Process -Payment Process -Complaint Handling Section B:Suggestions Section C: Demography and Personal Information 6

18 No. Name of Tool Contents Questionnaire Academic Process Cafeteria/Hostel/Security Management and Leadership Admission and Fees Relationship with staff Extracurricular Activities 4. Focus Group Discussion. Focused on contents in section. 2.6 Data Collection, Entry and Analysis Data coding and entry was done concurrently with data collection in the field. After which the consultant embarked on analysis of the data, comments and observations obtained from the field visits and secondary sources. The consultant carried out data coding, framework development for data entry and analysis of data collected in Ms Excel Platforms and SPSS. After analysis the consultant came up with an overall satisfaction index (SI), which is a single figure that measures the extent to which the respondents are satisfied. It is a weighted composite index that has values ranging from 0 to 100. It is used to measure the responses to one or more questions (factors) that ask about the same idea. The index is obtained by SPSS using the principle of weighted average method as follows: The frequencies (tallies) for different agreement levels are obtained and then multiplied by the respective weights for every factor under investigation. The sum of the product obtained is divided by the sum of tallies for every factor to obtain a mean score within a Likert scale of 1-5. This mean score is then multiplied by index interval; in this case 20 for arrange of 0 to 100 to enable presentation of results in percentages. Note: SPSS is used to do all these in one step. The mean score itself is stable and not affected when various subgroups of a composite interest groups have varying population, so long as the method for picking sample size is consistent across the subgroups. Therefore, the weighted composite index derived as average of mean scores from different subgroups will be the same as an index obtained directly without subdividing the subgroups so long as the same respondents are retained in the analysis. The main reason for reporting within subgroups is therefore to get a clearer picture of their contribution to the composite index. Focus group discussions were used as a form of qualitative data collection where respondents within an interest group were asked about their perceptions, opinions, beliefs and attitudes towards services they receive from KFS. The discussions were done in an interactive group setting to acquire feedback, with a minimum of 4 respondents (mini focus group model) where participants were free to talk with other group members. 7

19 The discussions were conducted in an unstructured and natural way where respondents were free to give views from any aspect. These views were recorded by the consultant and formed part of the survey report. During the discussions, the Consultant acted as the moderator to ensure that the session progressed smoothly. The FGD effectively applied to Customers, and the community since it was easy to assemble them in mini groups of four. The open ended questions were tested for inter-rater reliability before being recorded. This together with information delivered from quantitative data also formed the basis of suggestions for improvement in this report. 2.7 Deliverables The consultant then presentend a report to the client on the results of the entire survey exercise and submittedagreed bound hard copies, a soft copy in CD ROM in MS word/excel (and PDF) format of report. 8

20 Suppliers General Customers Students Average Index (%) CHAPTER THREE: SURVEY FINDINGS 3.1 Introduction to Findings This section contains demographic responses from customers and employees as captured by their respective questionnaires. 3.2 Overall Customer Satisfaction Index The overall Customer Satisfaction Index was (72.51%). The Table 3.1 below shows the index scores for the various sub-groups under customers. Table 3.1: Overall Customers Satisfaction Index Category of Customers Index (%) Suppliers General Customers Students Average Overall Customer Satisfaction Index was 72.51%. Suppliers scored highest with 78.84% while General Customers and Students score 71.72% and 66.97% respectively. Figure 3.1 below shows the results on a graph. Overall Customer Satisfaction Index Category of customers Figure: 3.1 Overall Customer Satisfaction Index 9

21 3.3 Customer Satisfaction Index (General Customers) KFS general customers were identified and categorised as follows. a. Government Ministries and Departments b. Private Sectors c. Development Partners d. Manufacturers/Timber Factories e. Bee Keeper/Farmer/Wood Carver/Saw Miller/Herbalist/Carpenters/Charcoal and Rain Markers/Forest Dwellers f. Community Forestry Association g. Eco Tourism Player h. Group Nursery Owners i. Non State Actors (NGOs, CBOs FBOs) j. Universities and Colleges k. Forest Neighbouring Community Table 3.2 shows the scores for the different parameters under customers Table 3.2: General Customers Satisfaction Index No Key Factor Index (%) a. Speed of Service b. Complaint Handling c. Courtesy of Staff d. Feedback e. Service Charter f. Quality of Services Average The mean score for General Customer was 71.72%. The highest score was Speed of Service 79.08% followed by Complaint Handling 73.34%, Courtesy of Staff 72.41%, Feedback 69.97%, Service Charter 68.81% and finally Quality of Services 66.71%. Figure 3.2 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 10

