Catering Services

Questionnaire Report 2006

Ursula Wolski
 Contents
Overview............................................................................................................................. 3
Introduction......................................................................................................................... 5
Sample............................................................................................................................. 5
Results................................................................................................................................. 7
1. Dietary preferences ..................................................................................................... 7
2. Ratings on various aspects of the catering outlets ...................................................... 9
2.1 Quality of food and drinks .................................................................................. 10
2.2 Size of food portions........................................................................................... 11
2.3 Cleanliness of the servery, seating area and cutlery ........................................... 12
2.4 Temperature of food ........................................................................................... 13
2.5 Attitude of serving staff ...................................................................................... 14
2.6 Value for money ................................................................................................. 15
2.7 Variety of products ............................................................................................. 15
3. Views on the newly refurbished Hub........................................................................ 17
4. Clothes and memorabilia in College Shop................................................................ 20
5. College Shop promotions.......................................................................................... 21
6. Reasons for using College Shop ............................................................................... 22
7. Additional comments/suggestions regarding catering facilities ............................... 23
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 29

2
 Overview
- 25.6% preferred a low fat diet, 20.4% were vegetarian, and 19.4% preferred
organic food and 13.2% preferred a low fat and low cholesterol diet

- Quality of food and drinks

o A high percentage of respondents rated the Hub (23.7%), Café Jules

(12.9%) and the Tapas Bar (16.9%) as ‘excellent’
o 53.4% rated Kingswood as ‘poor’

- Size of food portions

o The majority of ratings were ‘good’, but a high percentage also gave
ratings of ‘excellent’ and ‘average’
o A high percentage rated Kingswood as ‘poor’

- Cleanliness of servery, seating area and cutlery

o 45.2% rated the Hub as ‘excellent’

o A fairly large percentage rated Crosslands, Tapas Bar and Kingswood as
‘average’ and ‘poor’

- Temperature of food

o A high percentage rated the Hub, Crosslands and the Tapas Bar as
‘excellent’
o 31.5% rated Kingswood as ‘poor’

- Attitude of serving staff

o Most of the ratings were ‘good’ and ‘average’, with some outlets rated as
‘excellent’
o 16.7% rated Kingswood as ‘poor’

- Value for money

o Most outlets were rated as ‘average’

o 25.0% rated the Tapas Bar as ‘excellent’

- Variety of products

o A high percentage rated the Hub (22.7%), Tapas Bar (18.8%) and College
Shop (13.2%) as ‘excellent’
o Crosslands (32.7%) and Kingswood (43.8%) were rated as ‘poor’

3
- Views on the Hub

o 42.5% had positive things to say about the Hub, such as it was a nice place
to eat and the food was good
o However, 32.1% had not yet visited the Hub and 4.7% thought that it
needed more advertising
o 14.0% said that it lacked atmosphere as it was ‘cold and clinical looking’
o 9.3% said that the staff were pleasant and helpful, although at times the
service was a bit too slow
o Only 3.6% had any negative comments to make regarding the Hub

- 37.8% rated the clothes and memorabilia as ‘good’ and 26.3% rated it ‘average’

- 32.7% claimed to have not noticed the college shop promotions, those that did
16.5% rated it as ‘good’ and 21.8% as ‘average’

- Similarly to 2005, most respondents used the College Shop to buy lunch and
snacks, 35.4% to buy newspapers and magazines and 34.5% because they had
forgotten items from their main shopping trip. Almost 30% of respondents used it
to buy cards (29.2%) and stationary (28.9%).

- Additional comments included: more variety in outlets, particularly in the college

shop which needed to be expanded and the problem of long queues dealt with.
Food was seen as too expensive.

4
 Introduction
The Catering Questionnaire was designed to obtain views and opinions of the catering
facilities provided at Royal Holloway. The aim was to identify any areas that could be
improved or changed in order to provide a better service in the future. A comparison has
been made wherever possible with the responses given in the 2005 questionnaire. 1
Respondents were also asked to rate various aspects of the catering services and the
college shop, as well as their views on the newly refurbished Hub.

Sample

The total number of returned questionnaires was 339, of which the majority of
respondents were staff (37.8%), 26.5% were non-resident students, 20.9% were resident
students – catered and 14.7% were resident students – self catered. Table 2 shows that the
majority of students were in their first year (21.5%) and second year (17.7%), 10.9%
were third years and 6.8% were postgraduate students.

