WATER AND SANITATION CUSTOMER PERCEPTION
Water & Sanitation Customer Perception and Satisfaction Survey
AND SATISFACTION
SURVEY PROJECT INITIATION
WORKSHOP
“Multinational companies now run water systems for 7 percent of the world‟s
population, and analysts say that figure could grow to 17 percent by 2015.
Private water management is estimated to be a $200 billion business, and the
World Bank … projects it could be worth $1 trillion by 2021. The potential for
profits is staggering: in May 2000 Fortune magazine predicted that water is about
to become „one of the world‟s great business opportunities‟, and that „it promises
to be to the 21st century what oil was to the 20th.‟”
-John Louma, “Water Thieves,” The Ecologist, March 2004
“The right to water and sanitation is a human right, equal to all other human
rights, which implies that it is justiciable and enforceable,”
-Catarina de Albuquerque,
UN Independent Expert on human rights obligations related to access to safe
drinking water and sanitation.
Agenda
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Introduction
Envisaged usage of results
Achieved sample
Demographics and socio-economic
indicators
Water conservation
Perceptions and satisfaction with water
and sanitation services
Knowledge and awareness –
communication
Knowledge and awareness –
environmental impact
Introduction
Developmentnomics (Pty) Ltd takes
this opportunity to present the results
of the CPSSP.
The project was conducted between
January 2013 and March 2013.
Envisaged usage of results
Since 2002, the Department has conducted research to ascertain the
perceptions of consumers in order to facilitate forward planning and
service delivery improvement.
The results were used and will still be used to:
 ascertain an acceptable level of service satisfaction which needs to be
achieved and maintained
 identify areas needing improvement
 uncover needs not currently being addressed
 compare the actual service against the Water Service Customer Charter
 measure the level of satisfaction with the service
SAMPLE ACHIEVED
ID
Sample group
1
Formal residential areas
1 000
1 026
2
Informal residential areas
600
601
3
Business areas
300
315
4
Customers on database
-
77
1 900
2 019
Total
Target
Achieved
www.developmentnomics.co.za
DEMOGRAPHIC AND
SOCIO-ECONOMIC
INDICATORS
Home language (n=1026) - Formal
2%
38%
32%
English
Afrikaans
IsiXhosa
IsiZulu
28%
Most spoken language (n = 601) - Informal
1%
1%
11%
2%
Afrikaans
English
IsiXhosa
Isizulu
85%
Other
Number of employees (n = 315)
Number of people in household (n = 1026)
504
600
500
250
384
200
400
200
Count
300
104
100
28
0
Formal
1-3
4-6
7-9
10 - 12
More
than 12
50
384
504
104
28
6
0
350
300
250
Count
100
6
Number of people in a household (n = 601)
200
150
100
50
0
Informal
150
1-3
4-6
7-9
More
than 12
296
264
38
3
Business
1 - 10
10 - 20
21 - 30
31 - 40
41 - 50
197
23
4
2
2
51 - 60 90 - 100
4
1
100 150
1
200 300
2
Not
Sure
79
Type of toilet in use ( n=1026) - Formal
Type of toilet in use (n = 315) - Business
0.95%
Flush toilet
100%
Flush toilet
Septic Tank
Bucket system
Long drop
Other
Type of toilet in use (n = 601)
0.17%
0.33%
0.67%
Flush toilet
Chemical toilet
38.27%
Bucket toilet
60.40%
Long drop
Septic tank
0.17%
Other
99.05%
Count
Ownership of electronic medium of communication
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Formal
Radio
863
TV with local
channels only
(SABC 1, 2 3,
eTV and
community
TV)
839
Satellite TV
Cellular
phone
Landline
telephone
None
446
856
158
0
Count
Ownership of electronic medium of communication
500
400
300
200
100
0
Informal
Radio
394
Televisio Satellite
n with
TV
local
channels
only
446
64
Cellular
phone
Landline
None
Other
479
7
28
1
Industry describing nature of business (n = 315)
250
Count
200
150
100
50
0
Percentage
Count
Agriculture,
hunting,
forestry and
fishing
3.17%
10
Construction
Hotels and
restaurants
0.95%
3
10.16%
32
Post and
Manufacturing telecommunic
ation
3.49%
11
9.84%
31
Retail trade
Transport and
storage
Wholesale
trade
64.13%
202
5.40%
17
2.86%
9
WATER USAGE AND
CONSERVATION
Water usage per month
Count
Water used per month (n=1026)
Sample
group
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Formal
Informal
Business
Less than
No
idea/don‟t 500 litres
know
Formal
651
132
500 - 1
000 litres
1 000 - 5
000 litres
136
81
5 000 10 000
litres
13
10 000 15 000
litres
5
Proportion who don’t know
the amount of water they use
per month
63.45%
61.06%
80.63
More
than 15
000 litres
8
Informal residents were asked to estimate
water usage in terms of buckets they think
they use per month, 61.06% don‟t know
amount they use.
