customer satisfaction survey - home - prince william ... · 2. total overall satisfaction is...

2016-17

Customer Satisfaction Survey

Prince William County SchoolsOffice of Accountability

Program Evaluation

August 2017

Overall

In addition to the overall results, results are provided separately for central office and school-based administrators. This report contains three sections: 1. Executive Summary 2. Numerics by position (Overall, Central Office Administrator, and School-based Administrator). 3. Numerics by Department

Executive Summary

2016-17 Customer Satisfaction Survey

Prince William County Public Schools

Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation August 2017

Notes: 1. Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. 2. Total overall satisfaction is calculated from the raw data and may differ from the sum of Excellent and Good due to rounding.

The 2016-17 Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS) data was administered online to all 498 central office and school-based administrators of Prince William County Public Schools (PWCS) in June 2017. A total of 334 staff members responded to the CSS for a response rate of 67.1%. The purpose of the survey is to determine the level of satisfaction with central office services. The survey includes three consistent questions across departments (responsiveness, level of customer service, and overall satisfaction). Questions are grouped by 17 departments.

The CSS is administered to measure the School Division’s progress toward PWCS Strategic Plan Goal 5, Object 5.1 and Goal 3 Objective 3.2, which states, “Survey data will show that student parent/guardian, and employee satisfaction with the School Division meets or exceeds the previous year's survey results.” Results from the survey are reported to department leaders to inform improvement efforts, as well as reported in the School Board Budget Book to determine the extent central offices are meeting or exceeding their “Central Office Performance Measures.”

Ex

ecu

tive

Ad

min

istratio

n

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

y

Hu

man

Reso

urc

es

Acco

un

tab

ility

Stu

den

t

Servic

es

OS

MA

P

Stu

den

t

Learn

ing

Pro

fessio

nal

Learn

ing

EL

Pro

gra

ms

Sp

ecia

l

Ed

ucatio

n

Facilitie

s

Fin

an

ce

Fo

od

Servic

es

Risk

Man

ag

em

en

t

Tra

nsp

orta

tion

Instru

ctio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

Positions

Overa

ll

81%84% 93% 89% 87% 97% 99% 90% 94% 99%90% 97% 69% 96% 94% 89% 97%Overall 90%

96%80% 97% 89% 94% 95% 100% 89% 96% 100%98% 98% 73% 97% 94% 87% 99%Central Office Administrator 92%

74%87% 89% 90% 85% 98% 99% 91% 93% 98%87% 97% 66% 95% 95% 93% 96%School-Based Administrator 89%



Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation August 2017

Notes: 1. Percentages may not add to 100% due to rounding. 2. Total overall satisfaction is calculated from the raw data and may differ from the sum of Excellent and Good due to rounding.

Excellent Good Fair Poor OverallDepartment

Executive Administration 37% 47% 13% 3% 84%

Communications Services 50% 44% 7% 0% 93%

Information Technology Services 39% 50% 9% 1% 89%

Instructional Technology Services 36% 51% 11% 2% 87%

Human Resources 60% 37% 3% 0% 97%

Accountability 76% 24% 1% 0% 99%

Student Learning 41% 49% 9% 1% 90%

Professional Learning 45% 50% 5% 1% 94%

EL Programs and Services 35% 55% 9% 1% 90%

Student Management and Alternative Programs (OSMAP) 68% 31% 1% 0% 99%

Student Services 46% 51% 3% 0% 97%

Special Education Services 19% 49% 24% 8% 69%

Facilities Services 59% 37% 3% 1% 96%

Food and Nutrition Services 66% 28% 5% 1% 94%

Financial Services 47% 42% 10% 1% 89%

Risk Management and Security Services 63% 34% 2% 1% 97%

Transportation Services 27% 54% 16% 2% 81%


Prince William County Schools, Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation August 2017

