Microsoft Word - Harry Mitchell LC.doc

NATIONAL BENCHMARKING SERVICE FOR SPORTS
AND LEISURE CENTRES

FACILITY REPORT
FOR
HARRY MITCHELL LEISURE CENTRE

Prepared by the
Sport Industry Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University
September 2007

NATIONAL BENCHMARKING SERVICE FOR SPORTS AND
LEISURE CENTRES

CONTENTS

Page

1. INTRODUCTION
1

2.
THE USER SURVEY SAMPLE
2

3.
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE FOR HARRY MITCHELL LEISURE
4
CENTRE

4.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA
10

5.
RESULTS: CURRENT PERFORMANCE SCORES FOR HARRY
11
MITCHELL LEISURE CENTRE

APPENDIX 1: USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
30

NBS REPORT FOR HARRY MITCHELL LEISURE CENTRE

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1
This report has been produced by Sport England’s National Benchmarking Service
for Sports and Leisure Centres (hereafter referred to as ‘NBS’) for Harry Mitchell
Leisure Centre, which is run by Sandwell Leisure Trust. The report has been
compiled by staff from the Sport Industry Research Centre (SIRC) at Sheffield
Hallam University.

1.2
Before investigating the details of performance for Harry Mitchell Leisure Centre
in this report, please read the accompanying Guidance document to accompany
facility reports.

1.3
The data in this report is based upon a survey of 318 users of the centre between
30th June and 8th July 2007, conducted by Leisure Net Solutions; and a financial
return based on the year 1st April 2006 to 31st March 2007. The user survey and
financial return are supplemented by catchment area data provided by the
University of Edinburgh. A catchment area map is provided in section four of this
report.

1.4
Harry Mitchell Leisure Centre is classified as being a 'dry without outdoor' centre
which means that it has an indoor sports hall which could accommodate at least 4
badminton courts, but no swimming pool or outdoor provision. The actual floor
space of the centre is 2,341m2 which means that it is benchmarked against
comparable centres with a total floor space of 1,500m2 to less than 3,000m2 (that is
medium sized centres) and it has 2,219m2 of usable space. The catchment area has
a relatively high proportion (25.79%) of residents from NS-SEC 6&7, representing
the most disadvantaged people in society.  The centre is managed by a trust. In
brief the benchmarking 'families' used for Harry Mitchell are:

•  Dry without outdoor (benchmark family of 10 centres)
•  20%+ of catchment population in NS-SEC 6&7 (benchmark family of 41
centres)
•  1,500 to <3000m2 floor space (benchmark family of 49 centres)
•  Trust (benchmark family of 35 centres)

1

2.
THE USER SURVEY SAMPLE

Figure 1: Harry Mitchell User Survey Characteristics

Note: The survey instrument groups respondents according to the new NS-SEC

classification as used in the 2001 Census and now used as standard in all government surveys.

2.1
The broad nature of the 318 people who took part in the survey is shown in Figure
1. The primary purpose of the data in Figure 1 is for calculating Key Performance
Indicators (KPIs) for comparison against benchmarks, whilst a secondary purpose
is to provide important stakeholders with an overview of the user survey sample.
Venue managers should reflect on the data and qualify the extent to which they are
truly representative of the customer base (212,064 visits in 2006/07). It should be
emphasised that any performance indicator scores dependent on the user survey
findings are governed by the accuracy of the sampling in this survey.

2.2
A further test of representativeness is 'internal representativeness', that is the extent
to which the respondents to the user survey truly reflect the balance of the
programme and usage of the venue. Some key indicators in this regard are shown
in Figure 2.

2

Figure 2: Harry Mitchell User Survey Balance of Use

2.3
The use of fitness equipment and machines was the most frequently stated main
activity by survey respondents, followed by badminton. These two activities
together accounted for 71% of the main activities undertaken during the survey
period. Given the distribution of activities undertaken, it is not surprising that the
gym/fitness centre was the most utilised area of the facility. It is important that
managers are able to confirm that the distribution of the users is broadly in line
with the centre's overall usage patterns. The vast majority of activities undertaken
were casual (86%) rather than instructor led or club usage. 63% of the respondents
had some form of leisure card which gave them reduced price admission to the
centre. About two in every five discounted admissions made via leisure cards were
by people with some form of disadvantage.

2.4
Assuming that the surveys were conducted randomly and that the user profile
accurately reflects the centre's customer base, we now consider the centre's
performance against a series of Key Performance Indicators and family specific
benchmarks.

3

3.
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE FOR HARRY MITCHELL LEISURE
CENTRE

3.1
The centre's performance is reported first, for the key indicators, relative to CPA
thresholds; and second, for all indicators, relative to the 2006 national benchmarks,
the latest available.

3.2
At the time of reporting, the seven facility performance indicators which had been
proposed for the CPA have now been withdrawn from the CPA. Nevertheless, this
report retains a structure of reporting against the previously proposed CPA
thresholds for these seven indicators. This is because they are a good indication of
national government priorities for sports facilities, and can therefore still be
considered as key indicators for such facilities.

