Microsoft Word - Smethwick SC.doc

NATIONAL BENCHMARKING SERVICE FOR SPORTS
AND LEISURE CENTRES

FACILITY REPORT
FOR
SMETHWICK SWIMMING 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 SMETHWICK SWIMMING
4
CENTRE

4.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA
10

5.
RESULTS: CURRENT PERFORMANCE SCORES FOR SMETHWICK
11
SWIMMING CENTRE

APPENDIX 1: USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
30

NBS REPORT FOR SMETHWICK SWIMMING 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 Smethwick
Swimming 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 Smethwick Swimming 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 357 users of the centre between the
30th of June and the 8th of 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
Smethwick Swimming Centre is classified as being a 'wet' centre which means that
it has a swimming pool of at least 20 metres in length but no indoor sports hall that
is of the minimum configuration (of four badminton courts) specified by Sport
England to be classed as having 'dry' provision. The actual floor space of the centre
is 2,820m2 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 2,385m2 of usable space. The catchment area has a relatively high proportion
(23.44%) 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 Smethwick Swimming Centre are:

•  Wet (benchmark family of 27 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: Smethwick 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 357 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 (184,194 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: Smethwick User Survey Balance of Use

Note: the percentages 'swimming' and 'using the pool' may vary because of two factors: first,
many spectators use the pool area; second, the number of non-respondents to each question
differs considerably.

2.3
Using fitness equipment and machines was the most frequently stated main activity
by survey respondents, followed by swimming. These two activities accounted for
72% of the main activities undertaken during the survey period. Given the
distribution of activities undertaken, it is not surprising that the gym/fitness centre
and the pool were the most utilised areas 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 (83%) rather than instructor led or club usage. This finding is also
consistent with the nature of swimmers and gym/fitness centre users who form the
bulk of the sample. 61% 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 SMETHWICK SWIMMING
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 moderate relative to the proposed CPA thresholds, with
two of the seven key indicator scores above their upper thresholds, two indicator
scores between the thresholds and two indicator scores below the lower CPA
threshold. 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 a more detailed relative positioning than the performance
against the proposed CPA thresholds and in this case presents a relatively 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 is compared with the 2006
benchmarks.

3.6
One of the key indicator scores, relating to access by social classes 6&7, is in the
top quartile. Five others, however, are at or below their second quartile levels. The
relative position of 60+ users, at the 25% level, is the result of 60+ years being over
23% of the catchment population, but less than 8% of visits to the centre in the
period of the NBS user survey. The efficiency indicator subsidy per visit performs
at the bottom quartile relative to other similar facilities.

5

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 mixed access performance. It is
important to stress that not all the access groups identified are likely to be important
to a social inclusion agenda. Three of the groups which might be seen as important
to social inclusion perform at the 75% benchmark level or in the top quartile (NS-
SEC 6&7, disadvantaged card holders, and the unemployed), but five which are
relevant to social inclusion are below their 50% benchmark performance levels (11-
19 years, ethnic minorities, 60+ years, disabled under 60, and disabled 60+). Two
other indicators are in their top quartiles, but they are not normally considered
relevant to social inclusion because they are not necessarily disadvantaged (20-59
years, discount card holders).


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

6

3.8
Financial performance is rather weak relative to the benchmarks, with three subsidy
related indicators at or below their 25% benchmark levels. The main factors which
constrain this financial performance are high operating cost per visit together with
modest income levels and a relatively low throughput for a centre of this size - see
below. Direct income per visit is at its second quartile and it is relevant to note that
satisfaction with entrance charges and the value for money of activities are
respectively seventh and eighth in the satisfaction rankings, with average customer
scores of 4.22 and 4.19 out of 5. This suggests some scope to raise activity prices,
and hence direct 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 second quartile level, the simple product of a relatively
modest number of annual visits for a centre of this size. The weekly number of
people visiting performs at the bottom quartile, suggesting poor market penetration
in the local catchment population. The percentage of visits which are casual (83%)
is quite 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.