ExecAdmin

Commu-nications

InfoTech

InstTech HR Account-

abilityStudentLearning

ProfLearning

ELPrograms OSMAP Student

Services Spec Ed FacilitiesServices

FoodServ Finance Risk &

SecurityTrans-

portation2014-15 83% 92% 84% 88% 93% 98% 90% 89% 89% 97% 98% 71% 95% 98% 93% 96% 87%2015-16 83% 92% 84% 88% 93% 98% 90% 89% 89% 97% 98% 71% 95% 98% 93% 96% 87%2016-17 84% 93% 89% 87% 97% 99% 90% 94% 99% 90% 97% 69% 96% 94% 89% 97% 81%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Satisfaction 3 Year Comparison(Excellent & Good percentage)


Prince William County Schools, Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation August 2017

ExecAdmin

Commu-nications

InfoTech

InstTech

HumanResources

Account-ability

StudentLearning

ProfLearning

ELPrograms OSMAP Student

Services Spec Ed FacilitiesServices

FoodServ Finance Risk &

SecurityTrans-

portationCentral Office 80% 97% 89% 94% 95% 100% 89% 96% 98% 100% 98% 73% 97% 94% 87% 99% 96%School Based 87% 89% 90% 85% 98% 99% 91% 93% 87% 98% 97% 66% 95% 95% 93% 96% 74%Overall 84% 93% 89% 87% 97% 99% 90% 94% 90% 99% 97% 69% 96% 94% 89% 97% 81%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Overall Satisfaction Position Comparison(Excellent & Good percentage)

2016-17 Overall Customer Satisfaction Survey Results


Ex

ecu

tive

Ad

min

istratio

n

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

y

Hu

man

Reso

urc

es

Acco

un

tab

ility

Stu

den

t

Servic

es

EL

Pro

gra

ms

Stu

den

t

Learn

ing

Pro

fessio

nal

Learn

ing

OS

MA

P

Sp

ecia

l

Ed

ucatio

n

Facilitie

s

Fin

an

ce

Fo

od

Servic

es

Risk

Man

ag

em

en

t

Tra

nsp

orta

tion

Instru

ctio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

81%84% 93% 89% 87% 97% 99% 90% 94% 90% 99% 97% 69% 96% 94% 89% 97%

Overall Satisfaction Percent Based on Excellent and Good

90%Overall Satisfaction with Central Services

Number of Responses 334 of 498 Response Rate: 67.1%

MeanN % N % N % N % N

Overall Service Quality: Pilot ItemsStrongly

AgreeAgree Disagree Strongly

DisagreeNeutral

Executive Administration %

Total

The Executive Administration responds to administrators or teachers promptly. 77 25% 144 48% 24 8% 6 2% 3.8617%52

The Executive Administration shows a willingness to help PWCS employees. 86 28% 153 50% 13 4% 7 2% 3.9715%47

The Executive Administration provides information/resources in a timely manner. 66 22% 153 50% 28 9% 4 1% 3.8217%53

The Executive Administration values feedback as part of continuous improvement. 80 26% 135 44% 28 9% 4 1% 3.8519%58

Meetings conducted by the Executive Administration are relevant to participants. 60 20% 160 52% 15 5% 3 1% 3.8522%67

Resources and materials provided by the Executive Administration are free from errors. 81 27% 150 50% 19 6% 2 1% 3.9517%51

Information provided by the Executive Administration is up to date. 80 26% 172 56% 10 3% 2 1% 4.0414%43

The Executive Administration behaves professionally. 105 34% 158 52% 8 3% 3 1% 4.1610%31

The Executive Administration is polite. 108 35% 157 51% 7 2% 3 1% 4.1810%31

PWCS employees trust the Executive Administration. 51 17% 155 50% 29 9% 11 4% 3.6720%62

PWCS employees feel comfortable in contacting the Executive Administration for support. 66 22% 121 40% 29 10% 14 5% 3.6524%73