Table 1: Category of Respondent

Category % Response
Resident Student - Catered 20.9
Resident Student - Self Catered 14.7
Staff 37.8
Non-Resident Student 26.5

Table 2: Year of Student

Year % Response
First 21.5
Second 17.7
Third 10.9
Fourth 2.9
Postgraduate 6.8
JYA/Erasmus 1.5

1
As the number of responses differed from last year and for each question, the comparisons between 2005
and 2006 can only indicate the overall ratings.

5
 Figure 1: Category of Respondent

40 37.8

35

30
26.5
25
% Response

20.9
20

14.7
15

10

0
Resident Student - Resident Student - Self Staff Non-Resident Student
Catered Catered
Category

Figure 2: Year of Student

25

21.5

20
17.7

15
% Response

10.9
10

6.8

5
2.9
1.5

0
First Second Third Fourth Postgraduate JYA/Erasmus
Year

6
 Results

1. Dietary preferences
Table 3 shows that 4.2% of respondents had no dietary preferences, however 37.8% was a ‘no
answer’ so it is possible that these were also respondents with no dietary preferences. 25.6%
preferred a low fat diet, 20.4% were vegetarian, and 19.4% preferred organic food and 13.2%
preferred a low fat and low cholesterol diet. If a comparison is made with 2005 (Table 3.1), it
can be seen that low fat and vegetarian preferences have remained the highest, but organic
preferences has increased, and low carbohydrate has decreased.

Table 3: Dietary Preferences

Diet % Response
No answer 37.8
Low Fat 25.6
Vegetarian 20.4
Organic 19.4
Low Cholesterol 7.1
Low Fat & Low Cholesterol 6.1
Halal 5.5
None 4.2
Gluten Free 4.2
Vegan 2.3
Nut Allergy 1.6
Vegetarian & Low Fat 1.3
Dairy free 1.0
Other* 1.3
* Other included Kosher & Fair Trade

Table 3.1: Dietary Preferences 2005 & 2006

Diet 2005 2006

Low Fat 13.2 25.6
Vegetarian 8.9 20.4
Organic 4.9 19.4
Low Cholesterol 2.5 7.1
Low Fat & Low Cholesterol* 6.1 6.1
Halal 2.5 5.5
* Low fat & low carbohydrate in 2005

7
 Figure 3: Dietary Preferences

30.0

25.6
25.0

20.4
19.4
20.0
% Response

15.0

10.0
7.1
6.1
5.5
5.0

0.0
Low Fat Vegetarian Organic Low Low Fat & Low Halal
Cholesterol Cholestral
Diet

8
2. Ratings on various aspects of the catering outlets

The total number of questionnaires was 339. Table 4 shows the number of responses per
question for each outlet (the number in brackets are a percentage of the number of
responses per question/the total number of responses). These figures will need to be taken
into consideration when looking at the results.
Tables 5 to 11 show a comparison with 2005 and tables 9 – 11 include the college shop.
The Hub is a new outlet and so no comparisons can be made with last year; however
views on the Hub are covered later in the report.

Table 4: Number of Respondents

Tapas College
The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Kingswood SCR
Bar Shop
Quality of food 139 155 194 198 65 58 117
-
and drink (41.0%) (45.7%) 57.2%) (58.4%) (19.2%) (17.1%) (34.5%)
Size of food 135 148 174 181 57 56 110
-
portions (39.8%) (43.7%) (51.3%) (53.4%) (16.8%) (16.5%) (32.4%)
Cleanliness of 135 149 184 185 55 57 110
-
Servery (39.8%) (44.0%) (54.3%) (54.6%) (16.2%) (16.8%) (32.4%)
Temperature 128 147 162 172 56 54 109
-
of food (37.8%) (43.4%) (47.8%) (50.7%) (16.5%) (15.9%) (32.3%)
Attitude of 132 141 178 176 50 48 100 194
serving staff (38.9%) (41.6%) (52.5%) (51.9%) (14.7%) (14.2%) (29.5%) (57.2%)
Value for 134 142 179 171 48 45 99 189
Money (39.5%) (41.9%) (52.8%) (50.4%) (14.2%) (13.3%) (29.2%) (55.8%)
Variety of 132 142 173 168 48 48 101 190
Products (38.9%) (41.9%) (51.0%) (49.6%) (14.2%) (14.2%) (29.8%) (56.0%)

9
2.1 Quality of food and drinks

Table 5 shows that the majority of respondents rated the quality of food and drinks as
‘average’ and ‘good’. A fairly high percentage rated the Hub (23.7%), Café Jules (12.9%) and
the Tapas Bar (16.9%) as ‘excellent’. However, a large percentage rated Kingswood as ‘poor’
(53.4%). The results are similar to 2005, although the ratings for Kingswood have decreased.