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
Cleanliness of changing areas
4.66
3.68
0.98
Quality of car parking on site
4.26
3.38
0.88
Water temperature in the swimming pool
4.64
3.81
0.83
Cleanliness of activity
spaces
4.69 4.01 0.68
Water quality in the swimming pool
4.72
4.04
0.68

7

Rank gaps
Attribute Importance
Satisfaction
Gap
Cleanliness of changing areas
4
14
-10
Water quality in the swimming pool
1
10
-9
Water temperature in the swimming pool
5
13
-8
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3
11
-8
Number of people in the pool
7
12
-5

3.11 Four attributes feature in both of the tables above and the second table
demonstrates that these attributes are amongst the most important to customers.
Cleanliness of the changing areas shows the largest gaps whether measured by
mean scores or rankings. The appearance of cleanliness of the changing areas at
the top of the gap scores is not unusual for sports facilities. From the frequency
distributions in the appendix, it is apparent that 18% of respondents were
dissatisfied with the cleanliness of the changing areas, while only about 6% were
dissatisfied with the cleanliness of activity spaces (Appendix Q12m and n). There
appears to be a relative problem with the pool according to these respondents,
because water temperature, quality and number of people in the pool are also
among the largest gaps. They have levels of dissatisfaction of between 5% and
10% (Q12h, i and j). However, it should be emphasised that none of these
attributes had mean satisfaction scores less than 3, the neutral score. So any
problems are not absolute, but relative - the satisfaction scores falling short of the
importance scores - and minorities of customers are dissatisfied. Other significant
levels of dissatisfaction include 26% for quality of parking on site and 12% for
quality of food and drink (Q12k and l) - although it should be noted that these
attributes were at or near the bottom of the importance rankings by customers.

Strengths of the centre as perceived by customers
Attribute Satisfaction
Importance
Mean
Rank
Mean
Rank
Standard of coaching/instruction
4.57
1
4.72
2
Activity available at convenient times
4.41
2
4.61
9
Helpfulness of reception staff
4.39
3
4.61
10
Helpfulness of other staff
4.36
4
4.61
8
Ease of booking
4.33
5
4.53
12

3.12
According to the customers surveyed, the strengths of the centre involve staff and
accessibility attributes. All three staff attributes are in the top five satisfaction
rankings and two are also in the top ten for importance rankings - a desirable
correlation. The relatively high satisfaction with ease of booking and availability
of activities at convenient times may reflect the relatively low number of visits to
this centre. Overall satisfaction with the visit achieves a mean score of 4.21 out of
5, which is a good satisfaction scores compared with the individual attributes.

8

4.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA

4.1
The catchment area shown in this map is defined as the area within which
Smethwick Swimming Centre attracts more visitors than any other centre, i.e. the
area within which Smethwick is the dominant supplier.
Sport England Benchmark Service
Smethwick Swim Centre
Smet
Sme hw
t
i
hw c
i k
c
ick
ic
Be
B a
Be r
a w
r
ear o
w
w o
o
wo d
o
od
Ha
H
H r
a bor
rrb ne
born
or e
ne
Key
Catchment
Smethwick Swim 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
30/07/2007 Job PE using Mapinfo for Sport England
License numbers C02W 0003683 & 10003311 ©The Automobile Association 1999, all rights reserved

9

Proposed CPA Indicators
% visits 11-19 years ÷ % catchment population 11-19 years
3.29
3.00
2.61
2.61
2.15
2.00
1.48
1.33
1.18
1.10
1.00
0.91
0.92
0.90
CPA upper
0.71
0.65
0.72
0.71
0.44
CPA lower
0.22
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.78
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
2.19
2.00
1.65
1.50
1.00
1.00
0.74
0.68
0.73
0.73
0.73
0.58
0.51
0.50
0.50
0.44
0.41
CPA upper
0.34
0.35
0.21
0.19
0.19
0.21
CPA lower
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.07
CPA upper = 0.50
CPA lower = 0.20
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
11

