Prepared by Lake Market Research and Kent County Council

Kent County Council • Budget Consultation • Final Report • Prepared by Lake Market Research and Kent County Council • This report complies with ISO:20252 standards and other relevant forms of conduct • 1

Contents • Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 • Research Background………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4 • Response to Online Budgeting Tool – Representative sample of Kent residents.………………………………7 • Budgeting tool – an explanation………………………………………………………………………………………………………13 • Budgeting Tool – demographic differences………………………………………………………………………………………17 • Response to Online Budgeting Tool – Kent.gov completion……………………………..…..……………………......26 • Voting Results From Resident Deliberative Sessions………………………………………………………………………..39 • Summary of Resident Deliberative Sessions ……………………………………………………………………………………45 • Residents - Council Tax…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….55 • Residents views on areas of expenditure………………………………………………………………………………………….63 • Staff Voting Questions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..78 • Summary of Staff Deliberative Session ……………………………………………………………………………….……………84 • Staff - Council Tax …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….92 • Staff views on areas of expenditure …………………………………………………………………………………………………98 • Summary Comparison of Staff & Residents Views …………………………………………………………………………… 103 • Summary Conclusions ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………107 • Resident & Staff Conclusions & Recommendations …………………………………………………………………………..108 • Resident & Staff Suggestions for Reducing Costs / Increasing Revenue………………………………………........109 • 2

Executive Summary • Residents and staff recognised the need to make savings in response to the financial climate. • To obtain greater understanding of the need to make cuts KCC need to improve communication about the financial challenge and promote how KCC spends public money both now and in the future. Improved communication should lead to improved engagement. • Ideally, KCC should explicitly say which services will be protected as a result of 1.99% increase, as residents expressed strong desire to know where the money is spent. However, it is recognised that current funding arrangements do not make this possible. • Much support existed for increasing Council Tax up to 2% and a minority would pay more. There was no evidence that a referendum would be successful. • In the quantitative budget tool exercise, the top 5 areas ranked as the most important: • 100 miles of road gritted in bad weather over the course of the winter • 2 ½ weeks of residential care for 1 older person whose needs are judged substantial or critical • 69 hours of home care for an older person whose needs are judged moderate or substantial • 2 weeks of foster care for a child who cannot live safely at home, provided by a KCC registered foster carer • 1 week of foster care for one child who cannot live safely at home • Those involved in the research welcomed the opportunity and placed a high value on consultation before decisions are made. Where possible future decisions should reflect what people have said and this should be publicised. • Lots of good ideas about where savings can be made and income generated. These all fit within the main themes of prioritising spend to the most vulnerable, raising income, helping people and communities to do more for themselves and transforming services to deliver same/better outcomes at lower costs within existing strategies. • In the qualitative residents sessions, the proportion of people that would pay more council tax was 14% at the start of the session, rising to 74% at the end of the session, with 83% of people being willing to pay council tax over a 1.5% increase. • When asking residents which approaches they would choose to deliver savings, many chose a variety of approaches rather than one in particular suggesting that the solution will be a combination of different approaches, with transformations and efficiency savings being the most selected. • 3

Key Points for KCC Consideration • KCC need to promote their activities, the need for saving and their efforts to do so. KCC cannot assume that the general public are aware – they need to be told. • People responded strongly with views about where savings and improvements can be made where it was reflective of their own circumstances. This possibly makes information targeting easier. • Residents wanted a communication unit so people know what KCC provides and that way people will know who is accountable for certain things” • There was a level of concern across many of the groups (across ages) about the lack of youth services and also a corresponding increase in anti social behaviour – many felt that the lack of provision of activities for youths certainly adds to the ongoing issue of anti social behaviour. Both staff and residents felt KCC needed to do more in the area of Youth Services. • People seemed amenable to paying more council tax - Questions for a future survey could test if people are willing to pay extra, the how much exactly would people pay? • One of the key challenges is for KCC to promote the amount spent on all of the aspects of spend for the council. Not through putting it on the website, but perhaps in an information campaign to raise awareness – the question remains though – what real difference will being aware of the amount of spend do? This is an area to perhaps test further in future surveys. • KCC could look at making families pay for school transport if they have voluntarily left the area where their child goes to school. • KCC need to be aware that users of Libraries see these as a lifeline – more work needs to be done to identify savings and investigate areas where savings can be made – example staff felt that the opening hours could be improved and made more efficient. • Staff believed strongly that they would identify real areas of savings for KCC (and there were many examples provided). Perhaps KCC could look at utilising ways to collecting and collating these ideas to identify real savings that staff have come up with themselves – such as shared administration pools and alternative opening hours for libraries. • 4

