The overall level of citizens' satisfaction with the quality of administrative services increased from 5% in 2014 to 14% in 2015; at the same time, 4/5 of those who applied for administrative services to the one-stop-shops were satisfied with their work.

 

The two-component major survey on the quality of administrative services in Ukraine was commissioned by the Centre of Policy and Legal Reform think-tank with support from two UNDP projects – "Democratization, Human Rights and Civil Society Development Programme" and "Smart Practices for Oversight by Non-State Actors on Administrative Service Provision". The data presented was collected in second half of November this year. In both parts of the survey, interviews were conducted with citizens over 18 with account of geographical representation (except Crimea and temporarily occupied parts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts).

 

The first part of the survey assessed overall citizen satisfaction with administrative services rendered by the state (e.g. not only through one-stop-shops / centres for administrative service provision - CASPs) with a sample of 2,009 respondents. It also considered reasons for lack of such satisfaction, probed for experiences of corrupt behaviour (bribe-giving or trading in services rendered). Respondents were also asked to identify reasons for such corrupt behaviour and offer their opinion on the most effective ways to prevent corruption in administrative service provision.

 

The second part of the survey was modelled as an exit poll to interview only those citizens who visited a CASP. Interviews were conducted in 40 major cities of the country with a sample of 5,296 respondents. This part of the research looked into actual experiences of CASP clients as well as reasons for satisfaction or lack thereof.

 

The survey results were presented by Viktor Tymoshchuk, Deputy Head of the Centre for Policy and Legal Reform, and Iryna Bekeshkina from the Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Fund (sociological agency).

The majority of citizens define the quality of the state by its services as they will often visit the local municipality offices and service centres. Most of that, in turn, happens when they require a service, said Janthomas Hiemstra, UNDP Country Director. This makes the quality of public services particularly important in context of decentralization. That is why UNDP was glad and honoured to support this sociological survey.

Yuliya Klimenko, Deputy Minister of Economic Development and Trade of Ukraine, commented in which way the survey results are valuable for further development of the Government policy in the area of administrative services. She reiterated that the data indicate clearly that the level of citizen satisfaction is higher when services are provided by centres for administrative service provision. Therefore, further institutional development of the one-stop-shops should be supported and promoted.

 

It was concluded by the participants of the press-conference that it would be important to chart some ways forward and priority issues to be addressed:

 

o There is a critical need to continue the process of transferring more and more essential services (such as international passport issuance) to CASPs. This is mandated by the legislation and recently approved laws on decentralization in the area of administrative service provision.

o It is important to continue capacitating CASP personnel in becoming even more client-oriented and professional. Responsive, convenient and transparent service-provision is one of the keys to citizen trust.

o E-service provision is important to minimize risks of possible corrupt behaviour and maximize efficiency of service provision. Steps have to be continued to transfer services online, into open formats and with minimum physical paperwork.

 

The summary of the survey results is given below. For more information, please contact This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

 

***

 

• While only 14% of Ukrainians were happy about the quality of administrative services in 2015, this, itself, is a significant improvement compared to the last year when only 5% assessed administrative service provision as positive. This is followed by another positive trend whereby the number of dissatisfied administrative service clients decreased from 40% in 2014 to 32% this year;

• Seven in 10 Ukrainians (69%) applied for an administrative service in 2015. Amongst those who have first-hand experience of receiving services 48% were unhappy with the quality of the service or the process for its reception;

• Citizens were made particularly happy when administrative processes and scopes of necessary documents were well explained (26%), when officials conducted themselves politely (20%) and when hours to receive services were convenient (15%);

• Some of the factors that impacted negative assessments included long queues (28%), lengthy consideration of the case (over 21%), lack of clear explanations about the administrative procedures and necessity to visit the institution multiple times (18%). Finally, citizens were discontent when instructed to visit additional agencies and institutions to complete the procedure (13%);

 

• The percentage of those who openly admit to engaging in corrupt behaviours (bribery, gift-giving, requests or provision of services in return, etc.) seems rather low (12% in 2015 which is 1% more than last year);

• One third of all respondents believe that corrupt behaviours would help solve their problem (an increase of 5% from last year). One in every five respondents notes that "bribery is a norm of our life";

• Respondents believe that corruption in the area of administrative service provision should be addressed, first and foremost, by firing the official in question (62%) and toughening the criminal sanctions (51%);

 

• The level of citizens unaware of administrative service provision by state or local authorities has been on the decline during the last three years: in 2013, 67% of the population did not know of administrative service provision made by the state; in 2014 - 59% and in 2015 - 52%;

• 20% of respondents know that a one-stop-shop / centre for administrative service provision is created in their city. Out of them, 35% have experienced applying to such a centre. 4/5 remained satisfied with its work, with this satisfaction level being a 20% increase from last year's data;

 

• In 2015, the majority of respondents applied to their CASP to receive a certain service (73.3%) or to receive information and consultations (26.7%);

• Importantly, 6 in 10 respondents were able to solve their issue right away, 3 in 10 noted that their case is being addressed at the moment, and only 1 in 10 noted that they failed to get their issue resolved;

• The overwhelming majority of citizens needed only one or a two visits to the CASP to solve their issue (43% and 41% accordingly);

 

• The satisfaction levels with CASP performance continued to be on the rise: whereas in 2014 a share of 79% of respondents provided positive feedback on CASP experiences, this year the share grew to total 82%. The share of unsatisfied dropped from 7% to 5% in 2015;

• The happiest CASP clients reside in Rivne (95%), Ivano-Frankivsk (91%), Uman (76%), Lutsk (75%), and Odesa (73%). Unhappiest clients come from large cities of Kyiv and L'viv (11.7%), Dnipropetrovsk (10.5%), Mykolaiv (10%) and Kherson (9.2%);

• The waiting times was one of the parameters of assessment. In the assessed centres, 30% of citizens did not have to wait at all. There were no queues at all in Rivne, Kamyanets-Podilsky and Uman (96%, 95% and 82% of respondents noting no queues). The longest queues, of more than an hour, were observed in Dnipropetrovsk (29% of respondents) and Lviv (21% of respondents);

• The satisfaction level with politeness and professionalism of the CASP staff grew from 90% in 2014 to 92% in 2015;

• The absolute majority of visitors were satisfied with information boards (90%), information stands with samples of documents (90%), availability of service cards for each procedure (service roadmap) (87%), availability of templates of applications (83%), proper waiting spaces (86%), overall office premises (92%), and convenience of payment for services in the premises (80% satisfied, 20% unsatisfied);

• In general, the visitors were happy with accessibility of the office for people with special needs (68% satisfied, and 32% of unsatisfied).