% visits from black, Asian & other ethnic groups ÷ % catchment population in same
ethnic groups
10.87
10.00
5.25
5.00
3.52
1.74
1.71
1.38
1.57
1.14
1.16
0.69 0.94
0.86
0.86
0.83 1.06 1.27
0.59
CPA upper
0.18
0.18
0.18
CPA lower
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.01
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
1.58
1.50
1.00
0.78
CPA upper
0.65
0.60
0.55
0.50
0.53
0.50
0.43
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.35
0.32
0.31
CPA lower
0.16
0.16
0.06
0.08
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.32
CPA upper = 0.85
CPA lower = 0.35
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
12

% visits <60 years disabled ÷ % catchment population <60 years disabled
1.42
1.42
1.30
1.12
1.00
0.79
0.77
0.66
0.69
0.68
0.63
0.55
0.57
0.51
0.50
0.44
0.44
0.46
0.19
0.15
0.08
0.08
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.49
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
-1.52
-0.39
-0.37
-0.03
-0.09
0.11
0.00
CPA upper
0.60
0.84
0.98
0.87
1.09
1.46
1.85
1.85
2.00
CPA lower
3.65
4.00
4.92
4.92
4.92
6.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 3.48
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
13

Annual visits per sq. m. - 1
300
200
CPA upper
100
CPA lower
0
Centre score = 77
CPA upper = 150
CPA lower = 60
For this performance indicator, square metres of indoor space excludes offices and corridors
14

Other important Indicators
% visits 20-59 years ÷ % catchment population 20-59 years
1.44
1.44
1.44
1.40
1.36
1.27
1.28
1.25
1.24
1.20
1.20
1.20
1.18
1.18
1.13
1.14
1.11
1.10
1.00
0.93
0.93
0.93
0.84
0.80
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 1.31
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits which were first visits
20.83
20.83
20.83
20.00
14.55
15.00
9.54
10.00
8.52
7.17
6.65
6.54
5.56
5.92
5.04
5.00
3.71
3.25
3.25
3.36
1.85
1.85
2.24
0.91
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 6.50
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
15

% visits with discount card
79.14
79.14
76.60
76.60
65.43
60.11
60.00
57.31
56.42
56.23
50.00
40.94
40.96
38.61
40.00
36.17
27.17
27.17
18.73
20.00
8.65
5.33
4.47
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 61.30
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits with discount card for 'disadvantage'
47.48
47.48
47.26
40.00
30.50
30.00
27.54
24.88
19.30
20.00
16.16
16.71
12.96
13.93
10.63
9.22
10.00
7.23
8.13
6.81
4.27
2.47
1.16
1.16
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 22.32
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
16

% visits female
80
80
80
73
69
70
63
63
63
60
60
56
56
56
54
52
51
52
49
50
47
41
40
35
30
30
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 56
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits 60+ years disabled ÷ % catchment population 60+ years disabled
0.27
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.09
0.07
0.07
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.04
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
17

% visits unemployed
13.77
13.77
10.00
7.11
6.25
5.47
4.91
5.00
3.00
2.55
2.55
1.58
1.72
1.62
1.85
0.80
1.06
1.17
1.14
0.28
0.00
0.00
0.00
-5.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 3.39
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% cost recovery
164
150
140
136
113
110
101
103
96
100
80
80
75
71
66
58
51
47
50
36
27
27
27
0
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 52
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
18

Subsidy per visit (£) - 2
-1.92
-1.52
-1.52
-0.39
-0.37
-0.03
-0.09
0.11
0.00
0.60
0.84
0.98
0.87
1.09
1.46
1.85
1.85
2.00
3.65
4.00
4.92
4.92
4.92
6.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 2.49
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
-367
-321
-200
-26
-30
-2
-6
10
0
55
84
82
82
105
121
142
147
200
284
363
363
363
400
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 162
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.
19

