HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021 08 09 Regular 502 - Waste Pro Annual Performance Review • REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 502
Incnrinreted CITY COMMISSION AGENDA I AUGUST 9, 2021 REGULAR MEETING
1454
TITLE
Waste Pro Annual Performance Review
SUMMARY
The purpose of this agenda is to provide the results of the solid waste survey as well
as the City's annual evaluation of solid waste services.The performance bonus
provision of the franchise agreement with Waste Pro provides for a bonus of$15,000
provided the Contractor receives a customer satisfaction rating of 90% or greater.
Staff contracted with the Institute for Social and Behavioral Science (ISBS) at the
University of Central Florida to perform the survey again this year. Because of COVID-
19, last year's survey was adapted to on-line participation via email. This year's survey
followed the same format since the effects of COVID-19 are still being felt and the ISBS
is not performing phone surveys at this time. The ISBS modified the survey so that it
was suitable for online participation and the survey responses were solicited via email.
The level of customer satisfaction measured in this year's survey was 90.3%, which is a
decrease from last year's survey. Results dating back to 2007 are presented on the
attached Schedule of Historical Customer Satisfaction Results.
The statistical sample resulted in 759 completed surveys and contained 303
comments - 116 of which were positive and 187 of which were negative.The majority
of negative comments in order of frequency were related to recycling including bins
are too small, lack of guidance on acceptable recycling, inconsistent/missed pick-ups,
bins left in the street or thrown haphazardly without care causing them to crack or
break. Of the respondents who left comments, 32 desired follow up. Staff has initiated
contact to coordinate resolutions of those concerns/complaints with Waste Pro. The
commentary indicates that ongoing education efforts are warranted for recycling.
Approximately 2 years ago, with the cooperation of Seminole County City Staff
designed and disseminated a visual flyer to bring clarity to the topic of recycling(copy
is attached). Repeated messaging will undoubtedly be necessary. The following
communication efforts have been and will continue to be a priority for City Staff:
• Guidelines are given with each recycling bin picked up by a resident.
• Messages have been included in the "News You Can Use" portion of the utility
bill.
• The City News Letter will continue to be used to disseminate information about
trash, recycling and other matters.
• Staff will continue to encourage Waste Pro to use a tagging system to help
484
educate residents when their recycling is not picked-up.
On May 10, 2021, Ordinance 2021-03 authorized a new five year contract for
the franchise agreement with an option to renew for three additional one-
year terms. In accordance with Section 9.3 of the Solid Waste Agreement,
Waste Pro's performance is to be annually evaluated by the City Manager, or
his designee, and delivered to the City Commission at a public meeting. The
evaluation is based on the level of service criteria set forth in paragraph 9.3 of
the Agreement. Staff has completed the evaluation and has met with
representatives from Waste Pro to discuss the report. The survey cost of
$3,629 was paid from the Solid Waste Fund. Waste Pro's share of the survey
will be deducted from the $15,000 performance bonus for a net performance
bonus of$13,185. The current residential solid waste rate of$18.10 per
month remains unchanged since 2006, and is currently under evaluation by
City Staff to establish a new rate for residents targeted for the 2022 fiscal
year.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Commission affirm the Solid Waste survey results
and approve Waste Pro, our solid waste franchisee, to receive the
performance bonus of$15,000, (less shared survey cost) and also receive the
Annual Evaluation Report for Waste Pro for the period of March 1, 2020 -
February 28, 2021 as submitted by staff.
