customer, employee satisfaction and work environment survey report

  • Published on
    03-Jan-2017

  • View
    220

  • Download
    6

Transcript

Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reporti REPUBLIC OF KENYATHE JUDICIARYCUSTOMER, EMPLOYEESATISFACTION AND WORKENVIRONMENT SURVEY REPORTCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportii Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reporti CUSTOMER, EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION AND WORK ENVIRONMENT SURVEY REPORTReport byPerformance Management Directorate June 2016Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportii FOREWORDThe Constitution of Kenya requires all public institutions to be accountable in the delivery of services to the people of Kenya. In the last three years, the Judiciary has undertaken reforms aimed at enhancing accountability to the public. Performance-based management is one of the initiatives that was introduced to enhance accountability. It is a process that involves engagement with key stakeholders, monitoring and evaluating performance, and development of relevant policies in line with these interactions. In the Judiciary, performance-based management is being implemented through a framework developed by the Performance Management and Measurement Steering Committee. This Committee was tasked to oversee the institutionalization of performance-based management in the Judiciary with the Directorate of Performance Management as its Secretariat.One of the performance measures adopted is annual Customer and Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey. Customer satisfaction survey gauges the level of satisfaction of Judiciary customers with the services offered. Employee satisfaction and work environment surveys on the other hand measures the extent to which employees are content with their jobs and the physical conditions, work processes and its effects on performance. These are critical performance management and measurement tools that are carried out periodically to establish levels of satisfaction and to identify areas for improvement.This report is the first of its kind to be undertaken in line with performance-based management principles. The report presents baseline indicators that are crucial for the implementation and evaluation of performance indicators as signed in various Performance Management and Measurement Understandings. It answers the questions; where are we and how are we doing in meeting our customers and employees needs in the administration of justice.I therefore call upon all judges, judicial officers and staff to continually be committed in the pursuit of an effective performance-based management system, and to play their part in the implementation of this report at respective courts. My office will endeavor to ensure that the recommendations of this report are addressed. This will ensure inclusive management of our courts towards achieving judicial excellence. Hon. Dr. Willy Mutunga, D. Jur, SC, EGH Chief Justice and President of the Supreme Court of KenyaCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportiii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe customer, employee satisfaction and work environment survey report is a product of concerted and collaborative efforts of individuals and many players. I wish to acknowledge the survey consultant, Sigmund Peak International Limited for professionally undertaking nationwide data collection. Their expertise in survey methodology development, data collection at courts, registries and directorates was crucial for the success of this survey.I am equally indebted to Dr. Nyoike Wamwea, Director Performance Management, for his leadership and guidance during the survey, Heads of Stations, Registrars of Courts and Directors who supported collection of data. The input of Judiciarys customers, judges, judicial officers and staff that provided raw data and information has been very valuable.Gratitude also goes to the technical team comprising of Dr. Paul Kimalu, Joseph Osewe, Dominic Nyambane, George Obai, Fredrick Ombwori, Gilbert Kipkirui, Moses Maranga, Stephen Mbithuka, Hilary Patroba, Victor Lumumba, Everlyne Simiyu, Leonard Audi, Ezan Mwiluki, Yvonne Kinya, Linda Lukhale, and Martin Astiba for combining their knowledge and experience towards ensuring quality in data collection, analysis and report writing. Finally, the support accorded to the Judiciary by the World Bank, though Judicial Performance Improvement Project (JPIP) to undertake this survey is appreciated.Hon. Anne A. AmadiChief Registrar of the Judiciary Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportiv TABLE OF CONTENTSFOREWORD iiACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iiiTABLE OF CONTENTS ivLIST OF TABLES viLIST OF FIGURES viiLIST OF ACRONYMS ixEXECUTIVE SUMMARY xCHAPTER ONE: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION 11.0 Background 11.1 Objectives 11.2 Scope 21.3 Methodology 21.3.1 Study Design 21.3.2 Sample Size Determination and Sampling Procedure 21.3.3 Data Collection and Quality Control 31.3.4 Data Processing and Analysis 41.4 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents 4CHAPTER TWO: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION 52.0 Introduction 52.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents for Customer Satisfaction Survey 52.2 Customer Satisfaction Index 72.3 Awareness of Mandate And Core Values 82.4 Customer Care Desks 102.5 Registry Services 112.6 Service Delivery Charters 132.7 Alternative Forms Of Dispute Resolution 132.8 Pro-Bono Services and Cash Bail/Bond Refunds and Court User Committees (CUCS) 142.9 Ombudsman and Complaints Handling Mechanism 152.10 Customer Perception on Institutional Image 17Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportv 2.11 Perception on Judges and Judicial Officers 182.12 Perception on Judicial Staff 192.13 Location, Equipment and Facilities 202.14 Customer Communication 20CHAPTER THREE: EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION 233.0 Introduction 233.1 Socio - Demographic Characteristics for Employee Satisfaction Survey 243.2 Organization and Institutional Culture 263.3 Employee Competency 273.4 Training and Development 293.5 Communication 303.6 Motivation 313.7 Remuneration and benefits 33CHAPTER FOUR: WORK ENVIRONMENT 364.0 Introduction 364.1 Disability, HIV/AIDS and Gender Equality 374.1.1 Disability 374.1.2 HIV/AIDS 394.1.3 Gender Mainstreaming 404.2 Health and Safety 404.3 Premises Cleanliness 444.4 Office Space and Equipment 454.5 General Work Environment 474.6 Conduciveness and Care For Environment 49CHAPTER FIVE: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 505.0 Recommendations Implementation Matrix 50CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION 52APPENDICES 53Appendix 1: Customers Satisfaction Indices by Court 53Appendix2: Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Indices by Court/Directorate/Offices 61Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportvi LIST OF TABLESTable 1 Sample Size determination for Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey ................................................................ 3Table 2 Index Ratings ....................................................................................... 4Table 3 Customer Satisfaction Index by Court level ..................................... 7Table 4 Customer Satisfaction Index by Factor ............................................. 8Table 5 Customer Satisfaction on Judiciary Mandate and Core Values ..... 9Table 6 Customer Communication ..............................................................21Table 7 Perception of Paying Additional Money for Services and Case Processing .. .............................................................................................. 22Table 8 Employee Satisfaction by Court Type .............................................23Table 9 Work Environment ...........................................................................36Table 10 Recomendations Implementation Matrix ....................................50Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportvii LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1 Demographic Characteristics of Customers ............................................. 6Figure 2 Percentage of Respondents by Attributes ................................................ 9Figure 3 Satisfaction with Customer Care Desks ...................................................10Figure 4 Satisfaction with Registry Services ...........................................................12Figure 5 Satisfaction with Service Delivery Charters .............................................13Figure 6 Satisfaction with Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms .............14Figure 7 Satisfaction with Pro-Bono Services and Cash Bail/Bond Refunds /Ombudsman/CUC.....................................................................................15Figure 8: Ombudsman and complaints handling mechanism ............................16Figure 9 Percentage of Respondents Reporting Satisfaction with Institutional Image ..........................................................................................................17Figure 10 Perception of Judges and Magistrates ..................................................18Figure 11 Perception of Judicial Staff .....................................................................19Figure 12 Access to Court ........................................................................................20Figure 13 Retrieval of Court Files ............................................................................21Figure 14 Employee Satisfaction by Factors Affecting Satisfaction Level..................24Figure 15 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Employees .............................25Figure 16 Satisfaction with Organizational and Institutional Culture ..................27Figure 17 Employee Competency Levels ...............................................................28Figure 18 Perception on Training and Development ............................................29Figure 19 Percentage of Respondents Reporting Satisfaction with Internal Communication Structure .......................................................................31Figure 20 Level of Staff Motivation ..........................................................................32Figure 21 Percentage of Employee Reporting Satisfaction with Remuneration an Benefits ............................................................................................................33Figure 22 Staff selection, recruitment and promotion ..........................................34Figure 23 Staff Discipline .........................................................................................35Figure 24 Satisfaction indices for Disability, HIV/AIDS and Gender Equality .....38Figure 25 Level of satisfaction with HIV/AIDS policies and practices .................39Figure 26 Level of Satisfaction with Gender Mainstreaming ...............................40Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportviii Figure 27 Percentage of Satisfaction with Health and Safety Policies .................41Figure 28 Satisfaction with Health Measures .........................................................42Figure 29 Satisfaction with Safety Measures ..........................................................43Figure 30 Satisfaction with Premises Cleanliness ..................................................44Figure 31 Satisfaction with Office and Equipment ................................................46Figure 32 Satisfaction with General Work Environment .......................................48Figure 33 Satisfaction with Conduciveness and Care for Environment ..............49Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportix LIST OF ACRONYMSCEWE Customer, Employee and Work Environment CUCs Court User CommitteesCS Chief JusticeCRJ Chief Registrar of the JudiciaryDPAC Department of Public Affairs and CommunicationELRC Employment and Labour Relations CourtELC Environment and Land CourtHIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency VirusHOS Heads of StationHRMA Human Resource Management & AdministrationICT Information Communication Technology JTF Judiciary Transformation FrameworkJPIP Judicial Perfomance Improvement ProjectPMD Perfomance Management DirectoratePMMSC Performance Management & Measurement Steering CommitteeCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Reportx EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe customer, employee satisfaction and work environment survey was carried out to assess the level of satisfaction of Judiciary customers with the services offered to them and assess level of content of employees with their jobs and work environment and its effects on employee performance. The study covered 178 Court stations including Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, High Courts, Employment and Labour Relations Courts, Environment and Land Courts, Magistrates Courts and Kadhis Courts. The survey was conducted in May 2015. It employed quantitative and qualitative survey design using structured questionnaires administered to sampled respondents.The results indicate that the overall customer satisfaction index was 66.8 while the overall employee and work environment satisfaction index was 66.5. The report gives an indication of court users and other Judiciary customers are generally satisfied with the services offered, and employees on the other hand are content with their jobs and the work environment. However, the report highlights several findings and makes recommendation for improvement in the implementation matrix contained in Chapter 5 of this report. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report1 CHAPTER ONEINTRODUCTION1.0 BackgroundThe Judiciary is one of the three arms of government established under Chapter 10, Article 159 of the Constitution of Kenya. It is mandated to deliver justice expeditiously to all regardless of status. This implies that it has an obligation to remove barriers to justice by ensuring that the Judiciary is open, transparent and accessible to all. In line with this mandate, the Judiciary established performance measurement and accountability standards for judges, judicial officers and staff across courts, registries and directorates. Customer and employee satisfaction, and work environment index is one of the measures adopted under this framework. Customer satisfaction gauges the level of satisfaction with the services offered by the Judiciary. This is based on the recognition that it is not only the determination of cases that give customers positive or negative impression of the court, but also how they are treated right from when they enter court premises up to when they leave. Employee satisfaction measures the commitment and motivation levels of employees derived from working for the organization. A high employee satisfaction index means that employees are motivated in the organisation and this enhances job performance and their productivity. Work environment measures the status of the physical work environment and its effect on employee performance. It facilitates identifying factors that affect working conditions and designing appropriate measures to address them. It is against this backdrop that the Judiciary engaged Sigmund Peak International to undertake customer and employee satisfaction and work environment survey. 1.1 ObjectivesThe objectives of the survey were to: (i) Determine the level of customer satisfaction with service delivery standards, (ii) Determine the level of judges, judicial officers and staff satisfaction Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report2 with terms of service, (iii) Determine the level of employee perception on work environment conditions, and (iv) Make recommendation based on survey findings. 1.2 ScopeThe scope of the survey was both at courts and administrative units. In particular, the survey covered one hundred and seventy eight (178) court stations, including the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal, High Courts, Employment and Labour Relations Courts, Environment and Land Courts, Magistrates Courts and Kadhis Courts.1.3 Methodology1.3.1 Study DesignThis study employed a survey design with both quantitative and qualitative techniques. It involved sampling a section of the entire population for inclusion in the survey. A structured questionnaire with both closed-ended and open-ended questions was administered to the sampled respondents. Closed ended questions gathered quantitative information about the segments of the population whereas the open-ended questions gathered qualitative data to further explain certain elements of the same group.1.3.2 Sample Size Determination and Sampling ProcedureThe population for customer satisfaction survey consisted of litigants, their families and friends, plaintiffs, victims, witnesses, case experts, advocates, law enforcement officers, media, development partners, suppliers and employees. The sample of respondents involved those who interact with or understand the services of the Judiciary. On the other hand, the population for the employee satisfaction and work environment survey comprised judges, judicial officers and staff. Stratified proportionate, simple random sampling with replacement and purposive sampling techniques were used to sample respondents for the customer satisfaction survey. In particular, stratified proportionate sampling was used to cover the whole country based on court station as the first strata and proportionately determine the number of customers based on the number of court cases initiated in 2014. Simple random Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report3 sampling with replacement was used to target individual respondents at court level. Purposive sampling was used to target institutions with frequent engagements with the Judiciary based on identified thematic areas. Table 1 presents the sample size determination for customers and employees for the survey. The sample size was determined using Fishers model and the margin of error was 1.7% at 95% confidence level resulting in 3,323 respondents for the customer satisfaction survey. To mitigate against errors in stratification, 10% more respondents were added resulting in a total of 4,170 respondents. Further, the Fishers model was used to determine representative sample of employees resulting in a sample size of 1,923 employees for the employee satisfaction and work environment survey. However actual sample was 1,895.Table 1: Sample size determination for customer, employee satisfaction and work environment surveyError Margin (P-values) Customers sample size (Population >10,000)Employees sample size (Population = 4,562)5.0% 384 3544.5% 474 4304.0% 600 5313.5% 784 6693.0% 1,067 8652.5% 1,537 1,1502.0% 2,401 1,5731.7% 3,323 1,9231.5% 4,268 2,2051.0% 9,604 3,0931.3.3 Data Collection and Quality ControlSecondary data was obtained through a review of existing reference materials relevant to the study. Primary data for the customer and employee satisfaction and work environment survey was collected through questionnaires. Employee satisfaction and work environment survey questionnaires were sent to all staff via e-mail two days before the data collection. Customer satisfaction survey questionnaires were administered by research assistants who were deployed to courts. Prior Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report4 to actual data collection, all the tools were pretested in Nairobi. This was meant to test the research instruments and protocols and check the ability of the enumerators to use the tools accurately. To ensure data quality, the consultants were involved in data supervision and quality checks that involved spot checks, accompanied interviews, retraining and questionnaire editing both in the field and during data entry process.1.3.4 Data Processing and AnalysisData processing entailed data entry, collation, data cleaning, coding, analysis and interpretation. Analysis was done using MS Excel, SPSS and STATA. The responses were analysed and reported using descriptive and inferential statistics. Satisfaction indices were computed to determine the satisfaction levels. This is a weighted figure of the scores on a 4-point Likhert scale on a continum ranging from very satisfied to very dissatisfied. The weighted percentage average scores were used to obtain this figure. Fifty percent (50%) was used as the score below which respondents were deemed to be dissatisfied as presented in Table 2.Table 2: Index ratingsLevel of Satisfaction/Agreement Score Index (% score)Very Satisfied/Strongly Agree 4 75-100Satisfied/Agree 3 51 74Dissatisfied/Disagree 2 26-50Very Dissatisfied/ Strongly Disagree 1 Less or equal to 251.4 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of RespondentsThe Customer and Employee Satisfaction, and Work Environment Survey Report is presented along two broad thematic areas. First is access to justice by customers encompassing awareness of mandate, core values, court services, customer perception, institutional image, and stakeholder perception. Second is employee satisfaction and work environment consisting of organization and corporate culture, employee competency, training and development, communication, workload, motivation, working conditions, health and safety.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report5 CHAPTER TWOCUSTOMER SATISFACTION2.0 IntroductionThis Chapter presents findings on the customer satisfaction survey based on the factors affecting the level of customer satisfaction. The findings are based on perception of customers on access to and delivery of justice in the Judiciary. The level of customer satisfaction is measured through customer satisfaction index which is a composite score of individual service delivery attributes. The indices relate to the level at which the customers perceive the Judiciarys provision of services. The gap between the services delivered and customers expectations determines the level of satisfaction. The closer the gap between the expectations and the actual service delivered, the higher the satisfaction. Exceeding their expectations implies that customers are delighted resulting in higher satisfaction indices.2.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents for Customer Satisfaction SurveyThe respondents for the customer satisfaction survey had a myriad of demographic characteristics. Figure 1 shows that most of the respondents for the customer satisfaction survey were those who came to seek services in the Magistrates Courts. The results also indicate that 42.5% of the respondents had tertiary level of education and above and 34.6% were self-employed. With regard to nature of case for which the respondents were coming to court, 44.5% were attending court in relation to civil cases whereas 41.0% were attending in relation to criminal cases. On average, 37.8% of the respondents covered at most 10 kilometres to court and taking less than 1 hour to the court station.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report6 Court type81.9%2.2%1.2%9.6%3.4% 1.3% 0.4%100.0%80.0%60.0%40.0%20.0%0.0%Supreme CountCount of AppealHigh CourtMagistrate CourtKadhis CourtELCELRC40.0%20.0%0.0%37.8%23.8%10.1%6.8%22.8%10km and below11-20km21-30km31-40kmAbove 41kmDistance to court3.9%16.8%35.3%42.5%1.5%None Primary Secondary Tertiary and No responseaboveEducation45.0%40.0%35.0%30.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0%Case type50.0%41.0%44.5%11.6%2.9%30.0%20.0%40.0%10.0%0.0%Criminal Civil Traffic Noresponse40.0%20.0%0.0%8.0%17.3%34.6%15.6%20.5%2.9% 1.1%StudentUnempleyedSelf empleyedGovernment employeePrivate scctor employeeRetireeNo responseOccupation60.0%41.5%30.5%19.5%3.5% 4.5% 0.5%40.0%20.0%0.0%Less than 1 hour1-2 hours3-4 hours5-6 hours7 hours and...No responseTime taken to courtFigure 1: Demographic characteristics of customersCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report7 2.2 Customer Satisfaction IndexThe index was computed from the mean of weighted satisfaction levels of factors affecting customer satisfaction at courts excluding administrative units within the Judiciary. Table 3 presents the Customer Satisfaction Indices for the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, High Court, Employment and Labour Relations Court, Environment and Land Court, Magistrates Courts and Kadhis Courts. The findings indicate that, across court level, the overall Customer Satisfaction Index for the Judiciary was 66.8.Table 3: Customer satisfaction index by Court levelCourt Level Customer Satisfaction IndexSupreme Court 70.8Court of Appeal 70.7High Court 67.6Employment and Labour Relations Court63.2Land and Environment Court 66.1Magistrates Courts 66.3Kadhis Courts 72.2All 66.8The Judiciary is mandated to provide expeditious delivery of justice irrespective of status. This is achieved through cross cutting service delivery areas or initiatives such as registries, customer care desks and service delivery charters. Table 4 and appendix 1 presents interrelated factors identified as key determinant of overall Customer Satisfaction Index. The results show that customers perception of the judges and judicial officers was at 74.4%, perception of the customer care desk and registry at 72.4%, customer perception of other judiciary staff was 71.6%, institutional image of the Judiciary was 68.9%, satisfaction with the mission, vision, mandate and core values was 68.3% and satisfaction with complaints handling process at 59.9%. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report8 Table 4: Customer satisfaction index by factorType of courtFactorSupreme CourtCourt of AppealHigh CourtEmployment and Labour Relations CourtLand and Environment CourtMagistrates CourtsKadhis CourtsChildrens CourtAnti-corruption CourtMission, Vision, Mandate and Core Values72.3 71.8 69.1 60.7 67.3 67.9 71.8 71.1 67.0Customer Care Desk and Registry78.5 71.9 72.3 63.7 70.6 72.4 75.5 67.5 72.1Location, Equipment and Facilities71.5 70.2 66.8 68.1 67.4 64.1 70.2 70.9 69.6Customer Communication 64.1 67.6 62.4 56.6 61.9 61.8 69.8 63.9 62.0Service Quality 63.4 64.6 62.4 59.5 62.9 60.2 68.2 62.8 59.9Customers Perception of Judges and Magistrates76.1 78.2 75.0 66.3 69.2 74.1 79.4 70.8 80.8Customers Perception of other Judiciary Staff75.1 77.2 72.1 68.3 67.5 71.2 77.5 67.1 72.0Corporate Image 72.8 76.0 70.8 61.5 68.2 68.3 74.9 71.9 63.5Complaint Handling 65.4 65.9 59.7 59.9 54.0 60.1 57.7 58.3 55.0Customer Satisfaction Index 70.8 70.7 67.6 63.2 66.1 66.3 72.2 67.4 67.72.3 Awareness on Mandate and Core ValuesAccording to Chapter 10 of the Constitution, the mandate of the Judiciary is to administer justice and promote the rule of law. This mandate is discharged by providing independent, accessible, fair and responsive fora for dispute resolution and development of jurisprudence. The survey sought to determine customer awareness and satisfaction with the Judiciarys mandate, core values and services. It is evident from Table 5 that customers were least satisfied with the Judiciarys public accountability for its role and performance at 67.2%, Judiciarys communication of its vision and mission was at 67.4%. The respondents were most satisfied with the Judiciary handling of customers issues with impartiality 68.1% of which 63.3% strongly agreed as shown in Figure 2.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report9 Table 5: Customer satisfaction on Judiciary mandate and core valuesAttributes Satisfaction Index (%)The Judiciary has clearly communicated its vision and mission 67.4The Judiciary provides equal access to justice 69.3The Judiciary handles customers issues with impartiality 68.1My case has been handled fairly by judge/magistrate 70.3The Judiciary case processes are clear and easy to understand 67.7The Judiciary publicly accounts for its role and performance 67.2The finding is a pointer to the level of customers awareness of their rights to expeditious and equal access to justice regardless of status as outlined in Article 159 of the Constitution. Figure 2: Percentage of respondents by attributesCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report10 Figure 2: contd.The report recommends continued awareness campaigns on Judiciary mandate, core values and services through service weeks, talk shows and outreach programmes and other interventions.2.4 Customer Care DesksCustomer care desks provide a platform for the Judiciary customers to make general inquiries and seek information on various services. The survey sought to determine the customers satisfaction with the services offered at customer care desks in the Judiciary. Figure 3 shows that 82.3% of the respondents were satisfied that the customer care desks staff were courteous, 82.9% indicated that customer care desks were easy to find, 77.3% indicated the customer care staff were available, 68% indicated that they were able to find the information they need and 62% were satisfied that Judiciary provides guidance on services offered. However it should be noted that 48% were not satisfied with guidance offered at customer care desks and this needs to be improved. Figure 3: Satisfaction with customer care desksCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report11 Figure 3: contd.The report recommends the following: (i) Strengthen customer care desks by providing adequate training to judicial staff in charge, (ii) Provide adequate Information Communication and Education materials to customer care desks.2.5 Registry ServicesCourt registries are vital in keeping records and files on court cases. Customers visit court registries to file cases, update case records and make enquiries on matters regarding particular cases. Figure 4 presents customer satisfaction with registry services. The findings indicate that 75% of the respondents were satisfied that the staff were courteous, 71% were satisfied they act with integrity, 75% were satisfied with the guidance they get from the registry staff and 75% were satisfied that their issues were handled with confidentiality. However, 57% still believed that the file retrieval does not take place within 5 minutes as stipulated in the service charters. Further, 54% were not satisfied that judgments are availed in time and 53% also were not satisfied that cause lists were availed 7 days in advance.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report12 Figure 4: Satisfaction with registry servicesThe report recommends the following: (i) Judiciary to develop and fully implement registry manuals to improve efficiency at court registries, (ii) Enforce compliance to timely retrieval of files.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report13 2.6 Service Delivery ChartersService delivery charters provide a list of services offered by the Judiciary, obligations of the clients and service delivery standards they should expect. In particular, a service delivery charter typically shares a number of key characteristics, including clear and simple language; realistic and measurable performance standards; a dedicated grievance redress mechanism; and an effective public relations strategy to increase customers awareness about Judiciary services. The survey therefore sought to establish the level of customer satisfaction with courts service delivery charters. Figure 5 shows that 63.0% of the survey respondents agreed that they understood the contents of Judiciary service charters. However, it should be noted that 56.0% of the respondents indicated that the charters were not visible. This implies that legibility of the service delivery charters is an issue or in some instances they were not displayed at all. Figure 5: Satisfaction with service delivery chartersThe report recommends the following: (i) Ensure that service charters are legible and displayed in all court stations, (ii) Ensure compliance with service delivery standards contained in the charters.2.7 Alternative forms of Dispute ResolutionThe survey sought to establish customer satisfaction with alternative forms of dispute resolution. Figure 6 shows that 64.9% of respondents are satisfied with reconciliation services and 60.5% were satisfied with arbitration services. This finding suggests that although the Judiciary has initiated a number of measures to promote alternative dispute resolution, Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report14 a large proportion of the customers still express dissatisfaction. It is also important to note that 86.8% are dissatisfied with the notarizing services.Figure 6: Satisfaction with alternative dispute resolution mechanismsThe report recommends the following: (i) Strengthening of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, (ii) Sensitize litigants on notarizing services.2.8 Pro-bono Services and Cash Bail/Bond Refunds and Court User Committees Figure 7 presents satisfaction levels of pro-bono services and bail/bond refund. It shows that 92.8% were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with pro-bono services, 85.5% were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with payment and refund of cash bail/bond. This implies that in order to enhance service delivery at courts, specific policies ought to be developed Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report15 and implemented to strengthen provision of pro-bono services. The survey revealed that only 62% of the customers were not aware while 67% do not understand the importance of CUCs.Figure 7: Satisfaction with pro-bono services and cash bail/bond refunds/Ombudsman/CUCs2.9 Ombudsman and Complaints Handling Mechanism The results in Figure 8 presents the customers perception on judiciary ombudsman office and complaints handling mechanisms. The results indicate that 69% of the respondents were neither aware of existence of ombudsmans office nor facilities for reporting complaints respectively. In addition 80% of the respondents had never lodged a complaint with the Judiciary. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report16 The results further indicate that 61% of the respondents agreed that the Judiciary has an effective complaints handling mechanism. However, 57%, 60% and 64% disagreed that complaints by telephone, email and letters are timely acknowledged and responded to respectively. Figure 8: Ombudsman and complaints handling mechanism Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report17 The report recommends the following: (i) Strengthening provision of pro-bono services, (ii) Streamling internal processes and improving efficiency in payment and refund of cash bail/bond, (iii) Regularly review of court fees to make them affordable to customers, (iv) Sensitizing the public on the role of Ombudsman and court user committees.2.10 Customer Perception on Institutional ImageThe Constitution of Kenya 2010 ushered in reform initiatives aimed at enhancing access to and expeditious delivery of justice. In this regard, the Judiciary initiated a number of key flagship projects and programmes aimed at achieving judicial excellence, and restoring public confidence. The survey therefore sought to establish customers satisfaction with the Judiciarys image in light of on-going reform initiatives. Figure 9 indicates that 71.3% of the respondents agreed that their experience gave them confidence and trust in the Judiciary. About 67% indicated that the Judiciary demonstrates a positive image to the general public based on its performance. This finding implies that the reform initiatives were improving public image of the Judiciary. This implies the Judiciary was sensitive and responsive to the needs and aspirations of Kenyans. Thus, the reform initiatives should be mainstreamed across all courts thereby sustaining an institution that is friendly and fair to people, both in its outlook, processes and decisions. Figure 9: Percentage of respondents reporting satisfaction with institutional imageCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report18 The report recommends the following: (i) The Judiciary enhances its public engagement and media outreach to boost public confidence, (ii) Mainstream reforms initiatives across all courts to sustain positive institutional image.2.11 Perception on Judges and Judicial OfficersCustomer perception of judges and judicial officers is an important aspect in understanding the implementation of Judiciarys core mandate and values. It shows the decorum of judges, and judicial officers during hearing and determination of cases. The survey sought to determine customers perception on judges and judicial officers. Figure 10 shows that 84.5% of the respondents were of the view that judges and judicial officers were courteous, 86.1% were satisfied that judges and judicial officers listened and led court hearings well, 84% indicated that they demonstrated a high level of integrity in their duties and 74.2% felt that court decisions were made in a timely manner. However 25.7% of the respondents were not satisfied with timeliness of the court processes.Figure 10: Perception of judges and magistratesCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report19 The report recommends ensuring compliance with performance timelines on hearing and determination of cases.2.12 Perception on Judicial StaffFigure 11 presents customers perception on judicial staff. It shows that 78.0% of the respondents agreed that judicial staff were friendly and respectful, 76.9% indicated that they were helpful and cooperative, 76.3% indicated that they were professional at work while 76.8% indicated that judicial staff were well trained and properly oriented in their jobs.Figure 11: Perception of judicial staffCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report20 The report recommends promotion of an incentive scheme for judges, judicial officers and staff.2.13 Location, Equipment and FacilitiesThe physical condition and location, tools and equipment being used to provide the service determine customer perception of service quality hence customer satisfaction level. Figure 12 shows 80% of the respondents either strongly agreed (23%) or agreed (57%) that it was easy to find and identify the court location while 16% were of the contrary opinion.Strongly agree23%Strongly disagree5% Disagree11%The court was easy to find and identifiableAgree57%Dontknow4%Figure 12: Access to courtThe findings indicate that the signage or other means used by the Judiciary are actually effective in helping customers locate courts.2.14 Customer CommunicationGood communication channels and the ease with which communication flows in an organization are paramount for effective service delivery. Customers normally appreciate fast communication channels, which embrace feedback and accessibility of information. The customers were most satisfied with the ease of finding court dates at 71.1% satisfaction level, followed by the adequacy of notice leading to attendance of courts at 70.8% and the availability of court files at 61.4%. The findings also revealed that 45% of the respondents agreed that the court files were available when needed.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report21 Table 6: Customer communicationSN Attributes Satisfaction Level (%)1 It was easy for me to find out my court dates 71.12 There was adequate notice leading to attendance of court 70.83 It is easy to communicate with the Judiciary by phone 56.14 The Judiciary responds with written letters within 2 working days56.05 Cause lists are available seven days in advance 58.16 Customer Communication 62.3However, a good number of respondents indicated that the files were not available when needed as shown in Figure 13.Dont know17%Strongly agree9%Strongly disagree15%Court files are always available Agree38%Disagree23%Figure 13: Retrieval of court filesThe report recommends enhancement of file retrieval process from the Registries by emplementing the recommendations in the registry manuals.2.15 Corruption Below is a summary of the perception of the customers paying additional money for services and case processing in the different court levels.