Subsidy per resident (£)
-41.20
-40.00
-20.00
-17.84
-8.84
-4.42
-3.23
-0.21
-1.75
1.71
0.00
4.08
4.18
6.42
6.89
9.02
8.77
14.85
14.13
19.55
19.19
20.00
26.40
30.23
40.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 8.99
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
1.68
1.96
1.78
2.00
2.46
3.03
2.90
3.13
3.63
3.64
4.17
4.15
4.00
4.90
4.79
5.45
5.45
6.00
6.44
6.79
8.26
8.00
10.00
10.45
12.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 5.16
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.
20

Total operating cost per sq. m. (£)
48
99
147
124
208
186
230
279
297
310
310
393
405
405
405
475
500
802
1000
1063
1238
1238
1500
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 337
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. (£)
0
0
0
1
10
6
11
9
17
14
14
10
27
27
27
35
50
71
68
100
150
156
156
200
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 8
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

Energy costs per sq. m. (£)
6
4
4
15
19
17
19
27
26
27
32
29
36
39
37
39
50
100
138
138
137
138
150
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 38
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
7.83
6.35
6.00
4.58
4.13
4.00
3.79
3.52
3.05
2.79
2.80
2.61
2.68
2.39
2.23
1.80
2.00
1.50
0.77
0.77
0.77
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 2.67
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
22

Total income per sq. m. (£)
1431
1431
1123
1000
876
500
423
423
323
344
248
274
226
190
137
127
153
139
67
67
66
46
0
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 175
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Direct income per visit (£)
7.79
7.79
7.79
6.00
5.58
4.43
3.86
4.00
3.40
3.29
2.51
2.65
2.47
2.39
2.12
2.12
2.04
2.00
1.59
1.48
0.74
0.74
0.74
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 2.45
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
23

Secondary income per visit (£)
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.00
0.72
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.43
0.31
0.25
0.21
0.16
0.09
0.09
0.05
0.06
0.03
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 0.22
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Annual visits per sq. m. - 2
355
355
350
301
300
200
136
117
103
102
100
89
88
87
64
64
64
70
45
31
23
23
16
0
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 65
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
For this indicator, total indoor floor space is used
24

% visits casual, instead of organised
96
96
96
90
87
84
83
80
80
80
76
74
74
71
70
61
61
60
43
40
37
20
16
11
0
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 83
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
16.33
10.83
11.01
11.18
7.50
7.98
8.71
7.92
5.84
4.31
5.59
5.59
4.66
1.31
1.53
1.31
0.59
0.00
Wet
High NS-SEC
1500 to < 3000 sq.m.
Trust
Centre score = 3.20
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
25

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
9 4.61 353
2 4.41 349
7
0.20
b.
Ease of booking
12 4.53 322
5 4.33 289
7
0.20
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.52 349
7 4.22 343
6
0.30
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.48 345
6 4.27 330
8
0.21
Quality of facilities/services
g.
Quality of equipment
11 4.60 284
9 4.16 258
2
0.44
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.72 157
10 4.04 241
-9
0.68
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
5 4.64 158
13 3.81 237
-8
0.83
j.
Number of people in the pool
7 4.62 158
12 3.97 240
-5
0.65
k.
Quality of car parking on site
15 4.26 308
17 3.38 231
-2
0.88
l.
Quality of food and drink
17 4.00 268
16 3.50 226
1
0.50
Cleanliness
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
4 4.66 328
14 3.68 294
-10
0.98
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.69 337
11 4.01 317
-8
0.68
Staff
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
10 4.61 354
3 4.39 350
7
0.22
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.61 352
4 4.36 338
4
0.25
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
2 4.72 326
1 4.57 101
1
0.15
Value for money
r.
Value for money of activities
6 4.63 352
8 4.19 343
-2
0.44
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.19 288
15 3.68 235
1
0.51
Other attributes *
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
4.24 196
N/A
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
4.26 199
N/A
t.
Overall satisfaction with visit
N/A
4.21 350
* 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'.
26

