NATIONAL BENCHMARKING SERVICE FOR SPORTS
AND LEISURE CENTRES

FACILITY REPORT
FOR
HADEN HILL LEISURE CENTRE

Prepared by the
Sport Industry Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University

December 2009

NATIONAL BENCHMARKING SERVICE FOR SPORTS AND
LEISURE CENTRES

CONTENTS


Page

1. INTRODUCTION
1

2.
THE USER SURVEY SAMPLE
2

3.
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE FOR HADEN HILL LEISURE
4
CENTRE

4.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA AND POPULATION STATISTICS
10

5.
RESULTS: CURRENT PERFORMANCE SCORES FOR HADEN HILL
12
LEISURE CENTRE
•  KEY INDICATORS
•  OTHER IMPORTANT INDICATORS
•  SATISFACTION AND IMPORTANCE TABLES

APPENDIX 1: USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
32

NBS REPORT FOR HADEN HILL 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 Haden Hill
Leisure Centre, which is run by Sandwell Leisure Trust on behalf of Sandwell
MBC. 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 Haden Hill Leisure Centre in
this report, please read the accompanying Guidance document to accompany
facility reports.

1.3
The data in this report are based upon a survey of 372 users of the centre between
12th and 20th September 2009, conducted by Result Market Research; and a
financial return based on the year 1st April 2008 to 31st March 2009. 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 4 of this
report.

1.4
Haden Hill Leisure Centre is classified as being a ‘mixed without outdoor' centre
which means that it has a swimming pool of at least 20 metres in length and an
indoor sports hall which could accommodate at least 4 badminton courts but no
outdoor provision. The actual floor space of the centre is 4,556m2 which means that
it is benchmarked against comparable centres with a total floor space of at least
3,000m2 (that is large sized centres) and it has 3,712m2 of usable space. The
catchment area has a relatively high proportion (27.92%) 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 Haden Hill are:

•  mixed without outdoor (benchmark family of 21 centres)
•  20%+ of catchment population in NS-SEC 6 & 7 (benchmark family of 21
centres)
•  3000+ sq.m. (benchmark family of 42 centres)
•  Trust (benchmark family of 42 centres)

1

2.
THE USER SURVEY SAMPLE

Figure 1: Haden Hill User Survey Characteristics

Note: The survey instrument groups respondents according to the 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 372 people who took part in the survey is shown in Figure
1. The primary purpose of the data in Figure 1 is for calculating performance
indicator scores 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 (358,472 visits in 2008/09). 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: Haden Hill 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
Swimming was the most frequently stated main activity by survey respondents,
followed by using fitness equipment. These two activities accounted for 65% of
the main activities undertaken during the survey period. Given the distribution of
activities undertaken, it is not surprising that the pool and gym/fitness centre 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 (76%) rather
than instructor led or club usage. This finding is also consistent with the nature of
swimmers and gym/fitness centre users who form two-thirds of the sample. almost
two in every three of the respondents had some form of leisure card which gave
them reduced price admission to the centre. 31% of 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 performance indicators and family specific
benchmarks.

3

3.
SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE FOR HADEN HILL LEISURE CENTRE

3.1
The centre's performance is reported in two main parts. First, for key indicators
and other access, finance and utilisation indicators, the centre's performance is
reported relative to their 2009 national benchmarks. Second, for satisfaction and
importance scores from customers, the centre's performance is analysed by gap
analysis and grid analysis. We conclude the summary with our perception of the
main strengths, weaknesses and factors to watch out for at this centre.

Performance relative to national benchmarks

3.2
The reference points for the performance for each indicator are the four quartiles
and three benchmarks identified in the General Guidance Document (page 8) which
accompanies this report. This positioning has been judged by the NBS analysts by
examining 'average' performance across the four family comparisons. The four
comparisons for each indicator are in the detailed performance results in Section 5
of this centre report.

3.3
The seven facility performance indicators which were proposed for the CPA in
2007 have been retained as key indicators for NBS reporting. This is because they
are a good indication of national government priorities for sports facilities.

Key indicators
Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Key indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
11-19 years
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
NS-SEC 6&7
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Ethnic minorities
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
60+ years
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Disabled <60 years
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Subsidy per visit
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Visits per m2
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd

3.4
One of these key indicators, visits per square metre, is calculated differently to its
equivalent in the utilisation indicators below. For the key indicator, the square
metres of indoor space used in the calculation excludes corridors and offices. In
the utilisation indicators part of Section 5 of this report, and in the utilisation
summary below, the visits per square metre indicator includes corridors and offices
in the square metres. 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 key indicator subsidy per visit calculation
includes these estimated central establishment charges in the total costs. In the

4

financial indicators part of Section 5 of this report, and in the financial summary
below, the subsidy per visit indicator is measured by using actual costs, including
zero central establishment charges for your centre.

3.5
One of the key indicator scores, an access indicator, is in the top quartile. Two,
however, for 60+ years and disabled under 60 years, are at their bottom quartile
levels. These are the results of under-representation of visits to the centre by the
60+ year olds (9%) and disabled under 60 years (3%), when comparing with their
proportions (25% and 10% respectively) in the catchment area. Of the two
efficiency indicators, subsidy per visit performs in the bottom quartile relative to
other similar facilities.