Performance for key indicators relative to proposed CPA thresholds

3.3
The centre's performance is very good relative to the proposed CPA thresholds,
with three of the seven key indicator scores above their upper thresholds, three
indicator scores between the thresholds and no indicator scores below the lower
CPA threshold. A clear CPA strength of the centre is access, with all three
indicators which are above their upper thresholds of this type. For the seventh
proposed CPA indicator, disabled under 60 years, the measurement of the indicator
has changed and recommended CPA thresholds were not agreed.

4

Performance relative to national benchmarks

3.4
The figures in this section position performance for each indicator relative to the
four quartiles and three benchmarks identified in the general guidance which
accompanies this report. This positioning has been judged by the NBS analysts by
examining 'average' performance across the four family comparisons. These four
comparisons for each indicator are in the detailed performance results in Section 5
below.

Key indicators

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top

Key indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile

11-19 years

NS-Sec 6&7

Ethnic minorities

60+ years

Disabled <60 years

Subsidy per visit

3.5
The performance of the centre for key indicators relative to the national
benchmarks offers more detailed relative positioning than the performance relative
to proposed CPA thresholds and in this case presents a weaker picture after
allowing for the fact that 'disabled under 60' performance is now included and
'visits per square metre' performance is excluded. Because the definition of the
previously proposed CPA indicator for visits per square metre was changed by the
Audit Commission and DCMS, to exclude corridors and offices in the measurement
of square metres, there are no benchmarks to compare with at present for this
proposed CPA indicator. In the other indicators part of Section 5 of this report, and
in the utilisation summary below, the visits per square metre indicator is measured
in the way that NBS has always measured it (including corridors and offices in the
square metres), and compared with the 2006 benchmarks. Furthermore, the centre
had actual central establishment charges which were zero and in the financial return
you estimated what they would have been if they had been charged - the CPA
subsidy per visit calculation includes these estimated central establishment charges
in the total costs. In the other indicators part of Section 5 of this report, the subsidy
per visit indicator is measured by using actual costs, including zero central
establishment charges for your centre.

3.6
Two of the key indicator scores, both access indicators, are in the top quartile. Two
other access indicators, however, are in their bottom quartiles. One of these, for

5

60+, is above the lower CPA threshold but it is only just above - which is a
relatively weak performance - and the position in the bottom quartile indicates how
low the proposed CPA lower threshold was for this indicator. 60+ are 5.4% of
visits to the centre in the period of the NBS user survey but nearly 23% of the
catchment population. The efficiency indicator subsidy per visit performs at the
second quartile relative to other similar facilities.

Access

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Access indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Females

11-19 years

20-59 years

60+ years

NS-Sec 6&7

Ethnic minorities

Disabled <60 years

Disabled 60+

Unemployed

Discount card holders

Disadvantaged card holders

First visits

3.7  When considering the wider set of access indicators, rather than just those in the
proposed CPA key indicators, the picture is of split access performance. It is
important to stress that not all the access groups identified are likely to be important
to a social inclusion agenda. Four of the groups which might be seen as important to
social inclusion perform at or above their 75% benchmark levels (11-19 years, NS-
SEC 6&7, disadvantaged card holders, and the unemployed), but three which are
relevant to social inclusion are in their bottom quartiles (60+, disabled under 60, and
disabled 60+). Females are also at their bottom quartile and they comprise 32% of
visitors, which is unusually low for sports facilities, even dry ones. Two other
indicators are in their top quartiles, but they are not normally considered relevant to
social inclusion, because they are not necessarily disadvantaged (discount card
holders, first visits).

3.8
Financial performance is reasonable relative to the benchmarks, with three subsidy
indicators at their 50% benchmark levels or in the third quartile. All the subsidy
scores in the other indicators figures in Section 5 are calculated using the actual costs,
rather than including any estimated central establishment costs. The main factor
which drives this financial performance is strong operating cost performance, at or
above the 75% benchmark levels, which compensates for relatively weak income

6

performance. It is relevant to note that satisfaction with value for money of activities
and entrance charges are respectively eleventh and twelfth in the satisfaction rankings,
with average customer scores of 4.27 and 4.23 out of 5. Both these attributes also
feature in the largest importance-satisfaction gaps below, which suggests that prices
for the activities on offer are near to their limits of acceptability with customers.

Financial

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Financial indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Subsidy per visit

Cost recovery

Subsidy per m2

Subsidy per resident

Operating cost per visit

Operating cost per m2

Maintenance and repair

cost per m2
Energy cost per m2

Income per visit

Income per m2

Direct income per visit

Secondary income per visit

Utilisation

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Utilisation indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Visits per m2

% of visits casual

Weekly number of people

visiting

3.9
The main throughput indicator, visits per square metre, is measured in the other
indicators figures in Section 5 by using the total floor space of the centre. This
indicator performs at the third quartile level, the simple product of a reasonable
number of annual visits for a centre of this size. However, the weekly number of
people visiting performs at the second quartile, suggesting a rather weak market
penetration in the local catchment population. The percentage of visits which are
casual (86%) is very high by industry standards but whether or not this level of
casual use is appropriate depends on the targeting and programming policies of the
centre.