Water used per month (n= 315) - Business
300
250
On average, informal residents use about
80 buckets per month
Count
200
150
100
50
0
1 000 - 5
000 litres
Count
13
10 000 15 000
litres
3
15 000 20 000
litres
3
5 000 10 000
litres
7
50 000
and 75
000 litres
1
500 and
Less
1 000
than 500
litres
litres
9
20
More
No
than 100 idea/don‟
000 litres t know
5
254
Water usage compared to previous year
Water usage (n=1026) - Formal
Water usage (n = 315) - Business
6%
18.10%
36%
More
Don‟t know
14.60%
Same
44%
Less
61.90%
5.40%
Less
14%
More
Same
Don‟t
know
Water usage (n=601) - Informal
42%
46%
Sample
group
Proportion who claim that:
they use same
amount as last
year
Don't
know
Less
they don‟t know if they
are using less, more
or same as last year
More
11%
1%
Same
Formal
44%
36.35%
Informal
42%
46%
Business
61.90%
18.10%
Did tariff increases lead to a decrease in water consumption?
(n=1026) - Formal
(n=315) - Business
36%
49%
Yes
51%
No
64%
Yes
(n=615) - Informal
Sample
group
38%
Yes
62%
No
Formal
Informal
Business
Did tariff increases lead to
decrease in water consumption?
Yes
No
51%
49%
38%
62%
36%
64%
No
Have you seen adverts or pamphlets on water conservation?
(n=1026) - Formal
Water conservation promotions (n = 315)
15%
21%
Yes
Yes
No
85%
No
79%
(n= 601) - Informal
Sample
group
Yes
No
Formal
79%
21%
Informal
57%
43%
Business
85%
15%
43%
57%
Ye
s
Have you seen adverts or pamphlets on
water conservation?
Have you seen adverts or pamphlets on water conservation?
Knowledge of water conservation promotions (n=1024) -Formal
160
140
120
Count
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
Yes counts
155
No counts
46
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
44
130
136
119
59
83
87
33
24
19
18
18
35
18
Except only in Kraaifontein/Blouberg (57%), in all the other districts more than 70%
of respondents claimed that they heard radio advertisements and seen pamphlets
that promote water conservation.
Have you seen adverts or pamphlets on water conservation?
Count
Knowledge of water conservation promotions (n=601) Informal
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Central Kraaifontei Klipfontein Tygerberg
Cape Town n Blouberg
Bellville
Area
Yes
39
34
74
42
No
92
24
34
2
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsh
a
South
Heidelberg
Peninsula Kuilsriver
12
48
53
39
53
29
10
16
Mitchells Plain had the lowest percentage (18.5%) of respondents who said they
heard radio advertisements and seen pamphlets that promote water conservation.
95.5% of respondents in Tygerberg/ Bellville had seen the advertisements
promoting water conservation.
Have you seen adverts or pamphlets on water conservation?
Count
Knowledge of water conservation promotions (n=315) - Business
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central Cape
Town Area
Yes
172
No
40
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
25
Klipfontein
Mitchells
Plain
11
Khayelitsha
9
Tygerberg
Bellville
22
3
4
South
Peninsula
10
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
16
1
0
0
0
1
1
More than 80% of respondents in all districts (100% in districts such as
Tygerberg/Bellville, Mitchells Plain, Khayelitsha) said they heard radio
advertisements and seen pamphlets that promote water conservation.
Has your household changed behaviour to conserve water within last year?
(n=1026) - Formal
(n=315) - Business
33%
37%
63%
Yes
No
(n= 601) - Informal
Sample
group
42%
58%
Yes
Yes
67%
No
Has your household changed behaviour
to conserve water within last year?
Yes
No
Formal
63%
37%
Informal
58%
42%
Business
33%
67%
No
ATTITUDES
TOWARDS WATER
AND CONSERVATION
ISSUES
Cape Town has enough water so we don‟t have to worry about how much we use
(n=1026) - Formal
(n=315) - Business
3%
23%
Strongly agree
11%
20%
22%
Disagree
Strongly disagree
(n=601) - Informal
21%
Strongly agree
7% 11%
Agree
29%
32%
37%
Agree
Neutral
24%
Strongly agree
24%
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
17%
Agree
Neutral
19%
Disagree
Strongly disagree
Generally the feelings amongst all the sample
groups are that water is a scarce resource and
the way it should be used is very important.