Kent County Council consults with residents annually on its Budget arrangementsin order to gain an insight into informed public opinion on the direction of travel for the next 2-3 years. The campaign for this year’s Budget Consultation aimed to raise public awareness on how the Council is facing the challenge of sustained cuts by undertaking a whole-council transformation. The Consultation consisted of: • Research Background • 3 Budget Challenge ‘quick questions’ featured on the Kent.gov website • An online budgeting tool completed by a representative sample of Kent residents • 3 half day deliberative sessions with Kent residents • An online budgeting tool featured on the Kent.gov website • A half day deliberative session with Kent County Council staff • Other events organised by KCC • Areas highlighted in Red were carried out by KCC and areas highlighted in Blue were carried out by Lake Market Research.

Each component of the Consultation was conducted with varying objectives in mind. Comparisons in terms of statistics and open feedback should consider the following: • A note on comparing Consultation components • 3 half day deliberative sessions with Kent residents • - Provide an overview of opinion and test the softer issues • Residents were recruited at random and the majority were unaware of the budget challenge KCC were facing at the beginning of the deliberative sessions • By the end of the sessions, most had an understanding for the ‘tough decisions’ faced and the need to make significant savings • Suggestions put forward at the end of the session and the second voting exercise reflects this increased awareness • An online budgeting tool completed by a representative sample of Kent residents • - Residents were recruited at random and were not provided with any context with regard to savings and the budget challenge KCC are facing • - Completed the budget tool and supporting questions online with no context provided by KCC or Lake Market Research • Residents gave feedback based on their own circumstances and knowledge. Feedback represents a true, unbiased view of perceptions • An online budgeting tool on the Kent.gov website • - Residents completing were exposed to significant contextual information with regard to savings and the budget challenge, as the online link was featured surrounding this information • - The Kent.gov sample is likely to contain Kent County Council staff completions (who have an informed view of the challenge) • - These factors have had an influence on the awareness of the need to make savings and residents propensity to agree Council Tax being increased

Response to online budgeting tool • - Representative sample of Kent residents • 7

Methodology – Telephone recruited sample of Kent residents • Residents’ landline numbers were selected via random digit sampling and residents were invited to take part by our telephone interviewing team through: • Completion of the online budgeting tool • Attendance at a face to face deliberative session • Focusing on the online budgeting tool specifically: • Recruitment was conducted in line with 2011 Census statistics in terms of gender, age and social class to ensure a representative sample completed the tool. • Residents were sent an email containing a link to the budgeting tool to complete. • 514 Kent residents in total completed the tool. • Minimal weights have been applied in terms of age and gender to ensure exact representation with Census 2011 statistics. • Residents were asked 8 supplementary questions surrounding the budget tool to gauge overall opinions on savings. • 8

A response profile representative of the Kent population aged 16 and over….. • 9

Three quarters are aware of the need to make major budget savings. Just under half consider previous savings to have had a negative impact on their household. • How aware or not are you that local councils are having to make major budget savings that will impact on current services? • Thinking about the savings KCC has made over the last 4 years, what impact have they had on you and your household? • TOTAL AWARE 74% • TOTAL NOT AWARE 26% • TOTAL POSITIVE 7% • TOTAL NEGATIVE 47% • 10 • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514)

AGE • GENDER • Awareness of the need to make major budget savings increases with age, with a significantly lower proportion of 16-34 year olds aware. • How aware or not are you that local councils are having to make major budget savings that will impact on current services? • TOTAL AWARE 74% • TOTAL NOT AWARE 26% • % AWARE • 16-34: 58% • 35-44: 75% • 45-54: 78% • 55-64: 79% • 65+: 89% • Male: 78% • Female: 70% • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • 11

AGE • GENDER • A significantly higher proportion of residents aged 45-54 and residents with a disability have felt the impact of previous savings made. • Thinking about the savings KCC has made over the last 4 years, what impact have they had on you and your household? • TOTAL POSITIVE 7% • TOTAL NEGATIVE 47% • % NEGATIVE • 16-34: 41% • 35-44: 45% • 45-54: 57% • 55-64: 48% • 65+: 47% • Male: 46% • Female: 48% • Disabled: 66% • Not disabled: 45% • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • 12