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report22 Table 7. Perception of paying additional money for services and case processingCourt Type Strongly disagree Disagree AgreeStrongly agreeSupreme court 40.9% 22.7% 31.8% 4.5%Court of Appeal 33.9% 27.1% 28.8% 10.2%High Court 35.5% 32.7% 23.8% 8.0%Magistrate Court 34.7% 30.3% 23.0% 12.0%Kadhis Court 37.6% 29.7% 22.8% 9.9%Children Court 29.2% 54.2% 4.2% 12.5%Anti-corruption court 42.4% 33.3% 12.1% 12.1%Environment and Land Court 31.4% 34.3% 28.6% 5.7%Labour and Employment Court 30.0% 10.0% 60.0% All 35.0% 30.6% 23.2% 11.3%Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report23 CHAPTER THREEEMPLOYEE SATISFACTION3.0 IntroductionEmployee satisfaction is the extent to which employees are content with their jobs and work environment. It captures individual aspects or facets of their jobs, such as nature of work or supervision. These surveys usually address areas such as compensation, workload, and perceptions of management, flexibility, teamwork and resources among others. This particular survey focused on job engagement, employee development, recognition and rewards, scheme of service, internal relations, provision of working tools and employee welfare and the extent to which judges, judicial officers and staff members are engaged towards the aspirations of the Judiciary. There is a high correlation between employee satisfaction and individual productivity. The overall employee satisfaction index was 66.5% as presented in Table 8.Table 8: Employee satisfaction by Court TypeCourt TypeFactorsSupreme courtCourt of AppealHigh CourtEmployment and Labour Relations CourtEnvironment and Land CourtMagistrates CourtsKadhis CourtsChildren CourtGeneral Opinion of the Judiciary 78.2 82.7 80.7 74.2 83.3 81.4 83.3 79.7Selection, Recruitment and Promotion Practices 60.1 59.0 63.5 47.2 62.5 63.9 65.6 58.0Internal Communication at the Judiciary 60.9 62.1 68.6 59.2 67.3 69.9 74.7 66.8Corporate Culture, Team work and organization 63.1 66.4 67.7 62.6 68.8 69.9 72.0 69.4Staff Training and Development 51.2 50.2 57.1 45.2 56.5 59.4 67.2 46.1Motivation, Morale and Recognition 57.0 58.2 61.2 51.3 60.8 63.2 69.5 59.4My Immediate Supervisor 69.8 66.5 69.3 72.8 68.2 71 71.2 64.5Performance Management 48.6 52.3 55.0 42.4 51.2 58.6 62.4 56.5Remuneration and Benefits 64.1 59.3 63.0 51.4 61.1 62.8 68.2 65.1Employee Relations 61.9 62.6 64.2 63.0 62.0 65.0 68.6 64.1Management and Leadership 59.4 59.9 62.2 53.7 62.6 64.9 70.4 58.2Employment Engagement 71.7 71.0 73.8 66.9 80.8 75.3 81.8 81.9Work/Life Balance 61.8 60.6 62.4 52.1 68.8 63.5 69.2 68.8Overall Employee Satisfaction Index 62.3 62.4 65.6 57.5 66.5 67.3 71.8 65.5Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report24 Figure 14 represents the factors affecting employee satisfaction. The figure indicates that, satisfaction with the general opinion of the Judiciary was 81.2%, employee satisfaction was 74.8%, satisfaction with the immediate supervisor was 70.5%, work/life balance was 63.1% and motivation, morale and recognition was 62.4%. The findings imply that the overall levels of satisfaction of employees and their work environment was satisfactory, although appropriate measures should be taken to address staff concerns on training and development and encourage work-life balance among judges, judicial officers and staff. Figure 14: Employee satisfaction by factors affecting satisfaction level3.1 Socio - Demographic Characteristics for Employee Satisfaction SurveyThe respondents for the employee satisfaction and work environment survey consisted of judges, judicial officers and staff. Figure 15 presents socio-demographic characteristics where a majority were judicial staff constituting 88.4% of the respondents. The results also show that 67.6% of the respondents were drawn mainly from the Magistrates Courts while 21.7% were from the High Court. With regard to level of education, the results show that 44.0% of respondents had attained secondary education, Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report25 another 21.6% had first degree and while 18.4% had advanced diploma. The results indicate that 47.3% of the respondents were male and 66.7% were aged between 25-44 years. Finally, 43.5% of the respondents had over 10 years of service in the Judiciary.Court Type CadreLevel of Education Years of Service80.0%67.6%21.8%4.2% 2.5% 1.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.8% 0.6%70.0%60.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%80.0%88.4%90.0%100.0%70.0%60.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%50.0%45.0%40.0%35.0%30.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0% 3.1%18.4%24.6%11.1%15.9%24.5%43.5%5.0%5.6% 7.3%44.0%0.0%40.0%35.0%30.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0% 0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0% 47.3%33.4% 33.3%18.7%7.4%5.4%1.8%18-24years25-34years35-44years45-54years55 years and overNoResponse38.3%14.4%50.0%45.0%40.0%35.0%30.0%25.0%20.0%15.0%10.0%5.0%0.0%0.8%6.0%0.7% 4.0%Supreme courtHigh CourtMagistrate CourtKadhi CourtChildren CourtELCELRCNo ResponseCourt of AppealPrimary Secondary Advanceddiploma1st degree Mastersdegreeand adoveNoResponse NoResponseOver 10YearsBetween 5-10 yearsBetween 5-5 yearsLess than 3yearsKadhis Judicialstaff ResponseNoJudicialofficersJudgesMale Female No responseGenderAge of EmployeesFigure 15: Socio-demographic characteristics of employeesCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report26 3.2 Organization and Institutional CultureThe Judiciary Transformation Framework (JTF) emphasizes, that the primary responsibility for the successful and sustainable transformation of the Judiciary rests with its leadership, management and staff at all levels and in all capacities. It emphasizes that a clear and robust organizational design; a dynamic leadership and management team; and a competent and motivated staff are conditions necessary for a successfully transformed Judiciary. Sustaining the judicial transformative agenda therefore, is underpinned on a sound organization and institutional culture. Figure 16 shows the respondents satisfaction with the Judiciarys institutional culture. This study investigated the extent to which corporate culture and team-work were appreciated by the Judiciarys staff and management. The survey revealed that over 73% of the respondents were satisfied that there was a distinctive Judiciary culture to identify with. Over 35% of the respondents were satisfied that there was regular feedback from the supervisors. Over 62% were satisfied that employees ideas and contributions are encouraged and appreciated. Over 63% were satisfied that there was promotion of innovation culture in the Judiciary. Over 78% were satisfied that there was teamwork in the Judiciary.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report27 Figure 16: Satisfaction with organizational and institutional cultureThe report recommends adoption of regular performance feedback from supervisors.3.3 Employee CompetencyEmployee competencies refer to the traits, skills or attribute that judges, judicial officers and staff need to perform their jobs most effectively. These vary depending on the job and the position but there are some commonalities that apply to any job in any organization. Figure 17 shows the respondents competency levels. Over 72% of the respondents were satisfied with their competency on computer skills. Over 78% of the respondents indicated their communication skills were sufficient while 77% indicated their customer care/public relations were sufficient. Over 74% indicated their report writing skills were either good or excellent. Further, Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report28 74% indicated their supervisory skills were sufficient while 69% believe their data interpretation and analysis skills were sufficient. However, there is still need to enhance training in computer and data interpretation since over 28% and 30% of the respondents respectively did not agree.Figure 17: Employee competency levelsThe report recommends continuous training of judicial staff on computer and data interpretation.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report29 3.4 Training and DevelopmentTraining and development refers to teaching, or developing in oneself or others, on any skills and knowledge that relate to specific useful competencies. Training has specific goals of improving ones capability, capacity, productivity and performance of a particular job. This survey sought to determine employee perception on training and development activities at the Judiciary with a particular focus on policy, career growth, prioritization, equitable distribution of opportunities, and relevance. Figure 18 indicates that over 54% of the respondents were satisfied with the training policy in place. Only 49% of the respondents believed there was a clear career growth path while 51% were not satisfied. About 42% believed staff training was prioritised with 58% disagreeing. Only 30% believed there was consultation on training needs while 70% disagreed. Further, 34% believed there was an equitable training opportunity while 66% disagreed. It is notable that 62.5% of the respondents believed there was work relevant training.Figure 18: Perception on training and developmentCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report30 The report recommends the following: (i) Conducting a comprehensive training needs assessments for judges, judicial officers and staff, (ii) Continuous training of judges, judicial officers and staff on priority skills and competencies, (iii) Ensure equitable distribution of training opportunities.3.5 CommunicationOrganizational communication is the consideration, analysis, and criticism of the role of communication in organizational context. Its main function is to inform, persuade and promote goodwill. Organizational communication plays an important role in knowledge dissemination and learning. Figure 19 presents results of satisfaction with communication structure at the Judiciary. It indicates that 61.4% of the respondents were satisfied that there was good communication across courts, registries and directorates. About 90% were aware of their work expectations, 75.5% were satisfied that there was readily available information on their job, 63.6% believed that there was openness and transparency in communication, 69.2% believed that upward communication was encouraged while 55.7% believed that there was minimal gossip at work. However over 36% still believed there was no openness and transparency in communication while over 38% believed that communication across courts and directorates was not good.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report31 Figure 19: Percentage of respondents reporting satisfaction with internal communication structureThe report recommends development and implementation of Judiciary internal communication policy.3.6 MotivationEmployee motivation is crucial in building a productive workforce, since most of the work of managers is done through others. This survey focused Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report32 on level of staff motivation across Courts, Registries and Directorates. Figure 20 displays the level of motivation. It shows that 67.4% of the respondents were satisfied that they were motivated to perform their duties and responsibilities. About 60.0% were satisfied. Further, 56.3% believed that innovation was encouraged. However 65.2% believed there was no clear staff award and recognition policy while 51.6% believed that there was no recognition of good work.Motivated to perform duties and responsibilitiesHigh staff morale Innovation encouragedGood work recognitionClearity in staff recognation and awardpolicy60.050.040.030.020.010.0.050.040.030.020.010.0.050.040.030.020.010.0.010.020.030.040.041.0%24.2% 26.5%8.3%50.0.015.010.05.020.020.9%30.7%36.9%11.5%25.030.035.040.0.011.9%20.8% 16.0% 12.3%27.0%13.5%47.2%51.4%StronglydisagreeDisagree AgreeagreeStronglyStronglydisagreeDisagree AgreeagreeStrongly StronglydisagreeDisagree AgreeagreeStronglyStronglydisagreeDisagree AgreeagreeStronglyStronglydisagreeDisagree AgreeagreeStrongly44.6%27.2%16.2%11.9%Figure 20: Level of staff motivationCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report33 The report recommends development and implementition of an incentive scheme.3.7 Remuneration and BenefitsEmployee remuneration refers to the compensation given to the employees for their work performance. It provides basic attraction to an employee to perform job efficiently and effectively. It is a method of promoting morale, increasing motivation and fostering team cohesion. This survey sought to establish level of satisfaction with remuneration and benefits at the Judiciary. Figure 21 show that 63.4% of the respondents were satisfied