There are current water restrictions in Cape Town
(n=1026) - Formal
(n=315) - Business
3%
Strongly agree
5%
19%
14%
Agree
29%
33%
4%
9%
Strongly agree
26%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
58%
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
(n=601) - Informal
2%
13%
36%
Strongly agree
25%
24%
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
disagree
Generally, all the 3 sample groups agreed that there
are water restrictions in the City. This assertion is
more pronounced amongst businesses. This
suggest that there is a good water management
regime in the City in view of conservation.
The City manages its water supply in a responsible way
(n=1026) - Formal
(n=315) - Business
6%
8% 6%
19%
5%
9%
Strongly agree
Strongly agree
25%
29%
38%
Neutral
Disagree
(n=601) - Informal
5%
4%
29%
Strongly agree
Agree
43%
19%
Agree
Agree
55%
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly disagree
48% (sum of 19%-agree and 29%-strongly agree) of
informal respondents, 48% (sum of 29%-agree and
19%-strongly agree) of formal respondents and 64%
(sum of 55%-agree and 9%-strongly agree) of
business respondents agreed that the water supply is
well managed.
Neutral
Disagree
However, there is a sizeable proportion among the
formal and informal who were indifferent. This
indifference might suggest lack of information.
Other water conservation issues (Business)
Do you have a water conservation policy ?(n=315)
Do you have a water management device?
(n = 315)
21%
36.19%
Yes
No
79%
63.81%
Yes
No
Do you conduct an annual water audit ?(n = 315)
Would you rather have a prepaid water meter
installed? (n=315)
9.52%
17%
Yes
Yes
90.48%
No
No
83%
It should be a concern that most businesses do not have a water conservation policy and that most do
not undertake an annual water audit. Increasing awareness could be the key.
Other water conservation issues (Business)
Do you have a water conservation policy?(n=315) - Business
180
160
140
Count
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central Cape Kraaifontein
Town Area
Blouberg
Yes
39
8
No
173
20
Klipfontein
Mitchells
Plain
6
Khayelitsha
1
Tygerberg
Bellville
5
0
South
Peninsula
3
Helderberg
Kuilsriver
5
9
17
5
4
8
12
More than 70% of respondents across all districts (except in Mitchells
Plain) said they do not have a water conservation policy.
Other water conservation issues (Business)
Count
Do you conduct an annual water audit? (n=315) - Business
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
Yes
22
No
190
Kraaifontei
n Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
3
0
2
1
0
1
1
25
10
20
10
4
10
16
Most respondents across all districts said they do not conduct an annual
water audit.
Other water conservation issues (Formal)
Do you have a water management device?
(n=1026)
Would you rather have a prepaid water meter installed?
(n=1026)
0%
16%
39%
Yes
61%
No
Yes
No
84%
Most formal residents do not have a water management device and would
rather not have a prepaid water meter installed.
The benefits of the device and a prepaid water meter could be
communicated widely to the general populace to increase adoption.
Other
Other water conservation issues (Formal)
Count
Do you own a water management device? (n=1024) - Formal
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central Cape
Town Area
Yes counts
30
No counts
171
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
29
Klipfontein
Mitchells
Plain
66
Khayelitsha
31
Tygerberg
Bellville
35
48
61
South
Peninsula
83
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
67
123
120
71
16
35
38
Most (79.2%) respondents in Khayelitsha said they had a water management device, followed
by respondents in the South Peninsula (70.3%) and Heidelberg/Kuilsriver (63.8%). In Central
Cape Town Area, most respondents (85.0%) said they did not have a device, followed by
Klipfontein (79.9%) and Tygerberg/Bellville (77.4%).
Other water conservation issues (Formal)
Count
Would you rather have a prepaid water meter installed? (n=1024)
- Formal
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
Yes counts
47
No counts
Other
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
2
3
27
7
31
41
3
153
75
150
127
130
46
77
100
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
2
Most respondents would rather be billed for the water used on a monthly basis than have a prepaid water
meter installed in their homes. Over 90% of the respondents from Kraaifontein, Klipfontein, Mitchells Plain
and Heidelberg/Kuilsriver answered “no” to a prepaid water meter while in Khayelitsha and South Peninsula
40.26% and 34.75% respectively said they want to have a prepaid water meter installed.
CONCLUSIONS ON WATER CONSERVATION
 There is general lack of awareness of amount of water used across all sample groups
 Most consumers within the business and informal groups claim to use the same amount as
previous indicating lack of significant steps taken to conserve water
 Tariff increases have led to decreases in water consumption in the formal areas, no such effect
obtained in business and informal areas
 Most consumers said they heard advertisements on water conservation. The numbers are
higher in the business and formal areas and lower in informal areas
 Most consumers (business and formal) said they conserve water. This behaviour is generally
absent in the informal areas
 There is a very low adoption rate of water management devices within the formal and business
areas.