Table 5: Quality of Food and Drinks in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 23.7 2.6 4.4 12.9 15.3 3.0 6.4 16.9 30.0 5.2 5.4 6.8 5.8
Good 53.2 34.2 37.5 54.6 56.6 33.8 39.6 43.1 36.0 8.6 21.6 31.6 36.4
Average 20.9 45.2 36.8 27.8 22.2 48.0 43.9 29.2 26.0 32.8 45.9 46.2 42.1
Poor 2.2 18.1 21.3 4.6 5.8 15.2 10.2 10.8 8.0 53.4 27.0 15.4 15.7

Figure 4: Quality of Food and Drinks

100 2.6 3.0 5.2 6.8

12.9 16.9
90 8.6
23.7

80 34.2 33.8
31.6
70 32.8
% Response

60 54.6 43.1 Excellent

Good
50 53.2
Average
40 45.2 48.0 Poor
46.2

30
29.2 53.4
20 27.8
20.9
10 18.1 15.4
15.2
10.8
2.2 4.6
0
ar
s
ub

R
rs

ds

d
le

oo

SC
B
de

n
H

Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlets

10
2.2 Size of food portions
The results in table 6 show that most respondents rated the size of food portions as ‘good’,
with a fairly high percentage rating some outlets as ‘excellent’ (the Hub 15.6%, Founders
14.9%, Crosslands 16.0%, Tapas Bar 26.3% and SCR 13.6%). However, a fairly high
percentage of respondents also gave ratings of ‘average’, in particular Kingswood, where a
high percentage also rated it as ‘poor’. The results are similar to those of 2005.

Table 6: Size of Food Portions in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 15.6 14.9 11.9 5.2 9.3 16.0 12.6 26.3 12.2 7.1 5.9 13.6 11.8
Good 48.1 42.6 47.6 44.8 47.7 48.1 50.3 33.3 48.8 30.4 29.4 43.6 42.7
Average 29.6 29.1 28.6 44.3 39.0 30.9 30.5 29.8 26.8 39.3 41.2 31.8 36.4
Poor 6.7 13.5 11.9 5.7 4.1 5.0 6.6 10.5 12.2 23.2 23.5 10.9 9.1

Figure 5: Size of Food Portions

100
5.2 7.1
15.6 14.9 16.0 13.6
90
26.3
80
30.4
44.8
70
42.6 43.6
% Response

60 48.1 48.1 Excellent

33.3
Good
50
Average
39.3
40 Poor

30 29.1 44.3
29.8 31.8
20 29.6 30.9

10 23.2
13.5 10.5 10.9
6.7 5.7 5.0
0
ar
s

R
ub

rs

d
le

nd

oo

SC
B
de
H

Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlets

11
2.3 Cleanliness of the servery, seating area and cutlery

Table 7 shows that the majority of respondents gave ratings of ‘good’ and 45.2% rated the
Hub as ‘excellent’. 42.2% rated Crosslands, 38.2% rated the Tapas Bar and 35.1% rated
Kingswood as ‘average’, with a large percentage of respondents also rating these outlets as
‘poor’. Again the results are similar to 2005, although it would appear that there has been a
slight decrease in the ratings for Kingswood.

Table 7: Cleanliness in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 45.2 8.7 6.9 19.6 12.6 5.4 7.5 16.4 11.6 8.8 16.7 18.2 13.8
Good 38.5 42.3 45.8 48.4 52.0 33.5 30.1 38.2 58.1 36.8 36.1 49.1 55.0
Average 14.8 40.3 36.6 26.1 30.3 42.2 43.9 38.2 23.3 35.1 41.7 23.6 24.8
Poor 1.5 8.7 10.7 6.0 5.1 18.9 18.5 7.3 7.0 19.3 5.6 9.1 6.4

Figure 6: Cleanliness in Outlets

100
8.7 5.4 8.8
19.6 16.4 18.2
90

80 33.5
45.2
36.8
70 42.3
38.2
% Response

60 Excellent
48.4 49.1
Good
50
Average
40 42.2 Poor
38.5 35.1
30 40.3
38.2
20 26.1 23.6

10 14.8 18.9 19.3

8.7 6.0 7.3 9.1
0 1.5
rs

d
s

s
ub

ar

R
nd
le

oo

SC
de

B
H

Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa

gs
ss
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlet

12
2.4 Temperature of food

The majority of respondents gave ratings of ‘good’, although a fairly high percentage also
gave ratings of ‘average’. A fairly high percentage rated the Hub (19.5%), Crosslands (15.1%)
and the Tapas Bar (23.2%) as ‘excellent’, but 31.5% rated Kingswood as ‘poor’. Again the
results are similar to 2005 and once more it would appear that the ratings for Kingswood have
slightly decreased.

