HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020 06 08 Regular 500 - Waste Pro Annual Performance Review • REGULAR AGENDA ITEM 500
,n m=ared CITY COMMISSION AGENDA I JUNE 8, 2020 REGULAR MEETING
1959
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 UCF to
perform the survey again this year.
This year's survey was complicated by the COVID-19 environment. With the UCF
campus being closed, 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 91.4% which is up from last year.
Previous results from 2019 to 2007 were 90.8%, 94.6%, 95.2%, 94.78%, 93.4%, 94.5%,
95.2%, 97.1%, 96.8%, 94.2%, 97.0%, 93.4% and 93.2%, respectively.
The statistical sample resulted in 417 completed surveys and contained 184
comments - 78 of which were positive and 106 of which were negative. The majority
of negative comments in order of frequency were related to strewn trash/containers,
recycling, inconsistent/missed pick-ups. Of the respondents who left comments, 23
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. Last year, with the cooperation of
Seminole County we designed and disseminated a visual flyer to bring clarity to the
topic of recycling. Repeated messaging will undoubtedly be necessary and successive
mailings are now being scheduled.
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 9.1 of the Agreement which is listed in 168
the attached Annual Evaluation Report. Staff has completed the evaluation and has
met with representatives from Waste Pro to discuss the report.
On February 25, 2019, Ordinance 2019-04 authorized a one-year renewal of the
franchise agreement with an option to renew for an additional one-year term.The
evaluated year is the first those renewals and we are presently in the last renewal
year. It is anticipated that the competitive bid process will result in a new award by
December of this year.
The survey cost of$3,630 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.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Commission validate the Solid Waste survey results
entitling Waste Pro, our solid waste franchisee, to receive the performance bonus of
$15,000, (less shared survey cost) and also accept the Annual Evaluation Report for
Waste Pro for the period of March 1, 2019 - February 29, 2020 as submitted by staff.
169
, , Institute for Social and
UCF Behavioral Science
UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA
WINTER SPRINGS CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION WITH WASTE
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
by
Lauren Daniel and Amy M. Donley, PhD
May 2020
• • • • • • • • • •
a a • . • • •
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Overview.............................................................................................................. 1
SurveyCollection ................................................................................................ 2
Impact of COVID-19 on Survey Collection.................................................. 2
Results .................................................................................................................. 4
Impact of COVID-19 on Data Quality........................................................... 4
Overall Customer Satisfaction....................................................................... 4
Specific Comments & Complaints................................................................ 5
Customersto Contact .................................................................................... 6
DamagedTrash Bins ...................................................................................... 7
171
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
• • • • • • • • i • •
OVERVIEW
The Institute for Social and Behavioral Sciences (ISBS) at the
University of Central Florida 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 2020 from Waste Pro's customer database. A link to the
survey was sent through email to each customer who had an email
registered with their Waste Pro account. The survey was then taken by the
customer online. The survey was available to be taken from April 15 to
April 28, 2020.
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 in 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.
172
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • i • •
4 • i
SURVEY COLLECTION
Impact of COVID-19 on Survey Collection
As in past Waste Pro customer satisfaction surveys, this survey's
intended method of data collection was by telephone. However, due to
the ISBS phone lab on the UCF campus being closed due to COVID-19,
we were not able to utilize our typical number of telephone surveyors.
Data collection via telephone was still attempted by one surveyor, and no
surveys were obtained (n=162).
Because customer email addresses were also provided in the
sample ISBS received, we decided to create a modified survey that was
suitable for customers to take themselves and send a first wave of
customers a survey link via email. These customers were those who had
only provided their email address and could not be contacted any other
way. As seen in Table 1 , the response rate of this first wave of customers
using online surveying was 11 .39% from April 15 to April 20. Due to this
response rate, we hypothesized that the desired number of surveys (400)
could be achieved quickly by continuing to utilize email as the survey
distribution method as opposed to telephone surveys. Using an online
survey, ISBS was able to reach the desired number of surveys (417) in two
weeks, instead of the two months it took to reach this number in 2019's
effort.