 Most consumers are not interested in installation of prepaid water meters
What the Department could do differently:
The Department could work through community based groups to further increase
awareness on water conservation.
The Department could explore the idea of conducting workshops with business firms.
PERCEPTION ON AND
SATISFACTION WITH
WATER AND
SANITATION SERVICES
Water quality rating (n=315)
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Count
Count
Water quality rating (n=1026)
Taste
Smell
Colour
9
Overall
quality
18
Water
pressure
29
Poor
15
10
Average
97
67
108
135
136
Good
482
523
483
438
427
Excellent
432
426
426
435
434
Taste
Smell
Colour
Poor
13
10
6
Overall
quality
6
Water
pressure
8
Good
169
175
173
178
162
Excellent
101
99
95
85
94
Average
32
31
41
46
51
Count
Water quality rating (n=601)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Poor
Average
Good
Excellent
Above 85% of formal, informal and
business areas rated water quality highly
(i.e. good to excellent)
Taste
Smell
Colour
19
50
265
267
18
51
258
274
16
55
265
265
Overall
quality
15
90
221
275
Water
pressure
15
90
221
275
Regularity of water related problems
Frequency of experiencing water problems (n=315)
Frequency of water related problems (n=1026)
700
600
Count
500
400
300
200
100
0
Formal
Daily
Weekly
Twice a
month
Monthly
82
44
47
71
Once or
twice a
year
169
Never
613
Informal
Daily
Weekly
Twice a
month
Monthly
97
62
64
94
Once or
twice a
year
134
Count
Count
Daily
Monthly
Never
Once or
twice a
month
Once or
twice a
year
Weekly
7
5
157
18
116
12
Generally most consumers in formal and business
areas (around 59% for formal and 49% business)
do not frequently encounter water related problems.
The story is a little different in informal areas where
only 25% said they never experienced problems.
Frequency of water-related problems (n = 601)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Never
150
It is a concern though that some consumers
encounter problems daily, albeit few.
Overall satisfaction with water availability
Overall satisfaction with provision of tap
water(n=1026)
0.97%
Overall satisfaction with provision of tap water (n=315)
1%
0.49%
13.26%
Very satisfied
40.55%
30%
1%
Very dissatisfied
12%
Dissatisfied
Satisfied
44.74%
Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied
56%
Satisfied
Very dissatisfied
Very satisfied
Overall satisfaction with provision of tap water (n = 601)
3.00% 12.98%
13.14%
Very satisfied
Satisfied
17.30%
2.16%
Average
51.41%
Neither satisfied
nor dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Very dissatisfied
Despite occurrences of water related
problems, overall satisfaction levels of most
customers range from satisfied to very satisfied.
Overall satisfaction with water availability - Formal
Overall satisfaction with water availability (n=1024)
140
120
Count
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
Very satisfied
126
Satisfied
56
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
19
Dissatisfied
0
Very dissatisfied
0
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
14
53
10
0
0
73
72
6
1
2
68
72
12
3
0
48
76
9
4
0
32
23
22
0
0
16
47
51
2
2
39
59
6
0
1
Generally, formal residents seem to be satisfied with the water provided by the City.
With 90.72% (i.e. sum of 62.69% - very satisfied and 27.86% -satisfaction) who are satisfied in Central Cape Town, 87.01%
in Kraaifontein/Blouberg, 94.15% in Klipfontein, 90.32%% in Tygerberg/Bellville, 90.51% in Mitchells Plain, 93.33% in
Heidelberg/Kuilsriver and 71.43% in Khayelitsha. 43.22% in South Peninsula claimed to be neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.
Overall satisfaction with water availability - informal
Overall satisfaction with water availability (n=601)
Count
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
14
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
9
28
7
0
4
2
14
Satisfied
88
39
33
34
54
16
14
31
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
5
4
24
2
7
39
27
9
Dissatisfied
9
6
22
0
4
17
20
1
Very dissatisfied
15
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
Very satisfied
Tygerberg/Bellville had most (93.18% i.e. sum of 15.91% very satisfied and 77.27% satisfied) respondents
who were satisfied with the City‟s provision of tap water. Southern Peninsula and Khayelitsha districts had
the most number of respondents who were dissatisfied with the City‟s provision of tap water.
Overall satisfaction with water availability - Business
Overall satisfaction with water availability (n=315)
Count
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
65
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
4
2
12
2
1
3
5
Satisfied
120
18
6
5
8
1
7
12
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
22
6
2
5
0
2
1
0
Dissatisfied
3
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Very dissatisfied
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Very satisfied
Generally, respondents indicated they were satisfied with the City’s provision of tap water. Heidelberg/Kuilsriver had the most
respondents (100% i.e. sum of 29.41% - very satisfied and 70.59% -satisfied) who were satisfied followed by South Peninsula (90.01%
i.e. sum of 27.27% - very satisfied and 63.74% -satisfied) and Mitchells Plain (90.01% i.e. sum of 18.18% – very satisfied and 72.73% satisfied). In Khayelitsha, although 50% of the respondents said they were satisfied, an equal proportion of respondents indicated that
they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the service.