Table 8: Temperature of Food in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 19.5 8.8 9.2 11.1 13.5 15.1 12.7 23.2 26.2 3.7 9.1 11.9 8.2
Good 48.4 38.8 44.6 61.7 61.9 47.1 61.4 44.6 54.8 27.8 33.3 50.5 49.1
Average 23.4 37.4 32.3 20.4 23.2 26.7 22.9 23.2 16.7 37 39.4 30.3 36.4
Poor 8.6 15.0 13.8 6.8 1.3 11.0 3.0 8.9 2.4 31.5 18.2 7.3 6.4

Figure 7: Temperature of Food

100 3.7
8.8 11.1 11.9
15.1
90 19.5 23.2
27.8
80

70 38.8

50.5
% Response

60 47.1 Excellent
48.4 61.7
44.6 Good
50 37.0
Average
40 Poor
37.4
30
26.7 30.3
20 23.4 23.2
20.4 31.5
10
15.0 11.0
8.6 6.8 8.9 7.3
0
rs

d
s

s
ub

ar

R
nd
le

oo

SC
de

B
H

Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlets

13
2.5 Attitude of serving staff

Table 9 shows that most respondents rated the attitude of serving staff as ‘good’. However a
high percentage also rated it as ‘average’. A large percentage rated the Hub (26.0%), Café
Jules (16.3%), Crosslands (26.7%) and the Tapas Bar (22.0%) as ‘excellent’. However, 16.7%
also rated Kingswood as ‘poor’. Yet again, the results are similar to 2005.

Table 9: Attitude of Serving Staff in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR Shop
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 26.0 12.8 9.1 16.3 12.9 26.7 32.8 22.0 7.1 12.5 9.4 14.0 10.5 11.3 15.1
Good 51.9 48.2 47.9 45.5 50.0 48.9 44.3 44.0 61.9 37.5 31.3 49.0 52.4 47.4 51.8
Average 17.6 31.2 33.9 31.5 31.8 18.8 19.5 26.0 23.8 33.3 40.6 28.0 23.8 31.4 28.9
Poor 4.6 7.8 9.1 6.7 5.3 5.7 3.4 8.0 7.1 16.7 18.8 9.0 13.3 9.8 4.1

Figure 8: Attitude of Serving Staff

100
12.8 12.5 14.0 11.3
16.3
90 22.0
26.0 26.7
80

70 37.5
48.2 47.4
49.0
% Response

60 45.5 Excellent
44.0
Good
50 51.9 48.9
Average
40 Poor
33.3
30
31.4
31.2 31.5 28.0
20 26.0
17.6 18.8
10 16.7
7.8 6.7 5.7 8.0 9.0 9.8
4.6
0
ar
es
ub

op
rs

R
d
nd

oo

SC
B
de

l
H

Sh
Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlet

14
2.6 Value for money

In terms of ‘value for money’, the results are similar to 2005 as most respondents gave ratings
of ‘average’, although a fairly high percentage also gave ratings of both ‘good’ and ‘poor’.
However, a quarter of respondents rated the Tapas Bar as ‘excellent’.

Table 10: Value for Money in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR Shop
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 9.0 9.2 8.7 2.8 3.5 5.8 6.4 25.0 14.3 2.2 6.3 6.1 6.6 4.2 6.0
Good 19.4 25.4 29.1 15.6 18.8 31.0 33.5 35.4 47.6 17.8 25.0 27.3 30.2 32.8 21.1
Average 42.5 40.8 36.2 49.7 49.4 47.4 50.3 27.1 26.2 44.4 40.6 39.4 39.6 40.2 46.8
Poor 29.1 24.6 26.0 31.8 28.2 15.8 9.8 12.5 11.9 35.6 28.1 27.3 23.6 22.8 26.1