Access

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Access indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Females
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
11-19 years
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
20-59 years
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
60+ years
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
NS-SEC 6&7
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Ethnic minorities
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
Disabled <60 years
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Disabled 60+
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Unemployed
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Discount card holders
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Top
Disadvantaged card holders
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
First visits
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%
50%

3.6
When considering the wider set of access indicators, rather than just the five in the
key indicators, the picture is again of mixed access performance, with some clear
strengths. 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 are located at the 50% benchmark level or
above (11-19 years, NS-SEC 6&7, the unemployed, and disadvantaged card
holders), but four which are relevant to social inclusion are below their 50%
benchmark performance levels (60+ years, ethnic minorities, disabled under 60,
and disabled 60+). Two other indicators (20-59 years, discount card holders) are in
their top quartiles, but these groups are not normally considered relevant to social
inclusion, because people in these groups are not necessarily disadvantaged.

Financial
3.7
Financial performance is very weak relative to the benchmarks, with cost recovery
and subsidy indicators at their 25% benchmark levels or below. All the subsidy

5

scores in this summary table and in the other indicators figures in Section 5 are
calculated using the actual costs, rather than including any estimated central
establishment costs. The main factors which drive this financial performance are
relatively high operating costs in terms of visits or per square metre and also
relatively low income per visit and per square metre. It is relevant to note that
satisfaction with entrance charges and value for money of activities are eighth and
seventh in the satisfaction rankings, with average customer scores of 4.16 and 4.22
out of 5 respectively. Together these considerations suggest that the activity prices
are not near to the limit of acceptability for customers.

Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Financial indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Subsidy per visit
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Cost recovery
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Subsidy per m2
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Subsidy per resident
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Operating cost per visit
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
Operating cost per m2
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
Maintenance & repair cost per m2
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
Energy cost per m2
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
Income per visit
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Bottom
Income per m2
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
2nd
Direct income per visit
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
Secondary income per visit
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd

Utilisation
Bottom
2nd
3rd
Top
Utilisation indicators
25%
50%
75%
quartile
quartile
quartile
quartile
Visits per m2
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
% of visits that are casual
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
Weekly number of people
visiting
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd
3rd

3.8
The main throughput indicator, visits per square metre, is measured in the
utilisation summary table and 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 reasonably high number of annual visits for a centre of this
size. Meanwhile, the weekly number of people visiting also performs at the third
quartile, suggesting a fairly good market penetration in the local catchment
population. The percentage of visits which are casual (76%) is fairly 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.

6

Satisfaction with and importance of attributes

Gap
analysis

3.9
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
4.67
3.71
0.96
Cleanliness of activity spaces
4.62
3.92
0.70
Water quality in the swimming pool
4.75
4.10
0.65
Quality of car parking on site
4.22
3.63
0.59
Water temperature in the swimming pool
4.59
4.04
0.55

Rank gaps
Attribute
Importance
Satisfaction
Gap
Cleanliness of changing areas
2
18
-16
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3
15
-12
Water quality in the swimming pool
1
9
-8
Water temperature in the swimming pool
6
12
-6
Value for money of activities
4
7
-3

3.10
Four attributes feature in both the tables above. The second table demonstrates that
all of the attributes are among the most important to customers. However, the mean
score gaps and the smallest rank gap featured are not big by industry standards.
Cleanliness of the changing areas and activity spaces show the two largest gaps
whether measured by mean scores or rankings. The appearance of cleanliness
attributes at the top of the gap scores is not unusual for sports facilities. From the
frequency distributions in the appendix, it is apparent that 16% of respondents were
dissatisfied with the cleanliness of the changing areas (which is a modest level of
dissatisfaction), whilst 7% 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 quality and temperature in the pool
are also among the largest gaps - however, only 4% of respondents were
dissatisfied with either of these attributes (Q12h and i). 17% of respondents
expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of parking on site (Q12k) and 2% were
dissatisfied with the value of money of activities - the latter was in fact among the
centre's strengths (see grid analysis). So any problems are not absolute, but relative

7

- the satisfaction scores falling short of the importance scores - and minorities of
customers are dissatisfied.

Grid
analysis

3.11
The grid analysis reveals three attributes which are clearly in the quadrant for high
importance and low satisfaction: the two cleanliness attributes and the water
temperature in the pool - these are normally the attributes most immediately
deserving of managerial attention. Equipment quality and the number of people in
the pool are also marginally in the quadrant for high importance/low satisfaction.
Low satisfaction relative to other attributes is also evident for the car parking on
site and the food and drink attributes, but these are relatively low in importance too.
They may, however, have commercial implications - i.e. constraining income to a
greater or lesser extent.

3.12
Comparison of the centre's satisfaction scores with industry averages, provided by
the final satisfaction table in Section 5 of this report, shows that the centre is above
the industry average overall satisfaction for mixed centres, at 4.28 out of 5, and
exceeds industry average scores for 11 of the 19 individual attributes. However, it
should be noted that different satisfaction scores in different locations will be
caused not only by real differences in satisfaction but also by differences between
locations in their generosity of scoring.