22 Speed of Service Complaint Handling Courtesy of Staff Feedback Service Charter Quality of Services Average Index (%) Score for General Customers Factor Figure 3.2: Score for General Customers Speed of Service Table 3.3 shows the scores for the different parameters under Speed of Service. Table 3.3: Speed of Service No Key Factor Index (%) a. Waiting time before Service provision at KFS b. Action on inquiries/ letters / telephone/ c. Speed of Service provision at KFS d. Customers service desk Average The mean score for Speed of Services was 79.08%. The highest score was Waiting time before Service provision at KFS 82.44% followed by Action on inquiries/ letters / telephone/ %, Speed of Service provision at KFS 78.07% and finally Customers service desk 76.23%. Figure 3.3 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 11

23 Waiting time before Service provision at KFS Action on inquiries/ letters / telephone/ Speed of Service provision at KFS Customers service desk Average Index (%) Speed of Service Factor Figure 3.3: Speed of Service Complaint Handling Table 3.4 shows the scores for the different parameters under Complaint Handling. Table 3.4: Complaint Handling No Key Factor Index (%) a. KFS has effective channels for handling customer complaints b. Listening and communicating effectively with all stakeholders c. KFS management is focused towards producing tangible results c. KFS provides adequate feedback on complaints lodged d. Complaints lodged with KFS are dealt with in timely manner and objectively Average The mean score for Complaint Handling was 73.34%. The highest score was KFS has effective channels for handling customer complaints 76.73% followed by Listening and communicating effectively with all stakeholders 76.56%, KFS management is focused towards producing tangible results 75.38%, KFS provides adequate feedback on complaints lodged 72.04% and finally Complaints lodged with KFS are dealt with in timely manner and objectively 66%. Figure 3.4 shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 12

24 KFS has effective channels for handling customer complaints Listening and communicating effectively with all stakeholders KFS management is focused towards producing tangible results KFS provides adequate feedback on complaints lodged Complaints lodged with KFS are dealt with in timely manner and objectively Average Index (%) Complaint Handling Factor Figure 3.4: Complaint Handling Courtesy of KFS Staff Table 3.5 shows the scores for the different parameters under Courtesy Table 3.5: Courtesy of KFS Staff No Key Factor Index (%) a. KFS employees conduct themselves with utmost integrity b. Handling clients with dignity, courtesy and respect c. Setting clear minimum standards of service to the satisfaction of all clients d. Upholding zero-tolerance to corruption by not expecting, accepting or receiving inducement to offer services e. Prudent utilization of resources Average The mean score for Courtesy of KFS Staff was 72.41%. The highest score was KFS employees conduct themselves with utmost integrity 79.57% followed by Handling clients with dignity, courtesy and respect 77.9%, Setting clear minimum standards of service to the satisfaction of all clients 74.61%, Upholding zero-tolerance to corruption by not expecting, accepting or receiving inducement to offer services 68.67% and finally Prudent utilization of resources 61.31%. Figure 3.5 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 13

25 KFS employees conduct themselves with utmost integrity Handling clients with dignity, courtesy and respect Setting clear minimum standards of service to the satisfaction of all clients Upholding zero-tolerance to corruption by not expecting, accepting or receiving inducement to offer services Prudent utilization of resources Average Index (%) Courtesy of Staff Factor Figure 3.5: Courtesy of Staff Feedback Table 3.6 shows the scores for the different parameters under Feedback. Table 3.6: Feedback No Key Factor Index (%) a. Reasonable explanation given to any delay in service provision b. Courteous, timely and accurate response to all requests c. Clarity of guidelines and fairness in dealing with customers Average The mean score for Feedback was 69.97%. The highest score was Reasonable explanation given to any delay in service provision 72.36% followed by Courteous, timely and accurate response to all requests 70.04% and Clarity of guidelines and fairness in dealing with customers 67.51%. Figure 3.6 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 14