Satisfaction and importance scores: by mean gaps
GAPS
( Importance minus
IMPORTANCE
SATISFACTION
Satisfaction )
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
4 4.66 328
14 3.68 294
-10
0.98
k.
Quality of car parking on site
15 4.26 308
17 3.38 231
-2
0.88
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
5 4.64 158
13 3.81 237
-8
0.83
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.69 337
11 4.01 317
-8
0.68
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.72 157
10 4.04 241
-9
0.68
j.
Number of people in the pool
7 4.62 158
12 3.97 240
-5
0.65
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.19 288
15 3.68 235
1
0.51
l.
Quality of food and drink
17 4.00 268
16 3.50 226
1
0.50
r.
Value for money of activities
6 4.63 352
8 4.19 343
-2
0.44
g.
Quality of equipment
11 4.60 284
9 4.16 258
2
0.44
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.52 349
7 4.22 343
6
0.30
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.61 352
4 4.36 338
4
0.25
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
10 4.61 354
3 4.39 350
7
0.22
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.48 345
6 4.27 330
8
0.21
a.
Activity available at convenient times
9 4.61 353
2 4.41 349
7
0.20
b.
Ease of booking
12 4.53 322
5 4.33 289
7
0.20
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
2 4.72 326
1 4.57 101
1
0.15
27

Satisfaction and importance scores: by rank gaps
GAPS
( Importance minus
IMPORTANCE
SATISFACTION
Satisfaction )
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean no
Rank Mean
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
4 4.66 328
14 3.68 294
-10
0.98
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.72 157
10 4.04 241
-9
0.68
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
5 4.64 158
13 3.81 237
-8
0.83
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.69 337
11 4.01 317
-8
0.68
j.
Number of people in the pool
7 4.62 158
12 3.97 240
-5
0.65
k.
Quality of car parking on site
15 4.26 308
17 3.38 231
-2
0.88
r.
Value for money of activities
6 4.63 352
8 4.19 343
-2
0.44
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.19 288
15 3.68 235
1
0.51
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
2 4.72 326
1 4.57 101
1
0.15
l.
Quality of food and drink
17 4.00 268
16 3.50 226
1
0.50
g.
Quality of equipment
11 4.60 284
9 4.16 258
2
0.44
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.61 352
4 4.36 338
4
0.25
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.52 349
7 4.22 343
6
0.30
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
10 4.61 354
3 4.39 350
7
0.22
a.
Activity available at convenient times
9 4.61 353
2 4.41 349
7
0.20
b.
Ease of booking
12 4.53 322
5 4.33 289
7
0.20
d.
The range of activities available
14 4.48 345
6 4.27 330
8
0.21
28

APPENDIX 1:

USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
29

Q1 Main activity today?
Badminton
0 ( 0.0% )
Keep fit/aerobics/etc
14 ( 3.9% )
Fitness equipment/machines etc
161 ( 45.1% )
Martial arts
0 ( 0.0% )
Five-a-side football
0 ( 0.0% )
Gymnastics
2 ( 0.6% )
Basketball or volleyball
1 ( 0.3% )
Other physical activity
12 ( 3.4% )
Swimming or aqua fit
97 ( 27.2% )
A spectator
64 ( 17.9% )
Another type of activity
6 ( 1.7% )
Q2 Where did you do your main activity today?
Swimming pool
97 ( 34.4% )
Gym/fitness centre
183 ( 64.9% )
Outside facility
0 ( 0.0% )
Main hall
0 ( 0.0% )
Smaller hall
0 ( 0.0% )
Another part of the facility
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
75
Q3 How you are taking part in your main activity today?
An organised class/session
40 ( 14.1% )
As an individual user
234 ( 82.7% )
As a member of a club or team
4 ( 1.4% )
Other
5 ( 1.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
74
30

Q4 Is today your first ever visit to this facility?
Yes
23 ( 6.5% )
No
331 ( 93.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
Q5a Number of times visited in past 7 days.
1
167 ( 49.0% )
2
78 ( 22.9% )
3
61 ( 17.9% )
4
23 ( 6.7% )
5
9 ( 2.6% )
6
1 ( 0.3% )
7
1 ( 0.3% )
8 plus
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q5b Number of times visited in past 4 weeks.
1 to 5
198 ( 57.2% )
6 to 10
86 ( 24.9% )
11 to 15
41 ( 11.8% )
16 to 20
17 ( 4.9% )
21 plus
4 ( 1.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
11
31