485
Historical Customer Satisfaction Results
with Waste Management Services
provided by Waste Pro of Florida
Survey
Fiscal Year Result
2007 93.20%
2008 93.40% Survey Results
2009 97.00% 98.00%
2010 94.20%
2011 96.80% 96.00%
2012 97.10%
2013 95.20% 94.00%
2014 94.50%
92.00%
2015 93.40%
2016 94.78% 90.00%
2017 95.20%
2018 94.60% 88.00%
2019 90.80%
2020 91.40% 86.00%
2021 90.30% 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
486
r r
rQ a
V °6 `6 0 V
tL�7 o c
ELnIna)
� Baa
ji 0° m o a'Q o U)
c Q. a�
4 MM
m 072 + _ X
O
Q W 2' Q O D 42
u tn
O Q 0) u O
O CD
u C:
7 -E
to O
S m x y ro i 0)v
L p C Ui
U �H d�d ,y 'a O IA Q - O N C ' (1)
co V O
rry 8 w1���5-0
am
� (n
IIx i�M res Y .' (� f�0 .Q c0
EIr.d1y1i411 � , !n p 0
l z
O V L
® Z t a
C
Ln
Uj
� ` uj d -2 m
f0 n•
LOP � u to ► o
�, 0 Z w
0Q pv�7 ul
O e 1 o
•v - - - .2 M
G� CL v -
® m > 0CL
r V
in 0 41
ul
Ln •�
— ui.L
o
> °ZS Co� .Y
4-1
I o C a s
p 4- O
W 0 -.
Ln
•� O � Ems !'
H N v► &I c`o co � c �
E C V0 Ln
Qc
— V
Z � 16 �
0 o
C Q .0
L a+
O ® Q E o
aim J°- o Z°Oa
9� �,d >•, o a�
0 .r #
!qp�
m
4-1
m u 3
+� 0 # u V
0 Ln
0.
a (1) m
J � rNo
O
Z
487
go
WINTER SPRINGS CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION WITH WASTE
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
by
Jacquelyn Reiss and Amy M. Donley, PhD
June 2021
Institute for Social and
UCF Behavioral Science
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
• • • • • • • • • •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SURVEY COLLECTION ..................................................................................4
Impact of COVID-19 on Survey Collection ...................................................4
TABLE 1 . TOTAL SURVEY COLLECTION ATTEMPTS .................................5
RESULTS.........................................................................................................6
Overall Customer Satisfaction......................................................................6
TABLE 2. SATISFACTION WITH TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES ............7
Specific Comments & Complaints................................................................8
Customers to Contact................................................................................. 10
TABLE 3. COMMENTS, COMPLAINTS, AND CONTACT INFORMATION .. 10
DamagedTrash Bins.................................................................................. 11
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
489
• • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • •
OVERVIEW
The Institute for Social and Behavioral Sciences (ISBS) at the University
of Central Florida (UCF) contracted with the City of Winter Springs, FL to
conduct a survey to determine the level of customer satisfaction with the City's
solid waste disposal subcontractor, Waste Pro. The sample was obtained in
2021 from the City of Winter Springs' resident database. A link to the survey
was sent through email to each customer who had an email registered with the
City of Winter Springs. The survey was then taken by the customer online. The
survey was available to be taken from June 10 to June 24, 2021 .
The survey consisted of a structured, electronic questionnaire that is used
annually to determine consumers' satisfaction with Waste Pro. The survey
design included an initial screening question to ensure only residents who
currently live in the City of Winter Springs and are charged for trash collection
services are included. Participants are asked the following screening question:
"Does the monthly water bill that you get from the City of Winter Springs include
a charge for trash collection services?"
Individuals who responded "no" or "don't know" during the survey have
their surveys ended and are excluded from the final sample.
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
490
• • • • • • • • • •
SURVEY COLLECTION
Impact of COVI D-19 on Survey Collection
Although a majority of the past Waste Pro customer satisfaction surveys
had been conducted via telephone, the method of data collection for the annual
survey had been adapted last year to accommodate for the closure of the
ISBS's phone lab due to COVID-19. Since data collection had to be modified
from telephone to online survey last year and due to the continued closure at
UCF due to COVID-19, this year's survey was also conducted through an online
survey distributed via e-mail. Similar to last year, customer email addresses
were provided by the City of Winter Springs and utilized to collect data via a
modified survey that was suitable for customers to take themselves. While the
survey was distributed to customers in two waves last year, the survey this year
was distributed in one wave to all the e-mail addresses provided by the City of
Winter Springs. As seen in Table 1 , the response rate for the online survey
distributed between June 10th to June 24th was 12.83%.