Budgeting tool – A brief explanation • 22 Kent County Council services ‘worth £1,000 in council spending’ were devised by Kent County Council to construct the tool • Residents were shown a brief preamble detailing the budget challenge facing Kent County Council and an explanation of the exercise they were about to complete. • Residents were each shown 17 screens containing a pre-programmed list of 4 sequences so all 22 services were tested against each other. • On each screen, residents were asked to select the service that was most and least important to them.

The budgeting tool is an antidote to standard ‘rating’ or ‘importance’ scales. Respondents find these scales very easy but they do tend to deliver results which indicate that everything is "quite important”. Thereby making any data collected with regard to budget challenges or savings not especially actionable. The budgeting tool on the other hand forces respondents to make choices between options, while still delivering rankings showing the relative importance of the items being rated. It is simple to understand and as respondents make choices rather than expressing strength of preference using some numeric scale, there is no opportunity for scale use bias. • Budgeting tool – A visual guide • We would like your views on what services the Council should do its best to maintain. You will now see a series of screens that list key services detailing what £1,000 of council spending buys. On each screen, we would like you to select which of the services are most and least important to you, considering also what the costs are to deliver these. You will see each service appear 3 or 4 times to enable comparisons to be made.

Roads and social care dominate the services considered ‘most important’. • SERVICES TESTED UNDER ‘SOCIAL CARE’ • 15

In comparison, the majority of the ‘education & young people’ transport services are considered least important, together with libraries & the Contact Centre. • SERVICES TESTED UNDER ‘EDUCATION & YOUNG PEOPLE’ • 16

Whilst there is significant consistency across the age groups sampled, preferences vary in degree according to the most ‘relevant’ services. • Base: All answering (Aged 44 & under – 151, aged 45-54 – 126, aged 55+ - 229) • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • 17 • 17

As perhaps expected, preferences for the care services are more prominent amongst residents with a disability. • Base: All answering (Residents with a disability – 51, Residents who do not have a disability - 453) • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • 18 • 18

Budgeting tool – supplementary questions summary • In response to the six statements posed after the budgeting tool: • Just over a third believe Council Tax should be increased to maintain existing services. • Agreement with a Council Tax increase is highest amongst residents aged 65+. Half of 16-34 year old residents disagree that it should be increased to maintain services. • Over half believe charges should be introduced to currently free/ subsidised services. • Half believe that KCC should reduce or stop delivering some services to protect other services. • The vast majority agree that KCC need to encourage residents to take some responsibility in delivering services. • The vast majority believe KCC should help people to help themselves more and prioritise future spending to those in most need. • There is a stark difference in opinion between those aware and unaware of the need for major budget savings; highlighting the need to educate those currently unaware. • Please note that the representative sample of residents were not provided with any prior context with regard to the need to make savings or the budget challenge that KCC are facing. Residents gave feedback based on their own circumstances and knowledge and feedback represents a true, unbiased view of perceptions. • 19

Just over a third believe Council Tax should be increased to maintain existing services. Over half believe charges should be introduced to currently free/ subsidised services. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should…? • A significantly higher proportion of residents aware of the major budget savings required by local councils agree that Council Tax should be increased and services which are currently free/subsidised should be charged for. • 20 • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514)

The majority agree that KCC need to encourage residents to take some responsibility in delivering services and prioritise future spending to those in most need. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should..? • A significantly higher proportion of residents aware of the major budget savings required by local councils agree to helping people to help themselves more so they have less reliance on publicly funded services. • 21 • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514)

Consistent with deliberative session feedback, agreement with a Council Tax increase is lowest amongst residents aged 16-34 year old (likely connected to limited experiences of the services compared to older age groups). • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should…..? • Increase Council Tax to maintain existing services • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • 22

A significantly higher proportion of male residents believe Council Tax should be increased and KCC should reduce or stop delivering some services to protect others. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should..? • % AGREE • Increase Council Tax to maintain existing services • Introduce charges for some services which are currently free/subsidised • Reduce or stop delivering some services to protect other services • Encourage local people & communities to deliver certain services • Help people to help themselves more so they have less reliance on publicly funded services • Prioritise spending to protect services for the most vulnerable & those without • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • 23

