Title to go here
Residents’ Survey 2009London Borough of Sutton
2
Contents
Background, methodology and technical notes………slide 3Executive summary……………………………………...slide 12Key trends and areas of focus..………………………..slide 151) Quality of life and the area…………………………..slide 222) Community safety…………………………………….slide 443) Local public services …. …………………………….slide 534) Corporate Health ……………………………………..slide 625) Informing residents…………………………………....slide 776) Local democracy……………………………………...slide 887) Contacting the Council..……………….....................slide 958) Environmental issues ………………………………..slide 1039) Economic optimism…………………………………..slide 11110) Safeguarding children………………………………slide 117
3
Background
This report presents the findings from the 2009 Residents’ Survey conducted by Ipsos MORI on behalf of the London Borough of Sutton.
Having conducted several previous waves of residents’ research, this survey has an important role to play for the Council in terms of tracking residents’ satisfaction.
Specifically, the objectives of this survey were to:
– measure residents’ satisfaction with the Council and the services it provides;
– explore the attitudes of residents to the objectives of the Council; and
– explore attitudes of residents to action taken by the Council.
4
Methodology
Ipsos MORI conducted interviews with 802 adults aged 16+ living in the London Borough of Sutton.
Interviews were conducted face-to-face using Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI).
Quotas were set on age, gender and work status to match the profile of the population of Sutton. Data are also weighted to these profiles.
Fieldwork took place between 5th October and 19th November 2009.
5
Technical note Where results do not sum to 100, this may be due to multiple
responses, computer rounding or the exclusion of don’t knows/not stated.
An asterisk (*) represents a value of less than one half or one percent, but not zero.
Throughout the questionnaire, local residents were asked to think about their local area when responding to questions - defined as the area within 15 to 20 minutes walking distance from the respondents’ home.
“Net” figures represent the balance of opinion on attitudinal questions and provides a useful means of comparing the data for a number of variables. (E.g. in the case of a “net agree” figure, this represents the percentage who agree about a particular issue, less the percentage who disagree. For example, if 38% of residents agree they can influence Council-run services, and 62% disagree, the “net agree” figure is -24.)
6
Guide to statistical reliability
The variation between the sample results and the “true” values (the findings that would have been obtained if everyone had been interviewed) can be predicted from knowledge of the sample sizes on which the results are based and the number of times that a particular answer is given.
For example, on a question where 50% of the people respond with a particular answer, the chances are 95 in 100 that this result would not vary, plus or minus, by more than 3.5 percentage points.
NB: Strictly speaking the tolerances shown here apply only to random samples; in practice good quality quota sampling has been found to be as accurate.
Approximate sampling tolerances applicable to percentages at or near these levels
10% or 90%
30% or 70%
50%
2.1 3.2 3.5
Size of sample which survey result is based (802)
7
Guide to statistical reliability 2
When results are compared between sub groups (e.g. males versus females), different results may be obtained. The difference may be “real”, or it may occur by chance (because not everyone was interviewed). To test if the difference is a real one - i.e. if it is “statistically significant” - we have to know the size of the samples, the percentage giving a certain answer and the degree of confidence chosen.
For example, if 50% of males (base size: 358) give a particular answer, and 53% of females (base size: 444) give the same answer, there is not a statistically significant difference between the responses of the two groups.
If however, 58% of females give the same answer, then this is a statistically significant difference (since there is more than a 7.0 percentage point difference between the two).
Differences required for significance at or near these levels
10% or 90%
30% or 70%
50%
358 males vs. 444 females
4.2 6.4 7.0
709 White vs. 91 BME
6.6 10.1 11.0
8
To inform our analysis, residents were placed into one of six Local Committee Areas based on the ward in which they lived. The breakdown used was as follows:
1) Beddington and Wallington:
Beddington North; Beddington South; Wallington North; Wallington South
2) Sutton:
Sutton Central; Sutton North; Sutton West
3) Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont:
Belmont; Cheam; Sutton South
4) Carshalton and Clockhouse:
Carshalton Central; Carlshalton South and Clockhouse
5) St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley:
St Helier; the Wrythe; Wandle Valley
6) Cheam North and Worcester Park:
Worcester Park; Nonsuch; Stonecut
Area analysis
9
Sample Profile
Women
Sample Profile for Sutton: Key demographics
20%
17%
21%
42%
58%
17%
50%
50%
18%
16%
7%
55%
45%
17%
22%
13%
47%
53%
14%
19%
Men
16-24
25-34
35-44
Residents’ Survey sample (unweighted)
Population (Census 2008 mid-year estimates)
65+
Full-time
Not full-time
Gender
Age
Work status
55-64
Base: All valid responses. Source: Age and gender from 2008 Mid Year estimates. Work status from 2001 Census.
Base size 2009
358
444
60
127
146
161
136
172
338
464
45-54
10
Comparative data Where possible, comparisons have been made between:
- Sutton’s 2005 Residents’ Survey (based on 1,013 residents interviewed face-to-face between 20th June and 12th August 2005).
- Sutton’s 2007 Residents’ Survey (based on 813 residents interviewed face-to-face between 12th October and 19th November 2007).
- Sutton’s 2008/09 Place Survey (postal)
- National and London-wide 2008/09 Place Survey (postal)
However, comparisons between the postal and face-to-face survey methodologies should be treated with caution due to the difference in collection methods, and the impact this has been shown to have on results. They should therefore be treated as indicative comparators only.
Please also note that where comparisons have been made between the 2009 Residents’ Survey and the 2008/09 Place Survey, the 2009 Residents’ Survey data has been re-based to include ‘all valid responses’ as prescribed by CLG for all Place Surveys.
For comparison, we have also included data from our normative database from other face-to-face surveys Ipsos MORI has carried out in London since 2006. This is anonymised, but we have shown on the charts which are inner London and which are outer London boroughs.
11
Acknowledgements and publication of data
Ipsos MORI would like to thank the 802 residents of Sutton who took part in the survey.
We would also like to thank Ben Unsworth from Sutton Council for his help in getting the questionnaire into field and for his input throughout the survey process.
As the London Borough of Sutton has engaged Ipsos MORI to undertake an objective programme of research, it is important to protect the organisation’s interests by ensuring that it is accurately reflected in any press release or publication of the findings. As part of our standard terms and conditions, the publication of the findings of this PowerPoint report is therefore subject to the advance approval of Ipsos MORI. Such approval will only be refused on the grounds of inaccuracy or misrepresentation.
12
Executive summary
13
Executive Summary: Local area and quality of life
The proportion of residents reporting satisfaction with the area remains at a high level (90%), and there has been an improvement in perceived safety after dark .