7

Satisfaction with and importance of attributes

3.10
The tables below identify five attributes with the largest gaps between importance
and satisfaction, by mean scores or by ranks. These gaps signal the attributes with
the most potential to represent problems, although it should be emphasised that no
attribute has a satisfaction score of less than three, the neutral score (neither
satisfied nor dissatisfied), so there are no absolute problems among the attributes
scored in the user survey.

Mean score gaps
Attribute Importance
Satisfaction
Gap
Value for money of food and drink
4.24
3.75
0.49
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
4.59
4.14
0.45
Quality of food and drink
4.23
3.79
0.44
Activity
charge/fee
4.67 4.23 0.44
Value for money of activities
4.65
4.27
0.38

Rank gaps
Attribute Importance
Satisfaction
Gap
Activity charge/fee
4
12
-8
Cleanliness of changing areas
3
10
-7
Quality of equipment
1
7
-6
Value for money of activities
5
11
-6
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
8
14
-6

3.11
Three attributes feature in both the tables above while four of the attributes in the
second table are among the most important to customers. The gaps in these tables
are not very large by industry standards. The quality and value for money of food
and drink feature in the largest gaps. From the frequency distributions in the
appendix, it is apparent that 8.5% and 14% of respondents respectively were
dissatisfied with the quality and value for money of food and drink (Appendix Q12l
and s). Quality of lighting and flooring in the sports hall had the next highest levels
of dissatisfaction, at about 6.5% of respondents each (Q12e and f). This reinforces
the fact that there is not a widespread, absolute problem with such attributes.

Strengths of the centre as perceived by customers
Attribute Satisfaction
Importance
Mean
Rank
Mean
Rank
Quality of car parking on site
4.70
1
4.52
11
Ease of booking
4.61
2
4.64
7
Helpfulness of reception staff
4.61
3
4.55
9
Helpfulness of other staff
4.58
4
4.48
13
Activity available at convenient times
4.58
5
4.70
2

8

3.12 According to the customers surveyed, the strengths of the centre involve car
parking, staff and accessibility attributes. The appearance of the availability of
activities and ease of booking in the strengths is commendable given the reasonable
level of utilisation achieved by the centre. Overall satisfaction with the visit
achieves a mean score of 4.49 out of five.

9

.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA

4.1
The catchment area shown in this map is defined as the area within which Harry
Mitchell Leisure Centre attracts more visitors than any other centre, i.e. the area
within which Harry Mitchell is the dominant supplier.
Sport England Benchmark Service
Harry Mitchell Leisure Centre
Ch
C ur
Ch
hu
Ch
h
Ch r
u c
urr
ur hfi
c
chf
ch i
f e
hfii
hfi ld
e
eld
ld
eld
ld
Sw
S a
Sw
Sw n
a V
w
Sw n
a
ill
n V
n V
Vi a
illll
ill g
ill
Vi a e
ll g
a e
g
Swan Villag
West B
We
r
st B
We st B omw
r
i
st Br
st B omw
r
ch
i
omw ch
i
West Bromwi
Sand
Sa
w
nd e
w l
e l
l
Ol
O dbu
l
r
dbu y
r
Sme
Sm t
e h
t w
h i
w
hwc
i k
c
ic
Key
Catchment
Harry Mitchell Leisure Centre
Additional material ©Sport England 2007
Source: 2001 Census, Output Area Boundaries. © Crown Copyright 2003
Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of The Controller of HMSO
Map produced by The Planning Data Management Service
Unauthorised reproduction infringes infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings
02/08/2007 Job PE using Mapinfo for Sport England
License numbers C02W 0003683 & 10003311 ©The Automobile Association 1999, all rights reserved

10

Proposed CPA Indicators
% visits 11-19 years ÷ % catchment population 11-19 years
3.29
3.29
3.00
2.61
2.15
2.00
1.75
1.43
1.48
1.33
1.18
1.00
0.88
0.91
0.92
0.90
CPA upper
0.72
0.65
0.72
0.71
CPA lower
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.60
CPA upper = 1.00
CPA lower = 0.55
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits from social classes 6 & 7 ÷ % catchment population in social classes 6 & 7
2.19
2.00
1.65
1.65
1.50
1.20
1.00
1.00
0.83
0.73
0.73
0.73
0.58
0.51
0.50
0.50
0.41
CPA upper
0.35
0.29
0.34
0.22
0.19
0.19
0.21
CPA lower
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.96
CPA upper = 0.50
CPA lower = 0.20
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
12

% visits from black, Asian & other ethnic groups ÷ % catchment population in same
ethnic groups
10.87
10.00
5.25
5.00
4.02
2.26
1.74
1.71
1.40
1.57
1.05
1.14
1.16
0.86
0.86
0.83 1.06 1.27
0.51
0.59
CPA upper
0.18
0.18
CPA lower
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.48
CPA upper = 1.00
CPA lower = 0.75
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits 60+ years ÷ % catchment population 60+ years
1.58
1.58
1.50
1.00
0.78
0.60
CPA upper
0.54
0.55
0.53
0.50
0.45
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.35
0.32
0.31
0.26
0.18
0.16
0.08
CPA lower
0.06
0.06
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.23
CPA upper = 0.65
CPA lower = 0.15
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
13