Further, Table 1 shows the breakdown of the survey collection throughout
its duration. The sample frame was comprised of 8,480 customer email
addresses. The first e-mail to customers was sent out June 10, 2021 . Following,
a reminder e-mail was sent out to customers who had yet to complete the
survey a week later on June 17, 2021 . Out of the 8,480 e-mail addresses, 837,
or 9.9%, of customers could not be reached over email because their provided
email address either bounced back or failed. Approximately 6,529 customers, or
76.9%, did not open the survey link. Of those that did receive the email and
opened the survey link, 1 ,088 customers, or 97.7%, completed the survey.
Although 97.7% of people who did open the link submitted a survey, some
cases were excluded because they were not 18 years of age or older (n=3),
they did not live in Winter Springs (n=4), and they did not answer "Yes" to the
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
491
. . . . . . . . . .
•
screening question (n=322). After eliminating those survey respondents, the
final sample of Waste Pro customers was 759, which was 8.95% of all total
emails.
TABLE 1. SURVEY COLLECTION
Total
OPENED SURVEY, BUT DID NOT SUBMIT 26
TOTAL COMPLETED SURVEYS 1088
WASTEPRO CUSTOMERS 759
WAS NOT OVER 18 YEARS OLD 3
DID NOT LIVE IN WINTER SPRINGS 4
DID NOT ANSWER "YES' TO SCREENING 322
QUESTION
BOUNCED EMAILS 817
FAILED EMAILS 20
NO RESPONSE 6,529
TOTAL EMAILS SENT 8,480
• • -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
492
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • •
RESULTS
Overall Customer Satisfaction
After asking participants the initial screening questions, the survey asked
participants about their overall satisfaction with the trash collection services. The
question is as follows:
"As you probably know, solid waste in Winter Springs is picked up by a private
contractor, Waste Pro. All in all, are you satisfied or unsatisfied with the trash
collection services you receive at your place of residence?"
Out of the 759 Waste Pro customers who submitted a survey, only 745
customers responded to this question. The results, which are highlighted in
Table 2, show that customer satisfaction with Waste Pro (90.3%) exceeds the
90% satisfaction rating required. Compared to the 2019 and 2020 reports,
customer satisfaction with Waste Pro has marginally decreased from 90.8% in
2019 and 91 .4% in 2020, to 90.3% in 2021 .
Moreover, 33 participants, or about 4.4% of the sample, chose "Other"
when asked about their satisfaction. Of the 33 participants who chose "Other,"
24 left comments describing why they may have chosen "Other" as a response.
Of those 24 comments, about half indicated that they were mostly, partially, or
slightly satisfied with their trash collection services. Other comments suggested
customers felt like the service and pick-up times were inconsistent from week to
week, some comments mentioned they were unhappy about how their bins
were left or put back after being collected, and others expressed frustration
about recycling, mainly regarding the size of recycling bins. All comments are
listed on the "Comments on Satisfaction Level" sheet in the attached Excel
document.
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
493
. . . . . . . . . .
•
TABLE 2. SATISFACTION WITH TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES
Frequency Percentage (%)
SATISFIED 673 90.3%
UNSATISFIED 39 5.2%
OTHER 33 4.4%
TOTAL 745 100%
• • -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
494
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • •
Specific Comments & Complaints
The satisfaction questions were followed by an open-ended question
asking participants about specific comments complaints they have about their
trash collection services. The question is as follows:
"Do you have any specific complaints about the trash collection service that you
would like express?"