Cohesion also remains strong in Sutton, with more than eight in ten agreeing that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
Residents are most likely to cite activities for teenagers as most in need of improvement in the area, while crime is seen as the most important issue generally.
There have been some significant improvement in reported recycling behaviour, with more residents saying that they recycle a range of materials than in 2007.
14
Executive Summary: The Council and local services
The proportion of residents saying they are satisfied with Sutton Council remains broadly at the high level set in previous years (72%). This is particularly encouraging given the fall in satisfaction recorded nationally (and particularly in outer London) by the 2008/09 Place Surveys.
Furthermore satisfaction has also increased with some key Council-run services, such as street cleaning and secondary education, and parks and open spaces.
Despite this, the proportion of residents agreeing that the Council provides value for money has fallen since 2007 (from 44% to 40%) – this may be related to a drop in the proportion of residents saying that they feel informed by the services provided by the Council.
In line with 2007, around two in five residents feel that they can influence Council-run services. However, as in previous years, only one in five want to be more involved in doing do.
Of those who have contacted the Council, most are positive about their experience. There has been an increase in the proportion saying that they used the call centre to contact the Council from 2007, with fewer visiting Council offices in person.
15
Key trends and areas of focus
16
Key trends since 2005 – Quality of life
2005 2007 2009
The area has got better to live in over the past two years
10 10 9
Feel safe after dark 46 50 60
Agree that residents from different backgrounds get on well
81 82 84
There has been little shift in the proportion saying the area is getting better since 2005, but fewer say the area has got worse than in previous years.
However, more residents feel safe walking alone in their local area after dark in 2009 than in 2007.
Sutton residents are as likely to agree in 2009 than in previous years that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
17
Key trends since 2005 – Sutton Council
2005 2007 2009
Satisfaction with the way Sutton Council runs things
67 69 72
Council gives good value for money 42 44 40
Sutton Council is NOT remote and impersonal
36 36 35
The level of satisfaction with the Council overall has shown little change since 2005, but has maintained a relatively high level.
Likewise, the proportion of residents who do not see the Council as too remote and impersonal has not changed.
However, there has been a drop of four percentage points since 2007 in terms of perceived value for money.
18
Key trends since 2005 – Feeling informed and getting involved
2005 2007 2009
Feel informed about the services and benefits provided by Sutton Council
61 58 45
Would like to have more of a say in what the Council does
22 15 19
Feel able to influence Council-run services
35 35 38
The proportion of residents who want to get more involved is lower than in 2005, but has crept up slightly since 2007.
However, while there has been no change in residents’ perceived ability to influence Council-run services, the extent to which they feel informed by Sutton Council has dropped since 2007.
19
Feeling informed and being engaged
Considering longer-term trends, residents’ views on whether they feel well informed, or would like to be more involved, may warrant particular attention:
One of the most significant falls in the 2009 survey is in the proportion of residents who feel informed about the services and benefits provided by Sutton Council: this has fallen from two-thirds (65%) of residents in 1999 to just under six in ten (58%) in 2007, and now sits at around two in five (45%). Furthermore, this compares slightly less favourably to other areas - half (49%) of those questioned in face-to-face surveys in Outer London Boroughs by Ipsos MORI in 2009 feel informed.
This is particularly important given that the majority of residents would like to know what the Council is doing, but are happy to let it get on with its job. Similar to 1999, six in ten agree with this statement (60% in 1999, compared to 62% in 2009).
20
Feeling informed and being engaged cont… Despite a small rise from 2007, the proportion of residents who would
like more of a say in what the Council does and the services it provides remains lower than in 1999 (24% in 1999, 15% in 2007 and 19% in 2009). Those who would like more of a say are more likely to be dissatisfied with their local area and with Sutton Council overall; so it is worth noting the small increase in desire for involvement since 2007.
Feeling informed about Council services and benefits is strongly related to higher levels of satisfaction with the local area, Sutton Council and perceived value for money. While satisfaction with the authority has risen, perceptions of value for money have slipped, and this may be linked to falling levels in the proportion of residents feeling informed.
There may be an opportunity to reverse this falling trend by making better use of the direct information provided by Sutton Council (which is accessed by half (51%) of residents) and the Council website (which one in three (32%) access).
21
Roads, pavements, traffic and parking
Again, looking at longer-term trends, there also appears to be particular concern about the use and state of Sutton’s roads and pavements:
Having risen between 2003 and 2007, satisfaction with road and pavement maintenance has fallen considerably in 2009. Given this is a highly visible service closely associated with the Council, it may be appropriate to target action in areas where these concerns are most prominent.
Close to three in ten (28%) feel that traffic congestion is an area most in need of improvement within Sutton. Furthermore, around a quarter (23%) feel that road repairs are also an area of concern.
When it comes to environmental issues, Sutton residents are most likely to feel that parking is a problem in their area. A third (33%) of residents cite this as a particular concern compared to a quarter (25%) in 2007. Speeding traffic remains the second highest individual concern (27% cite it as an issue). Dog fouling has also risen as a general concern (from 11% in 2007 to 16% in 2009).
% satisfied with 2003 2005 2007 2009
Road maintenance 54 59 63 54
Pavement maintenance 54 57 63 50
22
Main Findings 1: Quality of life and the area
23
Summary
Nine in ten residents (90%) are satisfied with their local area.
Most residents (60%) think that their local area has not changed much in the last two years. Although one in four (25%) think that it has got worse, this has declined from three in ten (29%) in 2007 and close to four in ten (37%) in 2005.
The level of crime (46%), public transport (40%) and clean streets (39%) are seen as the most important things in making an area a good place to live.
However, with the exception of level of crime (27% of residents cite this), the things most in need of improvement tend to differ from those seen as more important: these being activities for teenagers (31%), traffic congestions (28%).
Linked to this, tackling crime and anti-social behaviour is the service most residents think is important to invest in (65%).
In line with previous years, more than eight in ten (84%) agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together.
24
25%
64%
4%4%1%*%
9 in 10 residents are satisfied with their local area
Neither/nor
Very satisfied
Fairly dissatisfied
Fairly satisfied
Very dissatisfied
Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
Net satisfaction score +84
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Satisfied
90%
Don’t know
25
90
90
87
83
79
76
74
73
73
Inner LB 2009
Sutton 2009
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2009
Inner LB
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2007
Outer LB 2006
Outer LB 2008
Sutton performs well compared with other Boroughs, particularly those in outer London
% Satisfied with area
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
26
90 80 75 79 73
1410126
And this compares favourably to the 8 in 10 recorded in the 2008/09 Place survey – and greater than outer London
Q Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
**Sutton08/09
Place SurveyInne
rOute
rLondo
n
* Sutton 2009 Residents’
survey
*Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (800) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1205).
Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only
Place Survey data 2008/09
27
90%
6%
55-64 year olds, C2DE and social renting residents are less likely to be satisfied with their local areaQ1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place
to live?
Dissatisfied
Satisfied
Age
Socio-economicgroup
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
ABC1
C2DE
Tenure
Social rented
Owner occupier
Private rented 94%
82%
91%
87%
92%
91%
81%
89%
92%
92%
Proportion who are satisfied
16-34
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
28
Residents from St. Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley are less likely to feel satisfied with their local area
26
25
40
14
18
25
66
67
54
80
63
61
3
4
3
7
6
5
4
3
2
10
7
1
1
1
1
3
% Very satisfied % Fairly satisfied %Neither nor
% Fairly dissatisfied %Very dissatisfied Don't know
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
% Satisfied
92
92
94
93
81
87
% Dissatisfied
5
3
2
0
13
8
Q1 Overall, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with your local area as a place to live?
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Base
179
152
124
76
134
137
29
What impacts on satisfaction with local area?
Perceptions of cohesion and safety appear to be related to satisfaction with local area: those who believe that people from different backgrounds get on well together and those who feel safe when walking outside after dark are more likely to be satisfied with their local area as a place to live that those who do not (92% and 93% compared to 72% and 87% respectively ).
Residents who feel informed about Sutton Council overall are also more positive, with more than nine in ten of those who feel informed being satisfied with their local area (94% compared to 86% of those who not feel informed).
Attitudes towards Sutton Council are also important: eight in ten (81%) of those who disagree that the Council provides value for money and six in ten who are dissatisfied with the Council overall (61%) are satisfied with their local area, compared with nine in ten overall (90%).
30
9%
60%
25%
5%1%
1 in 4 (25%) think the area has got worse over the last 2 years, although this is fewer than in 2007 (29%) and 2005 (37%)
Area has got better
Area has not changed
much
Area has got worse
Have lived here less than two
years
Q2 On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much?
Don’t know/can’t remember
% Got better
% Not changed
much
% Got worse
2005 10 44 37
2007 10 49 29
2009 9 60 25
-16 Net Better
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
31
29
25
10
9
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2007
Sutton 2009
Although the proportion satisfied with the area is greater than elsewhere in London, in terms of perceived positive change, Sutton is performing worse than other London Boroughs
% Believe the area has got better
Q On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
32
9%
60%
25%
6%
Perceptions that the area has got worse increase with age; however male, BME and those renting privately are more positive
Got worse
Got better
Age
Gender
Ethnicity
35-44
45-54
55-64
Male
Female
65+
White
BME
Tenure
Social rented
Owner occupier
Private rented
Proportion who say ‘got worse’
16-34
6%
30%
27%
11%
27%
29%
21%
34%
41%
35%
22%
9%
Q2 On the whole, do you think that over the past two years, this area has got better or worse to live in, or haven’t things changed much?
Not changed much
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Lived here less than 2 years /
don’t know
33
Aspects of life that are seen as important are not necessarily the same as those that are seen as in need of improvement locally
46
40
39
33
31
31
30
23
18
17
17
16
14
27
8
19
8
8
9
11
16
31
12
28
14
23
The level of crime
Public transport
Clean streets
Parks and open spaces
Education provision
Health services
Shopping facilities
Affordable decent housing
Activities for teenagers
Facilities for young children
The level of traffic congestion
Job prospects
Road and pavement repairs
% Most important generally % Most need improving
Q3 From the list, which four or five, if any, would you say are most important in making somewhere a good place to live?Q4 Thinking about this local area, which of the things below, if any, do you think most need improving?
The ‘Level of Crime’ is the most important issue (46%), activities for teenagers is the area most in need of improvement (31%)
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
The most important
issues tend not to be
those perceived as most in need
of improvement
34
Level of crime is seen as the most important but activities for teenagers most in need of improving. Clean streets and housing are also priorities for residents
0
10
20
30
40
0 10 20 30 40 50
% Most need improving locally
% Important generally
Cultural facilitiesEducation
Access to nature
Public transport
Community activities
Sports & leisure
Facilities for young children
Parks and open spacesWages/ cost
of living
Race relations
Pollution
Job prospects
Health services
Shopping
Traffic congestion
Road/pavement maintenance
Affordable decent housing
Clean streets
Activitiesfor teenagers
Level of crime
Mean: 21
Mean: 13
Most important
Most needs improving
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
35
What needs improving locally – by Local Committee AreaSt. Helier, the Wrythe and
Wandle Valley
Activities for teenagers 41%
Level of crime 30%
Traffic congestion 28%
Road and Pavement repairs 24%
Affordable decent housing 21%
Cheam North and Worcester Park
Traffic congestion 39%
Activities for teenagers 27%
Level of crime 22%
Road and Pavement repairs 19%
Sports and leisure facilities 15%
Carlshalton and Clockhouse
Activities for teenagers 27%
Road and Pavement repairs 24%
Job prospects 18%
Traffic congestion 17%
Facilities for young children 15%
NB Residents in Carlshalton and Clockhouse, and Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont are more likely to say “none of these” (14% and 11%
respectively, vs 5% overall)
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
36
What needs improving locally – by Local Committee Area
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Activities for teenagers 21%
Level of crime 19%
Clean streets 19%
Traffic congestion 17%
Affordable decent housing 14%
Sutton
Level of crime 38%
Activities for teenagers 28%
Road and Pavement repairs 25%
Clean streets 23%
Affordable decent housing 20%
Beddington and Wallington
Traffic congestion 42%
Activities for teenagers 36%
Road and Pavement repairs 31%
Level of crime 31%
The level of pollution 24%
37
Tackling crime and anti-social behaviour is the top priority for residents in terms of investment priorities
65
41
41
33
31
30
27
25
22
20
Tackling crime and ASB
Supporting elderly and vulnerable people
Regenerating run-down areas
Improving educational standards
Helping people to develop skills and find work
Providing more out-of-school activities and facilities
Building new council housing and affordable homes
Providing safer roads for pedestrians and cyclists
Helping local businesses to prosper
Making the streets cleaners
Q35. Which of these services do you think are the most important for the Council to invest in?
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
38
27%33% 35%
73%
36%
45%
36%
69%
51%
33%29%
68%
57%
30%26%
59%53%
24% 22%
59%
Tackling crime and ASB Supporting elderly andvulnerable residents
Improving educationsstandards
Helping people todevelop skills and find
work
16-34 35-44 45-5455-64 65+
Investment priorities differ by age
Tackling crime and ASB is a particular concern for middle age groups; older residents are more
likely to be concerned about support for the elderly; and younger age groups are more likely
to be concerned about education and skills
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q35. Which of these services do you think are the most important for the Council to invest in?