173
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
► ■ • • • • s • t • r
Table 1 shows the breakdown of the survey collection throughout its
duration. The sample was comprised of 6,663 customer email addresses.
The survey was sent out in two waves. Wave 1 was sent on April 15, 2020
and consisted of those customers who had only provided their email as
their contact information. Wave 2 was sent on April 20, 2020, to all other
customers who provided their email address in addition to other contact
information.
20.31 % of customers could not be reached over email because their
provided email address either bounced back or failed. Approximately
71 % of customers did not open the survey link. Of those that did receive
the email and open the survey link, 97.3% submitted a completed survey.
After eliminating survey respondents who were not 18 (n=1 ), did not live
in Winter Springs (n=37), did not answer "Yes" to the screening question
(n=190), and who did not complete the survey (n=4), 417 completed
surveys remained, 6.26% of all total emails.
TABLE 1. TOTAL SURVEY COLLECTION ATTEMPTS
Wave 1 Wave 2 Tota
Completed Surveys 9 603 612
Incomplete Surveys 0 17 17
Bounced Emails 20 1 ,317 1 ,337
Failed Emails 0 16 16
No Response 70 4,631 4,701
Total Emails Sent 79 6,584 6,663
174
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
• • • • • • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • i • •
4 • i
RESULTS
Impact of COVID-19 on Data Quality
Transitioning from obtaining the data via telephone to online
surveys provided benefits not only in the data collection process, but in
data quality. In 2019, 87 customers left a comment or complaint; in the
current report, comments or complaints were received from 184
customers. The comments overall were longer and provided more detail
in comparison to the 2019 report, because the customer was able to type
them themselves.
Overall Customer Satisfaction
After asking participants the initial screening questions, surveyors
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?"
The results show that customer satisfaction with Waste Pro (91 .4%)
exceeds the 90% satisfaction rating required. Compared to the 2019
report, customer satisfaction with Waste Pro has increased from 90.8 to
91 .4 from 2019 to 2020. Table 2 shows the results of customers,
satisfaction levels. Customers who chose "Other" were able to leave a
comment to explain their satisfaction level; these comments generally
stated that the customer was "partially" or "somewhat" satisfied. All
comments are listed on the "Comments on Satisfaction Level" sheet in the
attached Excel document.
175
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
n • r
TABLE 2. SATISFACTION WITH TRASH COLLECTION SERVICES
Frequency Percentage (%)
Satisfied 381 91 .4
Unsatisfied 19 4.6
Other 17 4.1
Total 417 100
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. 187 (44.84%)
customers answered that they had comments to express, and 184
(44.12%) completed a comment. 78 customers left a positive comment,
many stating that Waste Pro does an "excellent" job, and that they "always
go above and beyond". These customers are pleased with the "courteous
and friendly" service.
106 customers chose to leave a complaint, the majority of which
concerned recyclables. The main complaints were that many customers
would like larger bins for their recyclables and find the current ones too
small. Many customers also stated that they are not sure what is approved
and can be recycled and would like clearer guidance on this matter.
Finally, customers also complained about recyclables often being spilled
or left in the street.
176
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
• • • • • • • • i • •
. r • • r r a • •
Common complaints that did not concerns recyclables included
bins being left in the way of traffic (in the road or in the middle of
driveways), bins being thrown and broken, and inconsistent pickup times.
The "Comments" and "Complaints" sheets in the attached Excel
document shows the verbatim responses from customers.
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 187 customers that answered that they
had a specific comment or complaint, 184 left one; 23 customers
answered that they would like to be contacted about their comment or
complaint. The customers' contact information, as well as their complaint
or comment, is listed in the "Complaint Contact" sheet in the attached
Excel document.