26 There is an appropriate communication channel between management and students The non-teaching staff at KFS are courteous KFS staff responds to administrative queries promptly Student complaints are handled in a timely manner Index (%) Feedback Factor Figure 3.6 Feedback Service Delivery Charter Table 3.7 shows the scores for the different parameters under Service Delivery Charter. Table 3.7 Service Delivery Charter No Key Factor Index (%) a. The extent to which you are able to access all the information you need from KFS b. The extent to which KFS service charter is applicable to you as a customer c. Confidentiality in handling client information d. Provision of prompt and accurate information on all requests Average The mean score for Service Delivery Charter was 68.81%. The highest score was The extent to which you are able to access all the information you need from KFS 70.87% followed by The extent to which KFS service charter is applicable to you as a customer 70.52%, Confidentiality in handling client information 69.02% and finally Provision of prompt and accurate information on all requests 64.83%. Figure 3.7 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 15

27 There is an appropriate communication channel between management and students The non-teaching staff at KFS are courteous KFS staff responds to administrative queries promptly Student complaints are handled in a timely manner Departmental staff provide sufficient information Index (%) Service Delivery Charter Factor Figure 3.7 Service Delivery Charter Quality of Service Table 3.8 shows the scores for the different parameters under Quality of Service Table 3.8 Quality of Service No Key Factor Index (%) a. The organization is committed to innovation, creativity and visionary planning b. Accomplishment of transaction or purpose of visit to KFS c. Taking prompt corrective measures on errors and deficiencies that occur d. Handling stakeholders issues with the urgency and confidentiality required Average The mean score for Quality of Service was 66.71%. The highest score was The organization is committed to innovation, creativity and visionary planning 69.18% followed by Accomplishment of transaction or purpose of visit to KFS 69.02%, Taking prompt corrective measures on errors and deficiencies that occur 64.32% and finally Handling stakeholders issues with the urgency and confidentiality required 64.30%. Figure 3.8 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 16

28 The organization is committed to innovation, creativity and visionary planning Accomplishment of transaction or purpose of visit to KFS Taking prompt corrective measures on errors and deficiencies that occur Handling stakeholders issues with the urgency and confidentiality required Average Index (%) Quality of Service Figure 3.8 Quality of Service Factor 3.4 Suppliers Satisfaction Index Table 3.9 shows the scores for the different parameters under Suppliers. Table 3.9: Suppliers Satisfaction Results No Key Factor Index (%) a. Complaint Handling b. Overall Communication c. Procurement Process d. Payment Process Average Suppliers Satisfaction Index was 78.84%. The highest score was Complaint Handling 85.93% followed by Overall Communication 84.16%, Procurement Process 77.13% and finally Payment Process 68.14%. Figure 3.9 shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 17

29 Complaint Handling Overall Communication Procurement Process Payment Process Average Index (%) Suppliers Satisfaction Results Factor Figure 3.9: Suppliers Satisfaction Results Complaint Handling Table 3.10 shows the scores for the different parameters under Complaint Handling. Table 3.10: Complaint Handling No Key Factor Index (%) a. Timely handling of lodged complaints b. Adequacy of mechanism for lodging of complaints c. Feedback on lodged complaints Average The mean score for Complaint Handling according to suppliers was 85.93%. The highest score was Timely handling of lodged complaints 94.92% followed by Adequacy of mechanism for lodging of complaints 87.47% and Feedback on lodged complaints 75.4%. Figure 3.10 shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 18

30 Timely handling of lodged complaints Adequacy of mechanism for lodging of complaints Feedback on lodged complaints Average Index (%) Complaint Handling Factor Figure 3.10: Complaint Handling Overall Communication Table 3.11 shows the scores for the different parameters under Overall Communication. Table 3.11: Overall Communication No Key Factor Index (%) a. Ease of Communication with KFS b. Quality of advice/information received c. Speed of communication d. Speed/efficiency with which query was dealt with e. Public Service Area Facilities(lounges, WCs) Average The mean score for Overall Communication was 84.16%. The highest score was Ease of Communication with KFS 98.25% followed by Quality of advice/information received 96.85%, Speed of communication 90.92%, Speed/efficiency with which query was dealt with 7057% and finally Public Service Area Facilities (lounges, WCs) 64.22%. Figure 3.11 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 19