39
10%
74%
6%2%
7%
In line with 2007, more than 8 in 10 agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together
Definitely agree
Tend to disagree
Tend to agree
Definitely disagree
Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?
Net agree score +76
% Agree%
DisagreeNet agree
2005 81 7 +74
2007 82 10 +72
2009 84 8 +76
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
40
84
83
81
77
74
65
64
Sutton 2009
Inner LB 2008
Inner LB 2009
Inner LB 2009
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2008
Outer LB 2007
Cohesion appears to be a strength in Sutton, particularly when compared to outer London Boroughs
% Agree
Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
41
91 84 75 78 75
22 259 16 25
London
Place Survey data 2008/09
Inner Outer
Perceptions of community cohesion are more positive than in the 2008/09 Place survey
Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?
% Agree % Disagree
**Sutton08/09
Place Survey
* Sutton 2009 Residents’
survey
*Base: All excluding responses of “Don’t know”, “Too few people” and “All same backgrounds” (734) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (982).
Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only
42
Carshalton and Clockhouse residents are the most likely to feel people from different backgrounds get on well together
Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?
2
10
22
8
8
11
94
75
63
74
73
70
3
6
5
6
8
5
3
2
2
8
1
8
8
11
9
6
% Definitely agree % Tend to agree
% Tend to disagree % Definitely disagree
% Don't know % Too few / all same backgrounds
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
% Agree
% Disagree
Net agree
Base
96 3 +93 76
85 6 +79 179
85 8 +77 124
82 7 +75 137
81 10 +71 152
81 13 +68 134
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
43
76%
80%
86%
77%
85%
White residents and those living in owner occupied homes are the most likely to agree that people from different backgrounds get on well together
Q81 To what extent do you agree or disagree that your local area is a place where people from different backgrounds get on well together?
84%
8%Disagree
Agree
Proportion who agree
Ethnicity
White
BME
Tenure
Social rented
Private rented
Owner occupier
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
44
Main Findings 2: Community safety
45
Summary
Almost all residents feel safe during the day (96%), although those living in social rented accommodation are less likely to say this.
Generally, levels of perceived safety after have improved since previous years. Around a third feel unsafe (32%) – this is highest in the Beddington/Wallington and St Helier areas.
Sutton compares well with other London Boroughs, both outer and inner, in terms of perceived safety.
In terms of being a victim of crime, residents are most likely to be worried about ASB (58%) – this is reflected in their priorities for policing in the area.
46
1
8
3
24
43
44
53
16 8 1
Around a third of residents feel unsafe at night, but more residents feel safe than in previous years
Q68/69 How safe or unsafe do you feel when outside in your local area…
% Never go out
% Fairly safe % Fairly unsafe
% Very unsafe
During the day
At night
2009 2007 2005
96 95 92
60 52 47
Women, BME residents, and social renters are more likely to feel unsafe in the day
Women and those living in Beddington/Wallington and St Helier are more likely to feel unsafe after dark
% Safe
% Very safe
% Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
47
96
92
92
90
88
84
Sutton 2009
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2007
Inner LB 2009
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2008
Perceived safety during the day is higher in Sutton than elsewhere in London
% Safe
Q How safe do you feel walking outside in this neighbourhood alone in the daytime?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
48
74
60
54
54
52
43
42
Inner LB 2009
Sutton 2009
Inner LB 2008
Inner LB 2009
Outer LB 2007
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2008
Sutton residents are also among the most likely to feel safe after dark in London, and much higher than other outer London Boroughs
% Safe
Q How safe do you feel walking outside in this neighbourhood alone after dark?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
49
Residents from the St. Helier, and Beddington /Wallington areas are more likely to feel unsafe after dark
16
9
17
9
30
14
35
35
36
54
43
73
30
31
25
22
18
10
12
10
9
9
4
6
15
11
6
7
1
2
11
% Very safe % Fairly safe % Fairly unsafe % Very unsafe
% Never go out % Don't know
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
% Unsafe
42
41
34
31
18
14
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q69 How safe or unsafe do you feel when outside in your local area alone after dark?
Base
179
134
137
152
124
76
50
10%
38%
20%
9%
22%
1%
In line with 2007, around half say they feel safe on public transport after dark
Very safe
A bit unsafe
Fairly safe
Very unsafe
Q70 How safe do you feel travelling on public transport in this area alone after dark?
% Safe % Unsafe
2005 35 31
2007 44 29
2009 48 28
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Never use
Again, it is women and those living in Beddington/Wallington and St Helier who are more likely to feel unsafe
51
% Not at all worried
14139998685
4441
39333030
2917
12
3841
4451
444755
5149
4
5
7
7
15
14
10
24
32
2
1
1
Sutton residents are most concerned about anti-social behaviour, but around half are also concerned about burglary and vandalism Q71-79 And now could you tell me how worried you are about being the victim of each of these crimes in the area?
% Don’t know
% Fairly worried % Not very worried
2009 2007 2005
58 64 71
54 47 55
49 52 60
42 46 49
39 35 42
38 35 39
35 37 42
25 26 33
18 18 22
% Worried% Very worried
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Burglary
Anti-social behaviour
Robbery in the street
Vandalism
Theft (incl contents of car)
Theft of car
Rape/sexual assault
Attack (other than robbery or rape)
Racist attacks
52
Q80 Which two or three, if any, should be given the highest priority?
52%38%
30%26%25%24%
17%17%
12%11%
3%
5%*%
This is reflected in preferred policing priorities
Anti-social behaviour
Drug related crime
Town centre crime
Sex offences
Hate crimes
Street robbery
Vandalism
Theft
Disorder / disturbances
Domestic violence
Graffiti
Other
Don’t know
(22) (26) (24) (13) (13) (7) (6) (2) (4)
(18) (20) (37) (60)
2007 %
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
53
Main Findings 3: Local Public Services
54
Summary
There is a high level of satisfaction with the majority of universal services in Sutton, but there appear to be concerns about road and pavement maintenance – while more are satisfied than dissatisfied, satisfaction has fallen since 2007.
In terms of leisure and cultural facilities, satisfaction is highest with libraries and parks and open spaces, and this has increased since 2007– this increases further among users.
Residents are also considerably more likely to be satisfied with education services than dissatisfied, particularly primary and secondary schools, and adult education.
Encouragingly, there is a high level of satisfaction with recycling and this has increased since 2007.
Parks and bus services are the most frequently used services, but others are also used often – two in five use libraries or sports facilities at least once a month, and a third use the local tip.