Figure 9: Value for Money

100 2.8 2.2 4.2

9.0 9.2 5.8 6.1
90 15.6 17.8
25.0
80 19.4 27.3 32.8
25.4 31.0

70
% Response

60 44.4 Excellent
49.7 35.4
Good
50 42.5
40.8 39.4 Average
40.2
40 47.4 Poor

30
27.1
20 35.6
29.1 31.8
24.6 27.3
10 22.8
15.8 12.5
0
ar
es
ub

op
rs

R
d
nd

oo

SC
B
de

l
H

Sh
Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlet

2.7 Variety of products

15
Table 11 shows that the majority of ratings were ‘average’, although 49.2% rated the Hub,
39.4% rated Founders and 44.7% rated the College Shop as ‘good’. However, some
respondents also rated the Hub (22.7%), Tapas Bar (18.8%) and the College Shop (13.2%) as
‘excellent’. However, a significant proportion also rated the variety of products in outlets as
‘poor’, most notably Crosslands (32.7%) and Kingswood (43.8%). The table shows similar
results to 2005, although it would appear that for some outlets the ratings have slightly
declined.

Table 11: Variety of Products in Outlets

The Hub Founders Café Jules Crosslands Tapas Bar Kingswood SCR Shop
2006 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005 2006 2005
Excellent 22.7 7.0 4.0 6.4 2.4 2.4 4.8 18.8 17.5 4.2 6.3 5.9 4.8 13.2 15.7
Good 49.2 39.4 40.0 28.9 38.2 21.4 23.5 35.4 42.5 14.6 18.8 29.7 34.6 44.7 47.5
Average 18.9 36.6 43.2 43.4 43.5 43.5 47.6 41.7 25.0 37.5 46.9 41.6 38.5 33.7 25.3
Poor 9.1 16.9 12.8 21.4 15.9 32.7 24.1 4.2 15.0 43.8 28.1 22.8 22.1 8.4 11.5

Figure 10: Variety of Products in Outlets

100 2.4 4.2

7.0 6.4 5.9
13.2
90 18.8
22.7 21.4 14.6

80 28.9 29.7
39.4
70
35.4 37.5 44.7
% Response

60 Excellent
49.2 43.5 Good
50
Average
43.4 41.6
40 Poor
36.6
30
41.7 33.7
20 h 43.8
18.9
32.7
10 21.4 22.8
16.9
9.1 8.4
4.2
0
es

ar
ub

op
rs

d
nd

oo

SC
B
de

l
H

Sh
Ju

la

w
s
un
e

pa
ss

gs
Th

é
Fo

af

Ta
ro

in
C

K
C

Outlet

16
3. Views on the newly refurbished Hub

There were 193 responses to this question and the breakdown is as follows:

Positive Comments (82 comments, 42.5%)

Overall 42.5% of comments made simply stated that The Hub was ‘nice’ and ‘good’, or
the ‘food was good’

“Very good, the food is very good” (Resident student catered)

“The food is nice and good value” (Non Resident student)

“Personally I think every student canteen should be like The Hub” (Resident
student catered)

“Great addition to the campus” (Staff)

Not Visited (62 comments, 32.1%)

These respondents said that they had yet to visit The Hub, although quite a few
respondents said that they had heard positive things about it.

“I haven’t had a chance to visit it, but I have heard that it’s nice” (Staff)

“Haven’t tried it personally, but it is recommended by colleagues” (Staff)

“Haven’t had a chance to go and see it yet” (Resident student catered)

Expensive (43 comments, 22.3%)

Despite the positive comments, almost a quarter of respondents thought that the outlet
was too expensive.

“Excellent dining hall, but quite expensive” (Resident student catered)

“I wouldn’t eat there all the time, simply because it’s expensive” (Resident
student self catered)

“Very nice, but very expensive” (Non-resident student)

17
Atmosphere (27 comments, 14.0%)

Respondents found the Hub ‘clean, spacious, big and modern; however felt that the
atmosphere was ‘cold, needed more colour and seemed a bit empty’. Although several
respondents (8) thought that the atmosphere was fine. A couple of respondents pointed
out that it was a strange place to go to amongst all the construction work and therefore
this may account for the lack of atmosphere experienced by some.

“Whenever I go it is embarrassingly empty” (Non-resident student)

“It is OK, but I don’t find the atmosphere as exciting as the others” (Resident
student catered)

“Too much white can make it seem a bit clinical, some warm colours interspersed
throughout would improve it, especially in winter” (Non-resident student)

“Feels very bright and fresh and the ‘open’ counters give a very good impression,
the place is very clean and the atmosphere is friendly” (Staff)

Staff (18 comments, 9.3%)

Generally staff was seen as friendly and helpful, although several respondents thought
that at times the service was too slow. One problem area highlighted was that there
needed to be more tills open as sometimes the queues were too long (11 comments).