The Executive Administration collaborates effectively with PWCS employees. 67 22% 149 49% 25 8% 6 2% 3.8119%57

Employees get adequate support from the Executive Administration to do their jobs. 65 21% 153 50% 23 8% 9 3% 3.7918%56

The Executive Administration understands the needs of schools. 57 19% 151 50% 20 7% 7 2% 3.7623%69

The Executive Administration is respectful when working with others. 98 32% 158 52% 12 4% 2 1% 4.1211%33

The Executive Administration listens to the concerns of PWCS employees. 74 24% 152 50% 18 6% 5 2% 3.8918%56

The Executive Administration makes decisions with the best interests of students in mind. 86 28% 154 50% 16 5% 1 0% 4.0116%48

The Executive Administration makes decisions with the best interests of staff in mind. 58 19% 146 48% 28 9% 4 1% 3.7423%69

The Executive Administration provides accurate information to employees. 77 25% 171 56% 11 4% 1 0% 4.0314%44

The Executive Administration has the expertise to provide reliable guidance to employees. 85 28% 159 53% 7 2% 1 0% 4.0617%50

When a PWCS employee contacts the Executive Administration with a problem, a sincere interest in solving the problem is shown.

85 28% 137 45% 13 4% 5 2% 3.9321%64

The Executive Administration has the knowledge to provide the services promised. 94 31% 149 49% 11 4% 1 0% 4.0716%49

Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation Overall Results - Page 1



Excellent Good Fair PoorExecutive Administration

Executive Administration

Overall responsiveness of the Executive Administration. 113 39% 131 46% 31 11% 12 4%

Overall customer service of the Executive Administration. 104 36% 140 49% 35 12% 8 3%

Overall satisfaction with Executive Administration. 107 37% 135 47% 39 13% 8 3%

84%Executive Administration Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorCommunications Services

Communications and Technology Services

Level of customer service provided by Communications Services staff. 76 55% 58 42% 5 4% 0 0%

Quality of publications (e g , Division Leader, Communicator, Calendar). 74 54% 51 37% 12 9% 0 0%

Assistance provided to communicate PWCS information to internal audiences. 68 50% 59 43% 9 7% 0 0%

Community relations. 61 46% 62 47% 10 8% 0 0%

Value of web services in enhancing digital communications. 48 35% 58 42% 20 15% 11 8%

Support from media production services. 68 60% 39 34% 7 6% 0 0%

Legislative/Government relations. 38 42% 46 51% 6 7% 0 0%

Assistance from community and business engagement in building or maintaining partnerships. 52 46% 55 49% 5 4% 0 0%

Value of assistance from SPARK. 65 58% 41 37% 6 5% 0 0%

Assistance provided in addressing communication issues during crises or challenging situations. 72 57% 46 37% 7 6% 1 1%

Dissemination of urgent information to target audiences. 74 56% 46 35% 9 7% 3 2%

Overall responsiveness of Communications Services. 73 54% 57 42% 5 4% 1 1%

Overall satisfaction with Communications Services. 68 50% 60 44% 9 7% 0 0%

93%Communications Services Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorInformation Technology Services


Level of customer service provided by Information Technology Services staff. 81 45% 80 44% 17 9% 2 1%

Quality of on-site technical support. 78 44% 75 42% 22 12% 3 2%

Quality of Help Desk support. 82 46% 82 46% 14 8% 2 1%

Administrative application support. 66 40% 82 50% 16 10% 1 1%

Central data processing services (i e , report cards, network, security, etc). 54 37% 68 47% 21 14% 3 2%

Quality of computer hardware. 40 23% 103 58% 29 16% 5 3%

Telecommunications (telephones). 51 29% 94 53% 29 16% 3 2%

Imaging Center (i e , offset printing and bindery services). 95 63% 52 34% 4 3% 0 0%

Promptness in resolution of HelpDesk tickets (within 10 business days). 82 46% 71 40% 22 12% 2 1%