8

Weaknesses in service attributes, as perceived by customers

3.13  Putting together the results of the gap analysis and grid analysis, the weakest
attributes are shown in the following table. Cleanliness of the changing areas is the
main relative weakness indicated by both the gap and grid analyses.

Relatively weak attributes
Evidence
Primary
Cleanliness of changing areas
Relatively large gaps and relatively high
weaknesses
Cleanliness of activity spaces
in importance
Water temperature in the pool
Secondary
Quality of food & drink
Relatively low satisfaction but relatively
weaknesses
Value for money of food & drink
low in importance
Quality of car parking

Strengths in service attributes, as perceived by customers

3.14  Combining the results of the grid analysis and the satisfaction scores, the table
below summarises the strongest attributes.  Staff and accessibility attributes are in
the top five satisfaction rankings and one is also in the top five for importance
rankings - a desirable correlation.

Relatively strong attributes
Evidence
Primary
Standard of coaching/instruction
In top five satisfaction scores;
strengths
Activity available at convenient times
relatively high in importance
Helpfulness of reception staff
Secondary
Ease of booking
In top five satisfaction scores but not
strengths
The range of activities available
high in importance

Main strengths and weaknesses

3.15
As a result of the analysis above, we conclude that the main strengths, weaknesses
and factors to watch for at this centre are as shown in the following table.

Strengths Two
access
indicators; accessibility; staff
Ones to watch
Pool attributes; car park attribute; food and drink
Weaknesses
Three access indicators; finance; cleanliness

9

4.
MAP OF CATCHMENT AREA AND POPULATION STATISTICS

4.1
The catchment area shown in this map is defined as the area within which Haden
Hill Leisure Centre attracts more visitors than any other centre, i.e. the area within
which Haden Hill is the dominant supplier. On the next page are key population
statistics for the catchment area.
Sport England Benchmark Service
Haden Hill Leisure Centre
Rou
Ro
dle
dl y
e
Ne
N t
Nee
Ne h
t e
h r
e
the t
r o
t n
o
Nethertton
Por
Po t
r w
t a
w y
a
Portw
Row
Ro l
w e
l y
e  Re
y
y
g
Re i
g s
i
gi
Pr
gi
Pr
P
P i
r m
ii r
m
m o
r se
oo  H
se
i
H
se Hll
i
Primrose Hill
i
Bl
B ack
l
h
ack eat
h
ackh
h
eat
Blackheat
Old
Ol  Hi
d H
d
l
Hii l
l
Old Hi
Qu
Q a
u rry
a
uar
ua r
r  B
y a
B nk
a
Coombes
Coombe
C
w
oombess ood
w
swo
sw
w
sw od
o
oo
Cra
Cr d
a l
d e
l y
e
Key
Catchment
Haden Hill Leisure Centre
Additional material ©Sport England 2009
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
28/10/2009 Job PE using Mapinfo for Sport England
License numbers C02W 0003683 & 10003311    ©The Automobile Association 1999, all rights reserved

10

Haden Hill Leisure Centre
confirmation of catchment data used
% population 11 - 19
13.38
% population 20 - 59
61.26
% population 60+
25.36
% population non-white
8.62
% population groups NS-SEC 67
27.92
% population <60 disabled
9.73
% population 60+ disabled
12.58
total residents competing
25235
total residents non-competing
41472
difference
16237
11

Key Indicators
% visits 11-19 years ÷ % catchment population 11-19 years
2.95
2.00
1.86
1.86
1.25
1.15
1.02
1.02
0.94
1.00
0.91
0.68
0.73
0.69
0.61
0.52
0.56
0.44
0.21
0.25
0.21
0.17
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.76
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits from social classes 6 & 7 ÷ % catchment population in social classes 6 & 7
1.23
1.08
1.03
1.06
1.00
0.86
0.85
0.71
0.63
0.56
0.58
0.49
0.52
0.50
0.45
0.41
0.41
0.40
0.16
0.16
0.08
0.00
0.00
-0.50
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.90
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
13

% visits from black, Asian & other ethnic groups ÷ % catchment population in same
ethnic groups
6.74
6.74
6.10
6.00
4.00
2.92
2.64
2.54
2.16
1.85
1.99
2.00
1.49
1.53
1.38
1.12
0.93
1.08
1.04
0.62
0.44
0.31
0.31
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 1.09
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits 60+ years ÷ % catchment population 60+ years
1.32
1.27
1.00
0.92
0.84
0.73
0.74
0.63
0.55
0.56
0.55
0.50
0.46
0.48
0.42
0.38
0.35
0.35
0.10
0.12
0.09
0.09
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.35
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
14

% visits <60 years disabled ÷ % catchment population <60 years disabled
1.24
1.24
1.24
1.20
1.12
1.00
0.96
0.96
0.90
0.84
0.80
0.71
0.70
0.65
0.62
0.58
0.60
0.49
0.50
0.41
0.40
0.25
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.20
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.30
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Subsidy per visit (£) - 1
-1.71
-1.71
-0.69
-0.05
-0.24
0.01
0.09
0.00
0.36
0.36
0.38
0.94
1.12
1.14
0.96
1.87
1.77
2.00
3.78
3.78
4.00
5.70
6.00
6.75
8.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 2.12
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
15