that the Judiciary remuneration compares fairly to responsibilities. Further, 71.6% were satisfied that the remuneration compares fairly with the other public institutions, 51.1% were satisfied that the commuter allowance was adequate; 53.5% indicated that the house allowance was adequate, while 50.6% were satisfied that the per diem was adequate. However 58.4% did not believe that the annual awards and increments were based on merit. Adequate commuter allowanceAdequate per-diem allowanceAdequate house allowance9.9%17.9%31.0%41.2%10.5% 15.8%30.7%40.0%17.9%31.5%10.6%43.0%Remuneration compares fairly to other publicinstititions16.6% 9.5%18.9%55.0%Strongly disagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Figure 21: Percentage of employee reporting satisfaction with remuneration and benefitsCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report34 The report recommends development and implementation of a Judiciary annual employees incentive scheme.3.8 Perception on recruitment, promotion and discipline Organizations prosper when they have a perfect combination of employees. Recruitment is therefore important in ensuring this is achieved. Issues like diversity should be taken into account and proceses and systems regulary reviewed to ensure hidden bias is removed and talent is not blocked from entering the organization. The survey sought to find out whether recruitment, induction and promotion proceses are clear and transparent. Figure 22 shows the survey results.11.42350.115.50102030405060strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeRecruitment and selection process by the Judicial service commission are fair and in line with human resource policies13.325.846.414.401020304050Strongly disagreeDisagree Agree Strongly agreeThe induction process of new employees is appropriate fair and supportive19.735.5 34.610.2010203040Strongly disagreeDisagree Agree Strongly agreeThe Judiciary has a promotion policy that is clear and transparent20.834.4 34.710.2010203040Strongly disagreeDisagree Agree Strongly agreePromotions at the Judiciary is based on meritFigure 22: Staff selection, recruitment and promotionDiscipline on the other hand is important if emplyee morale and productivity is to be mentained. However, it should be noted that disciplinary process should be used carefully by following code of conduct and respecting workers rights. The survey sought to find out whether the disciplinary process is handled in a clear and transparent manner. Figure 23 shows the survey results.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report35 9.9 16.162.111.9020406080strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeDisciplinary actions are handled according to the Code of Conduct10.22058.511.4020406080strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeDisciplinary actions are handled objectively and fairly11.1 18.258.811.9020406080strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeAggrieved staff are given opportunity to defend themselves17.125.247.89.90102030405060strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeDisciplinary cases are handled within reasonable time26.932.5 33.17.5010203040strongly disagreedisagree agree strongly agreeThe Judiciary has in place an effective dispute resolution mechanism among the staffFigure 23 : Staff DisciplineThe report recommends development and implementation of the scheme of service.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report36 CHAPTER FOURWORK ENVIRONMENT4.0 IntroductionWork environment is the surrounding conditions in which judges, judicial officers and staff operate. It is composed of physical conditions, work processes and their effect on performance. This survey sought to determine factors in the work environment currently affecting employee performance. These include health and safety, premises cleanliness, office space and equipment, general work environment, conduciveness and care for the environment, disability, HIV/AIDS and Gender equality. The overall work environment index was 60.4% as summarized in Table 9 below.Table 9: Work environment by court typeType of the courtFactorsSupreme CourtCourt of AppealHigh CourtEmployment and Labour Relations CourtEnvironment and Land CourtMagistrates CourtKadhis CourtChildrens CourtHealth and Safety 61.5 59.4 60.3 53.3 63.0 60.0 68.0 64.0Premises Cleanliness 67.5 61.6 63.8 67.3 56.3 61.2 69.5 59.4Office Space and Equipment 61.9 56.3 57.2 59.0 58.9 55.3 60.4 59.7General Work Environment 61.5 54.2 60.1 59.5 64.6 59.4 68.7 66.0Conduciveness and Care for Environment60.4 58.0 61.2 51.5 59.2 61.2 68.7 66.8Disability, HIV/AIDS and Gender Equality61.9 62.9 64.6 57.5 61.2 65.0 68.5 67.0Work Environment Indices 62.4 58.8 60.9 57.9 60.5 60.1 66.4 64.6Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report37 4.1 Disability, HIV/AIDS and Gender EqualityThe staff members were asked to give their perception on issues concerning their satisfaction with regards to accessibility of premises and facilities for persons living with disability, awareness creation on HIV & AIDS and mainstreaming of gender into the programmes and projects undertaken by the Judiciary. 4.1.1 DisabilityThe persons with disabilities Act, 2003 provides for the rights of persons living with disabilities and advocates for mainstreaming of disability issues in all government policies, programmes and projects. Figure 24 presents the findings on mainstreaming of disability in the Judiciary where 63% of the respondents felt the Judiciary had mainstreamed disability into its programmes. The Survey also revealed that 61% of staff agreed that persons living with disability are treated equally in recruitment, appointment, promotion and training, 70% felt that persons living with disability were fairly treated in the Judiciary while 59% indicated that they get assistance promptly. However, they were least satisfied with the ease of use of washrooms by persons living with disability 34% about 52% of the respondent acknowledged provision of facilities that enhance accessibility by Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report38 Figure 24: Satisfaction indices for parameters in disability, HIV/AIDS and gender equality at the judiciaryThe report recommends the following: (i) Design of facilities in the Judiciary to always consider persons with disability, (ii) Washrooms to be modified to take care of persons with disabilityCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report39 (iii) Enhance accessibility by employees living with disability to key facilities. This would be ensuring each building is equipped with disability friendly facilities and equipment such as ramps, elevators, walkways, washrooms, among others, (iv) Establishment of structures for provision of prompt assistance to persons living with disabilities.4.1.2 HIV/AIDSThe Survey established that 85% of the respondents agreed that there was absence of discrimination of staff at work place on the basis of their HIV/AIDS status while 73% were satisfied with observation of confidentiality of the HIV status of staff. However, only 57% of the respondents indicated that they had been sensitised on HIV/AIDS related issues as presented in Figure 25.There is no discrimination of staff due to HIV status HIV Status of staff is kept confidentialI have been sensitized on HIV/AIDS related issuesStrongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree 16.2%68.3%45.4%10.2% 15.4%28.0%9.4%59.8%17.3%9.8%13.1%6.1%Figure 25: Level of satisfaction with HIV/AIDS policies and practicesThe report recommends the following: (i) Continuous sensitization for judges, judicial officers and staff on HIV and AIDS, (ii) Sensitisation of staff on HIV/AIDS and related issues should be integrated into the training programmes. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report40 4.1.3 Gender MainstreamingArticle 27 of the Constitution of Kenya provides for non-discrimination of any person on the basis of gender among others. In addition, Article 81(b) provides that no more than two thirds of all elective public positions should go to either gender. In this regard, 63% of the respondents acknowledged full compliance with this requirement by the Judiciary. Further, 74% indicated absence of gender based violence and 66% reported absence of sexual harassment while 65% agreed that Judiciary had created awareness on gender related issues. Figure 26 illustrates the findings of the survey. There is full implementation of the one-thirdgender ruleThere is no gender-based discrimination atworkplaceThe Judiciary has created awareness ongender related issuesThere is no sexual haressment at workplaceStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly Agree70.0%57.2%24.7%10.0% 8.0%60.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%70.0%60.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%8.7%15.1%60.7%15.5%60.0%40.0%50.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%11.9%25.1%54.8%8.2%0.0%60.0%70.0%40.0%50.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%8.8%17.0% 13.0%61.1%0.0%Figure 26: Level of satisfaction with Gender mainstreamingThe report recommends the following: (i) Operationalizition of 30% gender rule, intensifying awareness on gender related issues and strengthening redress mechanisms for gender based violence and sexual harassment. 4.2 Health and SafetyThe main goal of Occupational Health and Safety programs is to foster a safe and healthy work environment. This aims at protecting Judiciarys Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report41 employees and customers who might be affected by the workplace environment. The overall satisfaction level of respondents with health and safety measures in the judiciary was 60.2%.Figure 27 exhibits percentage of employees reporting satisfaction with health and safety measures in place at the Judiciary. It reveals that 84% agreed that the Judiciary was concerned with employees health and safety while 70% agreed that the Judiciary communicated its health and safety policy to employees. However, 36% were satisfied with the training received on health and safety at work place. The Judiciary is concerned about health & safety ofits employees I am satisfied with treining I have recoived on health andsafety at work placeThe Judiciary has communicated its health & safetypolicy to employeesStrongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree 19.6%49.8%10.2%9.7%6.1%25.4%20.5%7.6%28.2%21.9%42.2%58.8%Figure 27: Percentage of respondents reporting satisfaction with health and safety policiesWith regard to health, Figure 28 illustrates that 72% of the respondents agreed on the availability of sufficient mechanisms to ensure health and well-being of employees. However, majority of employees 80% were not satisfied with the trainings on First Aid. Similarly, (84%) indicated lack of regular fire drills in the Judiciary. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report42 There are sufficient mechanisms in place to ensurehealth and well-being of employeesI am satisfied with the way The judiciary has trainedstaff on first AID Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree Strongly DisagreeDisagreeAgreeStrongly Agree 12.7%2.5%49.4%35.3%Fire drills are conducted regularly20.1%9.1%18.9%52.0%46.6%16.7%3.5%33.2%Figure 28: Percentage of satisfaction with health measuresFigure 29 reveals that 52% of the employees were not satisfied with the level security of staff and equipment. However, there was improvement 58% regarding the prevailing condition and safety of employees work stations. With regard to fire safety; 38% indicated availability of fire fighting equipment in the premises; a low of 27% confirmed availability of clearly labeled fire exits; while a high of 84% indicated lack of regular fire drills in the Judiciary. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report43 50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%28.0%33.8% 32.5%5.8%40.0%50.0%60.0%9.1%18.8%9.7%62.5%70.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%40.0%50.0%30.0%20.0%20.5%31.5%41.0%7.0%10.0%0.0%14.7%27.8%47.8%9.6%StronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly Agree StronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeWires and cables are well protected I.e no bare orhanging wiresThere are clearly labelled fire exits in case ofemergency escape60.0%50.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%50.0%40.0%40.2%4.3%32.1%23.5%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%15.7%26.7%50.8%6.9%StronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeStronglyDisagreeDisagree Agree Strongly AgreeThere is adequate security for staff & EquipmentThe conditions and safety of my work station at themoment is goodThere is fire fighting equipment at my place of workto minimize risksWork-related accidents & illness are reported toimmediate supervisorFigure 29: Percentage of satisfaction with safety measuresThe report recommends the following: (i) Improve security for staff and equipment at the Judiciary premises by installing security cameras, security scanners, and personnel, building perimeter walls and by introducing inventory movement registers and tags, among others, (ii) Provide adequate fire-fighting equipment in all buildings and ensure they are regularly serviced, (iii) Properly labeled fire exits and regular training on fire drills and trainings be regularised, (iv) Continuous sensitization on first aid and general safety to provide emergency assistance in incidences of work related accidents. First aid boxes should be fitted in strategic locations in all buildings of the judiciary.