Q7 Do you have a leisure card?
Yes
217 ( 61.3% )
No
137 ( 38.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
Q8 Basis of eligibility for card/scheme.
Disadvantaged
79 ( 39.3% )
Other
122 ( 60.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
156
Q9 From where did you come here today?
Straight from home
312 ( 88.4% )
Straight from work, school or college
28 ( 7.9% )
Other e.g. from shopping
13 ( 3.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
4
Q10 Main method of transport.
Car/motorcycle
249 ( 70.1% )
Public transport
21 ( 5.9% )
Walked all the way
81 ( 22.8% )
Other, including cycle
4 ( 1.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
2
32

Q11Journey time.
0-5 minutes
137 ( 39.4% )
6-10 minutes
126 ( 36.2% )
11-15 minutes
48 ( 13.8% )
16-20 minutes
19 ( 5.5% )
21-30 minutes
13 ( 3.7% )
31-45 minutes
5 ( 1.4% )
Over 45 minutes
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
9
Q12a Satisfaction - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very satisfied
178 ( 51.0% )
Fairly satisfied
145 ( 41.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
17 ( 4.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
9 ( 2.6% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
8
Q12b Satisfaction - ease of booking.
Very satisfied
139 ( 48.1% )
Fairly satisfied
110 ( 38.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
36 ( 12.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
4 ( 1.4% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
68
33

Q12c Satisfaction - activity charges/fees.
Very satisfied
140 ( 40.8% )
Fairly satisfied
160 ( 46.6% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
25 ( 7.3% )
Fairly dissatisfied
13 ( 3.8% )
Very dissatisfied
5 ( 1.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
14
Q12d Satisfaction - range of activities available.
Very satisfied
137 ( 41.5% )
Fairly satisfied
153 ( 46.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
33 ( 10.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
7 ( 2.1% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
27
Q12e Satisfaction - quality of flooring in sports hall.
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
357
34

Q12f Satisfaction - quality of lighting in sports hall.
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
357
Q12g Satisfaction - quality of equipment.
Very satisfied
101 ( 39.1% )
Fairly satisfied
107 ( 41.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
43 ( 16.7% )
Fairly dissatisfied
5 ( 1.9% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
99
Q12h Satisfaction - water quality in pool.
Very satisfied
80 ( 33.2% )
Fairly satisfied
103 ( 42.7% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
47 ( 19.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
10 ( 4.1% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
116
35

Q12i Satisfaction - water temperature in pool.
Very satisfied
63 ( 26.6% )
Fairly satisfied
99 ( 41.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
51 ( 21.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
16 ( 6.8% )
Very dissatisfied
8 ( 3.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
120
Q12j Satisfaction - number of people in pool.
Very satisfied
75 ( 31.3% )
Fairly satisfied
100 ( 41.7% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
50 ( 20.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
12 ( 5.0% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
117
Q12k Satisfaction - quality of car parking on site.
Very satisfied
37 ( 16.0% )
Fairly satisfied
90 ( 39.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
44 ( 19.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
43 ( 18.6% )
Very dissatisfied
17 ( 7.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
126
36

Q12l Satisfaction - quality of food/drink.
Very satisfied
32 ( 14.2% )
Fairly satisfied
87 ( 38.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
79 ( 35.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
18 ( 8.0% )
Very dissatisfied
10 ( 4.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
131
Q12m Satisfaction - cleanliness of changing area.
Very satisfied
71 ( 24.1% )
Fairly satisfied
130 ( 44.2% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
41 ( 13.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
31 ( 10.5% )
Very dissatisfied
21 ( 7.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
63
Q12n Satisfaction - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very satisfied
103 ( 32.5% )
Fairly satisfied
141 ( 44.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
51 ( 16.1% )
Fairly dissatisfied
16 ( 5.0% )
Very dissatisfied
6 ( 1.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
40
37