Overall responsiveness of Information Technology Services staff. 74 42% 85 48% 17 10% 2 1%

Overall satisfaction with Information Technology Services. 71 39% 90 50% 17 9% 2 1%

89%Information Technology Services Overall Satisfaction

Information Technology Services areas of improvement

On-site technical support Count

Hardware 10

Software 9

Quality 15

Responsiveness 18

Other 4

Help Desk support Count

Accessibility 7

Quality 11

Responsiveness 10

Other 5

Central Data Processing Count

Information security support 8

Quality of report cards 2

Timeliness of report cards 3

Quality of network support 14

Timeliness of network support 13

Other 4




Excellent Good Fair PoorInstructional Technology Services


Level of customer service provided by Instructional Technology Services staff. 44 37% 60 50% 15 13% 1 1%

Relevance and timeliness of professional learning provided by Instructional Technology Services. 46 39% 55 46% 15 13% 3 3%

Instructional Software support. 36 31% 58 50% 18 16% 4 3%

Support of the Instructional Technology Coach (ITC) from Instructional Technology Services. 49 44% 40 36% 17 15% 5 5%

Accessibility of technology tools/equipment loaned to schools. 32 34% 51 54% 9 10% 2 2%

Collaboration with Instructional Technology Services in the hiring and managing of ITCs. 26 29% 46 51% 14 16% 4 4%

Overall responsiveness of Instructional Technology Services staff. 39 34% 65 57% 9 8% 2 2%

Overall satisfaction with Instructional Technology Services. 42 36% 60 51% 13 11% 2 2%

87%Instructional Technology Services Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorHuman Resources

Human Resources

Level of customer service provided by Human Resources staff. 157 64% 80 33% 6 2% 1 0%

Overall satisfaction with new employees (hired for FY 2016). 100 44% 120 53% 8 4% 0 0%

Administration of employee compensation and benefits. 140 60% 85 36% 8 3% 1 0%

Administration of retirement services (including ROP). 114 62% 67 36% 3 2% 0 0%

Management of employment and benefit records. 129 60% 82 38% 4 2% 0 0%

Administration of classified personnel. 112 50% 97 43% 14 6% 3 1%

Administration of certificated personnel. 129 59% 86 39% 5 2% 0 0%

Usefulness of training assistance and consultation services. 113 52% 91 42% 10 5% 2 1%

Quality of information presented (e g , Level meetings). 113 54% 88 42% 9 4% 0 0%

Overall responsiveness of Human Resources staff. 143 59% 89 37% 11 5% 0 0%

Overall satisfaction with Human Resources. 146 60% 89 37% 7 3% 1 0%

97%Human Resources Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorAccountability

Student Learning and Accountability

Level of customer service provided by Accountability staff. 111 82% 24 18% 0 0% 0 0%

Grants development and coordination. 53 57% 36 39% 4 4% 0 0%

Data analysis and reporting services. 101 75% 31 23% 3 2% 0 0%

Records management. 71 61% 46 39% 0 0% 0 0%

Implementation of the Divisionwide assessment program (e g , school support, SOL help desk, and training).

87 71% 33 27% 2 2% 0 0%

Strategic and improvement planning. 83 67% 38 31% 3 2% 0 0%

SACS/CASI accreditation. 64 63% 36 36% 1 1% 0 0%

Program evaluation (comprehensive evaluation and survey services). 85 69% 38 31% 0 0% 1 1%

Overall responsiveness of Accountability staff. 106 79% 27 20% 1 1% 0 0%

Overall satisfaction with Accountability. 102 76% 32 24% 1 1% 0 0%

99%Accountability Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorStudent Learning


Level of customer service provided by Student Learning staff. 79 44% 87 48% 12 7% 3 2%

Clarity of communication from Student Learning staff. 71 39% 94 52% 15 8% 1 1%

Curriculum/subject area leadership and support. 70 41% 85 49% 14 8% 3 2%

Program area (e g , Gifted, Specialty, Athletics, Library, Adult Education, Title I, and Head Start) leadership and support.