Perhaps unsurprisingly, a significantly higher proportion of disabled residents believe KCC should prioritise those in most need and are less agreeable to a Tax increase. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should..? • % AGREE • Increase Council Tax to maintain existing services • Introduce charges for some services which are currently free/subsidised • Reduce or stop delivering some services to protect other services • Encourage local people & communities to deliver certain services • Help people to help themselves more so they have less reliance on publicly funded services • Prioritise spending to protect services for the most vulnerable & those without • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample at 95% confidence level • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • 24

There is a stark difference in opinion between those aware and unaware of the need for major budget savings; highlighting the need to educate those currently unaware. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should..? • % AGREE • Increase Council Tax to maintain existing services • Introduce charges for some services which are currently free/subsidised • Reduce or stop delivering some services to protect other services • Encourage local people & communities to deliver certain services • Help people to help themselves more so they have less reliance on publicly funded services • Prioritise spending to protect services for the most vulnerable & those without Consistent with deliberative session feedback, increased awareness of the ‘budget challenge’ leads to a higher propensity to look into and suggest savings options • Base: All answering (unweighted – 514) • Significantly HIGHER than rest of sample • Significantly LOWER than rest of sample • 25

Response to online budgeting tool • - Kent.gov website completions • 26

Methodology – Kent.gov website completions • From 9th October to 28th November, a Budget Consultation section was featured on the Kent.gov website: • A link to the budgeting tool was featured on the Kent.gov website in the context of the ‘Budget Challenge’ faced and the detail of proposed budget savings to be made. • 853 residents completed the budgeting tool via the Kent.gov website in total. • Cautionary notes: • Multiple completions are possible • It is likely that a number of Kent County Council staff completed the tool; the exact number is unknown. • This is not to devalue the results but merely to put them in context. • Press launch at beginning of Consultation • Banner on homepage on kent.gov.uk • Information published on KCC intranet • Information published via KCC Twitter • Promotion via district councils (Thanet, Maidstone, Tonbridge and Malling) • KCC Community Engagement team Facebook page and Twitter • Emails sent to voluntary and community sector organisations via the Community Engagement team • Print advertising in the Dartford and Swanley Newshopper, Kent on Sunday • Online advertising in the KM (Kent Online), Kent On Sunday, and the Dartford and Swanley Newshopper • Facebook adverts • 27

There is a marked difference in the age profile of the Kent.gov response samplecompared to representative sample of residents recruited. • Marked differences in age, likely reflects the proportion of KCC staff taking part • (In future consultations we would recommend distinguishing between resident and staff participation • 28

In addition, contextualising the budgeting tool within the details of the current Budget Challenge has led to a much higher awareness of the savings required. • How aware or not are you that local councils are having to make major budget savings that will impact on current services? • Significantly HIGHER than representative sample at 95% confidence level • 29 • Base: Representative sample of Kent residents (514), Kent.gov completions (514)

Broadly consistent perceptions of the impact of savings observed so far across both sample groups; highlighting that both sample group are not skewed to a particular demographic group. • Thinking about the savings KCC has made over the last 4 years, what impact have they had on you and your household? • 30 • Base: Representative sample of Kent residents (514), Kent.gov completions (514)

In terms of the budgeting tool, results are broadly consistent with the representative resident sample with roads and social care dominating in importance. • ITEMS TESTED UNDER ‘SOCIAL CARE’ • 31

The areas considered least important are also broadly consistent across the two samples - ‘education & young people’ transport services, together with libraries. • ITEMS TESTED UNDER ‘EDUCATION & YOUNG PEOPLE’ • 32

An overall ranking summary emphasises the consistency between the two sample groups - key service priorities are broadly consistent. • ITEMS TESTED UNDER ‘SOCIAL CARE’ • 33

An overall ranking summary emphasises the consistency between the two sample groups - those comparatively least important are broadly consistent. • ITEMS TESTED UNDER ‘EDUCATION & YOUNG PEOPLE’ • 34

There is broad agreement on the direction of KCC amongst both sample groups. However, a significantly higher proportion of the Kent.gov sample agreed to increasing Council Tax and introducing charges. • Bearing in mind that council budgets have been significantly reduced over recent years, please state for each of the following how strongly you agree or disagree that KCC should…? • Significantly HIGHER than representative sample at 95% confidence level • 35 • Base: Representative sample of Kent residents (514), Kent.gov completions (514)