“Need more than one cashier working at lunchtime” (Staff)

“Service and staff quality is excellent, although could do with more staff on the
tills, at busy times the queues are long and your food is cold before you sit down”
(Resident student self-catered)

Variety (11 comments, 5.7%)

With the exception of a couple of respondents, it was generally thought that the Hub
offered a good variety of food in particular for different dietary preferences, although it
would be better once all the areas are open, such as the stir-fry counter.

“Pretty good, will obviously be better when all the new areas are open” (Non-
resident student)

18
Not aware/more advertising (9 comments, 4.7%)

Some respondents stated that they were unaware of the Hub and that more advertising
was needed, as well as better signage.

“It would be nice if more fuss was made about the place as some people don’t
know it’s there among all the building chaos” (Resident student – catered)

Coffee shop (9 comments, 4.7%)

In particular these respondents liked the coffee shop, although a couple of respondents
thought that there should be healthier options available other than cakes and cookies,
more pannini grills and the option to not to have to buy fair trade products as this was
expensive. Generally the coffee shop was seen as expensive.

“Good to have a coffee bar with decent cakes, but expensive” (Staff)

Negative comments (7 comments, 3.6%)

These respondents did not agree with the majority in that they though that the space could
have been used for something more worthwhile in that some of the food options were
unavailable and overpriced.

“Far too overpriced for the low quality and choice offered, lack of promised
retail area an annoyance” (Resident student self-catered)

Other comments included:

- Good recognition of dietary preferences (3 comments, 1.6%)

- Plenty of seating area (2 comments, 1.0%)
- Good salad selection (2 comments, 1.0%)
- Too far away from academic buildings (2 comments, 1.0%)
- More variety for dietary preferences (1 comment, 0.5%)
- Hard to access (1 comment, 0.5%)

19
4. Clothes and memorabilia in College Shop

Similarly to 2005, respondents rated the selection of clothes and memorabilia in the
college shop as ‘good’ (37.8%) and ‘average’ (26.3%).
Additional comments (18) included: Not interested in clothes and memorabilia (6); too
expensive (5); clothes should come from fair trade suppliers (2); different designs and the
availability of a catalogue showing the full range (2); should sell academic diaries (1) and
normal glue sticks (1) and the need for a bigger shop (1).

Table 12: Selection of Clothes and Memorabilia in College Shop

2006 2005
Excellent 7.7 6.7
Good 37.8 34.7
Average 26.3 26.7
Poor 3.8 5.2

Figure 11: Selection of Clothes and Memorabilia found in

the College Shop

50.0

45.0

40.0 37.8
34.7
35.0
% Response

30.0 26.7 26.3

2005
25.0
2006
20.0

15.0

10.0 7.7
6.7
5.2
3.8
5.0

0.0
Excellent Good Average Poor
Rating

20
5. College Shop promotions

As in 2005, the majority of respondents did not notice the college shop promotions
(32.7%). However, those that did gave ratings of ‘average’ (21.8%) and ‘good’ (16.5%).
Additional comments (7) included: unawareness of promotions (2); the meal deals were
seen as good, as were the reduced stock (2); although sometimes still expensive (1) and
only applied to those with a college card (1). Increased variety of offers was welcomed
(1).

Table 13: Rating of College Shop Promotions

2006 2005
Excellent 1.8 0.9
Good 16.5 18.4
Average 21.8 18.4
Poor 6.5 4.3
Not Noticed 32.7 35.3

Figure 12: Rating of Promotions in College Shop

40.0
35.3
35.0 32.7

30.0

25.0
% Response

21.8
2005
20.0 18.4 18.4
16.5 2006

15.0

10.0
6.5
4.3
5.0
1.8
0.9
0.0
Excellent Good Average Poor Not Noticed
Rating

21
6. Reasons for using College Shop

Table 14 shows that a high percentage of respondents (69.3%) used the college shop to
buy lunch and snacks; 35.4% bought newspapers and magazines and 34.5% because they
had forgotten items from their main shopping trip. The main reasons for using the college
shop have not differed since 2005.
Other reasons included (8): Other shops are too far away (2); to buy milk and tea (2);
medicines (2); toiletries (1) and groceries (1).