69 40% 88 51% 14 8% 0 0%

Content and program-specific professional development and instructional support. 68 40% 87 51% 14 8% 0 0%

Support for building leadership capacity in schools (lead teachers, department chairs, specialists, etc). 64 40% 84 52% 11 7% 3 2%

Overall responsiveness of Student Learning. 75 41% 89 49% 14 8% 3 2%

Overall satisfaction with Student Learning. 73 41% 88 49% 17 9% 1 1%

90%Student Learning Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorProfessional Learning


Level of customer service provided by Professional Learning staff. 88 49% 87 48% 4 2% 1 1%

Communication of expectations for schools from Professional Learning. 69 43% 79 49% 12 7% 1 1%

Instructional support and coaching services provided to schools by Professional Learning. 73 47% 70 45% 10 6% 2 1%

Management and support of Baldrige in Education/Baldrige in the Classroom. 40 38% 48 46% 14 13% 2 2%

Support for building leadership capacity in schools by Professional Learning. 72 45% 76 47% 10 6% 3 2%

Overall responsiveness of Professional Learning staff. 82 46% 89 50% 7 4% 1 1%

Overall satisfaction with Professional Learning. 79 45% 88 50% 9 5% 1 1%

94%Professional Learning Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorEL Programs and Services


Level of customer service provided by EL Programs and Services staff. 57 37% 84 54% 11 7% 4 3%

Communication of expectations for EL teachers at schools. 43 31% 78 57% 16 12% 1 1%

Quality of EL Programs and Services professional development. 56 37% 83 55% 9 6% 2 1%

Instructional support and coaching services provided to schools by the EL Programs and Services staff. 46 34% 75 55% 13 9% 3 2%

Support for building leadership capacity in schools. 43 32% 76 56% 15 11% 1 1%

Quality of technical assistance in registration records and SMS data entry. 49 36% 78 57% 7 5% 2 1%

Quality of technical assistance in accessing translated documents and obtaining interpreters. 59 40% 74 50% 10 7% 4 3%

Support for administrators in providing effective EL programs. 51 36% 74 52% 13 9% 3 2%

Level of support provided by Translations Services staff. 71 49% 62 43% 9 6% 2 1%

Level of support provided by Central Registration Services staff. 50 36% 80 58% 5 4% 2 1%

Level of support provided by EL Programs and Services staff. 60 40% 79 53% 10 7% 1 1%

Overall responsiveness of EL Programs and Services staff. 60 39% 79 51% 14 9% 1 1%

Overall satisfaction with EL Programs and Services. 53 35% 84 55% 14 9% 1 1%

90%EL Programs and Services Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorStudent Management and Alternative Programs (OSMAP)


Level of customer service provided by OSMAP staff. 77 73% 27 25% 2 2% 0 0%

Clarity of communications and expectations from OSMAP. 67 63% 36 34% 2 2% 1 1%

OSMAP referral process: long-term suspension, expulsion, placement appeals, or criminal reassignment. 49 56% 34 39% 4 5% 1 1%

Administration of summer school programs. 65 66% 31 32% 2 2% 0 0%

Summer school program offerings. 61 62% 35 36% 2 2% 0 0%

Administration of non-traditional (alternative) programs, excluding New Dominion and New Directions Alternative Education Centers.

52 58% 36 40% 2 2% 0 0%

Non-traditional (alternative) program offerings, excluding New Dominion and New Directions Alternative Education Centers.