Regularity of sanitation related problems
Frequency of sanitation related
problems (n=1026)
4%
8%
60%
Frequency of sewerage blockages (n = 315)
0.95%
0.95%
5%
Daily
7%
Monthly
Weekly
36.83%
Never
Twice a month
16%
55.87%
Monthly
Once or twice a year
Never
Frequency of sewerage blockage problems (n = 601
Daily
22.13%
29.62%
10.98%
Weekly
Twice a month
13.31%
8.32%
15.64%
Daily
2.22%
Monthly
Once or twice
year
3.17%
Once or twice a
month
Once or twice a
year
Weekly
)
Although generally most consumers do not
frequently encounter sanitation related
problems, it is a concern that some
consumers encounter problems more
frequently, e.g. daily.
Overall satisfaction with provision of sanitation services
Overall satisfaction sanitation service ( n=1026)
4% 2%
Overall satisfaction with provision of sanitation
services ( n =315)
1.59%
17%
Very satisfied
35%
Satisfied
Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
42%
Very dissatisfied
Overall satisfaction with sanitation
services
3.49%
Very satisfied
20.30%
45.26%
Satisfied
15.14%
15.81%
Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
12.38%
Dissatisfied
Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied
Satisfied
24.44%
1.90%
59.68%
Very dissatisfied
Very satisfied
Overall, approximately more than 60%
of customers in all areas are satisfied
(ranging from satisfied to very satisfied)
with provision of sanitation services.
Overall satisfaction with provision of sanitation services - Formal
Overall satisfaction with sanitation services (n=1024)
Count
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Very satisfied
Central
Kraaifontein
Cape Town
Blouberg
Area
121
14
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
52
51
42
37
13
28
Satisfied
54
43
71
77
64
10
49
65
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
23
13
27
20
20
27
36
8
Dissatisfied
2
3
1
5
6
2
15
4
Very dissatisfied
1
4
3
2
5
1
5
0
Most respondents said they are satisfied with the sanitation or sewerage services. Generally, formal residents seem to be satisfied with the
sanitation services provided by the City.
In descending order, the percentages of respondents in the different districts who were satisfied are as follows:
Heidelberg/Kuilsriver(88.57%, i.e. sum of 26.67 – very satisfied and 61.90% -satisfied); Central Cape Town (87.07%); Klipfontein (79.87%);
Tygerberg / Bellville (79.58%); Mitchells Plain (77.38%); Kraaifontein / Blouberg (74.02%); Khayelitsha (61.04%); and South Peninsula
(52.55%).
Overall satisfaction with provision of sanitation services - Informal
Overall satisfaction with sanitation services (n=601)
Count
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Central
Cape Town
Area
90
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
21
43
4
58
28
18
11
Dissatisfied
17
11
19
5
3
13
16
11
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
9
5
15
10
2
20
20
9
Satisfied
14
17
23
22
2
13
7
24
Very satisfied
1
4
8
3
0
3
2
0
Very dissatisfied
Tygerberg/Bellville followed by Heidelberg/Kuilsriver had most respondents who were
satisfied with the provision of sanitation services. Central Cape Town Area had the most
respondents (81.68% i.e. sum of 68.70% very dissatisfied and 12.98% dissatisfied) who were
dissatisfied with the City‟s provision of sanitation services.
Overall satisfaction with provision of sanitation services - Business
Overall satisfaction with sanitation services (n=315)
Count
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Very satisfied
Central
Kraaifontein Klipfontein
Cape Town
Blouberg
Area
51
6
2
Tygerberg
Bellville
Mitchells
Plain
Khayelitsha
South
Peninsula
Helderberg
Kuilsriver
9
2
1
2
4
Satisfied
129
16
6
10
8
0
7
12
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
23
5
2
3
0
3
2
1
Dissatisfied
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
Very dissatisfied
5
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Generally, across all districts except Khayelitsha, respondents indicated they were satisfied with the City‟s
provision of sanitation services. Heidelberg/Kuilsriver had the most respondent (94.12% i.e. sum of 23.53% -very
satisfied and 70.59% - satisfied) who were satisfied followed by Mitchells Plain (90.91% i.e. sum of 18.18%% very satisfied and 63.64%-satisfied) and Central Cape Town (84.91% i.e. sum of 24.06% – very satisfied and
60.85% - satisfied). In Khayelitsha, 25% of the respondents said they were satisfied while the remainder
indicated that they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied.