Annual visits per sq. m. (excluding offices)
277
243
202
201
200
134
127
118
100
100
90
91
80
86
62
59
48
53
40
13
13
19
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 97
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
For this performance indicator, square metres of indoor space excludes offices and corridors
16

Other important Indicators
% visits 20-59 years ÷ % catchment population 20-59 years
1.48
1.46
1.46
1.40
1.36
1.27
1.25
1.24
1.24
1.22
1.20
1.19
1.20
1.20
1.15
1.13
1.13
1.14
1.07
1.00
0.96
0.96
0.83
0.80
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 1.32
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits which were first visits
23.08
23.08
20.00
15.00
12.61
12.72
10.93
10.00
7.65
7.65
7.40
5.88
5.29
5.29
5.68
5.00
2.87
3.16
3.31
3.33
2.02
0.95
0.95
1.11
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 5.38
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
17

% visits with discount card
93.95
80.00
70.89
70.89
64.89
60.00
58.17
60.00
54.26
48.97
49.72
45.05
46.67
40.00
37.09
37.71
37.24
37.71
29.68
19.90
20.00
17.39
17.39
9.79
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 64.25
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits with discount card for 'disadvantage'
52.45
40.00
32.51
32.51
26.18
21.71
22.15
22.37
19.12
20.00
18.18
18.83
16.22
13.96
11.70
11.75
8.77
6.06
5.99
4.19
4.19
1.27
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 19.62
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
18

% visits female
78
75
71
68
64
64
65
64
60
59
60
58
58
51
50
51
51
45
43
39
40
20
11
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 58
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% visits 60+ years disabled ÷ % catchment population 60+ years disabled
1.27
1.00
0.74
0.72
0.72
0.50
0.43
0.37
0.37
0.39
0.32
0.28
0.27
0.25
0.27
0.17
0.11
0.12
0.07
0.07
0.00
0.00
0.00
-0.50
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.09
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
19

% visits unemployed
12.19
11.34
10.25
10.25
10.00
5.00
2.77
2.91
2.91
3.00
2.20
1.97 2.29
2.06
2.29
1.24
1.23
1.33
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-5.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 3.83
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
% cost recovery
176
176
150
131
108
108
102
98
100
90
91
86
79
76
72
72
68
54
50
40
39
40
42
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 66
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
20

Subsidy per visit (£) - 2
-2.41
-2.41
-2.00
-1.00
-0.05
-0.24
-0.14
0.00
0.29
0.29
0.32
0.09
0.94
1.12
1.14
0.96
1.87
1.77
2.00
3.78
3.78
4.00
5.70
6.00
6.75
8.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 1.32
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. (£)
-268
-268
-148
-6
-20
-20
20
9
0
63
37
55
17
63
56
117
174
150
180
272
500
1004
1000
1500
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 104
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.
21

Subsidy per resident (£)
-36.36
-36.36
-19.67
-1.78
-4.20
-3.34
1.84
0.68
0.00
5.32
6.56
4.44
6.30
9.56
10.04
11.26
17.45
34.96
33.26
44.53
50.00
79.37
100.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 18.79
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 (£)
1.94
1.85
1.85
1.85
2.00
2.84
2.78
2.93
3.30
3.18
3.70
3.59
3.96
4.00
4.48
4.28
5.19
5.72
6.00
6.34
6.72
8.00
9.94
10.00
11.69
12.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 3.91
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

Total operating cost per sq. m. (£)
35
35
109
147
110
231
199
284
254
290
246
300
391
362
370
476
444
524
500
630
1000
1500
1648
2000
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 308
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. (£)
2
0
0
2
7
9
7
7
8
13
13
14
18
18
20
21
28
37
50
65
100
148
150
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 7
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.
23

Energy costs per sq. m. (£)
4
4
14
10
17
19
25
26
26
32
37
39
40
38
45
48
50
61
63
72
100
150
169
200
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 30
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 (£)
5.59
5.59
5.00
4.84
4.32
4.12
4.22
4.00
3.70
3.58
3.42
3.29
3.34
3.00
2.70
2.76
2.76
2.80
1.98
2.00
1.78
1.65
1.74
1.47
1.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 2.59
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
24

Total income per sq. m. (£)
644
624
624
624
600
400
367
369
348
278
257
257
257
197
189
200
167
142
91
98
78
35
35
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 204
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Direct income per visit (£)
5.38
4.93
5.00
4.37
4.22
3.89
3.89
4.00
3.28
3.17
3.17
2.95
3.00
2.88
2.54
2.44
2.46
2.12
2.00
1.65
1.30
1.30
1.21
1.16
1.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 2.23
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
25

Secondary income per visit (£)
1.94
1.50
1.25
1.00
0.73
0.70
0.74
0.46
0.50
0.40
0.39
0.36
0.24
0.23
0.25
0.15
0.10
0.11
0.01
0.04
0.05
0.01
0.01
0.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 0.36
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Annual visits per sq. m. (including offices)
231
200
160
160
151
150
117
111
113
100
87
78
80
77
69
55
48
52
50
40
37
13
13
16
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 79
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
For this indicator, total indoor floor space is used
26

