Alabama Weatherization Assistance Program: Customer Satisfaction Highlights
The Alabama Weatherization Assistance Program's American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) results highlight a Customer Satisfaction Index of 83, surpassing the DOE WAP National Customer Satisfaction Index of 67. The program's strengths in communication and technical assistance are evident, but areas for improvement include communication sufficiency and frequency. Grantees are set to distribute results and initiate improvement actions by June 1, 2017, to enhance program operations. Detailed discussions, plans, and quality enhancements are underway to elevate program management at both grantee and subgrantee levels.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Alabama Weatherization Assistance Program American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)
Results, Now What? Plan Distribute Communicate
Grantee s will distribute results to subgrantees by June 1, 2017. If unable to meet this deadline, DOE will provide to subgrantees upon request Distribute I will provide the results by email by June 1, 2017
Grantees shall initiate a communication process with Subgrantees about areas for improvement Communicate Grantees will identify specific actions that will be taken to improve program operations We will discuss the results during this meeting I will set up a conference call to further discuss the results for those unable to attend and any others who would like to participate
During discussions of these results we will develop a plan to enhance program management and implement processes and quality improvements at the subgrantee level. Plan DOE considers this a key component of the 2018 State planning process. The 2018 State plan will include the steps taken by the grantee in conjunction with its subgrantees to implement these improvements.
Results Overview Highlights The Alabama Customer Satisfaction Index is 83 DOE WAP National Customer Satisfaction Index of 67. The Federal Government average for 2016 is 68. Scores for drivers of satisfaction range from 62 to 91, with Development of the WAP Plan scoring the lowest and Technical Assistance scoring the highest.
Results Overview Highlights Communication is the driver with the highest impact and therefore the most influence on satisfaction at this time. Overall, Alabama's Communication score is strong, at 86. However, the areas relating to the "sufficiency of communication about WAP polices and regulations" (78) and the "frequency of communication" (82) score lower; focus improvement efforts here to further strengthen Alabama's Communication.
Results Overview Highlights Technical Assistance is also a high-impact area with a considerable amount of influence on overall satisfaction. Alabama's Technical Assistance is strong, at 91. Work to maintain this strong performance moving forward. The comments received provide additional specific feedback that may be helpful in suggesting other improvements the state might undertake.
Alabama by the Numbers National Alabama Scores Sample Size Scores Sample Size National Min National Max National Impact Sample Size Development of the WAP Plan Extent of involvement in developing Plan Quality of opportunities to participate in developing Plan Degree to which Plan reflects input Distribution of Funds Timing of distribution funds ensured no service interruption Quality of Agency process for executing grant awards Timely payment from Agency once award is made Technical Assistance Ability to answer questions Timeliness of receiving requested information Ability to direct you to useful resources or information Responsiveness to tech assistance requests Clarity and consistency of assistance provided Effectiveness of tech assistance provided Training Provided by Third Parties Accessibility of training Scheduling of training Cost of training Quality of training Monitoring and Corrective Action Consistency of monitoring across Network Adherence to monitoring plan for on-site visit Usefulness of monitoring visits Clarity of feedback in monitoring report Timeliness of feedback in monitoring report Clarity of Corrective Action-Quality Improvement Plan process Partnerships Awareness of efforts to serve eligible households Sufficiency of Agency partnerships with other entities Effectiveness of partnerships created to better serve clients Communication Sufficiency of communication about WAP policies-regulations 579 10 0 0 0 0 80 78 89 78 97 100 93 100 96 95 96 96 100 96 97 85 87 89 98 93 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 91 88 100 92 99 100 44 43 48 42 64 57 63 71 70 72 69 72 73 65 70 66 64 61 63 74 70 65 73 69 71 68 71 58 59 58 59 69 70 532 509 519 502 572 568 566 562 575 575 574 573 570 575 572 567 566 565 553 557 570 530 563 569 568 567 548 528 524 507 511 576 572 62 61 60 67 72 59 72 83 91 