Informal areas water and sanitation peculiar issues
Approximate distance to the closest tap (n = 601)
450
400
350
Count
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Informal
1 - 20m
21 50m
51 70m
71 100m
101 200m
No tap
417
106
26
40
7
1
No
access
to water
1
Generally, most informal (around 87%) residents live
approximately between 1m to 50m from the nearest tap.
Do not
know
3
Informal areas water and sanitation peculiar issues
Households sharing the same tap (n = 601)
350
300
Count
250
200
150
100
50
0
Informal
1 - 50
51 - 100
330
68
101 200
49
201 500
18
501 2000
54
2000+
No tap
Not sure
73
2
7
Generally, most informal residents (around 55%) believe that
they share the same tap with around 50 households.
Informal areas water and sanitation peculiar issues
Household sharing same toilet (n = 601)
450
400
350
Count
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Informal
1 - 20
21 - 50
51 - 100
101 - 500
412
30
32
51
500 1000
46
1000+
No toilet
5
3
Do not
know
22
Generally, most informal residents (around 74%) believe that they
share the same toilet with around 50 households.
Informal areas water and sanitation peculiar issues
Count
Distance to the closest toilet (n = 601)
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Count
1 - 20m
21 - 50m
51 - 70m
71 - 100m
403
92
29
48
101 200m
18
No toilet
2
Do not
know
9
Generally, most informal residents (around 83%) believe that the
closest toilet is approximately some 50m away from their dwellings.
Conclusions on perception and satisfaction levels with water and sanitation
services
 Generally most consumers across formal, informal and business areas do not
frequently encounter water and sanitation related problems.
 There are consumers (albeit few) who encounter water and sanitation related
problems on a daily basis
 Generally, most consumers are satisfied with the provision of water and sanitation
services.
What the Department could do:
The Department could build on the positive perception by enhancing its stakeholder
engagement strategy with a view of engaging frequently with its customers and other
key stakeholders.
CUSTOMER
EXPERIENCE WITH
COMPLAINTS LODGING
AND SERVICE DELIVERY
PROCESS
Reporting water and sanitation issues to the City
Have you contacted the City of Cape Town to report a
water sanitation problem in the last 3 months?
(n=1026)
Have you contacted the City in last 3 months? (n = 315) Business
30.48%
11%
Yes
69.52%
Yes
No
No
89%
Did you contact the City to report water and
sanitation issue in the last 3 months? (n=601) Informal
46%
54%
Yes
No
Comparatively more customers from informal
areas contacted the City. This could suggest that
informal areas customers frequently encounter
water and sanitation related problems.
Method used to contact the
City (n=116)
Method used to contact the City (n =
96) - Business
1%
Call centre
23%
Community worker
6%
54%
Councillor
17%
12.61%
Call centre
10.81%
Community worker
75.68%
Water and sanitation
department
Councillor
Water and sanitation
department
Means used to conduct the City
(n=135) - Informal
11%
25%
28%
Call centre
Community worker
36%
Councillor
Department
Generally (around 64%) informal residents
report problems mainly through a
community worker and councillor. Formal
residents (54%) and business areas (76%)
mainly contact the City via the call centre.
Residence / location of customers who contacted the City (n=77) - On
database
12
9
10
10
9
8
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
Wynberg
1
4
Tamboerskloof
1
Somerset West
2
1
Sheldon Road
Bonteheuwel
2
Saxonsea
1
3
5
4
Saxiona
1
Kaalksteenfontein
1
Helderberg
1
3
Harare
1
Blouberg
2
1
Bellville
2
Belhar
4
Beaconhill
6
Means of contacting the City
Call Centre
Community worker
Councillor
Water and Sanitation
Department
Count
64
1
1
Tableview
Summer Greens
Strand
Sandrift
Salt River
Rugby
Ravensmead
Protea Park
Phoenix
Milnerton
GoodWood
Elsies River
Durbanville
Cape Town
Brooklyn
Bothasig
Avondale
Atlantis
0
Generally most customers (83%) who
contact the City via the call centre are from
affluent areas of the City.
11
Department could increase awareness in informal areas on benefits of lodging complaints.
Time taken to fix reported problems
City’s response time (n=116)
60
The City mostly respond to
reported problems in
formal areas in less than a
day.
Count
50
40
30
20
10
0
Formal
Less
than a
day
22
More
than a
day but
less than
3 days
22
Between
4 days
and a
week
4
More
More
than a
than 2
week but weeks but
less than less than
2 weeks
a month
4
2
More
than a
month
4
Not
I can‟t
remembe contacted
yet
r
55
3
Count
City's response time (n=127) - Informal
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Count
The City mostly respond to
reported problems in
informal areas in less than
a day.