Table 14: Reasons for Visiting Shop

2006 2005
Lunch & Snacks 69.3 70.6
Evening Meal 4.1 8.6
Main Shopping 34.5 36.5
Stationary 28.9 27.0
Cards & Gifts 29.2 31.0
Newspapers 35.4 46.9

Figure 13: Reasons for Using College Shop

80.0
70.6 69.3
70.0

60.0

50.0 46.9
% Response

2005
40.0 36.5 35.4
34.5 2006
31.0
28.9 29.2
30.0 27.0

20.0

8.6
10.0
4.1

0.0
Lunch Evening Main Stationary Cards & New spapers
Meal Shopping Gifts
Reason

22
7. Additional comments/suggestions regarding catering facilities

Respondents were asked if they had any additional comments or suggestions regarding
the catering facilities, in particular any additional food or retail items they would like to
see in the outlets. The number of responses to this question was 124 and the breakdown
of the results is as follows:

More variety (25 comments, 20.2%)

These respondents wanted to see more variety in the outlets, particularly those with
vegetarian or other dietary preferences, as well as healthier options. Crosslands was
especially seen as offering a poor variety of options. Several respondents commented on
the poor quality of the coffee available.

“Increased selection of jacket potato fillings in Crosslands” (Staff)

“More vegetarian sandwiches, there aren’t any mixed salad sandwiches

anymore” (Resident student self-catered)

“Somewhere to get a proper cup of coffee at a reasonable price” (Staff)

“More gluten free food” (Staff)

“More choice in Crosslands during the morning and lunchtime” (Staff)

Too Expensive (19 comments, 15.3%)

Some respondents thought that the outlets were too expensive, particularly for students;
furthermore some respondents said that they could not understand the differing price
range amongst the various outlets. However, some items were seen as good value for
money. Outlets particularly seen as expensive were The Hub, Crosslands and Café Jules.

“Confused by the diversity of prices across catering outlets for the same basic
items” (Staff)

“Cafe Jules, whilst very nice, serves rather expensive food, it would be nice to see
some cheaper sandwiches on sale on campus” (Non-resident student)

“Some food options are quite good value whilst other similar items (in terms of
cost of ingredients and effort to cook) seem much more expensive” (Staff)

“The food is too expensive, we are after all students and well known for having a
low budget to spend” (Non-resident student)

23
Quality of food (20 comments, 16.1%)

Respondents thought that the quality of food was poor in some of the outlets (16
comments), particularly in Kingswood (4 comments) and Founders (3 comments). It was
argued that in some outlets the vegetables were often overcooked and the food served
was cold, the sandwiches in Café Jules and the college shop were poor with the lack of
fresh ingredients.

“The food in Founders is usually disgusting; the food is often burned, it is

unhealthy and just not good quality, fresh vegetables are hardly used”(Resident
student catered)

“The food at Kingswood is not very good, there is little variety of vegetables and
these are overcooked and tasteless” (Resident student catered)

However, some respondents thought that the quality of food was good (6 comments)

“I particularly like the range of Indian snacks (filled nan breads, bhajis etc),
they’re good value and very tasty” (Staff)

“Crosslands is excellent in terms of the simple good food on offer” (Staff)

Comments specific to college shop (79 comments, 63.7%)

Variety (16 comments, 20.3%)

Respondents wanted to see more variety in the college shop, such as:

- Increased range of sandwiches and snacks as they sell out quickly (3 comments)
- Healthier options such as more fruit and vegetables (3 comments)
- More ready made meals (2 comments)
- More salad bowls or non-sandwich options (1 comment)
- Other substitutes for chocolate due to an allergy (1 comment)
- Personal care products such as shampoo and conditioner (1 comment)
- Soy milk (1 comment)
- Catering for Afro-Caribbean diet (1 comment)
- Baguettes like those in Café Jules (1 comment)
- More vegetarian food (1 comment)
- More gluten free products (1 comment)

24
Queues (14 comments, 17.7%)

As has occurred in the past, respondents complained that the queues were often too long
and that more staff were needed at the tills, although a couple of respondents had thought
that the queues had improved from last year.

“The queues tend to be long due to understaffing at key times of the day”
(Resident student catered)

“The proactive handling of large queues in the Shop has improved over the last
year” (Staff)

Other items (10 comments, 12.7%))

Respondents would like to see a number of other items sold in the college shop including:
a wider selection of cards, graph paper, fair trade hot chocolate, make-up, foreign
newspapers, household items such as crockery, less expensive t-shirts with small college
logo, bike equipment and a larger choice of stamps.

“More birthday cards now that Waterstones has gone” (Non-resident student)

Extension of the college shop (9 comments, 11.4%)

These respondents thought that the college shop was overdue for a renovation and that it
needed to be expanded to meet the increasing demands of staff and students and to be
able to offer a wider range of products.

“It would be great to see the shop being extended so that it could offer a larger
selection and more deals to encourage students to go there” (Resident student
catered)

Too expensive (9 comments, 11.4%)

The college shop was seen as too expensive in comparison with other local shops and
supermarkets.