93 92 89 93 87 91 83 84 83 81 83 89 82 87 81 91 96 96 65 57 67 70 86 78 8 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 9 9 10 10 0.5 -- -- -- 0.7 -- -- -- 0.9 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.1 -- -- -- -- 0.4 -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.6 -- -- -- 2.0 -- 21 11 22 22 26 33 26 37 20 17 19 29 25 25 6 33 37 27 31 40 35 0 38 29 25 31 30 33 33 Usefulness of feedback about work plans-performance-monitoring Frequency of communication Clarity of communications Responsiveness of Agency staff to info requests Consistency of responses received Customer Satisfaction Index Overall satisfaction Compared to expectations Compared to the ideal Mission Fulfillment Confidence in fulfilling mission to assist low-income families Meet Organization Needs Trust in WAP to help meet organization needs 28 31 30 33 33 33 33 30 35 41 41 30 30 94 100 100 100 100 96 100 94 94 100 100 100 100 68 68 67 72 68 67 69 66 64 75 75 71 71 570 573 574 574 570 579 579 579 579 566 566 576 576 84 82 86 91 92 83 87 83 79 88 88 90 90 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 9 9 10 10 -- -- -- -- -- N/A -- -- -- 4.7 -- 5.1 --
Questions and Answers How could the process of the developing the Plan be improved? Strategic Planning More communication / interaction with subgrantees There is so little money in the program that the plan is basically a waste of time. with the additional mandates and paperwork weatherization requires more work for fewer results. Have inclusive opportunities for individuals with ideas who normally don't get an chance to help develop the plan. Enable more input from Weatherization Contractors to assist in developing a plan and process to improve the Program. The Contractors have the most "hands-on" knowledge and experience which in numerous cases is extremely vital to the outcome of program. I think it is good and our input was well received and doesn't need a lot of improvement
Questions and Answers What additional technical assistance needs would you like the State WAP Agency to address? Budgeting More detail training The state of Alabama or ADECA is always allowing us to attend training classes in state or out of state. They encourage us to attend as many training courses as possible. I am pleased with their efforts. No questions at this time. I think they do a good job of addressing our needs
Questions and Answers What, if any, additional training and technical assistance needs do you want the State WAP Agency to address? Budgeting for grants More training for staff Assessment Training some advanced IR camera training
Questions and Answers What would you like to see the State WAP Agency do to increase partnerships with other government/non- government entities to serve eligible households? Assist with community assessments I don't care what they do or how they get it done, just do it Partner with Power companies so that they can donate or provide Wx clients with LED light bulbs, and or other energy benefits We need help from the State and Federal levels with information and meeting with other companies communicating the benefits of the Weatherization program. That could be pamphlets, media, websites, etc. We have to better sell this great program.
Questions and Answers What more could DOE WAP do to help the State and local agencies meet the needs of low- income people in the State? More consistent flow of funding Get grants administered BEFORE the grant period begins / recognized the quality, or lack thereof, of the housing stock with which we work / have the ability to suspend or exempt requirements based on the needs of the house (audits will exclude these houses from work) / include the use of heat pumps since the ARRA monitor that was sent to Alabama had never seen one before, did not know how they worked, and recommended to DOE (which DOE accepted) that they not be used. Provide more funding so that we can weatherize more homes. Our waiting list is continuously accumulating and the clients are getting very restless due to their homes need of assistance. Increase the funding for the Weatherization Program. This is one of the most effective programs available to low-income people and it works. I have seen it first hand. I have been in homes where people are crowded around one heater because they are cold due to the conditions of their homes. Homes with broken or missing windows and panes, no attic insulation, holes in walls, you name it. Then, we weatherize these homes and we see the smiles and the tears of people now that their are able to enjoy their homes because they are now energy efficient, comfortable and safe. It is amazing. A program like this that works is the least funded available to our clients. We need additional funding to help the thousand of people in need of this service. We need more money but that's up to the state