55
9
18
8
12
9
29
82
80
71
67
67
65
54
50
8
30
Universal services: residents are satisfied on balance, but there are some concerns over road and pavement maintenance, satisfaction with which has fallen since 2007. Significant increases in satisfaction since 2005 can be seen with street cleaning, and maintenance of grass verges and trees
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q5-12 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Street lighting
Refuse collection
Pavement maintenance
Road maintenance
Maintenance of trees
Care of the environment
Maintenance of grass verges
Street cleaning
(83)
(88)
(65)
(57)
(52)
(62)
(59)
(57)
(84)
(81)
(67)
(62)
(62)
(60)
(63)
(63)
2007 2005
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
56
6
5
6
5
46
42
42
27
23
5
Education and care services: Satisfaction is highest with primary schools, with fewer residents expressing an opinion about childrens’ services and social services. A significant improvement can be seen in perceptions of secondary education.
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Primary schools
Social services
Adult education /
SCOLA
Services for under 5s*
Secondary schools
(29)
(24)
(45)
(18)
(n/a)
(45)
(38)
(39)
(28)
(27)
2007 2005
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009 * Please note that, in 2007, the statement read “Borough services for the under 5s”
57
4
15
9
14
85
72
54
51
32
6
Leisure and cultural services: Residents are most satisfied with parks and open spaces – these have seen a significant rise in satisfaction since 2007. However, a decline in satisfaction can be seen with theatres, arts and events
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Parks and open spaces
Theatres/arts/events
Sports and
swimming facilities
Playgrounds
Libraries
(72)
(69)
(54)
(40)
(44)
(75)
(69)
(55)
(47)
(48)
2007 2005
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
58
3
89
87
5
Users are more satisfied than the public at large
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Parks and open spaces
(571) (76)
(86)
(81)
(86)
2007 2005
Base: All users Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Libraries
(320)
59
10
79
57
10
Environmental services: Levels of satisfaction with green garden waste are maintained from 2007, while satisfaction with recycling has increased
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Recycling
Green garden waste
(81)
(69)
(74)
(56)
2007 2005
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
60
10
42
19
1
Other services: Again, levels of satisfaction are maintained from 2007
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
Q13-26 I would like you to tell me how satisfied or dissatisfied you are with the quality of each of these in your local area?
% Satisfied
Register office
Council housing / Sutton Partnership Housing*
(31)
(15)
(39)
(21)
2007 2005
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
* Please note that, in 2005 and 2007, the statement read “Council housing”
61
Parks and local bus services are most likely to be frequently used, but around two in five also use sports facilities and libraries at least once a month
49
46
24
16
14
7
1
24
16
16
23
19
26
6
5
13
11
12
18
16
32
14
12
6
6
7
10
11
9
16
10
4
7
17
17
13
10
28
27
4
13
25
16
26
17
36
45*
Q27-34 Please indicate how frequently you have used the following public services provided or supported by Sutton Council
Almost every day/At least once a week
About once a month Within the last 6 months
Within the last year Longer ago Never used/ don’t know
Local tips/ household waste recycling centres
Local bus services
Parks/ open spaces
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% At least once a month
Sports/leisure facilities
Libraries
Local transport info
Theatres/concert halls
Museums / galleries
32
63
73
39
39
34
6
5
62
Main Findings 4: Corporate health
63
Summary
Overall satisfaction with the Council is at a similarly high level to previous years (72%), and compares well with other London Boroughs. This is against a backdrop of decline in satisfaction with local authorities recorded in the 2008/09 Place Survey.
Although residents are less likely to speak highly of the Council, the balance is still positive – many would be neutral (49%).
Residents are more likely to disagree than agree that the Council is too remote and impersonal,
There has been a fall of four percentage points since 2007 in the proportion of residents agreeing that the Council provides value for money (from 44% to 40%).
There are some notable geographical differences, however, with those living in St Helier more likely to be negative about Sutton Council.
64
67%
18%
7%2%1%5%
Around seven in ten residents are satisfied with the way the Council runs things
Neither/nor
Very satisfied
Fairly dissatisfied
Fairly satisfied
Very dissatisfied
Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
Net satisfaction score +63
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Satisfied
2005 67
2007 69
2009 72
65
84
72
67
67
65
53
51
43
Inner LB 2009
Sutton 2009
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2006
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2007
Inner LB 2009
Outer LB 2008
Sutton Council is outperforming other outer London Boroughs in this respect
% Satisfied with the council
Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
66
7350 49 55 46 45
23192210
And satisfaction is higher than in the Place Survey
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
**Sutton08/09
Place SurveyInne
rOute
rLondo
n
Place Survey data 2008/9
* Sutton 2009 Residents’
survey National Average
Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
*Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (797) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205).
Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only
67
72%
9%
C2DE and social renting residents are less likely to be satisfied with the Council
Dissatisfied
Satisfied
Age
Socio-economicgroup
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
ABC1
C2DE
Tenure
Social rented
Owner occupier
Private rented 83%
57%
74%
64%
78%
74%
73%
73%
71%
72%
Proportion who are satisfied
16-34
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
68
Residents from St. Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley are least likely to feel satisfied with the Council
5
8
5
3
3
8
80
69
71
66
65
56
8
15
15
26
19
20
4
5
3
5
9
14
2
3
3
2
2
4
% Very satisfied % Fairly satisfied %Neither nor
% Fairly dissatisfied %Very dissatisfied % Don't know
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q36 And now, taking everything into account, how satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the way Sutton Council runs things?
% Satisfied
85
78
76
69
68
64
% Dissatisfied
4
7
7
5
13
17
Base
76
152
124
137
179
134
69
30%
49%
14%4%
1%3%
More residents would speak highly of the Council than negatively, but most would be neutral
Be neutral if asked
Speak highly without being asked
Be critical if asked Speak highly if asked
Be critical without being asked
Q37 Which of the following statements comes closest to how you feel about Sutton Council?
Net advocacy score +15
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Speak highly
33%ABC1 residents, and those living in the Carshalton and Clockhouse area, are more likely to be advocates of the Council (38% and 54% respectively compared to 33% overall).
70
22%
37%
30%
5%2%4%
As in previous years, most residents do NOT agree that the Council is too remote and impersonal
Neither/nor
Strongly agree
Tend to disagree
Tend to agree
Strongly disagree
Net agree score -9
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Agree
2005 30
2007 26
2009 26
No opinion
Q48 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council is too remote and impersonal
Social renters, and those who live in St Helier, are more likely to agree with this statement (35% and 34%).
71
39%
32%
19%
6%3%1%
Value for money: two in five agree that the Council provides it – a slight decline on previous years
Neither/nor
Strongly agree
Tend to disagree
Tend to agree
Strongly disagree
Net agree score +15
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Agree
2005 42
2007 44
2009 40
No opinion
Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money
72
55
40
36
35
32
Inner LB 2009
Sutton 2009
Outer LB 2009
Outer LB 2008
Inner LB 2009
But, Sutton compares favourably with other London Boroughs in terms of perceived Council VfM
% Agree
Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
73
41 36 35 4330 33
34263125
Q49 To what extent do you agree with following statement:
Sutton council gives local residents good value for money?