Budgeting tool – sample groups summary • The online budgeting tool was completed by a representative sample of Kent residents as well as a sample of residents who completed the survey via the Kent.gov website. • A consistent response to the budget priorities was received amongst both sample groups; highlighting the accuracy of these results. • However, it should be noted that: • The Kent.gov sample is likely to contain Kent County Council staff completions • Residents completing the survey were exposed to significant contextual information with regard to the need for savings to be made and the budget challenge • We believe that these two factors have had an influence on the awareness of the need to make savings as well as response to a proposed Council Tax increase & charge introduction • We therefore recommend the use of the representative sample results for projecting the view of Kent residents as a whole • This is not to devalue the results from the Kent.gov website but merely to put them in context. • 36

Resident Deliberative Sessions • 37

Methodology & Profile – Resident deliberative sessions • As mentioned previously, residents’ landline numbers were selected at random and residents were invited to take part in the Consultation by our telephone interviewing team through: • Completion of the online budgeting tool • Attendance at a deliberative session • Recruitment of the resident sessions • All who expressed an interest in attending a deliberative session were given a follow up call with the dates and times selected for the sessions and invited to take part • Residents were recruited according to gender and age profiles to ensure a good spread of residents attended each session • Location of the resident sessions • Three venues were chosen to hold the deliberative sessions – 1 in Mid Kent (Maidstone), 1 in West Kent (Tonbridge) and 1 in East Kent (Canterbury) • Venues were selected on the basis of geographical spread, parking facilities, public transport access and value for money • Those attending the resident deliberative sessions were from a mixed demographic profile to ensure a good spread of residents attended each session: • Residents attended from across Kent: Ashford – 7; Canterbury – 7; Dartford – 3; Dover – 8; Gravesham – 6; Maidstone – 7; Shepway – 5; Swale – 4; Thanet – 4; Tonbridge & Malling – 14; Tunbridge Wells – 12; Sevenoaks – 6 • 38

Voting Results From Resident Deliberative Sessions • 39

Perceptions of service usage, quality and value increase once residents are informed of the services provided by KCC. • How often do you or a member of your household use a Kent County Council service? • What do you think about the quality of Kent County Council’s services? • To what extent do you agree that Kent County Council provides value for money for the services it provides? • 40

At the end of the sessions, a significant majority would be prepared to pay more Council Tax (83% over 1.5%). • With regard to Council Tax which of the following would you most like to see? • How much extra Council Tax would you be prepared to pay in order to protect some of the Council’s services? • 41

Broad consistency in the services held most important to residents, with social care ranking highest. • The County Council has to make substantial spending reductions over the next 3 years, which ONE of the following service areas should the Council protect the MOST from these reductions? • Beginning of deliberative session • End of deliberative session • 42

There is more support for Libraries at the end of the sessions and less support for public transport and support for schools services (consistent with deliberative session open feedback). • The County Council has to make substantial spending reductions over the next 3 years, which ONE of the following service areas should the Council protect the LEAST from these reductions? • Beginning of deliberative session • End of deliberative session • 43

Consistent with online survey findings, a combination of approaches is required to make savings with transformation and efficiency savings ranking highest. • Now that you have had a chance to understand more about the Council’s budget, which of the following alternative approaches to delivering savings would you recommend the Council should adopt over the coming years? • End of deliberative session Consistent with deliberative session open feedback as the majority were looking for ways to deliver a service in a more efficient and different way where they felt possible • 44

Summary of Resident Deliberative Sessions • It should be noted that the deliberative sessions are QUALITATIVE in their nature and this is not a summary of quantitative data where percentages can be applied. This was solely an exercise to gain attitudes and opinions of residents towards the budget and the priorities of KCC. Care should be taken to ensure that this is an overview of attitude and opinion and not a statistical overview of views of Kent residents. • 45