While the satisfaction with Waste Pro's services was high, like past years,
many satisfied customers still took the opportunity to express their comments or
complaints with Waste Pro's services. Out of the 759 Waste Pro customers who
submitted a survey, 660 responded to this question and 306 customers
answered that they had a comment or complaint to express. Out of the 306
customers who had a comment or complaint, 303 completed a comment.
Approximately 116 customers left some type of positive comment. Out of
those positive comments many stated that Waste Pro and the trash collectors
do an "excellent" job, they are "amazing," "dependable," "consistent," and that
they "always go above and beyond". Many of these customers mentioned that
they are pleased with the "courteous," "respectful," efficient," and "personable"
service and always appreciate that their trash collectors are "friendly" and
"always have a smile on their faces." Further, there were a number of customers
who said the trash collection service was good but complained about the size of
recycling bins or had minor complaints about rare mishaps when their trash was
collected.
Alternatively, about 187 customers chose to leave a complaint, or partial
complaint about the service. Out of the approximate 187 customer complaints, a
proportion expressed various concerns recyclables. The main complaints about
recyclables were that many customers would like larger bins and find the current
ones too small. A few customers also stated that they are not sure what is
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
495
• • • • • • • • • •
approved and can be recycled and would like clearer guidance on this matter.
Finally, customers also complained about recyclables and trash being spilled or
left in the street, not collected all the way, not collected regularly, and their
recycling and trash bins being left in the street or thrown/put back roughly to the
point that the collection containers break.
Further, other customer complaints that solely concerned trash collection
described inconsistent pick-up times and inconsistent trash collection, including
trash containers being missed occasionally and all trash not being collected
from the bins regularly. Additionally, there were a number of complaints about
trash bins being left in the street, left open, or put back roughly to the point that
they break. The "Comments" and "Complaints" sheets in the attached Excel
document shows the verbatim responses from customers.
• . -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
496
. . . . . . . . . .
•
Customers to Contact
Customers who expressed any sort of comment or complaint, regardless
of whether they reported overall satisfaction with their trash collection services,
were asked if they would like to be contacted by the City of Winter Springs to
discuss their specific comments or complaints.
Table 3 shows that out of the 306 customers that answered that they had
a specific comment or complaint, 303 customers actually left a comment in their
survey response. Out of those 306 customers who had a comment or complaint,
only 305 answered the question asking whether they wanted to be contacted.
Out of those 305 responses, 32 customers answered that they would like to be
contacted about their comment or complaint. While all 32 customers left
comments, only 31 customers left their contact information. The customers'
contact information, as well as their complaint, is listed in the "Complaint
Contact" sheet in the attached Excel document.
TABLE 3. COMMENTS, COMPLAINTS, AND CONTACT INFORMATION
Has a Left Contact
Comment or Left a Comment Wants to be Information
(Out of customers who
Complaint or Complaint Contacted want to be contacted)
Freq. % Freq. % Freq. % Freq. %
YES 306 46.4% 303 99% 32 10.5% 31 99%
NO 354 53.6% 273 89.5%
TOTAL 660 100% 306 100% 305 100% 32 100%
• • -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
497
. . . . . . . . . .
•
Damaged Trash Bins
Lastly, all respondents were asked if their trash collection containers are
damaged to the point that they need replacing. The question is as follows:
"Is your trash collection container (bin) damaged to the point where you would
like it to be replaced?"
Out of the 759 Waste Pro customers who submitted a survey, a total of
743 responded to this question. Most customers who responded indicated that
they are satisfied with the condition of their containers (87.3%). Table 4 shows
that 94 customers' containers are damaged to the point where they would like
them replaced. Of those 94 customers, 4 wanted to be contacted about the
comment or complaint they left earlier in the survey, and 90 left their name,
address, and contact information, which can be found in the "Damaged Bins
Contact" sheet in the attached Excel document.
TABLE 4. DAMAGED TRASH COLLECTION CONTAINERS
Frequency Percentage (%)
YES 94 12.7%
NO 649 87.3%
TOTAL 743 100%
• • -• (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
498
Voal
WASTE PRO OF FLORIDA INC.