47 54% 38 44% 2 2% 0 0%

Overall responsiveness of OSMAP staff. 74 70% 31 29% 1 1% 0 0%

Overall satisfaction with OSMAP. 72 68% 33 31% 1 1% 0 0%

99%Student Management and Alternative Programs (OSMAP) Overall Satisfaction

Student Management and Alternative Programs (OSMAP) areas of improvement

Improve Customer Service Count

Hearing officers 1

Criminal reassignment specialists 1

Secretaries 1

Improve Program Offerings Count

Summer School 1

Virtual High School 1

Other 1




Excellent Good Fair PoorStudent Services


Level of customer service provided by Student Services staff. 76 51% 70 47% 3 2% 0 0%

Clarity of written communications from Student Services staff. 70 47% 76 51% 2 1% 0 0%

Implementation of curricula, programs and services to support academic success. 59 44% 73 54% 3 2% 0 0%

Specialized services provided to students in need of additional support. 61 44% 70 51% 6 4% 1 1%

Counseling services provided to students that promote their academic, personal/social, and career development.

60 45% 63 47% 9 7% 2 1%

Consultation and assistance in interpreting and implementing policies, regulations, and procedures. 58 41% 75 53% 8 6% 1 1%

Overall responsiveness of Student Services staff. 72 48% 73 49% 4 3% 0 0%

Overall satisfaction with Student Services. 69 46% 76 51% 4 3% 0 0%

97%Student Services Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorSpecial Education Services


Level of customer service provided by Special Education Services staff. 46 25% 91 49% 39 21% 9 5%

Promptness of Special Education support to schools in response to requests for assistance. 45 26% 82 47% 37 21% 9 5%

Quality of professional development. 36 21% 75 44% 48 28% 10 6%

Information (including regulatory requirements) and support provided by Special Education Services. 41 24% 86 50% 39 23% 7 4%

Dissemination of information regarding compliance issues. 44 25% 93 53% 30 17% 8 5%

Value of support offered through site visits to school by Special Education staff. 49 30% 70 43% 33 20% 12 7%

Proactive in efforts to collaborate with school staff when addressing school-level problems that impact special education students.

43 25% 76 45% 39 23% 12 7%

Collaboration with other departments in the Division when addressing instructional, behavioral, or psycho-social issues.

34 20% 80 47% 41 24% 16 9%

Quality of Special Education Services central office review. 36 23% 83 53% 33 21% 5 3%

Quality of systems to support effective instruction (i e , CEIS, PBIS, MTSS, etc). 38 25% 77 51% 32 21% 5 3%

Overall responsiveness of Special Education Services staff. 42 23% 94 51% 39 21% 9 5%

Overall satisfaction with Special Education Services. 36 19% 91 49% 44 24% 14 8%

69%Special Education Services Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorFacilities Services

Finance and Support Services

Level of customer service provided by Facilities Construction staff. 89 61% 50 34% 6 4% 0 0%

Construction of new facilities and additions. 69 62% 32 29% 10 9% 0 0%

Major renovations of existing facilities. 67 59% 40 35% 7 6% 0 0%

Overall responsiveness of Facilities Construction staff. 86 61% 48 34% 8 6% 0 0%

Level of customer service provided by Facilities Planning staff. 75 53% 57 40% 9 6% 0 0%

Projection of student membership. 50 38% 69 53% 7 5% 5 4%

Capital improvements program. 58 48% 52 43% 8 7% 3 2%

Boundary planning process. 50 42% 55 47% 10 8% 3 3%

Overall responsiveness of Facilities Planning staff. 67 48% 64 46% 7 5% 1 1%

Level of customer service provided by Facilities Management (Maintenance) staff. 97 65% 47 32% 4 3% 1 1%

Electronic work order system (SchoolDude). 74 52% 57 40% 7 5% 3 2%

Repair services--Custodial equipment, emergency custodial response, graffiti removal. 85 63% 45 33% 4 3% 1 1%

Repair services--Heating, ventilating, air conditioning. 85 61% 45 32% 6 4% 4 3%

Repair services--Electrical, kitchen, plumbing. 86 63% 46 34% 3 2% 2 1%

Repair services--Carpentry, painting, structures and grounds. 86 62% 47 34% 4 3% 1 1%