31 Ease of Communication with KFS Quality of advice/information received Speed of communication Speed/efficiency with which query was dealt with Public Service Area Facilities(lounges, WCs) Average Index (%) Overall Communication Factor Figure 3.11: Overall Communication Procurement Process Table 3.12 shows the scores for the different parameters under Procurement Process. Table 3.12: Procurement Process No Factor Index (%) a. Ease of access to procurement information b. Transparency of tendering process at KFS c. Support from user departments d. Courtesy of procurement staff at KFS e. Response to request for clarifications and queries during tendering f. Fairness in evaluation and selection process Average Satisfaction index for Procurement Process was 77.13%. The highest score was Ease of access to procurement information 94.53% followed by Transparency of tendering process at KFS 88.29%, Support from user departments 79.57%, Courtesy of procurement staff at KFS 73.1%, Response to request for clarifications and queries during tendering 65.77% and finally Fairness in evaluation and selection process 61.53%. Figure 3.12 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 20

32 Ease of access to procurement information Transparency of tendering process at KFS Support from user departments Courtesy of procurement staff at KFS Response to request for clarifications and queries during tendering Fairness in evaluation and selection process Average Index (%) Procurement Process Factor Figure 3.12: Procurement Process Payment Process Table 3.13 shows the scores for the different parameters under Payment Process. Table 3.13: Payment Process No Factor Index (%) a. Timely payment of suppliers b. Payments are made as stipulated in the contract c. There is no inducement of KFS officers to process payment Average The mean score for Payment Process was 68.14%. The highest score was Timely payment of suppliers 74.48% followed by Payments are made as stipulated in the contract 68.48% and There is no inducement of KFS officers to process payment 61.46%. Figure 3.13 below shows the summary of the scores on a graph. 21

33 Timely payment of suppliers Payments are made as stipulated in the contract There is no inducement of KFS officers to process payment Average Index (%) Payment Process Factor Figure 3.13: Payment Process 3.5 Student Satisfaction Index The overall Student Satisfaction Index was 66.97%. The Table below shows summary of survey findings per survey parameters. Table 3.14 Summary of Students Satisfaction Index No Factor Index (%) a. Academic Processes b. Learning Environment c. Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities d. Admission Process and Fees e. Management and Leadership f. Extracurricular Activities g. Relationship With Staff Average The highest score was Academic Processes 76.73% followed by Learning Environment 76.08%, Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities 73.82%, Admission Process and Fees 68.3%, Management and Leadership 59.74%, Extracurricular Activities 58% and finally Relationship With Staff 56.13%. Figure 3.14 below shows graphical representation of Students Satisfaction Key parameters. 22

34 Academic Processes Learning Environment Cafeteria/Hostels/Security Facilities Admission Process and Fees Management and Leadership Extracurricular Activities Relationship With Staff Average Index (%) Student Satisfaction Indices Factor Figure 3.14 Student Satisfaction Indices Academic Processes Table 3.15 below shows performance of Key indicators on Academic Processes. Table 3.15 Academic Processes No Factor Index (%) a. In general, the course facilitators (lecturer) at KFC display high standards of competence b. There are no classes clashes on the KFC timetable c. The time allocated for each lecture session is reasonable d. Examination-related issues are promptly addressed e. Lectures always begin on time f. Examinations results at KFC are processed and released on time g. I am satisfied with the course registration process at the start of the semester h. The student evaluation methods at KFC are objective i. The curriculum taught at KFC is relevant j. Lecturers are available for consultations Average The mean score for Academic Process was 76.73%. The highest score was In general, the course facilitators (lecturer) at KFC display high standards of competence. 9.14% followed by There are no classes clashes on the KFC timetable 86.83%, The time allocated for each 23