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report44 4.3 Premises CleanlinessClean surroundings are an important factor in increasing work productivity. Keeping offices clean at all times will create a more productive atmosphere. In this survey, six parameters were investigated giving an overall satisfaction index of premises cleanliness of 62.3 %.The staff were most satisfied with the cleaning of offices as required, with an index of 69%, followed by the availability and strategic placement of litter bins at 67%. However, they were least satisfied with the cleanliness and supply of necessary toiletries in the washrooms for their use at 49%, the adequacy of drinking water at 52% and the adoption of appropriate sanitation at 52%. Figure 30: Satisfaction with Premises CleanlinessCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report45 The report recommends the following: (i) Maintenance of appropriate sanitation and hygiene standards in the offices, courtrooms and shared facilities,(ii) Cleanliness of staff and public washrooms and supply of necessary toiletries should be prioritised. 4.4 Office Space and EquipmentAdequate office space enhances employee productivity while proper office equipment keeps the operations of the institution running smoothly and efficiently. The survey indicated a satisfaction level of 56.2% on office space and equipment. As presented in Figure 31, the staff were most dissatisfied 58% with the quality of facilities in their offices while 51% felt that there was adequate parking space in the Judiciary. Only 47% were happy with the design of their work stations and general ergonomics and 54% with the location of their work station. There was general dissatisfaction with the adequacy of office space with 68% dissatisfied while 71% of staff were dissatisfied with adequacy of seats. However, 52% agreed that they had adequate equipment to do their job. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report46 Figure 31: Satisfaction with Office and EquipmentThe report recommends the following: i. Provision of adequate office space for judges, judicial officers and staff, ii. The design and location of work stations should be facilitative and general ergonomics prioritised, iii. Offices should be adequately equipped with requisite office Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report47 furniture and equipment, iv. Provision of adequate parking space.4.5 General Work EnvironmentA positive work environment makes employees feel good about coming to work and this provides the motivation to sustain them throughout the day. Five parameters were investigated under general work environment and the results revealed staff satisfaction index of 59.7%. About 51% were satisfied with temperature, humidity and airflow at work place while 54% were satisfied with the availability of open work environment. Majority of staff (68%) indicated that their work load was reasonable while 68% indicated that work stress did not affect their performance. There was less than positive feedback on the Kenya Judicial Staff Association where 44% believed that it is active, and 49% dont know how to contact the association. Further, the Survey revealed that documents in Judiciary are easily retrievable.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report48 Figure 32: Satisfaction with general work environmentThe report recommends development and implementation of Judiciary work environment management policy.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report49 4.6 Conduciveness and Care for EnvironmentAspects regarding the conduciveness and care for work environment were investigated and the results are presented in Figure 33. The overall satisfaction level stood at 61.1% indicating that the staff were satisfied with the conduciveness of and care for environment. The staff members were in least agreement that there existed an environment policy for the Judiciary at 44% and continuity in environment care at 48%. Similarly, only 35% agreed that there is a designated office/officer handling environmental issues. 40.0%50.0%30.0%20.0%19.7%32.5%42.2%5.5%10.0%0.0%40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%22.7%33.0%39.7%4.6%StronglyDisagreeDisagree AgreeAgreeStronglyStronglyDisagreeDisagree AgreeAgreeStronglyStronglyDisagreeDisagree AgreeAgreeStrongly40.0%30.0%20.0%10.0%0.0%The Judiciary has shown continuity in Environment CareThe Judiciary has a work environment policy There is a designated office/officer handlingwork environment issues26.0%38.6%30.8%4.5%Figure 33: Satisfaction with Conduciveness of and Care for the EnvironmentThe report recommends the following: (i) The Judiciary should develop an environment management policy, (ii) Administrative units should be mandated to coordinate and follow-up environmental issues. Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report50 CHAPTER FIVEIMPLEMENTATION PLAN5.0 Recommendations Implementation MatrixThe implementation matrix provides a road-map for successful implementation of the recommendations of the survey report. In this regard, there is need therefore, for leadership from the CJ, CRJ, Registrars, Directors, and Heads of various courts in implementation of this report.Table 10: Recommendations Implementation MatrixMeasure Recommendation ResponsibilityCustomer Satisfaction Index Conduct awareness campaigns on Judiciary mandate, core values and services through service weeks, talk shows and outreach programmesCRJStrengthen customer care desks by providing adequate training to judicial staff in chargeRegistrars Provide adequate Information Communication and Education materials to customer care desksDPACDevelop and implement registry manuals to improve efficiency at court registriesRegistrars Enforce compliance timelines on performance standards on hearing and determination of cases, file retrieval and typing of proceedings and judgement PMDDisplay service delivery charters at all court stations HOSsEnforce compliance with service delivery charter standards RegistrarsStrengthen alternative dispute resolution mechanisms CRJSensitize litigants on notarizing services RegistrarsStrengthen provision of pro-bono services RegistrarsMainstream timely payment and refund of cash bail/bondCRJReview court fees for improved access to court services CRJSensitize litigants on role of Ombudsman and Court User CommitteesHOSsEnhance public engagement and media outreach to boost public confidenceCRJMainstream reform initiatives across courts to sustain positive institutional image CRJCustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report51 Measure Recommendation ResponsibilityE m p l o y e e Satisfaction IndexAdopt of regular performance feedback from supervisors PMDTrain judicial staff on computer and data interpretation ICTConduct training needs assessments for judges, judicial officers and staffHRMATrain judges, judicial officers and staff on priority skills and competenciesHRMAEqual distribution of training opportunities HRMADevelop and implement Judiciary internal communication policyDPACFormulate and implement an incentive scheme for judges, judicial officers and staffPMMSCWork Environment IndexDesign court prototype with provision for persons with disability CRJSensitize judges, judicial officers and staff on HIV and AIDSCRJPromote infrastructure accessibility by employees living with disability to key facilitiesCRJFormulate and implement redress mechanisms for gender based violence and sexual harassmentCRJOperationalize30% gender rule and awareness on gender related issues CRJImprove security for staff and equipment at the Judiciary premises by installing security cameras, security scanners, and personnel, building perimeter walls and by introducing inventory movement registers and tagsCRJProvide adequate and regularly serviced fire fighting equipment in all buildings CRJInstall adequate security signage at all courts eg. Fire exits and fire drillsCRJSensitize judges, judicial officers and staff on first aid procedures CRJEquip all courts with First aid boxes at strategic locations CRJMaintain appropriate sanitation and hygiene standards in the offices, courtrooms and shared facilitiesHOSsEnsure clean staff and public washrooms and supply necessary toiletries at all courts HOSsProvide adequate office space for judges, judicial officers and staffCRJEquip all courts and offices with adequate furniture and equipmentCRJProvide adequate parking space for all judges, judicial officers and staff CRJDevelop and implement of Judiciary work environment management policyHRMACustomer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report52 CHAPTER SIXCONCLUSIONThe Customer Satisfaction Survey was undertaken to establish the satisfaction levels of the Judiciarys customers and assess the customers perception on quality of service delivery. The customer survey targeted litigants and their families and friends, plaintiffs, victims and witnesses including experts for the case, advocates, law enforcement officers, contractors and suppliers, media and development partners. Employee and work environment survey on the other hand was undertaken to establish the level of employee morale, how employees perceive the workplace, assess teamwork and management activities. The Overall Customer Satisfaction Index was 66.8% while that for employee and work environment were 66.5% and 60.4% respectively. This was based on 4-point Likert scale computation. The results show general satisfaction according to this scale. It is therefore imperative for the Judiciary to implement the Report recommendations.Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report53 APPENDICESAppendix 1: Customer satisfaction indices per courtCourt nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexSUPREME COURTSupreme Court 74.7 79.9 74.7 69 64.1 74.9 71.9 72.8 72.9 72.3COURT OF APPEALEldoret Court of Appeal 100 100 97.2 63.9 75 100 75 75 75 85.3Kisumu Court of Appeal 87.3 81.3 75.6 70.1 76 83.3 81 91.7 70 78.6Nairobi Court of Appeal 70.3 66.3 73.1 67.5 68.5 70.8 67.8 75 58.8 69.7Nakuru Court of Appeal 56.8 59.8 47.4 43.1 45.7 51.8 57.7 45.8 50 50.2HIGH COURT/ DIVISIONSBungoma High Court 73.8 83.3 75.2 70.9 57.2 67.9 79.5 76 67.5 72.3Busia High Court 77.1 80.7 65.9 66.2 62.3 73.4 74.7 64.6 60 69.9Eldoret High Court 69.4 75.6 63.5 61.2 62.8 85 76.9 74.6 63.9 69Embu High Court 64 67.8 64.4 59.7 60.3 75.6 69.3 73.1 60.1 65.1Garissa High Court 76.8 79.5 79.2 80.8 82.2 80.4 78.6 85.7 55 79.6Homa Bay High Court 74 75 54.5 59.4 66.8 80.3 75 76.3 56.3 67.3Kakamega High Court 68.8 73.7 59.8 54.7 56.6 72.9 70.8 69 44 64.8Kericho High Court 73.7 77.9 71.1 70.4 68.5 84.1 77.4 80.8 76 74Kerugoya High Court 77.3 79 76.5 76.9 73.8 76.4 76.1 75 77.1 74.9Kisii High Court 65.3 63.4 61.9 57.4 59.1 69.3 61.2 64.8 60.4 61.8Kisumu High Court 82.8 87.2 74.8 72 71.1 79.7 79.1 77.7 71 77.5Kitale High Court 63.7 78.8 67.1 62 59.3 63.1 66.4 65.9 54.3 65.7Machakos High Court 65.6 70.9 64.5 66.4 64.1 73.2 73.3 70 56.3 67.4Malindi High Court 59 68.4 69 56 54.4 66.4 75.5 60 55 63.4Meru High Court 58.8 60.3 61.9 52.7 62.4 65.9 62.6 59.6 43 60.6Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report54 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexMilimani Civil Division 72 67.6 74.8 67.3 68.4 80.7 68.8 68.8 63.1 70.3Milimani Commercial and Admirality Division66.6 67.8 69.1 62.1 63.7 76.2 60.1 64.5 57.5 65.7Milimani Constitutional Human Rights Division76 86.7 81.3 68.9 61.3 82.8 84.4 78.1 62.9 76.1Milimani Criminal Division69.8 72.8 70.6 64.2 64.4 71.1 71 74.2 65.2 68.7Milimani Environment & Land Division62.1 71.7 66.5 58.9 62.3 85.3 73.8 69.8 63.8 67.2Milimani Judicial Review Division66.7 75.7 72.5 63.6 63.8 83.9 77.5 70 48.6 70.5Mombasa High Court 64.4 59.8 60.6 50.7 53.5 70 64.2 57.2 52.3 59.3Muranga High Court 73.5 79.7 69.9 74.7 73.5 85.9 86.8 78.1 0 74.9Nakuru High Court 80.8 82.3 64.2 55.6 52.3 67.6 75.8 92.9 46.7 67.8Nyeri High Court 71.2 71.2 69.4 56.7 62.9 77.1 72.5 78.3 63.1 68Nairobi Industrial Court 63.5 63 70 51.8 63.4 70.7 68.7 61.1 57.8 63.9MAGISTRATE COURTSBaricho Magistrate Court 74.9 76.9 74.7 71.2 69 71.6 75.1 65 65.9 72.8Bomet Magistrate Court 67.3 52.3 45.6 40.5 48 48.2 49.8 45.3 53.2 49.2Bondo Magistrate Court 66.8 69.3 59.6 58.1 62.8 68.3 66.7 67.8 54.6 63.3Bungoma Magistrate Court75.8 83.4 74 69.7 63.4 79.6 77.6 79.5 50 74.1Busia Magistrate Court 75.7 83.8 77.1 70 65 80.3 80.2 74.7 56.3 74.9Butali Magistrate Court 70.2 72.1 61.7 60 62.9 72.7 71.6 66.8 52 66.2Butere Magistrate Court 69.5 73 63 62.4 64.9 73.3 71.7 69.9 58.3 67.7Chuka Magistrate Court 71.2 75.8 67.6 69.8 63.5 77.4 76.5 70.8 67.4 70.3Eldama Ravine Magistrate Court64.5 69.6 53.2 48.3 51.3 60.2 62.4 60.1 52.7 57.3Eldoret Magistrate Court 63.7 70.1 61.9 54.4 59.6 70.7 66 65.3 56.3 62.7Embu Magistrate Court 71.7 70.5 67.5 55 60.7 81.6 65.7 78.8 72.5 66.8Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report55 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexEngineer Magistrate