Repair services--Building services. 86 62% 47 34% 4 3% 2 1%

Repair services--Landscaping, pest management. 78 57% 47 35% 9 7% 2 1%

Repair services--Environmental, roofing. 79 63% 40 32% 4 3% 3 2%

Seven-Fourteen (7/14) year building refresh program. 54 55% 37 37% 7 7% 1 1%

School generated improvement projects (i.e. , projects, permits, and records). 62 56% 43 39% 3 3% 3 3%

Overall responsiveness of Facilities Management (Maintenance) staff. 91 61% 52 35% 5 3% 2 1%

Overall customer service of Facilities Services. 93 61% 51 34% 6 4% 2 1%

Overall responsiveness of Facilities Services. 89 59% 57 38% 3 2% 3 2%

Overall satisfaction with Facilities Services. 90 59% 56 37% 4 3% 2 1%

96%Facilities Services Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorFood and Nutrition Services


Level of customer service provided by Food and Nutrition Services staff. 72 64% 37 33% 2 2% 1 1%

Efficiency of the service in the student lunch and breakfast program. 54 63% 28 33% 4 5% 0 0%

Quality of the food. 49 45% 47 43% 9 8% 4 4%

Special food services (catered meals for special functions). 58 60% 32 33% 5 5% 2 2%

Overall responsiveness of Food and Nutrition Services staff. 75 68% 33 30% 1 1% 1 1%

Overall satisfaction with Food and Nutrition Services. 72 66% 31 28% 5 5% 1 1%

94%Food and Nutrition Services Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorFinancial Services


Level of customer service provided by Financial Services staff. 43 37% 54 47% 18 16% 1 1%

Payment of employees. 79 69% 31 27% 3 3% 1 1%

Payment of vendors. 59 56% 42 40% 4 4% 0 0%

Budget services. 47 44% 50 46% 10 9% 1 1%

Accounting services. 49 48% 46 45% 7 7% 0 0%

School activity fund audits. 36 51% 31 44% 3 4% 0 0%

Purchase of goods, services, and construction requirements. 49 46% 50 47% 8 7% 0 0%

Warehouse store. 56 57% 39 40% 2 2% 1 1%

Pick up/delivery service. 65 63% 36 35% 3 3% 0 0%

Courier service. 82 75% 25 23% 2 2% 0 0%

Property control services. 49 54% 39 43% 2 2% 1 1%

Overall responsiveness of Financial Services staff. 55 47% 49 42% 11 9% 1 1%

Overall satisfaction with Financial Services. 55 47% 49 42% 12 10% 1 1%

89%Financial Services Overall Satisfaction




Excellent Good Fair PoorRisk Management and Security Services


Level of customer service provided by Risk Management and Security Services staff. 112 64% 58 33% 4 2% 0 0%

Courtesy and professionalism of Risk Management and Security Services staff. 120 69% 49 28% 3 2% 2 1%

Management of Divisionwide safety/liability issues. 104 61% 61 36% 4 2% 1 1%

Crisis management training and consultation. 98 59% 61 37% 5 3% 2 1%

Hazardous waste disposal and response. 57 53% 46 43% 3 3% 2 2%

Claims management. 66 52% 55 44% 4 3% 1 1%

Security/safety consultation. 96 59% 65 40% 2 1% 1 1%

Overall responsiveness of Risk Management and Security Services staff. 111 65% 57 33% 4 2% 0 0%

Overall satisfaction with Risk Management and Security Services. 109 63% 58 34% 4 2% 1 1%

97%Risk Management and Security Services Overall Satisfaction

Excellent Good Fair PoorTransportation Services


Level of customer service provided by Transportation Services staff. 54 31% 88 51% 26 15% 5 3%