% visits casual, instead of organised
97
93
91
81
78
80
76
78
74
73
69
69
65
60
57
59
52
47
37
40
22
19
20
16
0
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 76
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
Weekly number of people visiting the facility, as % of catchment population 11+
74.97
60.00
43.44
42.06
40.00
22.89
24.85
23.13
20.00
13.18
12.42
12.71
13.73
9.54
7.38
6.80 8.23
8.00
5.55
4.10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-20.00
Mixed without
High NS-SEC
3000+ sq.m.
Trust
outdoor
Centre score = 13.33
lowest score
25%
50%
75%
highest score
27

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
10 4.48 366
2 4.38 367
8
0.10
b.
Ease of booking
15 4.30 295
3 4.30 271
12
0.00
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.42 365
8 4.16 364
5
0.26
d.
The range of activities available
17 4.25 352
4 4.28 338
13 -0.03
Quality of facilities/services
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
12 4.44 202
13 4.02
49
-1
0.42
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
14 4.41 202
14 3.96
49
0
0.45
g.
Quality of equipment
7 4.51 288
10 4.07 242
-3
0.44
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.75 156
9 4.10 249
-8
0.65
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
6 4.59 158
12 4.04 244
-6
0.55
j.
Number of people in the pool
11 4.47 158
11 4.04 243
0
0.43
k.
Quality of car parking on site
18 4.22 347
19 3.63 259
-1
0.59
l.
Quality of food and drink
19 4.15 278
17 3.76 253
2
0.39
Cleanliness
m.
Cleanliness of changing areas
2 4.67 357
18 3.71 338
-16
0.96
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.62 360
15 3.92 345
-12
0.70
Staff
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.48 370
5 4.28 367
4
0.20
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.50 370
6 4.26 328
2
0.24
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
5 4.59 317
1 4.42
96
4
0.17
Value for money
r.
Value for money of activities
4 4.60 367
7 4.22 358
-3
0.38
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.28 292
16 3.86 256
0
0.42
Other attributes *
t.
Overall satisfaction with visit
N/A
4.28 371
* 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'.
28

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
2 4.67 357
18 3.71 338
-16
0.96
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.62 360
15 3.92 345
-12
0.70
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.75 156
9 4.10 249
-8
0.65
k.
Quality of car parking on site
18 4.22 347
19 3.63 259
-1
0.59
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
6 4.59 158
12 4.04 244
-6
0.55
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
14 4.41 202
14 3.96
49
0
0.45
g.
Quality of equipment
7 4.51 288
10 4.07 242
-3
0.44
j.
Number of people in the pool
11 4.47 158
11 4.04 243
0
0.43
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
12 4.44 202
13 4.02
49
-1
0.42
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.28 292
16 3.86 256
0
0.42
l.
Quality of food and drink
19 4.15 278
17 3.76 253
2
0.39
r.
Value for money of activities
4 4.60 367
7 4.22 358
-3
0.38
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.42 365
8 4.16 364
5
0.26
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.50 370
6 4.26 328
2
0.24
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.48 370
5 4.28 367
4
0.20
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
5 4.59 317
1 4.42
96
4
0.17
a.
Activity available at convenient times
10 4.48 366
2 4.38 367
8
0.10
b.
Ease of booking
15 4.30 295
3 4.30 271
12
0.00
d.
The range of activities available
17 4.25 352
4 4.28 338
13 -0.03
29

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
2 4.67 357
18 3.71 338
-16
0.96
n.
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3 4.62 360
15 3.92 345
-12
0.70
h.
Water quality in the swimming pool
1 4.75 156
9 4.10 249
-8
0.65
i.
Water temperature in the swimming pool
6 4.59 158
12 4.04 244
-6
0.55
r.
Value for money of activities
4 4.60 367
7 4.22 358
-3
0.38
g.
Quality of equipment
7 4.51 288
10 4.07 242
-3
0.44
e.
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
12 4.44 202
13 4.02
49
-1
0.42
k.
Quality of car parking on site
18 4.22 347
19 3.63 259
-1
0.59
s.
Value for money of food/drink
16 4.28 292
16 3.86 256
0
0.42
f.
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
14 4.41 202
14 3.96
49
0
0.45
j.
Number of people in the pool
11 4.47 158
11 4.04 243
0
0.43
l.
Quality of food and drink
19 4.15 278
17 3.76 253
2
0.39
p.
Helpfulness of other staff
8 4.50 370
6 4.26 328
2
0.24
o.
Helpfulness of reception staff
9 4.48 370
5 4.28 367
4
0.20
q.
Standard of coaching/instruction
5 4.59 317
1 4.42
96
4
0.17
c.
The activity charge/fee
13 4.42 365
8 4.16 364
5
0.26
a.
Activity available at convenient times
10 4.48 366
2 4.38 367
8
0.10
b.
Ease of booking
15 4.30 295
3 4.30 271
12
0.00
d.
The range of activities available
17 4.25 352
4 4.28 338
13 -0.03
30