Court63.4 79.4 63.9 74 52.2 76.3 75 69.4 80 67.6Garissa Magistrate Court 79.8 79.9 76.8 78.1 74.1 80.2 75.4 78.8 58.6 76.7Garsen Magistrate Court 86.4 90.3 78.5 79.1 88.5 91.9 91.1 88.9 60 85.6Gatundu Magistrate Court56.9 70.6 59.7 51.6 54.2 51.1 62.9 46.9 47 57.2Gichugu Magistrate Court70.8 76.9 71.6 67.3 66.6 71.9 74.6 68.8 61.7 71.2Githongo Magistrate Court77.3 77.5 80.4 80.2 72.6 93.3 90.9 83.7 80.7 80Githunguri Magistrate Court67.5 71.9 58.3 56.3 60.5 46.2 70.9 41 25 61.4Hamisi Magistrate Court 60.8 68.5 52.1 55.1 54.4 69.7 62.5 62.5 53.3 59Hola Magistrate Court 71.6 82.9 65.3 62 64.8 95.5 94.7 81.7 65 74.9Homa Bay Magistrate Court71.5 76.6 66.4 68.6 65.6 75.9 71.6 75.6 72.9 70.1Isiolo Magistrate Court 70.9 69.4 60.5 65.4 64.5 73.6 76 65.4 60.4 66.5Iten Magistrate Court 68.7 77 68.6 66.5 63.1 74.6 73.3 73.8 56.9 69.9Kabarnet Magistrate Court66.1 73.3 73.3 65.8 72.2 78 75.2 73.6 52.5 71.7Kajiado Magistrate Court 68.4 67.2 63.4 65.4 64.7 72.6 69.1 64.9 61.8 67Kakamega Magistrate Court70.6 72.8 61.3 56.1 58.1 73.3 71 67.2 59.6 65.4Kakuma Magistrate Court 68.5 51 31.8 42.2 44.2 76.4 69.2 71.9 48.3 49.4Kaloleni Magistrate Court 73.7 77.7 64.6 67.5 65.6 76.7 71.6 68.8 68 69.8Kandara Magistrate Court 71.5 73.4 65.7 61.9 59.7 69.6 71.4 60 50.7 66Kangema Magistrate Court74.7 80.4 77.4 67.1 70.5 76.2 70.3 68.8 54.6 73.3Kangundo Magistrate Court65.1 75.3 63.7 71.5 58.5 75.3 77.3 71.9 73 68.4Kapenguria Magistrate Court75 51.2 52.2 50 64.6 75 70.8 75 75 59.8Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report56 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexKapsabet Magistrate Court68 69.8 56.1 53.4 61.1 72.8 72.8 62.5 52.5 62.9Karatina Magistrate Court 61.2 70.1 68.2 54.1 62 74.4 74.6 74.4 58.2 65.6Kehancha Magistrate Court61.5 71.9 65 67.6 62.5 72.1 72.9 68.8 60 67.3Kericho Magistrate Court 73 70.3 67.5 63.4 64.2 76.3 69.1 70.5 67.6 68.3Keroka Magistrate Court 77.6 84.2 69.5 72 66.1 74.7 77.5 77.5 51.7 73.6Kerugoya Magistrate Court76.9 77.7 81 75.2 74 76.8 79.2 70.8 77 76.4Kiambu Magistrate Court 73.7 66.3 66.9 58 62.8 78.7 66.3 70.5 62.3 66.3Kibera Magistrate Court 49.4 67.1 55.3 57.2 46.6 72.8 63.7 58.8 60.7 57.6Kigumo Magistrate Court 79.2 79.7 72.5 71.8 74.3 72.5 73.3 75 70.5 74.4Kikuyu Magistrate Court 60.4 72.6 56.8 58.2 55.6 58.3 63.1 52.4 39.6 59.2Kilgoris Magistrate Court 69.8 68.4 46.5 41.2 54.3 75.5 71.9 72 47.8 58.8Kilifi Magistrate Court 65.4 71 65.8 64.7 61.4 68.9 71.8 66.2 56.8 66.7Kilungu/Nunguni Magistrate Court63.5 60.4 64.2 56.7 52.1 77.6 67.3 67.3 72.5 61.7Kimilili Magistrate Court 71.3 73 62.8 60.5 63 73 73.4 70.4 66.7 67.6Kisii Magistrate Court 64.4 63.3 61.1 58.8 57.6 66.8 58.5 65.8 61.9 60.9Kisumu Magistrate Court 75.5 77.6 71.4 67.8 67.8 81.6 76.4 75.3 67.6 73.1Kitale Magistrate Court 66.2 70.2 66.2 63 60.9 71.5 72.7 66.3 63.7 66.2Kithimani Magistrate Court62.6 78.1 66.3 67.1 65 78.6 77.8 77.5 70 70.3Kitui Magistrate Court 71.8 77.8 76.1 75.2 63.9 72.5 72.6 81.9 61 72.2Kwale Magistrate Court 68.9 75.7 63.1 61.2 53.9 86.9 77 62.5 45.8 67.3Kyuso magistrate Court 67 68 56.2 64.8 52.8 61.7 70 54.7 75 61.5Lamu Magistrate Court 72.5 86.6 67.2 70.9 69.4 90.4 87.5 75 71.9 75.7Limuru Magistrate Court 70.7 75 73.8 64.9 61.1 79.7 76.5 77 77 70.6Lodwar Magistrate Court 57.5 59.4 47.7 54.9 51.9 68.8 50 59.4 75 53.7Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report57 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexMachakos Magistrate court60.1 70 62.6 66.3 58.7 68.2 67.8 63.5 56.9 64.2Makadara Magistrate Court55.3 75.1 55.1 56.8 50.8 89.5 74.4 53.7 51.5 61.3Makindu Magistrate Court58.4 55.7 54.2 56.5 55.1 68.8 61.6 62.5 54.8 57.6Makueni Magistrate Court63.9 71.4 56.4 58.9 57.4 68.8 70.8 66.7 75 63.2Malindi Magistrate Court 59.9 69.7 73.3 59.9 56.8 68.2 68.4 57.2 61.9 63.6Mandera Magistrate Court68.1 74.2 74.2 73.9 72.7 73.5 70.8 78.4 50.7 72.3Maralal Magistrate Court 74.6 82.9 69 74.3 66 86.8 83 68.1 50 75.5Mariakani Magistrate Court65.3 61.2 69.1 68.3 58.8 71.2 71.5 69 73.3 65.9Marimanti Magistrate Court70.7 69.7 61.1 68.1 67.5 72.7 68.9 75 62.8 67.2Marsabit Magistrate Court79.9 83.7 71.2 79.6 71.2 83.5 81.8 75 44.4 76.9Maseno Magistrate Court 66.6 70.2 62.7 64.5 62.1 74.4 72.7 72.7 71.3 66.9Maua Magistrate Court 61.9 61.2 60.5 63.4 58.7 69.4 66.9 61.1 51.8 61.6Mavoko Magistrate Court 74.7 77.8 68.8 72.9 67.7 74 75.2 71.9 62.9 72Mbita Magistrate Court 68.2 72.8 68.5 61.4 63.2 71.6 70.4 72.5 60.5 66.7Meru Magistrate Court 60.7 65 60.3 56.6 58.7 66.9 62.9 54.3 46.6 60.7Migori Magistrate Court 68.3 74.7 66 65.3 65 69.6 70.3 65 65.7 67.7Milimani Anti-corruption Court65.7 64.6 65.4 58.5 56.8 78.5 64.8 56.6 65 63.7Milimani Childrens Division69.9 68.8 69.5 63.7 63.7 72.2 66.7 70 56.3 67.4Milimani Commercial Court68 69.1 64.7 63 60.1 72.9 64.1 71.6 47.8 65Milimani Family Court 60.8 72.8 64.2 60 54.6 81.6 70.7 64 59.3 64Milimani Magistrate Court65 72.3 64.2 63.3 57.3 73.8 69 64.7 53.4 65.3Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report58 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexMolo Magistrate Court 76.3 79.4 63.7 64.3 64.6 76.9 76.4 73.3 69.6 70.5Mombasa Magistrate Court69.1 64.4 65.1 54.1 58.8 74.4 65.5 67.3 54.9 63.6Moyale Magistrate Court 77.7 83.8 63.8 85 72.8 90.6 90.6 74 58.5 78.3Mukurwe-ini Magistrate Court67.6 75.6 62.8 58.8 68.6 81.3 79.2 80.8 71.7 70Mumias Magistrate Court 68 72.3 61.1 59.6 60.2 71.1 72.2 65.2 42.5 66Muranga Magistrate Court72.1 80.9 73.2 68.5 70.7 78 75.3 67.1 58.3 72.3Mutumo Magistrate Court73 85.7 40.7 42.6 47.7 87.5 89.6 75 65 63.5Mwingi Magistrate Court 79.4 83 77.9 74.2 62.4 81.9 83.8 82.8 74.8 76.7Nairobi City Court 56.5 61.7 57.6 56 57.8 72.2 69.4 57.6 56.1 61.1Naivasha Magistrate Court75.5 66.9 72.2 72 62.4 77.9 74.5 76 70.8 70.9Nakuru Magistrate Court 60.2 65.4 52.2 50.7 47.6 60.6 61.1 68.1 51.1 56.2Nanyuki Magistrate Court 66.5 77.9 65.5 66.2 55.5 75.7 75.5 72.4 55 67.3Narok Magistrate Court 68.8 56 59.1 45.4 57.5 60.2 58.8 59.6 70.2 57.9Ndhiwa Magistrate Court 77.5 77.4 61.3 67.2 71.5 79.9 75.7 81.9 71.7 71.3Nkubu Cagistrate Court 66 69 68.8 65 68.8 72.7 70.7 62.5 59.4 68.1Nyahururu Magistrate Court66.7 71.6 67.2 70.8 53 75 73.8 71.6 60 67.8Nyamira Magistrate Court 66.9 72.4 57.1 60.2 61.8 70.8 69 67.1 67.5 64Nyando Magistrate Court 75.8 70 63.6 62 64 78.3 74.6 78.6 58.3 68.9Nyeri Magistrate Court 60.5 77.8 72.8 56.3 57.9 75.3 76.1 76.2 60.4 67.3Ogembo Magistrate Court68.3 70.4 53.2 52.1 63.1 70.7 66.7 70.1 40.6 61.7Othaya Magistrate Court 72.2 75.4 58.5 61.1 65.2 81.3 79.2 76.8 69.7 68.7Oyugis Magistrate Court 72.9 80.5 67.3 62.8 66.9 71.3 72.3 66.1 67 69.9Rongo Magistrate Court 75.3 77.9 64.3 67.4 70.9 77.1 75 86.7 87.5 72.4Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report59 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexRunyenjes Magistrate Court71.6 75.6 63.5 52.6 56.6 79.9 70 73.9 63.1 66.4Shanzu Magistrate Court 64.1 64.2 65 59.2 57.7 71.9 74.3 74.3 54.2 64.9Siakago Magistrate Court 63 77.4 60.8 56.6 53.8 76.6 74 74.2 60.7 65.2Siaya Magistrate Court 66 74 61.8 66.2 62.3 68.9 65.6 61.9 58.9 65.4Sirisia Magistrate Court 69.7 75 65.4 62 62.2 75.2 71.5 72 62.1 68.6Sotik Magistrate Court 62.3 65.4 52.1 45.1 52.8 64.5 66.4 61.4 55.6 56.7Tamu Magistrate Court 83.4 77.9 69.2 68.4 66.1 77.5 82.1 75.8 52.5 74.1Taveta Magistrate Court 80.9 82 74.3 61.2 51 86.4 84.4 75 40 71.7Tawa Magistrate Court 70.5 74.1 65.1 72.1 66.7 80.7 74.7 76 73.6 71.1Thika Magistrate Court 66.1 73.4 68.7 61.5 55.9 77.4 74.1 64.1 61.1 67Tigania Magistrate Court 64.9 68.5 60.2 61.7 52.9 72.1 66.8 62.5 46.3 62.7Tononoka Magistrate Court68.5 61.5 69.3 64.3 68.7 75 70.8 72.1 57.5 67.6Ukwala Magistrate Court 82.6 86.4 69.5 59.6 65.5 78.3 75.8 85.7 52.2 74Vihiga Magistrate Court 61.9 67.7 50.6 53.6 56.1 74.7 67.3 65.6 53.3 59.9Voi Magistrate Court 62.1 73.9 59.7 58.8 55.5 66.6 64.6 61.8 48.7 62.0Wajir Magistrate Court 71.5 66.4 76.5 68.8 67.7 65.6 71.3 71.9 46.7 70.0Wanguru Magistrate Court74.1 77.8 71 66.7 67.4 77.7 77.3 78.8 75 72.7Webuye Magistrate Court 71.5 77.8 69.3 66.5 64.4 78.1 76.4 72.8 69.6 70.9Winam Magistrate Court 80.3 70.4 64.8 62.3 63.6 79.4 79.4 82.5 62.5 70.6Wundanyi Magistrate Court75.8 83.5 78.9 73 48.6 81.3 81.4 79.2 63.2 73.7KADHI COURTSBungoma Kadhi Court 78.1 78.9 75.5 76.4 58.1 75 85.4 71.9 0 74.2Garissa Kadhi Court 77.3 75.9 78.1 82.7 75.1 79.7 81.6 75 52.9 77.2Garsen Kadhi Court 78 82.3 70.6 67.5 71.5 88 81.7 83.6 68.9 76.0Hola Kadhi Court 79.6 90.3 69.1 66.1 67.2 95 90.5 70.5 40.0 76.1Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report60 Court nameClear mission, vision and core valuesCustomer care desk and registryLocation, equipment and facilitiesCommunication to customersService qualityCustomers perception of Judges and MagistratesCustomers perception of judicial staffInstitutional imageComplaint handlingOverall Satisfaction IndexIsiolo Kadhi Court 70.8 75 68.1 72.2 77.4 75 75 79.2 62.5 73.6Kajiado Kadhi Court 70.8 93.8 83.3 100 90 93.8 91.7 100 100 90.7Kilifi Kadhi Court 71.9 75 73.1 75 75.3 77.8 75 75 75.0 75.0Kisumu Kadhi Court 77.6 79.2 65.5 61.5 63.7 80.4 77.7 71.4 65.0 70.9Kitale Kadhi Court 100 75 69.2 0 65 75 75 100 0 75.5Kwale Kadhi Court 70.9 94.4 71.4 81.6 42.1 98.2 88 85.4 62.5 76.4Lamu Kadhi Court 72 75.5 64 72.6 69 83.8 86.1 83.7 63.6 72.8Machakos Kadhi Court 66.7 75.3 61.9 73.4 62.4 74.6 73.8 73.3 50 68.3Malindi Kadhi Court 64.1 75.9 76.6 75.9 74.4 72.5 77.3 66.7 62.5 73.5Mandera Kadhi Court 78.3 78.8 82.8 81.1 79.2 81.3 86.9 79.2 50.0 80.8Mombasa Kadhi Court 72.1 67.7 76 65.4 65.2 75.8 74.1 79.2 55.5 70.2Moyale Kadhi Court 75 81.3 70 91.7 79.2 100 100 87.5 87.5 85.0Nairobi Kadhi Court 62.3 68.9 66.4 65.4 67.2 75.8 72.3 75 76.5 68.7Wajir Kadhi Court 85.4 76.2 67.9 63.9 81.3 72.9 68.1 75 75 72.6Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report61 Appendix 2: Employee satisfaction and work environment indices by Court/Directorate/OfficeCourt/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexSUPREME COURTSupreme Court 73.4 58 58.4 56.4 47.3 50.9 64.9 60.5 60.5 54.9 65.6 61.7 57.8COURT OF APPEALEldoret Court of Appeal 100 65 75 72.7 52.5 80 75 54.2 70 59.4 85.9 75 71.4Kisumu Court of Appeal 76.4 60.8 65.2 66.6 53.5 62.8 67 59.4 66.1 66.4 73.3 64.2 65Malindi Court of Appeal 86.1 65.4 67.1 73.8 48.8 63.6 73.3 61.6 64.2 66.1 73 58.7 65.9Nairobi Court of Appeal 85.6 54.8 56.1 60.4 49.4 52.2 67.6 59.6 63.1 53.6 67.7 61.2 59.3HIGH COURT/DIVISIONSBungoma High Court 87.5 80 71.9 66.7 65 60 71.9 95.8 100 65.6 75 75 72.2Busia High Court 81.3 47.5 73.4 65.6 37.5 57.5 59.4 77.1 45 59.4 86.7 80.4 63.8Eldoret High Court 83.8 61.9 71.6 70.3 50.5 64.3 66.5 66.7 69.1 66.1 79.3 63.5 66.9Embu High Court 84.2 66.6 67 72.3 59.3 65.7 70.9 64.8 65.6 66.5 73.1 63.1 68Garissa High Court 87.5 66.3 70.3 63 54.4 55 60.9 76 76.3 62.5 81.3 72.3 67.7Homa Bay High Court 80.2 57.1 68.8 60.5 47.4 62.4 63.5 59.2 61.7 54.3 67.7 56 60.4Kakamega High Court 80.7 58.4 68.9 67.9 59.3 61.7 69.7 62.3 64.6 61.8 76.1 64.7 66.1Kericho High Court 86.5 68 70.6 71.1 52.9 62.5 75.3 62.2 62.2 66.8 72.1 63.6 66.8Kerugoya High Court 79.2 68.3 70.4 71.9 63.9 58.8 64.4 67 71 65.2 74.3 61.5 66.9Kisii High Court 82.6 58.7 66.6 67.7 56.8 55.9 73 62.9 56.5 55.1 71.8 65.3 63.9Kisumu High Court 78.3 71.7 76.3 74 63.4 70.7 78.2 67.9 70.5 68.7 78.3 70.3 72.1Kitale High Court 87.5 77.5 73.4 67 60 77.5 85.9 81.3 87.5 81.3 83.6 71.4 76.1Machakos High Court 80.6 63.8 64.9 67.7 58.4 63.8 68.7 67.1 61.5 59.5 73.9 58.7 65Malindi High Court 82.5 52.1 73.7 72.2 54.9 61 76.4 66.3 66.7 63.1 75 65.2 67.2Meru High Court 83.5 65.3 69.6 71.6 59.4 62.9 70.4 63.4 65.9 66.8 75.5 64.6 67.6Milimani Civil Division 84.4 45.4 52.4 57.6 42.5 48.8 64.1 69.4 43.3 54.3 64.8 61.9 56.3Milimani Commercial And Admirality Division78.1 59.1 66.5 66.9 57 60.8 70.7 62.7 71 62.7 74.2 59.2 65.4Milimani Criminal Division58.3 47.1 54.2 61.1 30 43.3 47.9 47.1 42.5 40.6 68.1 55.3 50.4Milimani- Employees And Labour Relations Court79.2 43.8 57.9 63.9 45.4 56.7 65.6 50 56.7 45.8 65.6 56.2 56.1Milimani Environment &Land Division62.5 47.2 57.3 58.2 31.5 50 78.6 57.3 55 54.7 74.7 48.4 56.5Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report62 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexMilimani Judicial Review Division/Constitutional Court83.3 57.5 60.4 57.5 42 43.8 52.1 70.1 62 56.6 67.7 67.7 57.2Mombasa High Court 79.8 65.1 68 65.9 57.9 58.2 68.4 55.3 63.6 60.7 72.2 58.2 63.3Muranga High Court 76.6 61.8 67.8 60.9 55.9 52.8 62.7 64.3 60.5 60.8 72.4 61.7 62.9Nairobi Industrial Court 78.8 56.6 67.2 64.1 54.4 55.1 67.5 62.1 72.8 55.8 72.7 62.6 63.2Nakuru High Court 81.3 67.5 73 68.4 60.7 64.2 74.1 70.9 62.1 63.2 76.6 67.2 68.9Nyeri High Court 81.3 66.7 77 83.8 86.1 75 84.4 58.3 70 82.8 84.2 69.6 80.6MAGISTRATE COURTSBaricho Magistrate Court 79.2 70 71.4 72.6 64.6 67.3 74 55.8 64.6 70.4 77.1 57.6 68.9Bomet Magistrate Court 76.6 72.5 72.4 72.5 59 70.8 71.3 57.8 66.6 65.6 73.4 62.1 68.5Bondo Magistrate Court 84.6 68.5 65.9 66.5 59.9 59.2 59.9 55.8 64 60.4 71.5 64.1 64.4Bungoma Magistrate Court79.5 69.4 72.4 76 66.8 72.2 73.6 75.1 72.2 70.1 75 73.9 72.5Busia Magistrate Court 79.7 61.9 71.7 73.8 54.2 65.9 71.4 57 56.2 65 78.1 64.1 67Butali Magistrate Court 84.7 64.9 77 74.2 70.3 70.1 78.1 60.4 62.8 70.1 79.7 64 72.4Butere Magistrate Court 78.3 60.1 69.7 63.7 57.1 54.7 61.3 71.5 62.2 58.1 75.3 61 64.3Chuka Magistrate Court 88.9 56.3 75.7 72.3 65.1 73.9 70.5 71.8 68.9 63.9 