Residents • Warm ups & views of KCC services

The positives……………………. All residents were very positive about Kent as a place to live and most felt a strong sense of ownership of their area. Very few negatives about Kent were mentioned and these were primarily centred around traffic, freight on the roads and ‘Operation Stack’. ”There are so many great places to visit, zoo’, historic houses, gardens and castles!” ”It’s the coast and the beautiful countryside – we really are the ‘Garden of England’!” ”Its great for accessibility to London and the Coast, Europe and Airports – everything is within easy reach!” ”The people of Kent are the best thing about it!” Residents were asked what they thought the best three things about Kent were - the responses were fairly consistent and covered areas such as : Access major routes Access to Countryside Accessibility generally Climate Calm feel Heritage Countryside Easy access to airports & ferry Rural Proximity to London Fast train to London The 11+ Easy to access hospitals Close to parks Education for people Close proximity to the sea The pace of life The beauty of the gardens Sense of community Feel safe Weather

Encouraging Feedback……The Consultation Feedback from residents regarding their involvement in the groups was wholly positive and many felt that all residents should try and be involved in some small element. They felt their views were listened to and that KCC were able to answer questions regarding transformations and funding. On the whole, residents were highly approving of the exercise overall. “Thank you for today and the opportunity to be involved. I’ve really enjoyed it and met some nice people – I think we’ve made some really good suggestions which were listened to” ”I’ve really enjoyed this evening and being part of this…its great to be able to give feedback on such an important subject. I feel like my opinion has really counted” “You’ve got to consult with the public – you are imposing the changes, you need to ask us what we think” “I think everyone in Kent should have Dave’s presentation…. Otherwise people just don’t know do you? They’d be really shocked if they saw the figures” “This affects everyone in Kent, its so important that people get involved” “Its all about having a wider social conscience, these are tough decisions to make”

What are the MOST IMPORTANT services that KCC provide? Residents were asked which services they considered to be the most import, including those services that they might not use very often. This question was interesting as it highlighted the lack of knowledge that the majority of the residents held regarding WHAT KCC actually did and the extent of the services it provides. • Services Considered to be MOST important • Schools / education • Street lighting • Social services • Waste collections • Transport services • Hospitals and healthcare • Roads (condition mainly) / Highways • Free bus service • Youth Services • Not used very often but valuable • Care for the elderly • Disabled parking badges • Foster care • Social Services • Youth Services • Libraries “People / residents really need to be encouraged to do so much more in their local area” “Different boroughs have different recycling schemes – how can this be cost effective?” There needs to be a communication unit so people know what KCC provides and that way people will know who is accountable for certain things” “Roads (condition) are by far the biggest issue but they are in such a state” “I get so confused about WHO does what, KCC or my local Council ?”

IMPACT OF THE SAVINGS MADE OVER LAST 31/2 YEARS • Many residents had noticed the effects of the savings over the last three and a half years and cited the following areas • Some residents in the groups specifically mentioned care for the elderly (some had experienced this first hand, while others had experienced it through different means). They felt that the level, standard and commitment to care had reduced. • “Carers haven’t been turning up and no-one seems to care” • “The care service is so bad, we’ve had to sell our house and buy another and move my mum in with us and I am now her carer” • Residents talked of issues surrounding the roads (and pavements), specifically the condition of them and the general impression that repairs were not carried out as often as they should and the amount of potholes and roads in poor condition across the county. Some talked of the poor standard of repairs (in that roads were patched) while others talked of the seemingly inefficient way of doing it with different gangs digging the hole, other gangs to fill it in and another gang to finish it off – they felt this must be highly inefficient and that a co-ordinated approach was needed. • Streetlights were mentioned repeatedly regarding views that they are turned off more than in recent times. While some residents applauded this approach others felt that it was a significant health and safety issue. One resident from Dover discussed the increase in crime rates as a result of streetlights being off. Suggestions for change included turning off every one in three (which in practice is simply not possible), or changing them to solar powered or more efficient light bulbs. • Refuse collections were also mentioned extensively and views generally were mixed regarding whether it was an improvement having them less often or not. Some felt that more recycling could be done and that Councils could collect more to ultimately reduce the need for as much waste to be collected. • Residents talked about the issues of anti social behaviour and the need for some venues or activities for young people to attend. There were discussions from those that lived in more rural areas that the community wardens had been very good in keeping anti social behaviour from youths under control, but others felt that this had • stopped now that their warden had gone. PAVEMENTS ELDERLY CARE POT HOLES & ROADS STREETLIGHTS ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR SOCIAL CARE COMMUNITY WARDENS REFUSE COLLECTIONS

Prepared by Lake Market Research and Kent County Council