35 In general, the course facilitators (lecturer) at KFC display high There are no classes clashes on the KFC timetable The time allocated for each lecture session is reasonable Examination-related issues are promptly addressed Lectures always begin on time Examinations results at KFC are processed and released on time I am satisfied with the course registration process at the start of The student evaluation methods at KFC are objective The curriculum taught at KFC is relevant Lecturers are available for consultations Average Index (%) lecture session is reasonable 85.49%, Examination-related issues are promptly addressed 85.07%, Lectures always begin on time 81.11%, Examinations results at KFC are processed and released on time 80%, I am satisfied with the course registration process at the start of the semester 72.18%, The student evaluation methods at KFC are objective 67.05%, The curriculum taught at KFC is relevant 59.72% and finally Lecturers are available for consultations 59.7%. Figure 3.15 below shows graphical representation of Key indicators on Academic Processes. Academic Processes Factor Figure 3.15 Academic Processes Learning Environment Table 3.16 below shows key indicators under Learning Environment. Table 3.16: Learning Environment No Factor Index (%) a. The lecture theatres/rooms are clean b. The lighting in the lecture theatres/rooms is adequate c. I am satisfied with availability of relevant journals in the library d. The environment at the College is conducive for learning e. External noise does not interfere with lectures/classes f. There is enough furniture in the lecture theatres/classes

36 No Factor Index (%) g. I am satisfied with the availability of ICT facilities at KFC h. Laboratories are adequate i. An audio system is of good quality j. The level of technology used in lecturing is of high standards k. I am satisfied with availability of relevant books in the library l. I am satisfied with the level of access of ICT facilities by students m. Lecturers theatres/rooms are adequate Average The mean score for Learning Environment was 76.08%. The highest score was The lecture theatres/rooms are clean 90.69% followed by The lighting in the lecture theatres/rooms is adequate 90.68%, I am satisfied with availability of relevant journals in the library 86.17%, The environment at the University is conducive for learning 85.63%, External noise does not interfere with lectures/classes 77.76%, There is enough furniture in the lecture theatres/classes 76.77%, I am satisfied with the availability of ICT facilities at KFC 76.68%, Laboratories are adequate 74.98%, An audio system is of good quality 70.36%, The level of technology used in lecturing is of high standards 69.77%, I am satisfied with availability of relevant books in the library 64.77%, I am satisfied with the level of access of ICT facilities by students 63.32% and finally Lecturers theatres/rooms are adequate 61.45%. Figure 3.16 below shows the results on Learning Environment. 25

37 The lecture theatres/rooms are clean The lighting in the lecture theatres/rooms is adequate I am satisfied with availability of relevant journals in the library The environment at the College is conducive for learning External noise does not interfere with lectures/classes There is enough furniture in the lecture theatres/classes I am satisfied with the availability of ICT facilities at KFC Laboratories are adequate An audio system is of good quality The level of technology used in lecturing is of high standards I am satisfied with availability of relevant books in the library I am satisfied with the level of access of ICT facilities by students Lecturers theatres/rooms are adequate Average Index (%) Learning Environment Factor Figure 3.16 Learning Environment Cafeteria / Hostels and Security Facilities The results for Cafeteria/Hostel and Security Facilities were as shown in Table 3.17 below. Table 3.17 Cafeteria/ Hostels/Security Facilities No Factor Index (%) a. The hostels facilities at KFC are of high standard (if applicable) b. I am satisfied with the quality of food served at the cafeteria/dining hall(s) c. The cost of food at the cafeteria/dining hall is reasonable d. The cafeteria/dining hall is clean e. The student wash rooms are clean f. I am satisfied with the security measures within KFC g. The students wash rooms are sufficient h. Security staff at KFC are courteous i. The student hostels are always clean (if applicable) Average

38 The hostels facilities at KFC are of high standard (if applicable) I am satisfied with the quality of food served at the The cost of food at the cafeteria/dining hall is reasonable The cafeteria/dining hall is clean The student wash rooms are clean I am satisfied with the security measures within KFC The students wash rooms are sufficient Security staff at KFC are courteous The student hostels are always clean (if applicable) Average Index (%) The mean score Cafeteria/ hostels/ security facilities was 73.82%. The highest score was The hostels facilities at KFC are of high standard (if applicable) 80.06% followed by I am satisfied with the quality of food served at the cafeteria/dining hall(s) 79.99%, The cost of food at the cafeteria/dining hall is reasonable 79.5%, The cafeteria/dining hall is clean 69.92%, I am satisfied with the security measures within KFC 69.87%, The students wash rooms are sufficient 69.84%, Security staff at KFC are courteous 68.73% and finally The student hostels are always clean (if applicable) 67.6%. The results are shown in Figure 3.17 below. Cafeteria /Hostels and Security facilities Factor Figure 3.17 Cafeteria /Hostels and Security facilities Admission Process and Fees Table 3.18 below shows key parameters under Admission Process. Table 3.18 Admission Process No Factor Index (%) a. Fees at KFC are competitive b. Student registration process at KFC is straight forward c. The admission process at KFC is transparent d. I am satisfied with the KFC fees payment processes Average

