thirds of the respondents were satisfied” (see Table 3 and Figure 3 “very below). No Response 3 Very Dissatisfied 1 Dissatisfied 1 Satisfied 53 Very satisfied 115 TOTAL 173 Table 3: Responses to the question satisfied were you with how “How well the Environmental Health staff explained things to you?” Figure 3: Responses to the question “How satisfied were you with how well the Environmental Health staff explained things to you?” Eighteen respondents made specific written comments saying the most helpful thing about the Food Safety Program services was the way the EHD staff answered questions and explained food safety principles. One respondent noted that their EHS was friendly and helpful in answering “very questions.” Another said their EHS took the time explain why certain “to things should be done in certain ways.” An additional nine respondents said the information provided by the EHD staff was most helpful. One respondent noted that inspections detailed information was provided.” Another “during said their EHS was informative and courteous.” One respondent “very suggested that the EHD more information.” “provide Eleven survey respondents made positive written comments commending the EHD for helping them keep updated on food safety technology and regulations. One noted the helpfulness of on new information.” “updates Another respondent noted that their EHS very helpful with keeping us “was up to date on new laws and enforcements.” A third respondent recognized the EHS’s to work with and educate staff on new procedures.” “willingness Professionalism of Environmental Health Division Survey respondents frequently cited the EHD staff for their professionalism, knowledge and concern for the health of the community. They particularly appreciated the food safety guidance and advice given by the EHSs and the positive interaction between the EHSs and restaurant staff. One respondent commented on the EHD staff’s concern for the health of the public.” “sincere Thirteen survey respondents made very positive written comments about the professionalism of the EHD staff. One respondent described their EHS as
thirds of the respondents were “very satisfied” (see Table 3 and Figure 3 below). No Response 3 Very Dissatisfied 1 Dissatisfied 1 Satisfied 53 Very satisfied 115 TOTAL 173 Table 3: Responses to the question “How satisfied were you with how well the Environmental Health staff explained things to you?” Figure 3: Responses to the question “How satisfied were you with how well the Environmental Health staff explained things to you?” Eighteen respondents made specific written comments saying the most helpful thing about the Food Safety Program services was the way the EHD staff answered questions and explained food safety principles. One respondent noted that their EHS was “very friendly and helpful in answering questions.” Another said their EHS took the time “to explain why certain things should be done in certain ways.” An additional nine respondents said the information provided by the EHD staff was most helpful. One respondent noted that “during inspections detailed information was provided.” Another said their EHS was “very informative and courteous.” One respondent suggested that the EHD “provide more information.” Eleven survey respondents made positive written comments commending the EHD for helping them keep updated on food safety technology and regulations. One noted the helpfulness of “updates on new information.” Another respondent noted that their EHS “was very helpful with keeping us up to date on new laws and enforcements.” A third respondent recognized the EHS’s “willingness to work with and educate staff on new procedures.” Professionalism of Environmental Health Division Survey respondents frequently cited the EHD staff for their professionalism, knowledge and concern for the health of the community. They particularly appreciated the food safety guidance and advice given by the EHSs and the positive interaction between the EHSs and restaurant staff. One respondent commented on the EHD staff’s “sincere concern for the health of the public.” Thirteen survey respondents made very positive written comments about the professionalism of the EHD staff. One respondent described their EHS as
Alexandria_CUSTOMERSERVICEEVALUATION2012FINAL.docx