The Residents’ Survey result also compares well with the Place Survey
% Agree % Disagree
**Sutton08/09
Place SurveyInne
rOute
rLondo
n
Place Survey data 2008/9
* Sutton 2009 Residents’
survey National Average
*Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (782) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205).
Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only
74
40%
25%
White residents, those not working full-time, and those aged 65 or over are more likely to agree that the Council provides VfM
Disagree
Agree
Age
Ethnicity
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
White
BME
Work status
Not working FT
Working FT
44%
36%
27%
42%
50%
44%
37%
36%
37%
Proportion who agree
16-34
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money
75
Residents from St. Helier, and Beddington / Wallington are most likely to DISAGREE that the Council provides value for money
1
1
3
1
51
46
39
36
37
31
37
25
36
22
36
37
10
14
15
27
19
23
2
5
4
11
7
9
3
1
4
1*
3
% Strongly agree % Tend to agree %Neither nor
% Tend to disagree % Strongly disagree % No opinion
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Agree
51
47
41
39
38
32
% Disagree
12
19
20
38
22
30
Q49 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The council gives local residents good value for money
Base
76
124
152
134
137
179
76
What impacts on satisfaction with Sutton Council and perceptions of value for money?
Perceptions of value for money and satisfaction with Sutton Council appear to be related. Three in ten (29%) of those who disagree that Sutton Council provides value for money are dissatisfied with the Council overall compared to just two per cent of those who agree.
Satisfaction with the Council is also higher among those who feel informed about the benefits and services it provides (87% satisfied vs 60% of those who do not feel informed).
Ability to influence Council-run services is also important. Eight in ten of those who feel able to influence services are satisfied with Sutton Council compared to two in three of those who do not feel able to do so (81% vs 65%).
77
Main Findings 5: Informing residents
78
Summary
As in the Place Survey, residents are most likely to say they feel informed about how to vote. However, they are more likely in the Residents’ Survey to feel informed about how public services are performing, the standards they should expect, how to influence decisions, and how to complain. They are also more likely to feel informed overall.
However, the proportion of residents saying they feel informed by the Council has fallen steadily over time (from 58% in 2007 to 45% in 2009), and Sutton now lags behind other London Boroughs in this respect. This is important when we consider the association between levels of being informed and satisfaction with the Council.
Residents obtain most of their information about the Council from the local authority itself, through newspapers, magazines and leaflets (51% say they receive information this way).
79
27
3
6
4
3
3
4
53
45
41
41
42
37
33
13
38
37
39
40
39
45
3
10
11
12
10
16
13
4
4
5
4
5
4
5
% Very well informed % Fairly well informed% Not very well informed % Not very well informed at all% Don't know
Residents are highly informed about registering to vote; they are least informed about how to get involved in local decision-making
Q38-44 How well informed do you feel about each of the following?
How and where to register to vote
How your council tax is spent
How you can get involved in local decision-making
What standard of service you should expect
How well local public services are performing
How to complain about local public services
% Informed
80
48
47
45
45
40
37
What to do in a large-scale emergency
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
80
% Informed (Sutton Residents’)
% Informed (Place – Sutton)
Residents are more likely to say they feel informed about the performance and expected standards of local services in the Residents’ Survey than the Place Survey
How and where to register to vote
How your council tax is spent
How you can get involved in local decision-making
What standard of service you should expect
How well local public services are performing
How to complain about local public services
What to do in the event of a large scale emergency,
eg pandemic flu
% Informed (Place – LBs) Base Sutton
Residents’*
Base Sutton Place**
776 123
769 1,072
768 1,198
769 1,108
773 1,033
802 1,250
770 1,108
Q38-44 How well informed do you feel about each of the following?
*Base: All excluding “Don’t know”. Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09.
Please note that due to the different methodologies, this should be seen as indicative only
80%
50%
49%
48%
47%
40%
39%
94%
36%
51%
40%
36%
13%
28%
90%
38%
62%
39%
35%
15%
32%
81
3%
49%39%
7% 3%
About the same proportion of residents do feel informed about local services as those who do not
Very well informed
Not very well informed
Fairly well informed
Not well informed at all
Q45 Overall, how well informed do you feel about local public services?
Net informed score +6
Younger residents (aged 16-24), and those living in St
Helier and Cheam North / Worcester
Park, are most likely to say they are not informed (59%, 56% and
56% respectively, compared to 52%
overall)
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
82
5337 37 39
12
47
This is a more positive picture than that painted by the Place Survey
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
**Sutton08/09
Place SurveyLondo
n
Place Survey data 2008/9
* Sutton 2009 Residents’
survey
National Average
Q45 Overall, how well informed do you feel about local public services?
*Base: All excluding “Don’t know” (800) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009. **Base: All valid responses 2008/09 (1,205).
Please note that due to the different methodologies, comparisons should be seen as indicative only
83
45%
58%
61%
63%
The extent to which residents feel informed by the Council about its services has fallen over time. This is important because we know that how well informed people are is associated with how satisfied they are with the Council
Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides?
2009
Very/Fairly well informed
2007
2005
2003
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
84
67
60
60
51
49
45
36
Inner LB 2009
Outer LB 2006
Inner LB 2009
Inner LB 2008
Outer LB 2009
Sutton 2009
Outer LB 2007
And Sutton residents feel less informed by their local authority than elsewhere in London
% Informed about council services
Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides?
Source: Ipsos MORI normative database. Face-to-face surveys carried out in London since 2006. Data have been anonymised
85
45%
52%
Older residents and those of higher socio-economic status are more likely to feel informed about the Council
Not informed
Informed Proportion who are informed
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides?
Age
Socio-economic group
40%
48%
53%
48%
46%
45%
38%
35-44
45-54
55-64
65+
ABC1
C2DE
16-34
86
Residents from St. Helier, and Cheam North / Worcester Park, are least likely to feel informed about Sutton Council
2
1
6
6
5
68
55
45
39
25
25
25
38
30
37
57
57
4
6
11
17
10
1
8
1
2
6*
12
% Very well informed % Fairly well informed % Only limited info
% Doesn't tell us much % Don't know
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Informed
69
56
51
44
30
27
%
Not informed
29
44
40
55
69
67
Q46 How well informed do you feel Sutton Council keeps you about the services and benefits it provides?