Q12o Satisfaction - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very satisfied
179 ( 51.1% )
Fairly satisfied
136 ( 38.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
29 ( 8.3% )
Fairly dissatisfied
3 ( 0.9% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 0.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
7
Q12p Satisfaction - helpfulness of other staff.
Very satisfied
158 ( 46.7% )
Fairly satisfied
149 ( 44.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
27 ( 8.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
3 ( 0.9% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
19
Q12q Satisfaction - standard of coaching/instruction.
Very satisfied
66 ( 65.3% )
Fairly satisfied
28 ( 27.7% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
6 ( 5.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 1.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
256
38

Q12r Satisfaction - value for money of activities.
Very satisfied
136 ( 39.7% )
Fairly satisfied
157 ( 45.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
35 ( 10.2% )
Fairly dissatisfied
10 ( 2.9% )
Very dissatisfied
5 ( 1.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
14
Q12s Satisfaction - value for money of food/drink.
Very satisfied
41 ( 17.4% )
Fairly satisfied
98 ( 41.7% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
78 ( 33.2% )
Fairly dissatisfied
15 ( 6.4% )
Very dissatisfied
3 ( 1.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
122
Q12t Satisfaction - overall satisfaction of visit.
Very satisfied
113 ( 32.3% )
Fairly satisfied
208 ( 59.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
20 ( 5.7% )
Fairly dissatisfied
9 ( 2.6% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
7
39

Q13a Importance - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very important
240 ( 68.0% )
Fairly important
93 ( 26.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
18 ( 5.1% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
4
Q13b Importance - ease of booking.
Very important
209 ( 64.9% )
Fairly important
79 ( 24.5% )
Neither important nor unimportant
32 ( 9.9% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
35
Q13c Importance - activity charges/fees.
Very important
213 ( 61.0% )
Fairly important
112 ( 32.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
18 ( 5.2% )
Fairly unimportant
4 ( 1.1% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
8
40

Q13d Importance - the range of activities available.
Very important
204 ( 59.1% )
Fairly important
111 ( 32.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
24 ( 7.0% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 0.9% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 0.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
12
Q13e Importance - quality of flooring in sports hall.
Very important
98 ( 50.0% )
Fairly important
56 ( 28.6% )
Neither important nor unimportant
37 ( 18.9% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 1.0% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 1.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
161
Q13f Importance - quality of lighting in sports hall.
Very important
98 ( 49.2% )
Fairly important
63 ( 31.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
32 ( 16.1% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 1.5% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 1.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
158
41

Q13g Importance - quality of equipment.
Very important
201 ( 70.8% )
Fairly important
57 ( 20.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
24 ( 8.5% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
73
Q13h Importance - water quality in pool.
Very important
118 ( 75.2% )
Fairly important
34 ( 21.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
5 ( 3.2% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
200
Q13i Importance - water temperature in pool.
Very important
109 ( 69.0% )
Fairly important
43 ( 27.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
4 ( 2.5% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 1.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
199
42

Q13j Importance - number of people in pool.
Very important
107 ( 67.7% )
Fairly important
43 ( 27.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
7 ( 4.4% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.6% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
199
Q13k Importance - quality of car parking on site.
Very important
150 ( 48.7% )
Fairly important
103 ( 33.4% )
Neither important nor unimportant
44 ( 14.3% )
Fairly unimportant
6 ( 1.9% )
Very unimportant
5 ( 1.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
49
Q13l Importance - quality of food/drink.
Very important
119 ( 44.4% )
Fairly important
61 ( 22.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
66 ( 24.6% )
Fairly unimportant
12 ( 4.5% )
Very unimportant
10 ( 3.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
89
43