% visits <60 years disabled ÷ % catchment population <60 years disabled
1.42
1.30
1.16
1.12
1.00
0.77
0.69
0.65
0.68
0.63
0.55
0.57
0.51
0.50
0.46
0.44
0.46
0.38
0.18
0.19
0.15
0.08
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.30
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
At present, no proposed CPA thresholds are available for this indicator, because the indicator has changed. As soon
as the thresholds have been decided, NBS clients will be notified and their performance for the indicator compared with
the new thresholds.
Subsidy per visit (£) - 1
-1.92
-1.52
-0.31
-0.39
-0.37
-0.09
0.11
0.00
CPA upper
0.35
0.60
0.98
0.87
1.09
1.46
1.85
2.19 2.05
2.00
2.67
CPA lower
3.65
4.00
4.92
4.92
6.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.27
CPA upper = -0.10
CPA lower = 2.40
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
(a) To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest subsidy) is on the left of each cluster, and the
best score (= lowest subsidy) is on the right of each cluster. Also, note that the best scores/lowest subsidy and some
of the 75% benchmarks are 'negative subsidies' - i.e. surpluses.
(b) Subsidy for this proposed CPA indicator includes consideration of estimated central establishment charges where
the actual charges are zero
14

Annual visits per sq. m. - 1
300
200
100
CPA upper
CPA lower
0
Centre score = 96
CPA upper = 100
CPA lower = 35
For this performance indicator, square metres of indoor space excludes offices and corridors
15

Other important Indicators
% visits 20-59 years ÷ % catchment population 20-59 years
1.44
1.44
1.40
1.37
1.36
1.28
1.28
1.25
1.24
1.20
1.20
1.18
1.18
1.13
1.14
1.09
1.10
1.02
1.00
0.93
0.93
0.84
0.84
0.80
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.14
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits which were first visits
20.83
20.83
20.83
20.00
16.13
15.00
13.73
9.54
10.00
8.75
8.52
7.99
6.65
6.54
5.92
5.04
5.00
3.24
3.25
3.25
3.36
1.85
2.24
0.91
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 11.04
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
16

% visits with discount card
79.14
76.60
76.60
65.43
60.00
57.31
56.42
56.23
53.05
48.59
40.94
40.96
40.00
36.85
38.61
27.17
27.17
18.77
20.00
13.73
8.65
5.33
4.47
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 62.58
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits with discount card for 'disadvantage'
47.48
47.26
40.00
30.50
30.00
24.88
24.88
19.30
20.00
16.71
13.93
11.97
12.96
10.63
10.00
8.26
7.23
8.13
6.81
5.28
3.13
2.47
1.16
1.16
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 21.38
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
17

% visits female
80
80
73
69
70
66
63
63
59
60
60
56
56
54
51
51
52
49
50
42
41
40
35
35
30
30
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 32
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits 60+ years disabled ÷ % catchment population 60+ years disabled
0.27
0.24
0.24
0.23
0.20
0.12
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.09
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02 0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.01
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
18

% visits unemployed
13.77
10.00
7.11
7.11
6.25
5.47
5.02
5.00
3.00
2.55
1.62
1.72
1.62
1.85
1.17
1.06
1.17
1.14
0.57
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
-5.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 3.86
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% cost recovery
164
150
140
112
113
110
103
100
94
96
80
75
71
65
66
58
52
47
50
36
36
27
27
0
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 62
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
19

Subsidy per visit (£) - 2
-1.92
-1.52
-0.31
-0.39
-0.37
-0.09
0.11
0.00
0.35
0.60
0.98
0.87
1.09
1.46
1.85
2.19 2.05
2.00
2.67
3.65
4.00
4.92
4.92
6.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.83
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
(a) To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest subsidy) is on the left of each cluster, and the
best score (= lowest subsidy) is on the right of each cluster. Also, note that the best scores/lowest subsidy and some
of the 75% benchmarks are 'negative subsidies' - i.e. surpluses.
(b) Subsidy for this indicator includes consideration of actual central establishment charges whether they are zero or
positive
Subsidy per sq. m. (£)
-367
-321
-200
-29
-26
-30
-6
18
10
0
55
55
86
82
82
105
121
151
147
200
284
363
363
400
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 75
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest subsidy) is on the left of each cluster, and the best
score (= lowest subsidy) is on the right of each cluster. Also, note that the best scores/lowest subsidy and some of the
75% benchmarks are 'negative subsidies' - i.e. surpluses.
20

Subsidy per resident (£)
-41.20
-40.00
-20.00
-17.84
-4.42
-3.23
-0.63
-1.75
1.78
1.71
0.00
5.28
4.18
6.42
6.89
8.77
11.36
14.85
14.13
20.08
19.19
20.00
26.40
30.23
40.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 5.97
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
The catchment population used for this indicator allows for competing facilities nearby. This is different from previous
NBS reports.
Total operating cost per visit (£)
1.68
1.96
1.78
2.00
2.53
2.46
2.90
3.13
3.63
3.64
4.00
4.39 4.17
4.15
4.90
4.79
5.28
5.45
6.00
6.44
6.98
8.26
8.00
10.00
10.45
12.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 2.16
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest cost) is on the left of each cluster, and the best
score (= lowest cost) is on the right.
21