Centre satisfaction scores compared with industry average scores
centre
centre
industry
industry
score
rank
mean
rank
Activity available at convenient times
4.38
2
4.41
2
Ease of booking
4.30
3
4.28
5
The activity charge/fee
4.16
8
4.07
10
The range of activities available
4.28
4
4.24
6
Quality of flooring in the sports hall
4.02
13
3.99
11
Quality of lighting in the sports hall
3.96
14
3.87
15
Quality of equipment
4.07
10
4.08
9
Water quality in the swimming pool
4.10
9
4.12
8
Water temperature in the swimming pool
4.04
12
3.99
11
Number of people in the pool
4.04
11
3.99
11
Quality of car parking on site
3.63
19
3.76
16
Quality of food and drink
3.76
17
3.64
18
Cleanliness of changing areas
3.71
18
3.65
17
Cleanliness of activity spaces
3.92
15
3.92
14
Helpfulness of reception staff
4.28
5
4.35
4
Helpfulness of other staff
4.26
6
4.37
3
Standard of coaching/instruction
4.42
1
4.50
1
Value for money of activities
4.22
7
4.13
7
Value for money of food/drink
3.86
16
3.56
19
Overall satisfaction with visit
4.28
4.25

31

APPENDIX 1:

USER SURVEY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS
32

Q1 Main activity today?
Badminton
39 ( 10.5% )
Keep fit/aerobics/etc
55 ( 14.8% )
Fitness equipment/machines etc
103 ( 27.7% )
Martial arts
1 ( 0.3% )
Five-a-side football
3 ( 0.8% )
Gymnastics
2 ( 0.5% )
Basketball or volleyball
0 ( 0.0% )
Other physical activity
4 ( 1.1% )
Swimming or aqua fit
139 ( 37.4% )
A spectator
25 ( 6.7% )
Another type of activity
1 ( 0.3% )
Q2 Where did you do your main activity today?
Swimming pool
139 ( 40.6% )
Gym/fitness centre
141 ( 41.2% )
Outside facility
0 ( 0.0% )
Main hall
37 ( 10.8% )
Smaller hall
14 ( 4.1% )
Another part of the facility
11 ( 3.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
30
Q3 How you are taking part in your main activity today?
An organised class/session
73 ( 21.1% )
As an individual user
262 ( 75.7% )
As a member of a club or team
9 ( 2.6% )
Other
2 ( 0.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
26
33

Q4 Is today your first ever visit to this facility?
Yes
20 ( 5.4% )
No
352 ( 94.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q5a Number of times visited in past 7 days.
1
125 ( 33.6% )
2
68 ( 18.3% )
3
85 ( 22.8% )
4
62 ( 16.7% )
5
16 ( 4.3% )
6
8 ( 2.2% )
7
7 ( 1.9% )
8 plus
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q5b Number of times visited in past 4 weeks.
1 to 5
123 ( 35.7% )
6 to 10
64 ( 18.6% )
11 to 15
91 ( 26.4% )
16 to 20
52 ( 15.1% )
21 plus
15 ( 4.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
27
34

Q7 Do you have a leisure card?
Yes
239 ( 64.2% )
No
133 ( 35.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q8 Basis of eligibility for card/scheme.
Disadvantaged
73 ( 30.7% )
Other
165 ( 69.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
134
Q9 From where did you come here today?
Straight from home
259 ( 69.6% )
Straight from work, school or college
85 ( 22.8% )
Other e.g. from shopping
28 ( 7.5% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q10 Main method of transport.
Car/motorcycle
267 ( 71.8% )
Public transport
50 ( 13.4% )
Walked all the way
49 ( 13.2% )
Other, including cycle
6 ( 1.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
35

Q11Journey time.
0-5 minutes
95 ( 25.6% )
6-10 minutes
139 ( 37.5% )
11-15 minutes
57 ( 15.4% )
16-20 minutes
50 ( 13.5% )
21-30 minutes
19 ( 5.1% )
31-45 minutes
8 ( 2.2% )
Over 45 minutes
3 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
1
Q12a Satisfaction - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very satisfied
196 ( 53.4% )
Fairly satisfied
128 ( 34.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
31 ( 8.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
11 ( 3.0% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
Q12b Satisfaction - ease of booking.
Very satisfied
119 ( 43.9% )
Fairly satisfied
118 ( 43.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
32 ( 11.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 0.4% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.4% )
Missing/Not applicable
101
36

Q12c Satisfaction - activity charges/fees.
Very satisfied
126 ( 34.6% )
Fairly satisfied
186 ( 51.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
37 ( 10.2% )
Fairly dissatisfied
14 ( 3.8% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
8
Q12d Satisfaction - range of activities available.
Very satisfied
131 ( 38.8% )
Fairly satisfied
174 ( 51.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
31 ( 9.2% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 0.6% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
34
Q12e Satisfaction - quality of flooring in sports hall.
Very satisfied
11 ( 22.4% )
Fairly satisfied
29 ( 59.2% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
8 ( 16.3% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 2.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
323
37

Q12f Satisfaction - quality of lighting in sports hall.
Very satisfied
15 ( 30.6% )
Fairly satisfied
21 ( 42.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
10 ( 20.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 4.1% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 2.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
323
Q12g Satisfaction - quality of equipment.
Very satisfied
77 ( 31.8% )
Fairly satisfied
112 ( 46.3% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
47 ( 19.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
6 ( 2.5% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
130
Q12h Satisfaction - water quality in pool.
Very satisfied
91 ( 36.5% )
Fairly satisfied
104 ( 41.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
44 ( 17.7% )
Fairly dissatisfied
8 ( 3.2% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
123
38

