Executive Summary

Research objectives

The Canadian Forces Housing Agency (CFHA), an agency within the Department of National Defence (DND), has been the operator and maintainer of the DND portfolio of housing since its creation in 1996. This portfolio is comprised of roughly 12,500 units, which are available to Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) members in 27 different locations throughout Canada.

CFHA’s Customer Service Program is responsible for the overall management and continuous improvement of services provided to occupants of DND housing at CAF Bases and Wings across Canada. To meet this obligation, the Customer Service Program must have a clear understanding of their customers’ needs and whether those needs are being met. Feedback and input from CFHA customers is therefore, collected on a regular basis, through the administration of the CAF Occupant Survey previously conducted in 2005, 2014 and 2017. The Customer Service Program has identified the need to have the Occupant Survey re-administered in order to collect current customer feedback.

The objective of this research is to measure satisfaction with CFHA services through both telephone and online surveys. By re-administering the Occupant Survey in 2020, key performance indicators will be evaluated over time. In addition, the 2020 survey will include some updated items, and will include an online phase of research with an aim to testing the possibility of transitioning this research to an online platform in future years.

The findings from the research will be used by CFHA to:

· Assess CFHA customer satisfaction with services provided;

· Track key indicators of the Customer Service Program’s performance since 2014;

· Identify areas for improvement in CFHA customer service; and

· Report on departmental performance.

Methodology

The research consisted of a telephone survey and an online survey conducted with occupants^{^[1]} of DND housing. The phone survey was conducted with 2,002 occupants during the period January 15 to February 23, 2020. The online survey was conducted with a total of 726 occupants during the period January 17 to February 17, 2020. A master sample list of all CFHA occupants in Canada was randomly split into two (one for each survey type) and stratified to ensure representation across the 27 base locations within each survey to ensure each occupant can participate in only one or the other. A more detailed description of the methodology used to conduct this study is presented at the back of this report (Appendix A), along with a copy of the questionnaire (Appendix B).

The cost of this research was $129,406.47 (HST included).

Key findings

CFHA’s on-going efforts to improve its housing stock, address maintenance and repair issues and expand its communications with occupants continue to reap rewards. Occupants’ satisfaction with their housing, as well as their views about CFHA’s services and communications, have improved since 2017 (in many cases continuing an upwards trend dating back to 2014).

The factors that affect satisfaction with CFHA services remain consistent with previous waves, and include being satisfied with condition of their home, positive experiences with repairs and renovations, and feeling well-informed about housing-related issues. Thus, there is no evidence that a significant strategic shift is needed. Further progress in occupant perceptions is likely to come from continued improvements in the same areas (although incremental growth in positive perceptions may become increasingly difficult to achieve and may “top out” at a certain point).

The following summarizes the key findings of the 2020 research:

Experience and satisfaction with DND housing

· There continues to be widespread satisfaction with DND housing (85% of occupants are at least somewhat satisfied with their current accommodation), and the proportion who are most satisfied has continued to increase (up 5 points from 2017 and up 12 points from 2014). Occupants who are satisfied with their current home attribute this to the property itself (e.g., it is well-maintained, large enough, modern/renovated), with a greater proportion than before mentioning its affordability. Dissatisfaction continues to stem primarily from the poor condition of the home, although mentions of poor-quality renovations, maintenance problems or properties that need upgrading have all declined since 2017.

· Satisfaction with several housing attributes have improved since 2017, including affordability (55% are very satisfied, up 10 points form 2017), housing condition (37%, up 9) and energy efficiency (26%, up 7). A gap analysis indicates that housing condition and energy efficiency nonetheless remain priority areas for improvement (i.e., housing attributes that are of relative importance to occupants, but with which they are least satisfied). Previously affordability of rent also fell into this category, but relatively speaking is no longer as high a priority due to the noted improvement in satisfaction.

· Secondary priorities for improvement (i.e., weaker satisfaction than ideal, but of importance to a smaller number of occupants) continue to include privacy and size/space. As in the past, most occupants remain reasonably satisfied with location-related attributes, such as proximity to base, access to local amenities and quality of the neighbourhood, as well as home safety and security.

· Affordability continues to be the main reason given (without prompting) for choosing their current home, and this continues to increase steadily over time. More than six in ten have previous experience with non-DND housing (essentially unchanged from previous surveys) and a similar number considered buying or renting in the community before deciding to move into their current DND housing.

· Most occupants remain open to recommending DND housing to another CAF member, and the proportion most likely to do so (51% very likely) has increased since 2017 (up 10 points).

Experience and satisfaction with CFHA services

· Ratings of CFHA service have continued to steadily improve. More than six in ten occupants now rate CFHA service as excellent or good (an increase of 3 points from 2017, and 11 points since 2014), and a further quarter say it is acceptable. Only 12 percent (down 3 points) say service is poor or very poor.

· Both likes and dislikes of CFHA service continue to reveal three key themes in what matters to occupants: timeliness of response, quality of repairs and staff attitude. Occupant ratings of CFHA service in these three areas continue to improve over time, including for being friendly and courteous (50% give a rating of ‘excellent’, up 6 points from 2017), responding promptly (41%, up 7), being caring and empathetic (33%, up 8) and carrying out maintenance or repairs (33%, up 5). Nonetheless, there remains room for improvement on these issues for those occupants who are less than fully satisfied with CFHA service.