Total operating cost per sq. m. (£)
48
99
133 131
124
185
208
186
230
297
316
297
310
310
405
405
405
500
802
1000
1063
1238
1500
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 196
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest cost) is on the left of each cluster, and the best
score (= lowest cost) is on the right.
Maintenance and repair costs per sq. m. (£)
4
0
0
6
1
14
12
9
14
14
10
11
9
21
27
27
27
50
71
68
100
150
156
200
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 6
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest cost) is on the left of each cluster, and the best
score (= lowest cost) is on the right.
22

Energy costs per sq. m. (£)
4
6
4
4
12
10
8
19
19
17
19
26
29
27
37
36
39
50
100
138
137
138
150
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 10
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
To be consistent with the other diagrams, the worst score (= highest cost) is on the left of each cluster, and the best
score (= lowest cost) is on the right.
Total income per visit (£)
7.83
7.83
6.35
6.00
5.57
4.58
4.03
4.00
3.79
3.52
2.96
3.05
2.80
2.61
2.68
2.21
2.23
1.80
2.00
1.50
1.50
0.77
0.77
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.33
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
23

Total income per sq. m. (£)
1431
1123
1000
876
500
423
344
298
274
217
248
226
190
139
127
153
139
66
78
67
66
46
0
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 121
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Direct income per visit (£)
7.79
7.79
6.00
5.58
5.36
4.43
4.00
3.32
3.40
3.29
2.50
2.65
2.47
2.39
2.12
2.04
2.00
1.63
1.42
1.59
1.48
0.74
0.74
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.26
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
24

Secondary income per visit (£)
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.00
0.90
0.58
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.31
0.25
0.20
0.21
0.09
0.09
0.04
0.06
0.05
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.08
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Annual visits per sq. m. - 2
355
350
301
300
200
112
117
103
102
100
88
87
66
64
64
70
41
45
25
27
23
23
16
0
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 91
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
For this indicator, total indoor floor space is used
25

% visits casual, instead of organised
96
96
90
82
84
83
80
80
76
74
74
71
70
60
61
61
60
47
40
37
20
16
11
11
0
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 86
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Weekly number of people visiting the facility, as % of catchment population
65.24
60.00
40.00
22.19
22.97
20.00
10.83
11.01
11.18
8.61 10.07
7.98
8.71
7.92
4.87
5.59
5.59
4.66
2.21
1.34
1.53
1.31
0.59
0.00
Dry without outdoor
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 6.42
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
26

Satisfaction and importance scores: by attribute
GAPS
( Importance minus
IMPORTANCE
SATISFACTION
Satisfaction )
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean
Accessibility
a.
Activity available at convenient times
2 4.70 312
5 4.58 310
-3
0.12
b.
Ease of booking
7 4.64 286
2 4.61 259
5
0.03
c.
The activity charge/fee
4 4.67 307
12 4.23 306
-8
0.44
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.45 296
8 4.44 292
6
0.01
Quality of facilities/services
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
10 4.53 284
13 4.20
92
-3
0.33
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
8 4.59 283
14 4.14
91
-6
0.45
g.
Quality of equipment
1 4.75 278
7 4.49 272
-6
0.26
k.
Quality of car parking on site
11 4.52 271
1 4.70 204
10 -0.18
l.
Quality of food and drink
16 4.23 214
15 3.79 164
1
0.44
Cleanliness
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
3 4.68 260
10 4.30 226
-7
0.38
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
6 4.65 306
9 4.41 303
-3
0.24
Staff
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.55 316
3 4.61 315
6 -0.06
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
13 4.48 294
4 4.58 289
9 -0.10
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
12 4.51 241
6 4.53
45
6 -0.02
Value for money
r.
Value for money of activities
5 4.65 310
11 4.27 306
-6
0.38
s.
Value for money of food/drink
15 4.24 221
16 3.75 157
-1
0.49
Other attributes *
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
N/A
N/A
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
N/A
N/A
j.
Number of people in the pool
N/A
N/A
t.
Overall satisfaction with visit
N/A
4.49 307
* The other attribute(s) listed at the end of the table have either the satisfaction or importance scores but not both. This
is for logical reasons - e.g. Overall satisfaction with visit does not have an importance score; no satisfaction score for
pool attributes if there is no pool at the centre. Therefore such attributes do not appear in the subsequent tables of
'gaps'.
27

Satisfaction and importance scores: by mean gaps
GAPS
( Importance minus
IMPORTANCE
SATISFACTION
Satisfaction )
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean
s.
Value for money of food/drink
15 4.24 221
16 3.75 157
-1
0.49
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
8 4.59 283
14 4.14
91
-6
0.45
l.
Quality of food and drink
16 4.23 214
15 3.79 164
1
0.44
c.
The activity charge/fee
4 4.67 307
12 4.23 306
-8
0.44
r.
Value for money of activities
5 4.65 310
11 4.27 306
-6
0.38
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
3 4.68 260
10 4.30 226
-7
0.38
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
10 4.53 284
13 4.20
92
-3
0.33
g.
Quality of equipment
1 4.75 278
7 4.49 272
-6
0.26
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
6 4.65 306
9 4.41 303
-3
0.24
a.
Activity available at convenient times
2 4.70 312
5 4.58 310
-3
0.12
b.
Ease of booking
7 4.64 286
2 4.61 259
5
0.03
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.45 296
8 4.44 292
6
0.01
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
12 4.51 241
6 4.53
45
6 -0.02
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.55 316
3 4.61 315
6 -0.06
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
13 4.48 294
4 4.58 289
9 -0.10
k.
Quality of car parking on site
11 4.52 271
1 4.70 204
10 -0.18
28