Base
76
152
124
179
134
137
87
Most residents obtain information about the Council from the authority’s own information channels
51%
45%
32%
21%
7%
4%
1%
1%
Information provided by the council (newspaper, magazine, leaflets)
Local media (newspapers, TV, radio)
Council website / Internet
Word of mouth (e.g. family / friends)
Direct contact with the Council
From a local councillor
None of these
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q47 From which of the following sources, if any, do you obtain most of your information about Sutton Council and the services it provides?
Those aged 55 and over are more
likely to use Council information (60%), while those under 35 are most
likely to use the Internet (42%).
88
Main Findings 6: Local democracy
89
Summary Around two in five residents agree that they can influence Council-
run services (38%) – this is in line with previous waves of the Residents’ Survey.
The majority of residents (62%) like to know what the Council is doing, but are happy to let it get on with its job. A relatively small proportion would actually like to be more involved (19%).
When considering how they would like to have a say in the running of services, the most popular means of doing so is to complete questionnaires (42%), although a similar proportion say they would attend public meetings (39%).
In terms of getting involved, two in five say that they would just like more information (42%). However, one in five would like more consultation (20%) and one quarter say they would like to get involved online (27%).
90
36%
31%
14%
17%2%
Residents are more likely to disagree that they can influence Council-run services than agree, with around one in six saying that they do not know
Tend to disagree
Tend to agree
Definitely disagree
Net agree score -7
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Agree
2005 35
2007 35
2009 38
Don’t know
Q66 To what extent do you agree or disagree that you can influence council run services within your local area?
Definitely agree
91
By local committee area, residents in the Carshalton / Clockhouse, Sutton South / Cheam /Belmont, and Sutton areas are most likely to agree that they can influence council services
6
1
3
58
43
45
29
25
25
22
25
33
33
33
38
12
7
6
15
18
8
19
15
20
17
18*
25
% Definitely agree % Tend to agree % Tend to disagree
% Definitely disagree % Don't know
Beddington and Wallington
Sutton
Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont
Carshalton and Clockhouse
St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley
Cheam North and Worcester Park
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Agree
58
49
46
32
25
26
%
Disagree
34
32
39
48
58
56
Q66 To what extent do you agree or disagree that you can influence council run services within your local area?
Base
76
124
152
179
137
134
92
19%
62%
13%1%2%
3%
When it comes to the Council, although most want to be kept informed, few residents want to be involved
Like to know what it’s doing but happy to let it get on with its job
Already work for / involved with the CouncilNot interested in what it does or
how it does its jobWould like more of a sayNot interested as long as it
does its job
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
% Would like a say
2005 22
2007 15
2009 19
None/Don’t know
Q64 Which of the following statements comes closest to your own attitudes towards Sutton Council?
Although there are no differences by demographic sub
groups, those living in the Carshalton / Clockhouse and
St Helier areas are most likely to want to have more of a
say (38% and 26% respectively
compared to 19% overall).
93
Two in five say they would like to have more of a say by completing questionnaires, with a similar proportion saying they would attend public meetings
42
39
29
28
25
1
1
2
Completing questionnaires like this
Attending local public meetings
Meeting a local Councillor
Contacting Sutton Council via email, website or text
Phone call with a Councillor
Other
None of these
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q65 How would you personally prefer to have more of a say?
White residents are more likely
than BME residents to say
that they would like either a meeting or phone call with a councillor (33%
and 29%).
94
To be more involved, two in five say they would like more information, while a quarter would like to participate online
42
27
20
15
8
7
7
By receiving more information about what the Council is doing
Through the Council website / online
Through more / better consultation
By talking direct with Councillors
Through talking direct with frontline Council staff
None of these
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q67 And in which of the ways on this card, if any, would you like to get involved in the running of Council services within your local area?
-Residents who are working full-time are more likely than those not doing so to want to get involved online
-Those not working full-time are more likely to want to talk directly with Councillors
-Residents from C2DE backgrounds are more likely than ABC1 residents to say they want to receive more information about what the Council’s doing.
95
Main findings 7: Contacting the Council
96
Summary
Of the 46% that have contacted the Council in the last two years, most have done so through the call centre (76%).
Those who have contacted the Council tend to be positive about staff – in particular, most report staff to have been helpful.
Residents are slightly less positive about the speed with which the council responded to their query (25% say that the authority was slow), and a similar proportion were dissatisfied the outcome of their contact (27%).
97
76%
13%
5%
4%
2%
2%
2%
65%
23%
3%
9%
6%
2%
1%
2%
1%
72%
15%
1%
8%
4%
1%
2%
4%
1%
*%
By phone through the call centre
In person at Council Offices
In writing by email
In writing by letter
In person at local Access Point*
Via the Internet
Through someone else
Other
Don't know/can't rememer
% 2009
% 2007
46% of residents have contacted the council in the last two years. Of these, the majority used the telephone – significantly more than in 2007
Q51 How did you last get in contact with Sutton Council?
% 2005% change from 2007
+11
-10
+2
-5
-4
0
+1
-2
-1
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383)
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009 * In 2007 and 2005, this option read ‘One Stop Shop’
98
15
16
76
81
75
18
% Helpful % Unhelpful
Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them…
2007
2005
2009
Of those who contacted the Council, three quarters say that they found staff to be helpful
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383).
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009
Base: all who contacted the Council in the last
two years
472
330
383
99
18
20
70
72
68
21
% Interested in your problem
% Uninterested in your problem
2007
2005
2009
Seven in ten say that staff were interested in their problem
Base: all who contacted the Council in the last
two years
472
330
383
Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them…
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383).
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009
100
28
25
62
66
64
30
% Quick to respond % Slow to respond
2007
2005
2009
Two thirds of those who have contacted the council say that staff were quick to respond, but a quarter say they were slow
Base: all who contacted the Council in the last
two years
472
330
383
Q52 Thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council did you find them…
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383).
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009
101
20
20
74
76
71
20
% Easy % Difficult
2007
2005
2009
Seven in ten say that it was easy to get hold of the right person at the Council
Base: all who contacted the Council in the last
two years
472
330
383
Q53 Again, thinking about the last time you contacted Sutton Council, was getting hold of the right person easy?
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383).
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009
102
25
27
66
70
65
26
% Satisfied % Dissatisfied
2007
2005
2009
Two thirds were satisfied with the final outcome, although a quarter were dissatisfied
Base: all who contacted the Council in the last
two years
472
330
383
Q54 And were you satisfied or dissatisfied with the final outcome?
Base: All who have contacted the Council in the last two years (383).
Fieldwork Dates 5th October to 19th November 2009
103
Main findings 8: Environmental issues
104
Summary
Residents are most concerned about parking (33%), and speeding traffic (27%) in their local area. Parking and dog fouling are seen as more problematic than in 2007.
More residents claim to recycle in 2009 than in 2007 – this increase applies to several items, particularly glass and garden waste. Furthermore, there has been an increase in the proportion saying that they compost garden waste since 2007.