· One-quarter of occupants have undergone major renovations to their home in the past year and more than half have experienced minor repairs, levels which are consistent with 2017. As in the past, occupants’ overall satisfaction with CFHA service is linked to this experience. Since 2017, strong satisfaction with the quality and speed of both renovations and repairs, and with the promptness of the contractor, has continued to trend upwards, which has likely contributed to the continued improvement in overall satisfaction with CFHA service.

· Essentially unchanged from previous years, almost all occupants are aware of, and about half have used, the after-hours emergency service. Moreover, users remain largely satisfied with call centre staff and with the contractors’ services.

· Six in ten occupants are familiar with how to report complaints or concerns about the housing service, which has continued to increase over time (up 2 points from 2017 and 14 points since 2017). Consistent with previous years, three percent of occupants have used the process; among this group, there has been an increase in strong satisfaction with how the complaint was handled.

CFHA communications

· Seven in ten occupants recall some type of communication from CFHA in the past year (up from six in ten in 2017). Compared to previous years, these are much more likely to be remembered as an email rather than a printed format. Occupants clearly prefer email or some other type of digital distribution for both critical and general information; notably, an increasing minority prefer text notifications for critical news about emergency or urgent issues (39%, up from 27% in 2017).

· Ratings of CFHA’s communications efforts have continued to improve. Six in ten occupants now say that CFHA service is excellent or good (an increase of 6 points since 2017), and a further quarter say it is acceptable. Only 10 percent (down 4 points) say communications is poor or very poor. As before, occupants who give CFHA positive ratings for its communications are also more apt to be satisfied with CFHA services overall.

· As in 2017, spouses (who are disproportionately female) continue to be less likely than CAF members to recall receiving CFHA communications (a 14-point gap). While both groups are similarly positive about CFHA efforts in this area, it is likely worthwhile to continue trying to address this gap, especially in cases where CAF members travel, leaving spouses to handle housing issues.

· Use of the CFHA website has softened over time, to half of occupants. Such visits remain more common among those who have recently moved into their accommodation and to be driven by the need for housing information for an upcoming posting. One in ten occupants are aware of CFHA’s Twitter feed.

· Compared to 2017, occupants express greater interest (without prompting) for advance notice of work on their unit and other information specific to their home. Notably, online respondents also select rent increases (from a list of potential information types) as a top priority for information.

· There is relatively strong interest in using an online portal to access CFHA services or share contact or absence information (half or more are very likely to use these if a portal was available).

· Three-quarters are familiar with the Occupant Handbook, an improvement since 2017 (75%). but only a small minority (16%) are very familiar. Familiarity continues to be higher among those who have recently moved into their home.

Quality of life

· Belief that their current housing contributes to their overall satisfaction with life in the CAF has continued to grow, and is now the view of almost half of occupants (45%, up 6 points since 2017 and 18 points since 2014). A similar proportion (42%) say it makes no difference; the small group who say housing detracts from their quality of life has further declined (12%, down 3 points).

· Two-thirds of occupants are married or common-law and half have children at home. For those with other family members in the home, family well-being remains an important part of the decision to live in DND housing, on par with 2017.

· As before, virtually all occupants continue to say that the distances between home and regular destinations like work, their child’s school or daycare, recreation and shopping are reasonable.

Modal differences

An important part of the 2020 research was conducting a parallel online survey as the first step in transitioning from a telephone to a fully online methodology in the future. Online surveys are more cost and time efficient than telephone surveys, particularly for this occupant audience that already has a relationship with CFHA.

However, the data show evidence of modal differences[2], which fall into two main categories:

· In some cases, the modal differences are due to how questions were asked and answered, although substantial efforts were made to maintain consistency between the two surveys. For instance, some “open-ended” questions in the phone survey were changed to a prompted list in the online survey, to reduce the substantive costs associated with coding open-ended data. This list format, where respondents can select more than one answer, results in higher proportions across the board for all responses. In addition, when online respondents are asked to type in their responses to an open-ended question in their own words, they typically provide less detail (where a phone interviewer would probe for clarification) or are more likely to skip the question altogether.

· Another factor in the differences between the online and phone findings is the effect of social desirability bias. Research literature has consistently demonstrated that interview-based surveys (e.g., telephone) tend to elicit more socially-desirable responses (i.e., responses that will be viewed favourably by others), in comparison to self-administered surveys (e.g., online) since the latter does not involve direct contact with another individual. In the current study, phone respondents tend to provide higher satisfaction scores (reflecting the “socially desirable” response), while online respondents tend to express less satisfaction. Ultimately, the differences is one of degree rather than completely distinct opinions, and it may be that the online data more accurately represent occupants’ true opinions.

Overall, the modal differences are not substantial enough to change the conclusions drawn based on the findings. The online results will serve as a valid and reliable new baseline against which to compare future survey results if CFHA chooses a fully online methodology going forward.

Political neutrality statement and contact information

I hereby certify as a Representative of Environics Research that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, and standings with the electorate or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

Sarah Roberton

Senior Associate, Public Affairs

Environics Research Group

sarah.roberton@environics.ca

(613) 699-6884

Supplier name: Environics Research Group

PWGSC contract number: W857A-190002/001/CY

Contract award date: 2019-07-16

For more information, contact DND at por-rop@forces.gc.ca

[1] For the purpose of this survey, “occupant” includes both CAF members and spouses.

[2] The profile of phone and online respondents are largely similar by key characteristics such as gender, language, age and income meaning that disparities are the result of modal differences rather than differences in sample composition.