""""d ANNUAL EVALUATION REPORT
N�y1-d
For the Period March 1, 2020—February 28, 2021
AUTHORITY: In accordance with the Solid Waste Agreement dated March 1, 2006 and amended on
February 27, 2020 between the City of Winter Springs and Waste Pro of Florida, Inc.,
Section 9.3, Contractor's performance shall be annually evaluated by City's Authorized
Representative and/or City Commission.
The evaluation shall be based in the level of service criteria set forth in paragraph 9.1
of the Solid Waste Agreement. For each criteria the Authorized Representative shall
evaluate and grade Contractor's performance as Unacceptable, Acceptable but Needs
Improvement, or Good.
For each review criteria in which Contractor receives an unacceptable grade, the
Authorized Representative shall provide Contractor a written explanation of why
Contractor's performance was unacceptable and Contractor shall be given a reasonable
period of time, as determined by the Authorized Representative, to bring its level of
performance up to levels acceptable to the Authorized Representative.
EVALUATION:
Grade Scale: Good, Acceptable but Needs Improvement, Unacceptable (requires explanation)
CRITERIA A:
The number of complaints received pursuant to paragraph 9.2 of the Solid Waste Agreement and Contractor's
performance in resolving the complaints in a professional and expedient manner.
GRADE: Acceptable but Needs Improvement
EXPLANATION: The approval rating has been declining and at 90.3%is only 0.3%above the minimum
satisfaction rating of 90%. We had twice as many respondents this year vs. last year. The team needs to be more
conscientious. What is WP doing to ensure staffing consistency?
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: Ongoing
CRITERIA B:
Contractor's responsiveness to direction given by the Authorized Representative.
GRADE: Needs improvement
EXPLANATION: Contract section 4.1J requires WP to `tag' waste which is not properly containerized many of
the comments related to not understanding the rules of recycling—WP is not always tagging in appropriate
trash/recycling. Trash spillage has also been noted in the resident comments received in addition to calls handled
by the City's Customer Care Team.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: 8/1/2021
CRITERA C:
The number of times that Contractor had to pay liquidated damages pursuant to paragraph 25.0 of the Solid
Waste agreement.
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION: WP has not had to pay liquidated damages although a review of the WOs probably could have
resulted in liquidated damages (Section 25). There were at least 27 instances of co-mingled trash in which WP
was charged back for the load tickets,which is a very small percentage given all pickups throughout the year.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: Ongoing
499
CRITERIA D:
Contractor's participation in community meetings/events sponsored by City.
GRADE: Very Good
EXPLANATION: WastePro has always been major sponsor for the City's Winter Wonderland event. This
sponsorship meets the contractual agreement.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: N/A
CRITERIA E:
Contractor's financial viability to continue performing the collection and disposal service as required by this
agreement. (see paragraph 19.3(C)Annual Financial Report as described)
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION: Reviewed Audited Financial Statements at 12/31/2020 (Vestal&Wiler CPAs)
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: N/A
CRITERIA F:
Contractor's compliance with its"Customer Service Policy"required by paragraph 9.4 of the Solid Waste
Agreement.
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION:
The City has re-established the TracEZ system which allows our CSRs to directly report customer issues to
Waste Pro and obtain reports for monitoring and to determine resolutions. The biggest complaint we see is
surrounding recycling.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: Ongoing
CRITERIA G:
Inspection records of all collection vehicles.
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION: A narrative of WP's inspection policy was provided. A 3`d party inspects the vehicles annually
in August. Technicians perform safety inspections approximately every 300 hours.Repairs are scheduled as
needed.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: N/A
CERTIFICATION:
Certified by the undersigned Authorized Representative of the City of Winter Springs,Florida:
COWS: &6pia 6imn - 41,nanee btS. Date
Received by Contractor,Waste Pro of Florida:
r
`12- 6
Monrr-a—dror Date
500