Q13m Importance - cleanliness of changing area.
Very important
244 ( 74.4% )
Fairly important
65 ( 19.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
13 ( 4.0% )
Fairly unimportant
4 ( 1.2% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
29
Q13n Importance - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very important
254 ( 75.4% )
Fairly important
68 ( 20.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
12 ( 3.6% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
20
Q13o Importance - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very important
240 ( 67.8% )
Fairly important
96 ( 27.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
13 ( 3.7% )
Fairly unimportant
4 ( 1.1% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
44

Q13p Importance - helpfulness of other staff.
Very important
238 ( 67.6% )
Fairly important
97 ( 27.6% )
Neither important nor unimportant
14 ( 4.0% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
Q13q Importance - standard of coaching/instruction
Very important
253 ( 77.6% )
Fairly important
58 ( 17.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
12 ( 3.7% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
31
Q13r Importance - value for money of activities.
Very important
246 ( 69.9% )
Fairly important
89 ( 25.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
12 ( 3.4% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.6% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 0.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
45

Q13s Importance - value for money of food/drink.
Very important
148 ( 51.4% )
Fairly important
75 ( 26.0% )
Neither important nor unimportant
47 ( 16.3% )
Fairly unimportant
8 ( 2.8% )
Very unimportant
10 ( 3.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
69
Q14 Gender.
Male
152 ( 43.7% )
Female
196 ( 56.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
9
Q15 Ethnic origin of respondent.
White
241 ( 68.7% )
Mixed
30 ( 8.5% )
Asian or Asian British
66 ( 18.8% )
Black or Black British
11 ( 3.1% )
Chinese or other ethnic group
3 ( 0.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
6
46

Q16 Long term illness, health problem or disability.
Yes
31 ( 8.9% )
No
317 ( 91.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
9
Q17 Age.
11 to 19
39 ( 11.1% )
20 to 59
287 ( 81.5% )
60 plus
26 ( 7.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
Q18 Current employment status.
Working full-time (30+ hrs)
180 ( 50.8% )
Working part-time (less than 30 hrs)
64 ( 18.1% )
On government work training programme
1 ( 0.3% )
Housewife/ husband/ full-time in the home
9 ( 2.5% )
Retired - company / personal pension
4 ( 1.1% )
Retired - state pension only
15 ( 4.2% )
Temporarily unable to work
5 ( 1.4% )
Permanently unable to work
1 ( 0.3% )
Unemployed - more than 6 months
11 ( 3.1% )
Unemployed - less than 6 months
1 ( 0.3% )
In full-time education (school)
18 ( 5.1% )
Full-time student (college/university)
22 ( 6.2% )
Never worked
18 ( 5.1% )
None of these
5 ( 1.4% )
Refused to say
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
3
47

Socio-economic group.
1 & 2
128 ( 46.4% )
3
42 ( 15.2% )
4
16 ( 5.8% )
5
21 ( 7.6% )
6 & 7
69 ( 25.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
81
Q23 Postcode.
first part
number of
cumulative
of postcode
questionnaires
percent
B67
164
( 46.3% )
46.3
B68
55
( 15.5% )
61.9
B66
54
( 15.3% )
77.1
B69
17
( 4.8% )
81.9
B17
12
( 3.4% )
85.3
B32
9
( 2.5% )
87.9
B16
7
( 2.0% )
89.8
B65
7
( 2.0% )
91.8
B63
5
( 1.4% )
93.2
B62
4
( 1.1% )
94.4
B18
2
( 0.6% )
94.9
B70
2
( 0.6% )
95.5
B71
2
( 0.6% )
96.0
B20
1
( 0.3% )
96.3
B21
1
( 0.3% )
96.6
B23
1
( 0.3% )
96.9
B44
1
( 0.3% )
97.2
B45
1
( 0.3% )
97.5
B6
1
( 0.3% )
97.7
B60
1
( 0.3% )
98.0
B61
1
( 0.3% )
98.3
B64
1
( 0.3% )
98.6
DY11
1
( 0.3% )
98.9
DY4
1
( 0.3% )
99.2
DY8
1
( 0.3% )
99.4
WS2
1
( 0.3% )
99.7
48

WV16
1
( 0.3% )
100.0
Missing/Not applicable
3
49