Timeliness of bus transportation. 36 22% 74 45% 42 26% 11 7%

Adequacy of bus fleet. 39 25% 72 45% 40 25% 8 5%

Maintenance/repair of administration vehicles/bus fleet. 44 39% 63 55% 5 4% 2 2%

Transportation services for field/athletic trips. 57 40% 71 49% 13 9% 3 2%

Overall responsiveness of Transportation Services staff. 56 33% 80 47% 30 18% 5 3%

Overall satisfaction with Transportation Services. 46 27% 93 54% 28 16% 4 2%

81%Transportation Services Overall Satisfaction


2016-17 Central Office Administrator Customer Satisfaction Survey Results


Ex

ecu

tive

Ad

min

istratio

n

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

y

Hu

man

Reso

urc

es

Acco

un

tab

ility

Stu

den

t

Servic

es

EL

Pro

gra

ms

Stu

den

t

Learn

ing

Pro

fessio

nal

Learn

ing

OS

MA

P

Sp

ecia

l

Ed

ucatio

n

Facilitie

s

Fin

an

ce

Fo

od

Servic

es

Risk

Man

ag

em

en

t

Tra

nsp

orta

tion

Instru

ctio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

96%80% 97% 89% 94% 95% 100% 89% 96% 98% 100% 98% 73% 97% 94% 87% 99%


92%Central Office Administrator Satisfaction with Central Services



Central Office Administrator Service Quality: Pilot ItemsStrongly


DisagreeNeutral


Total






















29 20% 70 48% 7 5% 2 1% 3.8027%39


Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation Central Office Administrator Results - Page 1




Human Resources




















34 71% 13 27% 1 2% 0 0%
















29 45% 29 45% 7 11% 0 0%



























18 50% 17 47% 1 3% 0 0%


17 49% 17 49% 1 3% 0 0%











28 60% 16 34% 3 6% 0 0%

















19 40% 19 40% 6 13% 4 8%


18 31% 22 37% 12 20% 7 12%























Budget services. 27 41% 31 47% 8 12% 0 0%




Warehouse store. 33 58% 21 37% 2 4% 1 2%


Courier service. 51 75% 16 24% 1 1% 0 0%






2016-17 School-Based Administrator Customer Satisfaction Survey Results


Ex

ecu

tive

Ad

min

istratio

n

Co

mm

un

icatio

ns

Info

rmatio

n

Tech

no

log

y

Hu

man

Reso

urc

es

Acco

un

tab

ility

Stu

den

t

Servic

es

EL

Pro

gra

ms

Stu

den

t

Learn

ing

Pro

fessio

nal

Learn

ing

OS

MA

P

Sp

ecia

l

Ed

ucatio

n

Facilitie

s

Fin

an

ce

Fo

od

Servic

es

Risk

Man

ag

em

en

t

Tra

nsp

orta

tion

Instru

ctio

nal

Tech

no

log

y

74%87% 89% 90% 85% 98% 99% 91% 93% 87% 98% 97% 66% 95% 95% 93% 96%


89%School-Based Administrator Satisfaction with Central Services



School-Based Administrator Service Quality: Pilot ItemsStrongly


DisagreeNeutral


Total






















56 36% 67 43% 6 4% 3 2% 4.0616%25


Office of Accountability, Program Evaluation School-Based Administrator Results - Page 1




Human Resources




















53 72% 20 27% 1 1% 0 0%
















40 38% 59 56% 7 7% 0 0%



























34 63% 19 35% 1 2% 0 0%


30 58% 21 40% 1 2% 0 0%











32 37% 47 54% 6 7% 2 2%

















24 20% 57 47% 33 27% 8 7%


16 14% 58 52% 29 26% 9 8%























Budget services. 20 48% 19 45% 2 5% 1 2%




Warehouse store. 23 56% 18 44% 0 0% 0 0%


Courier service. 31 76% 9 22% 1 2% 0 0%






customer satisfaction survey - home - prince william ... · 2. total overall satisfaction is...

Documents