Satisfaction and importance scores: by rank gaps
GAPS
( Importance minus
IMPORTANCE
SATISFACTION
Satisfaction )
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean
c.
The activity charge/fee
4 4.67 307
12 4.23 306
-8
0.44
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
3 4.68 260
10 4.30 226
-7
0.38
g.
Quality of equipment
1 4.75 278
7 4.49 272
-6
0.26
r.
Value for money of activities
5 4.65 310
11 4.27 306
-6
0.38
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
8 4.59 283
14 4.14
91
-6
0.45
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
10 4.53 284
13 4.20
92
-3
0.33
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
6 4.65 306
9 4.41 303
-3
0.24
a.
Activity available at convenient times
2 4.70 312
5 4.58 310
-3
0.12
s.
Value for money of food/drink
15 4.24 221
16 3.75 157
-1
0.49
l.
Quality of food and drink
16 4.23 214
15 3.79 164
1
0.44
b.
Ease of booking
7 4.64 286
2 4.61 259
5
0.03
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.55 316
3 4.61 315
6 -0.06
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.45 296
8 4.44 292
6
0.01
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
12 4.51 241
6 4.53
45
6 -0.02
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
13 4.48 294
4 4.58 289
9 -0.10
k.
Quality of car parking on site
11 4.52 271
1 4.70 204
10 -0.18
29

APPENDIX 1:

USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
30

Q1 Main activity today?
Badminton
82 ( 25.8% )
Keep fit/aerobics/etc
32 ( 10.1% )
Fitness equipment/machines etc
143 ( 45.0% )
Martial arts
3 ( 0.9% )
Five-a-side football
12 ( 3.8% )
Gymnastics
2 ( 0.6% )
Basketball or volleyball
0 ( 0.0% )
Other physical activity
14 ( 4.4% )
Swimming or aqua fit
0 ( 0.0% )
A spectator
11 ( 3.5% )
Another type of activity
19 ( 6.0% )
Q2 Where did you do your main activity today?
Swimming pool
0 ( 0.0% )
Gym/fitness centre
177 ( 63.4% )
Outside facility
0 ( 0.0% )
Main hall
85 ( 30.5% )
Smaller hall
12 ( 4.3% )
Another part of the facility
5 ( 1.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
39
Q3 How you are taking part in your main activity today?
An organised class/session
18 ( 6.3% )
As an individual user
245 ( 86.0% )
As a member of a club or team
13 ( 4.6% )
Other
9 ( 3.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
33
31

Q4 Is today your first ever visit to this facility?
Yes
35 ( 11.0% )
No
282 ( 89.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
1
Q5a Number of times visited in past 7 days.
1
139 ( 46.2% )
2
77 ( 25.6% )
3
50 ( 16.6% )
4
18 ( 6.0% )
5
9 ( 3.0% )
6
2 ( 0.7% )
7
4 ( 1.3% )
8 plus
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q5b Number of times visited in past 4 weeks.
1 to 5
146 ( 50.0% )
6 to 10
74 ( 25.3% )
11 to 15
43 ( 14.7% )
16 to 20
23 ( 7.9% )
21 plus
6 ( 2.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
26
32

Q7 Do you have a leisure card?
Yes
199 ( 62.6% )
No
119 ( 37.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q8 Basis of eligibility for card/scheme.
Disadvantaged
68 ( 37.8% )
Other
112 ( 62.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
138
Q9 From where did you come here today?
Straight from home
280 ( 88.1% )
Straight from work, school or college
34 ( 10.7% )
Other e.g. from shopping
4 ( 1.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q10 Main method of transport.
Car/motorcycle
216 ( 69.2% )
Public transport
17 ( 5.4% )
Walked all the way
68 ( 21.8% )
Other, including cycle
11 ( 3.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
6
33

Q11Journey time.
0-5 minutes
84 ( 26.7% )
6-10 minutes
109 ( 34.6% )
11-15 minutes
56 ( 17.8% )
16-20 minutes
24 ( 7.6% )
21-30 minutes
18 ( 5.7% )
31-45 minutes
5 ( 1.6% )
Over 45 minutes
19 ( 6.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
Q12a Satisfaction - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very satisfied
205 ( 66.1% )
Fairly satisfied
89 ( 28.7% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
11 ( 3.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 0.6% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
8
Q12b Satisfaction - ease of booking.
Very satisfied
186 ( 71.8% )
Fairly satisfied
52 ( 20.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
17 ( 6.6% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
59
34