83.8 73.4 71.3Eldama Ravine Magistrate Court84.4 69.6 74.1 69.3 66.7 74 70.3 64.3 67.7 69 76.3 70.3 70.8Eldoret Magistrate Court 82.6 60.9 67.3 67.7 53.5 62.5 73.6 62.5 65 62 71.4 59.8 64.8Engineer Magistrate Court 85.7 61.4 62.9 72.4 53.5 58.8 70.6 67.8 54.6 59.7 70.6 57.1 64.9Garissa Magistrate Court 80 67.5 74.1 69.7 65 75.5 75.3 70 73.5 67.8 73 72 71.2Garsen Magistrate Court 78.8 61.8 70.7 75.4 53.7 60 74.1 56.7 67.5 67.5 75.5 63.5 67.3Gatundu Magistrate Court 78 66.1 68.1 60.9 55.8 57.3 69.1 60.6 55.8 60.2 67.1 62.8 62.8Gichugu Magistrate Court 81.3 64.8 64.6 67.5 53.2 55 72.7 55.5 54 51.3 64.3 48.3 61.9Githongo Magistrate Court85.7 64.6 66.3 74.3 48.4 71.7 91.7 66.1 64.3 68.4 79.6 70.3 71.4Githunguri Magistrate Court67 55 57 53.9 43.3 46 56.4 63.4 54.1 57.2 71.8 58.8 57.2Hamisi Magistrate Court 81.3 68.3 72 75.6 71.5 75.6 77.5 72.3 71.3 71.8 79.6 71.8 74Hola Magistrate Court 76.8 66.3 75.6 76.5 55.3 68.6 75.9 65.7 66.2 64.7 71.1 62.2 68.2Homa Bay Magistrate Court82.1 59.6 66.6 62.6 65.4 52.7 63.3 52.4 58.2 57.3 77.2 55.4 63.1Isiolo Magistrate Court 84.8 59.3 63.6 64 53.8 65.3 73.9 71.1 70.5 66.8 74.8 61.6 66Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report63 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexIten Magistrate Court 80.8 64 64.2 65.9 60.3 56.5 63.8 63.8 61.9 58.1 72.6 60.9 63.9Kabarnet Magistrate Court 91.3 77.5 84 83.3 64.9 77 85.1 81.9 80.5 83 87.4 72.9 79.9Kajiado Magistrate Court 88.8 75.7 79.1 79.5 67.4 67.9 78.8 58.8 73.8 72.5 84.5 68.6 74.8Kakakmega Magistrate Court87.5 66.7 75 67.5 55.9 65 68.8 78.6 71.7 69 90.6 68.1 71.8Kakuma Magistrate Court 75 57.3 65 66.3 62.8 57 66.4 50 56 64.4 69.7 57.9 62.4Kaloleni Magistrate Court 85.9 65.6 70.9 74.9 61.6 66.3 79.1 60.7 69.3 68.9 74.3 64.8 69.7Kandara Magistrate Court 77.1 58.3 65.1 74.6 55.3 58.8 70.6 54.8 58.3 62.8 71.4 64.3 64.5Kangema Magistrate Court76.8 68.2 71.1 73.3 62.6 63.9 70.8 68.2 71.4 69.6 74.1 68.4 69.6Kangundo Magistrate Court86.5 55 67.2 64.6 49.8 51.7 58.4 62.8 68 59.4 70.5 59.8 61.3Kapenguria Magistrate Court83.8 64.6 67.3 63.6 52.7 58.2 65.3 63.1 57.9 57.7 76.9 57.8 62.7Kapsabet Magistrate Court82.8 66.3 70.2 70.8 62.4 69.7 74.2 63.1 67.5 71.1 78.3 63.4 70.2Karatina Magistrate Court 82.3 59.4 70.6 65.3 57.1 60 69 57.1 59.2 62 72.3 63.6 64.3Kehancha Magistrate Court86.5 69.2 77.5 72.5 69.8 71.5 82.3 57.5 69.6 62 76.3 65.5 71.6Kericho Magistrate Court 83.3 70 74 75 51.5 62.1 61.5 72.2 84.2 75 75.1 66.7 69.5Keroka Magistrate Court 81.7 62.3 69.6 73.4 57.5 69.2 71.3 57.1 63.5 62.1 71.3 61 66.2Kerugoya Magistrate Court81.3 57.5 69.6 71.6 56.3 75 68.8 50 75 68.8 75 70.8 72.2Kiambu Magistrate Court 75.7 60 64.7 63.9 48.3 58.8 72 66 57.5 59.3 74.3 65.4 63.9Kibera Magistrate Court 89.1 69 72 76.2 65.8 67.5 78.7 60 74.9 79.8 84.1 64.1 73.3Kigumo Magistrate Court 86.7 70.8 79.6 82.3 60.3 72.4 79.2 66.8 73.8 76 80.9 64.4 74.4Kikuyu Magistrate Court 81.3 76.9 74.2 68.9 66.3 70.6 78.8 71.4 72 74.3 79.1 71.4 73.3Kilgoris Magistrate Court 74.4 60.8 61 64.2 52.4 57 65.3 51.4 59.3 59.2 70.3 56.8 60.5Kilifi Magistrate Court 75 68.2 73.1 68.9 59.4 63.8 70.1 63.9 65.4 64.8 70.8 65.1 66.5Kilungu Nunguni Magistrate Court87.5 47.1 61.5 78.9 59.6 75 78.6 72 77.1 72.7 81 71.2 72.7Kimilili Magistrate Court 83.3 68.3 55.2 59 36.1 47.9 79.2 68.1 41.7 41.7 54.4 52.4 56Kisii Magistrate Court 85 51 63.8 65 55.6 66 70 56.3 53.5 54.4 75.4 53.6 62.9Kisumu Magistrate Court 85 59 65.8 69.1 65.8 63.2 60.6 56.8 65.9 61.7 77.5 59.8 66Kitale Magistrate Court 82.3 68.2 72.6 69.2 61.1 64.5 66.4 63.3 69.4 60.9 74.1 59.5 66.8Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report64 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexKithimani Magistrate Court81.3 75.9 76 74 64.6 68.8 71.9 68.2 68.3 66.3 79.6 69.2 71.9Kitui Magistrate Court 77.5 67.5 70.3 66.7 65 49 66.1 52.1 56.3 60.6 69.6 59.6 64.2Kwale Magistrate Court 78.3 66 75.9 73.7 55.6 66 73.5 68.6 69.6 67 74.9 66.8 69.4Kyuso Magistrate Court 96.9 70.7 70 74.2 53.5 51 74.2 40.8 72.3 84.3 83.2 47.4 66Lamu Magistrate Court 79.7 52.9 69.6 66.2 56.1 69.6 68.4 63.1 50.9 58.1 73.1 58.5 64.3Limuru Magistrate Court 82.5 57.5 73.3 71.8 59.8 65.6 73.4 57.6 63.3 65.7 71.6 58.4 66.6Lodwar Magistrate Court 75 56.3 51.3 53.3 56.1 43 45.6 49.2 49 40.6 62.5 56.4 52.9Machakos Magistrate Court82.5 59.1 70.2 67.7 55.9 66 72.5 69.3 67.7 64.8 74.8 64.2 67Makadara Magistrate Court83.6 62.9 64.6 68.2 54.9 57.7 62.6 59.8 63.8 61.1 78.9 67.3 65.3Makindu Magistrate Court 80.7 64.3 74.5 69.7 61.4 59.8 71.9 61.8 66.5 65.2 74.5 58.6 66.9Makueni Magistrate Court 79.7 67.3 67.5 63.4 66.4 60.5 61.5 62 60 56.7 71.2 70.1 65.1Malindi Magistrate Court 81.3 60.8 71.2 67.9 44.5 57.5 72.7 65 72.5 60.9 77.4 60.3 64.8Mandera Magistrate Court 91.1 67.1 69.9 74.7 69 75.7 74.1 70.2 66.1 72.3 75.2 68 72Maralal Magistrate Court 86.3 69 79.9 82.3 74.8 75.9 82.2 78.8 73.9 81.3 84.9 70.1 78.6Mariakani Magistrate Court83.3 69.8 74 76.9 61.7 66.1 80.4 62.2 68.8 74.1 78.5 60.6 71.4Marimanti Magistrate Court83.3 59.4 77.4 72.3 58.2 60 70.9 64.5 72.8 69.2 82.6 59.1 69.4Marsabit Magistrate Court 90.6 73.4 81.3 84 68.6 78.1 71.9 69.8 75.9 74.7 81 71.1 76.8Maseno Magistrate Court 79.2 61.1 66.5 62.9 55.1 61.3 64.1 62.9 67.2 63.4 73.5 66.2 64.2Maua Magistrate Court 80.4 57.7 62.9 67.8 56.9 58.9 68.1 54.9 62.5 59.6 70.9 55.4 64Mavoko Magistrate Court 73.4 70.2 73.9 69.4 63.9 60.2 82 56.6 71.9 69.7 76.5 59.6 69.1Mbita Magistrate Court 85 53 69.4 72.8 63.4 59 72.5 67 66 72 74.6 64.1 67.9Meru Magistrate Court 78.1 70.9 67.4 68.5 59.6 55.9 68.8 67 60 64 72.1 58.3 67.2Migori Magistrate Court 76.6 61.6 66.6 67.8 52.8 61.4 69 60.8 60.3 61.5 72.3 61.2 64.3Milimani Anti-Corruption Court79.2 75 78.3 70.1 49.3 68.3 77.1 63.2 66.7 68.3 79.2 68.5 70.2Milimani Commercial 90 65.3 72.5 63.8 56.1 50 75.8 69.7 67 58.8 81.2 64.3 66.8Milimani Magistrate Court 84.4 63.5 63.1 76.4 53.7 64 71.9 54.2 61.3 64.8 75.9 70.1 66.9Mlimani Childrens Court 87.5 61.8 66.6 72 56.6 65 81.9 67.3 60 60.6 78.5 76.4 69.1Molo Magistrate Court 78.8 57.6 63.7 66.4 55.5 61.3 69.2 64.4 57.9 63.9 74.5 66.6 65.1Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report65 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexMombasa Magistrate Court83.8 59.2 68.1 72.2 55.1 61 69.7 62.3 66.3 64.6 71.4 60.2 65.2Moyale Magistrate Court 85.7 65.7 75.9 68.8 73.2 67.1 79.9 64.3 66.1 75 80.6 67.2 72.9Mukurwe-ini Magistrate Court75 60.4 64.9 61.6 53.8 52 60.6 64.2 55.7 61.7 72 60.3 61.4Mumias Magistrate Court 82.1 58 68.4 67.6 57.5 61.1 64.9 57.3 58.5 58.4 74 58.4 63.7Muranga Magistrate Court 81.3 62.4 67.8 61.5 52.8 57.5 60.5 63 56 59.4 72.6 60.1 61.4Mutumo Magistrate Court 78.1 54.8 66.8 73 45.2 50.6 76 43.6 43 62.6 73.9 56 62.2Mwingi Magistrate Court 84.4 70.7 67.2 68.8 63.7 62.8 62.2 67.3 65.6 59.4 74.4 62.2 66.3Nairobi City Court 75 69.5 74.1 71.4 60.1 64.3 78.6 61.6 59.2 65.3 74.5 62.6 67.9Naivasha Magistrate Court 68.8 61.5 71.1 73.2 62.7 65.9 70.5 57.1 62.4 62.1 75.9 59.5 66.9Nakuru Magistrate Court 84.4 65.6 68.8 65.6 68.1 72.5 83.5 67.7 57.5 72.7 83.9 67.9 71.5Nanyuki Magistrate Court 75.9 62.7 60.2 59.4 51.4 55.4 63.9 60.8 58.2 59.4 63.6 49.5 60.6Narok Magistrate Court 81.3 68.6 70.6 73.5 62.1 55 52.1 58.1 50 59.4 68.9 47.6 70Ndhiwa Magistrate Court 85.8 70.6 74.9 76.4 65.2 70.3 75.7 66 72.8 73.8 82 67.9 73.6Nkubu Magistrate Court 82.3 60.8 70.3 66.4 61.3 62.3 64.9 65.1 69.2 60.8 72.8 63.1 65.4Nyahururu Magistrate Court82.5 66 67.7 70.6 62.5 64.5 68.5 65.5 64.3 66.5 75.2 58.3 67.3Nyamira Magistrate Court 83.7 67.1 68 68.2 58.5 65.8 69.6 63.1 61 61.7 76.4 66.3 67.2Nyando Magistrate Court 86.8 73.5 76.7 74.8 68.1 66.9 76.5 67.3 77.8 72.3 78.1 66.6 73Nyeri Magistrate Court 77.5 57.3 67.5 71.1 55.9 57.5 59 56.7 68.5 63.5 78.4 66.7 65Ogembo Magistrate Court 80.6 48.1 62.3 70.4 56.3 63 78.3 44.8 45.5 57.8 69.2 55.9 61.9Othaya Magistrate Court 72.5 60.3 71.9 60.4 56.7 50 65.6 53.2 69 56 72.2 57.8 61.7Oyugis Magistrate Court 90.2 73.8 78.7 81.8 69.5 76.1 86.7 73.5 76.8 75.7 80.3 71.1 77.5Rongo Magistrate Court 85.7 71.6 75.7 75.6 62.3 66.3 62.5 58.2 67.3 71.4 81.2 68.5 71.2Shanzu Magistrate Court 78.6 61.3 69.9 58.6 58.9 48 59.1 57.1 56 57.1 61.9 57.6 59.7Siakago Magistrate Court 75 58.9 71.3 70.9 58.6 60.4 64.8 66.7 70.9 67.7 79.1 70.6 68.6Siaya Magistrate Court 89.6 68 81 76.6 63.4 70.8 85.4 75 65.3 65.9 84.2 69.7 74.8Sirisia Magistrate Court 84.4 71.3 73.5 77.5 70.8 67.9 73.9 63.5 70.5 64.6 80.1 67.5 71.9Sotik Magistrate Court 79.2 66.5 69.7 69.3 62.5 62.5 69.5 55 66.4 59.9 73 61.4 66.1Tamu Magistrate Court 92.5 58.6 76.9 76.8 62 59.5 68.1 61.3 62.1 71.6 85.4 68.6 70.7Taveta Magistrate Court 75 69.8 78.1 66.7 51.6 66 64.4 65.3 66.5 64.8 69.2 67.6 65.8Tawa Magistrate Court 85.2 63.6 76.7 71.2 60.3 71.5 67.5 61.6 69.8 64.7 82.1 71 70.5Thika Magistrate Court 77.3 56.3 63.5 62.4 45.9 52.1 66.5 62.2 54.4 52.6 67.8 63.4 59.6Tigania Magistrate Court 80.8 55.7 64 66.9 60.2 57.1 70.3 56.6 62.3 59.5 69.4 57.2 62.4Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report66 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexTononoka Magistrate Court78.1 72.5 71.4 74 78.9 75.3 73.9 57.9 75 75 76.4 56.1 70.3Ukwala Magistrate Court 90.4 71.6 76.9 78.3 69.6 70.1 80.5 59.2 74.7 70.2 87.6 65.2 74.7Vihiga Magistrate Court 76.8 54.6 68.8 65.1 51.9 57.9 66.1 64.7 61 64.7 71.9 65 64Voi Magistrate Court 85.2 65.9 77.3 75.9 63.9 72.2 73.1 70.1 67 71.1 77.5 61.7 71.4Wajir Magistrate Court 86.7 63.4 76.4 75.6 65.2 77.8 85.2 73.5 69.5 77.9 84.4 69.2 76Wanguru Magistrate Court80 64.4 67.4 65.8 61.6 57.8 70.4 56.8 67.9 64 74.6 63.7 65.7Webuye Magistrate Court 74.2 61.3 68.9 67.8 60.3 62 65.6 54 70.3 60.8 73.9 67.7 65.2Winam Magistrate Court 77.5 60.1 66.7 67.1 59 55.8 63.4 62.8 56.5 61.1 74.5 65 64.2Wundanyi Magistrate Court84.7 59.6 71.2 71.3 65.6 72.8 75.5 61.7 74 70.5 76.6 63.1 69.9KADHI COURTSGarissa Kadhi Court 75 50 93.8 45.8 40 40 56.3 41.7 65 50 75 67.9 56.6Kilifi Kadhi Court 75 55 78.1 63.6 63.9 58.3 71.9 50 50 70.8 73.3 60 65.5Kisumu Kadhi Court 87.5 79 73.8 72 62.9 69 74.4 68.5 55 70.5 81.8 62.5 70.6Kitale Kadhi Court 87.5 70 75 70.8 60 55 65.6 60 75 75 75 60.7 67.8Kwale Kadhi Court 62.5 53.8 62.5 58.2 66.3 54.2 65.6 44.2 55 57.8 72.4 54 60.5Machakos Kadhi Court 87.5 65 73 80.9 78.8 80 68.8 81.3 75 65.6 82.8 75 75.2Malindi Kadhi Court 81.3 68.8 81.3 82.3 76.3 91.3 81.3 77.1 75 76.6 84.4 69.3 78.8Mombasa Kadhi Court 78.1 65.6 69.1 67 70.6 65.3 68 65.1 63.8 66.4 79.9 72.5 70.1Nairobi Kadhi Court 83.3 57.5 68.7 66.6 54.3 55.7 67.2 64 61.1 67.6 74.7 64 65.3Thika Kadhi Court 62.5 43.3 40.6 42.4 37.9 38.3 65.3 43.1 45.8 43.8 45 43.6 44.7Voi Kadhi Court 81.3 67.5 87.5 78.1 81.3 60 85.9 65 75 65.6 85.7 62.8 76.7Wajir Kadhi Court 75 80 81.3 75 87.5 100 100 100 100 81.3 98.4 100 90.8OFFICES/DIRECTORATES/TRIBUNALSDirectorate - Accounts 75 57.5 59.4 56.5 44.3 48.5 61.6 62.1 56.5 49.9 66.8 48.8 56.1Directorate - Finance 71.4 45.2 58.4 57.9 43.5 58.4 70.9 52.9 59.2 52.1 64.5 52.2 56.2Directorate - Human Resource & Administration82.1 64.9 62.4 63.8 55.2 58.5 63.9 65.3 63.9 64.2 75.6 63.9 64.1Directorate - ICT 87.5 61.7 65.2 71.8 59 67 83.4 62.2 63.6 72.7 85.3 65.4 70.9Directorate - Performance Management88.5 65.9 62 62.2 52 58.3 77.9 66.5 67.2 62.6 68.3 65.3 64.5Directorate - Public Affairs & Communication76.6 64.5 68.4 71.9 51.2 64.8 78.1 70.6 67.1 67.6 72.3 59.9 67.2Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report67 Court/Directorate/RegistriesGeneral Opinion of the JudiciarySelection, Recruitment and Promotion PracticesInternal Communication at the JudiciaryCorporate Culture, Team-work and organisationStaff Training and DevelopmentMotivation, Morale and RecognitionMy Immediate SupervisorRemuneration and BenefitsEmployee RelationsManagement and LeadershipEmployment EngagementWork/Life BalanceOverall Employee Satisfaction IndexDirectorate - Supplies Chain Management Services83.9 64.3 56.6 58 48.6 52.9 59.8 59.5 48.6 48.1 61.9 58.1 56.6Head Quarter Office of The Superintendent75 60 60.7 62.5 52.8 70 75 60 70 59.4 70.3 64.3 63.8Headquarter Library Services77.1 69.5 67.2 71.3 56.9 56 77.8 69 81.5 65.2 81.8 73.1 70.9Judicial Service Commission (Secretariat)62.5 55 40.6 52.1 25 55 78.6 66.7 41.7 40.6 50 50 48.4Milimani Auctioneers Board50 65.6 75 70.8 51.4 70 82.8 66.9 50 66.1 76.7 62.5 68.7Office of the Chief Justice 68.8 51.3 49 59.4 56.3 57.8 68.8 39.8 66.3 60.2 73.4 58.9 59.6Office of the Chief Registrar of Judiciary75 75 62.5 68.8 60.6 71.3 75.8 64.6 67.5 74.2 77.7 60.7 69.3Office of the Deputy Chief Justice87.5 30 71.4 87.5 87.5 90 100 25 65 93.8 100 96.4 78.9Office of the Ombudsman 77.5 47.8 55.8 66.3 54.1 61 81.4 62.2 46 54.8 71.8 52.7 61Office of the Principal Judge - High Court50 75 75 68.8 52.8 68.8 84.4 65 50 64.3 76.7 62.5 68.6Office of the Registrar - High Court90.6 46.3 47.7 58.6 45.2 52.5 57.1 44.2 75.6 51.6 77.3 55.4 57.7Office of the Registrar - The Subordinate Court81.3 60 70.3 70.6 51.3 63.8 78.9 76.9 65 60.2 82.4 68.8 68.3Public Parties Tribunal 75 55 60.7 52.1 40 0 56.3 45.8 70 50 67.5 50 56.2Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report68 Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report69 Customer, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Report70 Chief Registrar of the Judiciary, Supreme Court Building, City Walk, NairobiP.O. Box 30041 00100, NairobiTel. +254 20 2221221info@judiciary.go.keWebsite http://www.judiciary.go.ke

Recommended

View more >