TABLE 3. COMMENTS, COMPLAINTS, & CONTACT INFORMATION
Hasa Comment Left a Comment Wants to be
or Complaint or Complaint Contacted
Freq. % Freq. % Freq.
Yes 187 44.8 184 98.4 23 12.4
No 230 55.2 3 1 .6 163 87.6
Total 417 100 187 100 186 100
177
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
Damaged Trash Bins
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?"
Most customers are satisfied with the condition of their containers
(363, or 87.1 %). Table 4 shows that 54 (12.9%) customers' containers are
damaged to the point where they would like them replaced. Their contact
can be found in the "Damaged Bins Contact" sheet in the attached Excel
document.
TABLE 4. CUSTOMERS WITH DAMAGED TRASH COLLECTION
CONTAINERS
Frequency Percentage (%)
Not Damaged 363 87.1
Damaged 54 12.9
Total 417 100
178
isbs@ucf.edu - (407) 823-1357
sciences.ucf.edu/sociology/isbs
WASTE PRO OF FLORIDA INC.
' ANNUAL EVALUATION REPORT
For the Period March 1,2019—February 29,2020
AUTHORITY: In accordance with the Solid Waste Agreement dated March 1, 2006 and amended on
January 28, 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)
CRTFERu A:
The number of complaints received pursuant to paragraph 9.2 of the Solid Waste Agreement and Contractor's
erformance in resolvin the complaints in a professional and a dient manner.
GRADE:Ace table but Needs Improvement
EXPLANATION:
■ Complaints resolved in allowable time frame.
■ Quantity of complaints still within acceptable levels
Steady decrease in service issues over last 12 months and less than the prior 12 months.The annual spike
in service issues Burin the summer months requires improvement.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE: Ongoing
CRITERIA B:
Contractor's responsiveness to direction 'ven by the Authorized Re resentative.
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION:
Contractor has been very responsive to City directions), A City/Waste Pro mutually developed system of
dispatching service issues via e-mail directly to Waste Pro field personnel which has shown notable success in
reducing*re eat calls and escalations.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE:NIA
CRITERA C:
The number of times that Contractor had to pay liquidated damages pursuant to.paragraph 25.0 of the Solid
Waste a eement.
GRADE:Good
m
EXPLANATION:
No li uidated damn es in this evaluation period.
179
EXPECTED RESfJLUTION DATE:N/A __
CRITERIA D:
Contractor's participation in community meetin slevents s .onsored by Cit:
GRADE: Goad
EXPLANATION:
Contractor provided$5,000 in donations to City's 4'of July event during the evaluation period,fulfilling
contractual requirement. Special event support which included provision of toters and roll-offs was well
coordinatedlexecuted.In attendance and well-represented at all re nested meetiri s.
_ .
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE.N/A
CRITERIA E:
Contractor's financial viability to continue performing the collection and disposal service as required by this
-
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION:Reviewed Audited Financial Statements at 12/31/1.9 (Vestal&Wiler CPAs
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE:NIA
CRITERIA F:
Contractor's compliance with its"Customer Service Policy".required by paragraph 9.4 of the Solid Waste
A Bement.
GRADE: Acceptable but Needs Improvement
EXPLANATION:
The previous!y i p lemented TracEZ sYstem was abandoned for the s stem described in CRITERIA B above.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE:Ongoing
----
— w
CRITERIA G:
Injection.records of all collection vehicles.
GRADE: Good
EXPLANATION: Three(3)new vehicles in service in Winter Springs;two(2)trucks refurbished; all vehicles
under o annual DOT.ins ection and are serviced every 200 en 'ne hours.
EXPECTED RESOLUTION DATE:NIA
CERTIFICATION:
Certified by the undersiput, uthorized Representative of the City of Winter Springs,Florida:
Shawn Boyle,, ,:y Manager Date
Receivedby o tractor,Waste Pro of Florida:
C or Date
180