Customer satisfaction survey (CSS) on the LLDA's [Laguna [Philippines] Lake Development Authorities'] overall performance

This report explains the findings of the satisfaction study conducted to determine the perception of the level of satisfaction of stakeholders of the LLDA's [Laguna [Philippines] Lake Development Authority] programs and project implemented in the Laguna de Bay (LDB) region. Specifically, it aimed to: 1. determine the level of stakeholders awareness of the LLDA's mandate vision, mission and objectives; 2. identify issues and concerns about the lake that confront the stakeholders and recommend measures that shall address gaps in the perception and satisfaction of the respondents on the service quality given by the LLDA; 3. identify the programs, projects and activities wherein stakeholders relate with the LLDA; 4. identify specific collaborative approaches/strategies/mechanisms among the stakeholders that would pursue or intensify institutional relationship; and 5. to analyze the factors associated with the overall rating of the respondents. In this study, satisfaction refers to the act of fulfilling the needs and managing expectations of the stakeholders in relation to their mission and mandate of (Market and Opinion Research Institute, 2004). Based on the said research, there are several key drivers that affect the satisfaction of stakeholders and costumers to the service provided by company institution. In this study, four drivers were considered. These are: 1. delivery and quality of services; 2. staff attitude and professionalism; 3. transparency to stakeholders; and 4. office operations and environment guidelines. To measure the stakeholders' satisfaction for driver, several statements were rated by the respondents/key informants (KIs). The samples was derived from the population of 35,930 stakeholders of the LLDA. These stakeholders were categorized into five such as: industries, fisheries and aquatics resources management councils (FARMCs),fishpen/cage operators, local government units (LGUs), non-government organizations (NGOs) and people's organizations (POs). With only a few number of individuals to be interviewed in the national government agencies (NGAs) and the academe, complete enumeration was used. Stratified random sampling was used to determine the samples for the remaining five categories. From the population, a sample of 290 was derived. With the LLDA setting the sample size of 300, the research group decided to add 26 more respondents from various categories of stakeholders to make sample size more representatives of the stakeholders. A Likert-scale was used to measure the ratings of the respondents/KIs for each statement. Results showed that based on the four drivers of satisfaction, the 2015 overall performance of the LLDA is 'Very Good' (4). Only the academe gave them a rating of 'Good' (3). All other stakeholders rated them 'Very Good' (4). This result is consistent with the respondents' perceived overall performance of the LLDA in 2015. The respondents rated them 'Very Satisfactory' (4). This time, only the FARMCS gave them a rating of 'Neutral' (3). All other stakeholders rated the LLDA as 'Good' and 'Neutral', it is important to look closely why such as rating was given. For the awareness, most (88%) of them are aware to the mandate, vision, mission and objectives (MVMO) of the LLDA. As to their awareness level, they claimed to be 'Moderately Aware' (4). For the issues and concerns about the lake that confront the stakeholders, the following issues were identified: 1. process of accreditation/permitting takes time; 2. communication lapses; 3.inspection and monitoring related problems, 4. environmental/enforcement concerns; 5. service delivery concerns; 6. accessibility of the LLDA office of the stakeholders; 7. honoring agreements with institutional partners; 8. tedious requirements on the LLDA's projects; and livelihood concerns, they suggested the following: 1. improve communication advocacy; 2. be where the actors are; 3. improve service delivery on community development obligations; 4. increase human resources of the LLDA for monitoring and enforcement and partnership buildings; 5. appropriate and prompt response to stakeholder concerns; 6. moratorium of fees after disasters and calamities; and 7. enforce environmental laws. The respondents also identified the programs, projects, and activities that they were involved. Finally, to enhance the LLDA's institutional collaboration among their stakeholder's some approaches were determined. In terms of determining the factors associated with overall rating of the LLDA, Spearman Rank Order Correlation Analysis was done for each stakeholder. While the LLDA stakeholders rated them 'Very Good' (4) and 'Satisfactory' (4) in their 2015 overall performance, it is important that the LLDA should sustain and probably enhance their performance to maintain or even get a higher rating in the future. Beyond the 'Very Good' and 'Satisfactory' ratings, they need to address the issues and concerns that were identified by the stakeholders. It is also important to determine why some stakeholders, like the FARMCs and the academe gave them 'Neutral' and 'Good' ratings. These stakeholders, like the other stakeholders, are equally important partners in the LLDA's quest to become not only on a regulatory agency but a role model of environmental governance in the future.