Q12i Satisfaction - water temperature in pool.
Very satisfied
82 ( 33.6% )
Fairly satisfied
101 ( 41.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
51 ( 20.9% )
Fairly dissatisfied
8 ( 3.3% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
128
Q12j Satisfaction - number of people in pool.
Very satisfied
81 ( 33.3% )
Fairly satisfied
97 ( 39.9% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
61 ( 25.1% )
Fairly dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Very dissatisfied
2 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
129
Q12k Satisfaction - quality of car parking on site.
Very satisfied
53 ( 20.5% )
Fairly satisfied
113 ( 43.6% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
48 ( 18.5% )
Fairly dissatisfied
33 ( 12.7% )
Very dissatisfied
12 ( 4.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
113
39

Q12l Satisfaction - quality of food/drink.
Very satisfied
59 ( 23.3% )
Fairly satisfied
95 ( 37.5% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
82 ( 32.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
13 ( 5.1% )
Very dissatisfied
4 ( 1.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
119
Q12m Satisfaction - cleanliness of changing area.
Very satisfied
95 ( 28.1% )
Fairly satisfied
123 ( 36.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
65 ( 19.2% )
Fairly dissatisfied
36 ( 10.7% )
Very dissatisfied
19 ( 5.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
34
Q12n Satisfaction - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very satisfied
103 ( 29.9% )
Fairly satisfied
145 ( 42.0% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
74 ( 21.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
12 ( 3.5% )
Very dissatisfied
11 ( 3.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
27
40

Q12o Satisfaction - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very satisfied
169 ( 46.0% )
Fairly satisfied
136 ( 37.1% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
58 ( 15.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
4 ( 1.1% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
Q12p Satisfaction - helpfulness of other staff.
Very satisfied
139 ( 42.4% )
Fairly satisfied
139 ( 42.4% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
48 ( 14.6% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Very dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
44
Q12q Satisfaction - standard of coaching/instruction.
Very satisfied
49 ( 51.0% )
Fairly satisfied
38 ( 39.6% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
9 ( 9.4% )
Fairly dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
276
41

Q12r Satisfaction - value for money of activities.
Very satisfied
131 ( 36.6% )
Fairly satisfied
182 ( 50.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
38 ( 10.6% )
Fairly dissatisfied
7 ( 2.0% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
14
Q12s Satisfaction - value for money of food/drink.
Very satisfied
61 ( 23.8% )
Fairly satisfied
116 ( 45.3% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
64 ( 25.0% )
Fairly dissatisfied
11 ( 4.3% )
Very dissatisfied
4 ( 1.6% )
Missing/Not applicable
116
Q12t Satisfaction - overall satisfaction of visit.
Very satisfied
134 ( 36.1% )
Fairly satisfied
207 ( 55.8% )
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
29 ( 7.8% )
Fairly dissatisfied
1 ( 0.3% )
Very dissatisfied
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
1
42

Q13a Importance - availability of activities at convenient times.
Very important
209 ( 57.1% )
Fairly important
127 ( 34.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
26 ( 7.1% )
Fairly unimportant
3 ( 0.8% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
6
Q13b Importance - ease of booking.
Very important
126 ( 42.7% )
Fairly important
133 ( 45.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
35 ( 11.9% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
77
Q13c Importance - activity charges/fees.
Very important
189 ( 51.8% )
Fairly important
151 ( 41.4% )
Neither important nor unimportant
17 ( 4.7% )
Fairly unimportant
4 ( 1.1% )
Very unimportant
4 ( 1.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
7
43

Q13d Importance - the range of activities available.
Very important
154 ( 43.8% )
Fairly important
151 ( 42.9% )
Neither important nor unimportant
33 ( 9.4% )
Fairly unimportant
10 ( 2.8% )
Very unimportant
4 ( 1.1% )
Missing/Not applicable
20
Q13e Importance - quality of flooring in sports hall.
Very important
106 ( 52.5% )
Fairly important
80 ( 39.6% )
Neither important nor unimportant
15 ( 7.4% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.5% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
170
Q13f Importance - quality of lighting in sports hall.
Very important
101 ( 50.0% )
Fairly important
84 ( 41.6% )
Neither important nor unimportant
16 ( 7.9% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.5% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
170
44

Q13g Importance - quality of equipment.
Very important
166 ( 57.6% )
Fairly important
104 ( 36.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
17 ( 5.9% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
84
Q13h Importance - water quality in pool.
Very important
123 ( 78.8% )
Fairly important
27 ( 17.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
6 ( 3.8% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
216
Q13i Importance - water temperature in pool.
Very important
106 ( 67.1% )
Fairly important
39 ( 24.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
13 ( 8.2% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
214
45

Q13j Importance - number of people in pool.
Very important
89 ( 56.3% )
Fairly important
55 ( 34.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
13 ( 8.2% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.6% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
214
Q13k Importance - quality of car parking on site.
Very important
136 ( 39.2% )
Fairly important
159 ( 45.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
44 ( 12.7% )
Fairly unimportant
8 ( 2.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
25
Q13l Importance - quality of food/drink.
Very important
109 ( 39.2% )
Fairly important
111 ( 39.9% )
Neither important nor unimportant
52 ( 18.7% )
Fairly unimportant
4 ( 1.4% )
Very unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Missing/Not applicable
94
46