Q12c Satisfaction - activity charges/fees.
Very satisfied
155 ( 50.7% )
Fairly satisfied
99 ( 32.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
26 ( 8.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
18 ( 5.9% )
Very dissatisfied
8 ( 2.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
12
Q12d Satisfaction - range of activities available.
Very satisfied
169 ( 57.9% )
Fairly satisfied
95 ( 32.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
20 ( 6.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
4 ( 1.4% )
Very dissatisfied
4 ( 1.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
26
Q12e Satisfaction - quality of flooring in sports hall.
Very satisfied
42 ( 45.7% )
Fairly satisfied
33 ( 35.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
11 ( 12.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
5 ( 5.4% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 1.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
226
35

Q12f Satisfaction - quality of lighting in sports hall.
Very satisfied
38 ( 41.8% )
Fairly satisfied
34 ( 37.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
13 ( 14.3% )
Fairly dissatisfied
6 ( 6.6% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
227
Q12g Satisfaction - quality of equipment.
Very satisfied
162 ( 59.6% )
Fairly satisfied
86 ( 31.6% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
19 ( 7.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
4 ( 1.5% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
46
Q12h Satisfaction - water quality in pool.
Very satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
36

Q12i Satisfaction - water temperature in pool.
Very satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
Q12j Satisfaction - number of people in pool.
Very satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly satisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
Q12k Satisfaction - quality of car parking on site.
Very satisfied
159 ( 77.9% )
Fairly satisfied
35 ( 17.2% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
6 ( 2.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 1.0% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
114
37

Q12l Satisfaction - quality of food/drink.
Very satisfied
46 ( 28.0% )
Fairly satisfied
56 ( 34.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
48 ( 29.3% )
Fairly dissatisfied
10 ( 6.1% )
Very dissatisfied
4 ( 2.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
154
Q12m Satisfaction - cleanliness of changing area.
Very satisfied
122 ( 54.0% )
Fairly satisfied
68 ( 30.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
24 ( 10.6% )
Fairly dissatisfied
6 ( 2.7% )
Very dissatisfied
6 ( 2.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
92
Q12n Satisfaction - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very satisfied
177 ( 58.4% )
Fairly satisfied
88 ( 29.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
26 ( 8.6% )
Fairly dissatisfied
9 ( 3.0% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
15
38

Q12o Satisfaction - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very satisfied
223 ( 70.8% )
Fairly satisfied
69 ( 21.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
17 ( 5.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
Q12p Satisfaction - helpfulness of other staff.
Very satisfied
200 ( 69.2% )
Fairly satisfied
68 ( 23.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
14 ( 4.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
4 ( 1.4% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
29
Q12q Satisfaction - standard of coaching/instruction.
Very satisfied
33 ( 73.3% )
Fairly satisfied
6 ( 13.3% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
4 ( 8.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 2.2% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 2.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
273
39

Q12r Satisfaction - value for money of activities.
Very satisfied
164 ( 53.6% )
Fairly satisfied
92 ( 30.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
27 ( 8.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
15 ( 4.9% )
Very dissatisfied
8 ( 2.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
12
Q12s Satisfaction - value for money of food/drink.
Very satisfied
49 ( 31.2% )
Fairly satisfied
46 ( 29.3% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
40 ( 25.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
17 ( 10.8% )
Very dissatisfied
5 ( 3.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
161
Q12t Satisfaction - overall satisfaction of visit.
Very satisfied
177 ( 57.7% )
Fairly satisfied
110 ( 35.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
15 ( 4.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
3 ( 1.0% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
11
40

Q13a Importance - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very important
232 ( 74.4% )
Fairly important
68 ( 21.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
11 ( 3.5% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
6
Q13b Importance - ease of booking.
Very important
207 ( 72.4% )
Fairly important
57 ( 19.9% )
Neither important nor unimportant
19 ( 6.6% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 1.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
32
Q13c Importance - activity charges/fees.
Very important
225 ( 73.3% )
Fairly important
65 ( 21.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
15 ( 4.9% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
11
41

Q13d Importance - the range of activities available.
Very important
183 ( 61.8% )
Fairly important
73 ( 24.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
31 ( 10.5% )
Fairly unimportant
8 ( 2.7% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
22
Q13e Importance - quality of flooring in sports hall.
Very important
187 ( 65.8% )
Fairly important
68 ( 23.9% )
Neither important nor unimportant
23 ( 8.1% )
Fairly unimportant
5 ( 1.8% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
34
Q13f Importance - quality of lighting in sports hall.
Very important
195 ( 68.9% )
Fairly important
63 ( 22.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
22 ( 7.8% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
35
42

Q13g Importance - quality of equipment.
Very important
219 ( 78.8% )
Fairly important
50 ( 18.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
8 ( 2.9% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
40
Q13h Importance - water quality in pool.
Very important
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly important
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
Q13i Importance - water temperature in pool.
Very important
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly important
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
43

Q13j Importance - number of people in pool.
Very important
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly important
0 ( 0.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
318
Q13k Importance - quality of car parking on site.
Very important
170 ( 62.7% )
Fairly important
76 ( 28.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
21 ( 7.7% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 1.1% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
47
Q13l Importance - quality of food/drink.
Very important
100 ( 46.7% )
Fairly important
70 ( 32.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
40 ( 18.7% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.5% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 1.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
104
44