Less than More than
a day
a day but
less than
3 days
26
24
Between
4 days
and a
week
7
More than More than More than
I can't
Not
a week
2 weeks
a month remember contacted
but less
but less
yet
than 2
than a
weeks
month
12
18
2
14
24
Time taken to fix reported problems (…cont.)
City's response time (n = 96) - Business
The City mostly respond to
reported problems in
business areas in less than
a day.
Count
80
60
40
20
0
More than
More than More than
Between 4
Not
Less than a a day but
I can’t
a week but 2 weeks but More than
days and a
contacted
less than 3
less than 2 less than a a month remember
day
week
yet
days
weeks
month
Count
61
14
3
6
3
1
4
4
Count
City's response time (n=77) - Customers on
database
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Series1
More
More
More than
than a day Between
than a
2 weeks
Less than
but less 4 days and week but but less
a day
a week less than 2 than a
than 3
days
weeks
month
36
13
0
1
0
More
than a
month
6
Not
I can’t
contacted
remember
yet
18
3
The customers on
database findings further
corroborate the
observation that the City
mostly respond to reported
problems in less than a
day
Rating of services rendered by workmen who fix problems
Service rating ( n=112) - Informal
100%
90%
80%
Count
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Poor
Average
Good
Excellent
The quality of work
performed by the
workmen/team
16
48
29
19
Professionalism of the
workmen/team
14
46
34
18
The time taken to fix
the problem by the
workmen/team
17
49
28
18
The services provided by
workmen in informal areas tend
to be generally rated as average
Rating of services rendered by workmen who fix problems (…cont.)
Service rating (n=116) - Formal
100%
90%
80%
Count
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Poor
Average
Good
Excellent
The quality of work
performed by the
workmen/team
13
52
33
18
Professionalism of
the workmen/team
16
56
29
15
The time taken to fix
the problem by the
workmen/team
17
57
27
15
The services provided by workmen
in formal areas tend to be
generally rated as average by most
customers.
Rating of services rendered by workmen who fix problems (…cont.)
Services rating ( n=77) - Customers on database
The services provided by workmen
in all areas tend to be generally
rated as average by most
consumers
80
70
60
Count
50
40
30
20
10
0
Poor
Average
Good
Excellent
The quality of work
performed by the
workmen/team
10
18
38
11
Professionalism of
the workmen/team
8
21
37
11
The time taken to fix
the problem by the
workmen/team
9
20
38
10
Department could re-define
its workflow processes,
develop the workmen and
configure teams to be more
customer-oriented at all
times.
Customer expectations regarding City‟s response time
Expected City's response time (n=134) - Informal
80
70
60
Count
50
40
30
20
10
0
Count
Within
1hour
Within 6
hours
Within 12
hours
Within 24
hours
Within 2
days
73
24
13
10
1
More
than 2
days
4
Don’t
know
9
Most customers (approximately
55%) in informal areas tend to
expect the City to fix reported
water and sanitation problems
within 1 hour.
Customer expectations regarding City‟s response time (…cont.)
Expected City's response time ( n=1026) Formal
700
600
Count
500
400
300
200
100
0
Count
Don’t
know
15
Within 1
hour
148
Within 6
hours
695
Within 12
hours
130
Within 24
hours
10
Within 2
days
28
Most customers (approximately
68%) in formal areas tend to
expect the City to fix reported
water and sanitation problems
within 6 hours
Customer expectations regarding City‟s response time (…cont.)
Expected City's response time (n=77)Customers on database
About a third of customers tend to
expect the City to fix reported
water and sanitation problems
within 6 hours
30
25

Count
20
15
10
5
0
Count
Within 1
hour
Within 6
hours
16
26
Within 12 Within 24
hours
hours
6
5
Within 2
days
4
More
than 2
days
2
Don’t
know
18
Department could focus more
on customer (stakeholder)
engagement to be better able
to manage customer
expectations.
 Management of customer
expectations could entail
customer- education
programmes, where consumers
are educated about their
obligations and responsibilities in
the process reducing information
gaps.
KNOWLEDGE AND
AWARENES
- COMMUNICATION
Knowledge on how to contact the Department on encountering water and
sanitation problems
Do you know how to contact the Department
upon encountering a problem? (n = 601) Informal
32%
Yes
No
68%
Need for the Department to increase awareness in informal areas.