Q13m Importance - cleanliness of changing area.
Very important
260 ( 72.8% )
Fairly important
78 ( 21.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
18 ( 5.0% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
15
Q13n Importance - cleanliness of activity spaces.
Very important
248 ( 68.9% )
Fairly important
87 ( 24.2% )
Neither important nor unimportant
24 ( 6.7% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
12
Q13o Importance - helpfulness of reception staff.
Very important
210 ( 56.8% )
Fairly important
127 ( 34.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
33 ( 8.9% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
2
47

Q13p Importance - helpfulness of other staff.
Very important
212 ( 57.3% )
Fairly important
130 ( 35.1% )
Neither important nor unimportant
28 ( 7.6% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
2
Q13q Importance - standard of coaching/instruction
Very important
215 ( 67.8% )
Fairly important
74 ( 23.3% )
Neither important nor unimportant
28 ( 8.8% )
Fairly unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Very unimportant
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
55
Q13r Importance - value for money of activities.
Very important
247 ( 67.3% )
Fairly important
98 ( 26.7% )
Neither important nor unimportant
20 ( 5.4% )
Fairly unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Very unimportant
1 ( 0.3% )
Missing/Not applicable
5
48

Q13s Importance - value for money of food/drink.
Very important
144 ( 49.3% )
Fairly important
93 ( 31.8% )
Neither important nor unimportant
50 ( 17.1% )
Fairly unimportant
2 ( 0.7% )
Very unimportant
3 ( 1.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
80
Q14 Gender.
Male
157 ( 42.2% )
Female
215 ( 57.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q15 Ethnic origin of respondent.
White
337 ( 90.6% )
Mixed
18 ( 4.8% )
Asian or Asian British
7 ( 1.9% )
Black or Black British
7 ( 1.9% )
Chinese or other ethnic group
3 ( 0.8% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
49

Q16 Long term illness, health problem or disability.
Yes
15 ( 4.0% )
No
357 ( 96.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q17 Age.
11 to 19
38 ( 10.2% )
20 to 59
301 ( 80.9% )
60 plus
33 ( 8.9% )
Missing/Not applicable
0
Q18 Current employment status.
Working full-time (30+ hrs)
184 ( 50.3% )
Working part-time (less than 30 hrs)
60 ( 16.4% )
On government work training programme
0 ( 0.0% )
Housewife/ husband/ full-time in the home
17 ( 4.6% )
Retired - company / personal pension
15 ( 4.1% )
Retired - state pension only
11 ( 3.0% )
Temporarily unable to work
2 ( 0.5% )
Permanently unable to work
4 ( 1.1% )
Unemployed - more than 6 months
6 ( 1.6% )
Unemployed - less than 6 months
8 ( 2.2% )
In full-time education (school)
9 ( 2.5% )
Full-time student (college/university)
44 ( 12.0% )
Never worked
5 ( 1.4% )
None of these
1 ( 0.3% )
Refused to say
0 ( 0.0% )
Missing/Not applicable
6
50

Socio-economic group.
1 & 2
97 ( 32.1% )
3
90 ( 29.8% )
4
13 ( 4.3% )
5
26 ( 8.6% )
6 & 7
76 ( 25.2% )
Missing/Not applicable
70
Q23 Postcode.
first part
number of
cumulative
of postcode
questionnaires
percent
B64
81
( 21.8% )
21.8
B63
61
( 16.4% )
38.3
B62
54
( 14.6% )
52.8
B65
38
( 10.2% )
63.1
DY2
35
( 9.4% )
72.5
DY1
18
( 4.9% )
77.4
B66
12
( 3.2% )
80.6
DY5
12
( 3.2% )
83.8
DY3
11
( 3.0% )
86.8
B69
7
( 1.9% )
88.7
B32
6
( 1.6% )
90.3
B68
6
( 1.6% )
91.9
DY8
4
( 1.1% )
93.0
DY9
4
( 1.1% )
94.1
DY11
3
( 0.8% )
94.9
DY10
2
( 0.5% )
95.4
DY6
2
( 0.5% )
96.0
865
1
( 0.3% )
96.2
B45
1
( 0.3% )
96.5
B60
1
( 0.3% )
96.8
B645
1
( 0.3% )
97.0
B71
1
( 0.3% )
97.3
B76
1
( 0.3% )
97.6
BA2
1
( 0.3% )
97.8
BY5
1
( 0.3% )
98.1
CV5
1
( 0.3% )
98.4
51

DV1
1
( 0.3% )
98.7
DY4
1
( 0.3% )
98.9
LN3
1
( 0.3% )
99.2
S43
1
( 0.3% )
99.5
WB4
1
( 0.3% )
99.7
WV7
1
( 0.3% )
100.0
Missing/Not applicable
1
52

Document Outline

Final Report - Haden Hill1109 Report v10
- Haden Hill1109 Report v10
- HadenHill1109 bar chart report
- HadenHill1109 satisfaction report
- HadenHill1109 industry means report
- 3 APPENDIX 1
- HadenHill1109 frequencies report
Haden Hill0001