39 Fees at KFC are competitive Student registration process at KFC is straight forward The admission process at KFC is transparent I am satisfied with the KFC fees payment processes Average Index (%) The mean score for Admission Process was 68.3%. The highest score was Fees at KFC are competitive 82.85% followed by Student registration process at KFC is straight forward 70.41%, The admission process at KFC is transparent 69.29% and finally I am satisfied with the KFC fees payment processes 50.66%. Figure 3.18 below shows graphical representation of performance on Admission process and fees at KFC. Admission Process Factor Figure 3.18: Admission Process Management and Leadership Table 3.19 below provides key parameters on Management and Leadership. Table 3.19 Management and Leadership No Factor Index (%) a. The student leadership at KFC is effective b. KFC top management responds promptly to important issues affecting the students c. I am satisfied with the students disciplinary process at KFC d. I am satisfied with academic division of the College e. KFC management supports student union activities f. I am satisfied with KFC s effort to support needy students g. Administrative delays at KFC cause indiscipline among students h. I am satisfied with KFC medical service Average

40 The student leadership at KFS is effective KFS top management responds promptly to important issues I am satisfied with the students disciplinary process at KFS I am satisfied with academic division of the university KFS management supports student union activities I am satisfied with KFS s effort to support needy students Administrative delays at KFS cause indiscipline among I am satisfied with KFS medical service Average Index (%) The mean score for Management and Leadership was 59.74%. The highest score was The student leadership at KFC is effective 82.82% followed by KFC top management responds promptly to important issues affecting the students 70.99%, I am satisfied with the students disciplinary process at KFC 69.36%, I am satisfied with academic division of the university 58.58%, KFC management supports student union activities 55.78%, I am satisfied with KFC s effort to support needy students 49.59%, Administrative delays at KFC cause indiscipline among students 49.57% and finally I am satisfied with KFC medical service 41.23%. Figure 3.19 below provides key parameters on leadership and management on students. Management and Leadership Factor Figure 3.19: Management and Leadership Extra Curricular Activities Table 3.20 below shows key indicators under Extra-Curricular Activities. Table 3.20: Extracurricular Activities No Factor Index (%) a. KFC s has a satisfactory range of social amenities (e.g. football pitches) Hockey fields, etc b. I am satisfied with KFC s support in extra-curricular activities c. The social amenities are well maintained Average

41 KFC s has a satisfactory range of social amenities (e.g. football pitches) Hockey fields, etc I am satisfied with KFC s support in extra-curricular activities The social amenities are well maintained Average Index (%) The mean score for Extracurricular activities was 58%. The highest score was KFC s has a satisfactory range of social amenities (e.g. football pitches) Hockey fields, etc 64.8% followed by I am satisfied with KFC s support in extra-curricular activities 59.72% and The social amenities are well maintained 49.49%. Figure 3.20 below shows key indicators under extracurricular activities. Extracurricular Activities Factor Figure 3.20 Extracurricular Activities Relationship with staff Table 3.21 below shows the key parameters that are indicators of effective student/staff relationship. Table 3.21: Relationship with staff No Factor Index (%) a. There is an appropriate communication channel between management and students b. The non-teaching staff at KFC are courteous c. KFC staff responds to administrative queries promptly d. Student complaints are handled in a timely manner e. Departmental staff provide sufficient information Average

42 There is an appropriate communication channel between management and students The non-teaching staff at KFC are courteous KFC staff responds to administrative queries promptly Student complaints are handled in a timely manner Departmental staff provide sufficient information Average Index (%) The average score for Relationship with staff was 56.13%. The highest score was There is an appropriate communication channel between management and students 71.04% followed by The non-teaching staff at KFC are courteous 60.28%, KFC staff responds to administrative queries promptly 56.95%, Student complaints are handled in a timely manner 46.77% and finally Departmental staff provide sufficient information 45.61%. Figure 3.21 below shows a graphical representation of relationship with staff at KFC. Relationship with Staff Factor Figure 3.21: Relationship with Staff 31