This is reflected in the proportions saying they separate recyclables at the roadside – more so than in 2007.
There are mixed views over incentivising, but more residents say that this would encourage them to separate waste than do not (57% compared to 41%, in line with 2007 levels).
105
Parking and speeding traffic are the largest concerns for residents
0
10
20
30
40
0 10 20 30 40 50
% Of most concern
% Problems in your area
Speeding traffic
Fly tipping
Noise pollution
Dog fouling
Parking
Weeds
Litter
Vandalism
Graffiti
Congestion
Mean: 20
Mean: 11
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Abandoned vehicles
Air pollution
Q55 Which of the following, if any, are problems in your area?Q56 Which one or two are of most concern to you?
106
33%
27%
18%
16%
13%
11%
7%
25%
27%
20%
11%
10%
13%
8%
28%
22%
24%
9%
6%
11%
16%
Parking
Speeding traffic
Vandalism
Dog fouling
Congestion
Litter
Graffiti
% 2009
% 2007
Concern about parking, dog fouling and congestion have increased since 2007
Q56 Which one or two are of most concern to you?
% 2005Percentage
point change from
2007
+8
0
-2
+5
+3
-2
-1
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
107
Q57 Which of the following, if any, do you currently regularly recycle?
94%
88%
87%
83%
68%
59%
41%
35%
23%
85%
72%
66%
72%
51%
38%
40%
28%
15%
90%
80%
71%
69%
62%
58%
30%
37%
13%
The proportion claiming to recycle has increased since 2007 in the case of all materials asked about, especially glass and garden waste
Paper
Cardboard
Plastics
Glass
Steel & Aluminium Cans
Textiles
Green garden waste*
Food waste
Electrical items
Percentage point change
from 2007
+9
+16
+21
+11
+17
+21
+1
+7
+7Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
2009 2007 2005
* Please note that, in 2007 and 2005, this statement read “Doorstep collection of green garden waste”
108
Encouragingly, significantly more residents now say they already separate items for collection than in 2007, with most of the reminder willing to do so in future
43%
79%
36%
33%
14%
33%
18%
5%
14%
3%
12% 4%
1%
3%
1%3%
Already do Very willing Fairly willingNot very willing Not at all willing Don't know
Q59-61 How willing, if at all, would you be to separate the following for collection at the kerbside?
Food waste
Glass
Textiles
% Change 2007-9
(Already do)
+12
+28
+6
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
109
Q62 To what extent would a financial incentive for separating those items for collection from your kerbside, encourage you to do so?
20%
37%
25%
16%2%
In line with 2007, residents appear receptive to being incentivised,– particularly younger residents and those in social rented accommodation
% A great deal/fair amount
% Not very
much / not at all
Net great deal/fair amount
2007 57 40 +17
2009 57 41 +16
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Not very much
A fair amount
A great dealNot at all
110
Q63 Do you currently compost items such as vegetable peelings, grass cutting and prunings?
There has been an increase in the proportion of residents who compost. Older residents and those in owner occupied accommodation are more likely to do so
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
49%
26% 73%
50%
1%
1%
Yes No Don't know
2007
2009
111
Main findings 9: Economic optimism
112
Summary
Residents are divided as to whether the economic condition of the country will improve over the next 12 months: three in ten believe it will improve (30%), a similar number feel the economy will get worse (29%), though residents are most likely to believe that things will stay the same (34%).
Sutton residents appear less positive than the national average where more than four in ten (44% October 2009 and 46% November 2009) believe that the economic condition of the country will improve compared to three in ten of Sutton residents (30%). However it should be noted that 2009 has been a particularly volatile year for measuring economic optimism.
Optimism about the economy is highest among male residents and those from BME backgrounds, those in full-time employment and who line in private rented or owner occupied accommodation.
113
30%
34%
29%
8%
Opinion is divided as to whether or not the economy will improve over the next 12 months
Get worse
Improve
Stay the same
Don’t know
Q82 Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months?
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
114
Sutton residents appear less positive than the national average recorded during fieldwork
46%
28%
23%
3%
44%
31%
23%
2%
Ipsos MORI Political Monitor
Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months?
*EOI: Economic Optimism Index (improve minus get worse) in percentage points
**Oct Base: 996 British adults 18+, 16th-18th Oct ’09; ***Nov Base: 1,006 British adults 18+, 13th-15th Nov ’09
Sutton Residents’ Survey. Sutton residents 16+ (802), 5th October to 19th November 2009
30%
34%
29%
8%
Sutton Residents’ survey
EOI* +1
Oct 2009** Nov 2009***
EOI* +23
EOI* +21
Improve Stay the same Get worse Don’t know
115
However, it should be noted that national economic optimism has been turbulent throughout 2009
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Jan-
09
Feb
-09
Mar
-09
Apr
-09
May
-09
Jun-
09
Jul-0
9
Aug
-09
Sep
-09
Oct
-09
Nov
-09
Dec
-09
Improve
Stay the same
Get worse
Source: Ipsos MORI Political Affairs Monitor Jan ’09 – Dec ’09: c1,000 adults aged 18+
Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months?
%
116
30%
34%
29%
8%
Those working full-time, males, BME residents and those not living in social housing are more likely to be optimistic
Get worse
Improve
Work status
Gender
Ethnicity
Not working full-time
Male
Female
White
BME
Tenure
Social rented
Owner occupier
Private rented
Proportion who think the economy will improve
Working full-time
Stay the same
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q82 Do you think that the general economic condition of the country will improve, stay the same, or get worse over the next 12 months?
Don’t know
30%
17%
32%
42%
28%
24%
35%
26%
33%
117
Main findings 10: Safeguarding children
118
The police and social services/the Council are seen as the most suitable organisations to contact if residents are concerned about the wellbeing of a vulnerable adult/child
54
45
5
2
2
8
*
*
The police
Social service/the Council
Friends/neighbour/family of the vulnerable adult/child
Healthcare services
School/college
Other (specify)
I would not contact anyone
Don’t know
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Q83 I would like you to imagine you were concerned about the wellbeing of a vulnerable adult or child you knew in your area.
If you wanted to alert someone to the situation, who would you contact, if anyone?
119
Males and those from BME backgrounds are more likely to contact
the Police
By subgroup – gender, ethnicity and social group appear to impact on who residents would contact
65%
52%
48%
60%
40%
49%
50%
41%Male
Female
Male
Female
% the police % social services/the Council
White
BME
ABC1
C2DE
Base: All residents (802) Sutton Residents’ Survey. Fieldwork Dates 5 th October to 19th November 2009
Females and those from ABC1 households are more likely to contact
social services/the Council
120© 2009 Ipsos MORI – all rights reserved