Knowledge on how to contact the Department on encountering water and
sanitation problems - Formal
Count
Knowledge of how to contact the City to report problems (n=1024)
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Central Cape
Town Area
Yes counts
135
No counts
66
Kraaifontein
Blouberg
59
Klipfontein
Mitchells
Plain
99
Khayelitsha
71
Tygerberg
Bellville
67
18
40
South
Peninsula
86
Heidelberg
Kuilsriver
81
83
88
38
37
32
24
The percentage distribution of respondents who said they knew how to contact the Department upon
encountering problems is as follows: Heidelberg/ Kuilsriver - 77.14%; Kraaifontein/ Blouberg – 76.62%; South
Peninsula – 72.88%; Mitchells Plain - 72.26%; Central Cape Town Area - 61.16%; and Khayelitsha - 51.95%. In
the regions, where there were more respondents who did not know than those who knew, the percentage
distribution of those who knew is as follows: Klipfontein – 46.10%; and Tygerberg/Bellville - 43.23%.
Knowledge on how to contact the Department on encountering water and
sanitation problems - Informal
District
Central Cape Town Area
Kraaifontein/Blouberg
Klipfontein
Tygerberg/Bellville
Mitchells Plain
Khayelitsha
South Peninsula
Heidelberg/Kuilsriver
Yes
No (%)
(%)
19.85
80.15
29.31
70.69
32.41
67.59
15.91
84.09
53.85
46.15
33.77
66.23
28.57
71.43
52.73
47.27
Most (84.09%) respondents in Tygerberg/Bellville followed by respondents in the Central Cape
Town Area (80.15%) said they don‟t know how to contact the Department. Overall, the
Department could target all districts in order to increase knowledge on how customers can reach
them when they encounter water and sanitation related problems.
Awareness of City’s customer service contact details
Do you know about the City's contact details for
queries? (n=1026) - Formal
Do you know about the City customer service
contact details for queries? (n=315) - Business
23%
49%
51%
Yes
No
77%
Yes
No
Do you know about the City's contact details for
queries? (n=601) - Informal
There is a need for the Department to increase
awareness in both informal and formal areas.
26%
74%
Yes
No
Awareness that the City has a single number for all service calls
Are you aware that the City has a single number for all
service calls? (n=1026) - Formal
28%
Are you aware that the City has a single number
for all service calls? (n=315)
42%
58%
72%
Yes
Yes
No
No
Are you aware that the City has a single number for all
service calls? (n=601) - Informal
16%
84%
Yes
No
Need for the Department to increase
awareness in both informal and formal
areas.
Previous usage of the single number for all service calls
Have you made use of the single number for
all service calls before? (n=1026) - Formal
Have you made use of this number before? (n=315)
32%
17%
68%
Yes
83%
Yes
No
No
Have you made use of the single number for all service
calls before? (n=615) - Informal
Generally, there is low previous usage of the
number in formal, informal and business
areas.
14%
86%
Yes
No
Interest in receiving information on Department’s initiatives
Would you like to receive information from
the Department? (n=1016) - Formal
18%
Would you like to receive information from the
Department (n=315) - Business
26%
Yes
82%
No
74%
Yes
No
Would you like to receive information from
the Department? (n=601) - Informal
13%
Yes
87%
No
The Department should take advantage of
customers‟ eagerness to receive information.
Preferred method of communication with the Department
Method
(1= most
preferred)
Formal
Informal
Business
1
Email / sms
Flyers
Twitter and Facebook
2
Billboards
Radio advertisement
Email/sms
3
Website
Newspaper advertisement
Website
4
Newspaper advertisement
Email/sms
Radio advertisement
5
Radio advertisement
Website
Newspaper advertisement
6
Flyers
Flyers
The Department should tailor-make its communication media in accordance with the
preferred methods of communication.
KNOWLEDGE AND
AWARENES
-ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT
Awareness of impact blocked sewers have on the environment
Are you aware of the impact blocked sewers
have on the environment? (n=1026) - Formal
Are you aware of the impact that blocked
sewers have on the environment? (n=315)
8%
20%
Yes
No
80%
Yes
92%
No
Are you aware of the impact blocked sewers
have on the environment? (n=601) - Informal
26%
Yes
74%
No
Awareness of City’s by-laws that regulate water usage and water abuse
Are you aware of the City's by-laws that regulate
water usage and water abuse? (n=1026) - Formal
49%
Are you aware of City's by-laws that regulate
water usage and water abuse? (n=315) Business
35%
51%
Yes
No
Are you aware of the City's by-laws that regulate
water usage and water abuse? (n=601) - Informal
50%
50%
Yes
No
Yes
65%
No
Awareness of penalty charges
Are you aware of penalty charges attached to
illegally connecting surface water to sewers (n =
315) - Business
48%
Need to increase awareness of penalty
charges.
Yes
52%
No
Awareness of penalty charges
attached to:
Making illegal water connections
Throwing old oil in the drain/sewer
Throwing foreign bodies/objects in the
drain
Not reporting leaking pipes in your
property
Discharging rain water into the sewer
Formal
(count)
643
204
118
Informal
(count)
273
280
222
51
72
10
25