Q13m Importance - cleanliness of changing area.
Very important
199 ( 76.5% )
Fairly important
42 ( 16.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
16 ( 6.2% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.8% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
58
Q13n Importance - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very important
222 ( 72.5% )
Fairly important
66 ( 21.6% )
Neither important nor unimportant
15 ( 4.9% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
12
Q13o Importance - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very important
212 ( 67.1% )
Fairly important
72 ( 22.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
28 ( 8.9% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
2
45

Q13p Importance - helpfulness of other staff.
Very important
184 ( 62.6% )
Fairly important
75 ( 25.5% )
Neither important nor unimportant
29 ( 9.9% )
Fairly unimportant
5 ( 1.7% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
24
Q13q Importance - standard of coaching/instruction
Very important
157 ( 65.1% )
Fairly important
55 ( 22.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
26 ( 10.8% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.8% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
77
Q13r Importance - value for money of activities.
Very important
230 ( 74.2% )
Fairly important
57 ( 18.4% )
Neither important nor unimportant
19 ( 6.1% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 1.0% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
8
46

Q13s Importance - value for money of food/drink.
Very important
106 ( 48.0% )
Fairly important
66 ( 29.9% )
Neither important nor unimportant
45 ( 20.4% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 1.4% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
97
Q14 Gender.
Male
215 ( 68.5% )
Female
99 ( 31.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
4
Q15 Ethnic origin of respondent.
White
120 ( 38.3% )
Mixed
19 ( 6.1% )
Asian or Asian British
131 ( 41.9% )
Black or Black British
31 ( 9.9% )
Chinese or other ethnic group
12 ( 3.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
47

Q16 Long term illness, health problem or disability.
Yes
16 ( 5.1% )
No
295 ( 94.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
7
Q17 Age.
11 to 19
77 ( 24.4% )
20 to 59
222 ( 70.3% )
60 plus
17 ( 5.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
2
Q18 Current employment status.
Working full-time (30+ hrs)
162 ( 52.1% )
Working part-time (less than 30 hrs)
24 ( 7.7% )
On government work training programme
1 ( 0.3% )
Housewife/ husband/ full-time in the home
9 ( 2.9% )
Retired - company / personal pension
8 ( 2.6% )
Retired - state pension only
4 ( 1.3% )
Temporarily unable to work
2 ( 0.6% )
Permanently unable to work
0 ( 0.0% )
Unemployed - more than 6 months
8 ( 2.6% )
Unemployed - less than 6 months
4 ( 1.3% )
In full-time education (school)
20 ( 6.4% )
Full-time student (college/university)
51 ( 16.4% )
Never worked
16 ( 5.1% )
None of these
2 ( 0.6% )
Refused to say
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
7
48

Socio-economic group.
1 & 2
87 ( 41.2% )
3
31 ( 14.7% )
4
13 ( 6.2% )
5
28 ( 13.3% )
6 & 7
52 ( 24.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
107
Q23 Postcode.
first part
number of
cumulative
of postcode
questionnaires
percent
B67
106
( 33.7% )
33.7
B66
50
( 15.9% )
49.5
B68
39
( 12.4% )
61.9
B71
13
( 4.1% )
66.0
B70
11
( 3.5% )
69.5
B69
7
( 2.2% )
71.7
B17
6
( 1.9% )
73.7
B32
6
( 1.9% )
75.6
B65
5
( 1.6% )
77.1
B16
4
( 1.3% )
78.4
B20
4
( 1.3% )
79.7
B62
4
( 1.3% )
81.0
DY4
4
( 1.3% )
82.2
B18
3
( 1.0% )
83.2
B21
3
( 1.0% )
84.1
B8
3
( 1.0% )
85.1
CH48
3
( 1.0% )
86.0
WR2
3
( 1.0% )
87.0
WS10
3
( 1.0% )
87.9
B15
2
( 0.6% )
88.6
B31
2
( 0.6% )
89.2
DE23
2
( 0.6% )
89.8
WS9
2
( 0.6% )
90.5
AB15
1
( 0.3% )
90.8
B19
1
( 0.3% )
91.1
B33
1
( 0.3% )
91.4
49

B42
1
( 0.3% )
91.7
B43
1
( 0.3% )
92.1
B44
1
( 0.3% )
92.4
B60
1
( 0.3% )
92.7
B61
1
( 0.3% )
93.0
B63
1
( 0.3% )
93.3
B64
1
( 0.3% )
93.7
B7
1
( 0.3% )
94.0
B74
1
( 0.3% )
94.3
B78
1
( 0.3% )
94.6
B92
1
( 0.3% )
94.9
CH56
1
( 0.3% )
95.2
CV6
1
( 0.3% )
95.6
DE7
1
( 0.3% )
95.9
DY2
1
( 0.3% )
96.2
DY6
1
( 0.3% )
96.5
GL51
1
( 0.3% )
96.8
M45
1
( 0.3% )
97.1
PE4
1
( 0.3% )
97.5
R68
1
( 0.3% )
97.8
ST1O
1
( 0.3% )
98.1
SY2
1
( 0.3% )
98.4
SY4
1
( 0.3% )
98.7
WR9
1
( 0.3% )
99.0
WS5
1
( 0.3% )
99.4
WV13
1
( 0.3% )
99.7
WV5
1
( 0.3% )
100.0
Missing/Not applicable
3
50