“College shop prices are too high when you compare it to a local supermarket”
(Staff)

25
Staff (7 comments, 8.9%)

Staff was seen as rude and unhelpful and that they should provide a better customer
service (5 comments), although one respondent pointed out that this could be due to
stress (overcrowding and busy periods). However, one respondent thought that they were
pleasant and friendly.

“Staff are often too busy talking to each other or friends” (Non-resident student)

Stock (6 comments, 7.6%)

Respondents thought that the shop often ran out of stock, particularly of certain items
(such as sandwiches). Staff members thought that stock levels were particularly low
during student vacations (3 comments).

“For staff, facilities for eating on campus, particularly during the vacations, are
very limited” (Staff)

Fair Trade (4 comments, 5.1%)

The selling of fair trade products in the college shop was met with approval (1 comment),
although this could be further increased as well as including eco-friendly cleaning
products (1 comment). Although a couple of respondents thought that these products
were too expensive (2 comments).

“The prices of fair trade products are distorted to the extent that many students
are put off by them” (Non-resident student)

Longer opening hours (4 comments, 5.1%)

Respondents thought that the college shop should be open later out of term times and
earlier at weekends.

“I often work later than 5, by which time the college shop is shut” (Staff)

Comments specific to SCR (14 comments, 11.3%)

Respondents thought that the food served in the SCR needed to be of better quality (6
comments), with more variety (4 comments), particularly vegetarian options. Other
comments included: more space for staff functions (1 comment), SCR did not always
follow the published menu (1 comment), and often as it was busy there was difficulty in
finding a free table (1 comment), unclean cutlery (1 comment).

26
 “The SCR food selection is extremely limited and the food is not sufficiently hot”
(Staff)

“The range of food available at the SCR is very poor. I often arrive there, not
long after it opens, to find no sandwiches, a pitiful selection of salad items and a
very restricted selection of cold meats/sandwich fillers” (Non-resident student)

Staff (10 comments, 8.1%)

Generally, some respondents thought that staff were friendly and helpful (4 comments),
whilst others disagreed (4 comments). A couple of respondents thought that staff in
Kingswood were not always aware of the details of the food that they were serving (2
comments).

“With the exception of Café Jules, staff seem genuinely welcoming and happy to
help” (Staff)

“Staff (in Kingswood) should know what they are serving” (Resident student
catered)

Healthy food (8 comments, 6.5%)

Respondents thought that there should be healthier food items available on campus,
particularly in the college shop, where there should be less processed food and more fruit
and vegetables. In other outlets, there should be less fried foods and more low fat items.

“I think there should be more focus on healthy food options at the college shop as
there is a lot of processed food” (Resident student self-catered)

“The vegetarian food in Founders is very good, but relies too much on
carbohydrates, we veggies are gaining weight” (Resident student catered)

Other comments included:

- Promotions (3 comments)
o Adverts for offers in college shop are often out-of-date
o Offers and deals should be more relevant to students’ needs
o More discounts should be available
- Online menus for Founders often do not advertise what is actually available (2
comments)
- Charity ( 2 comments)

27
 o More donations to charity, for example a fixed percentage of price going
to charity
o Charity boxes to be installed in the college bookshop as well
- More recycling facilities (1 comment)
- Energy saving products (e.g. light bulbs) (1 comment)
- Water dispensers in Founders (1 comment)
o Book orders to arrive earlier in bookshop (1 comment)
- Clear and obvious way of allowing constant student feedback, such as comment
boxes in dining halls (1 comment)
- Condiments such as ketchup should be free (1 comment)
- Knives and forks often run out in Founders and the Hub (1 comment)
- Menu to be placed on the wall in the Hub, currently only at the counter, therefore
unable to see what is available (1 comment)
- Provision of basic cutleries, pots and pans and other kitchen utensils for self-
catered students or the option to buy these at the start of term (1 comment)
- Sandwiches for buffet lunches are of low quality and not labelled (1 comment)
- Lack of catering in Huntersdale (1 comment)
- To be able to use debit cards in the college shop (1 comment)

28
 Summary
Overall, respondents tended to rate the outlets as ‘good’ and ‘average’, although a high
percentage rated some outlets, such as the Hub, Café Jules, Tapas Bar and Crosslands as
‘excellent’. However, a large percentage rated Kingswood as ‘poor’.

Generally, the Hub was rated quite highly on various aspects and this is highlighted by
the fact that 42.5% of respondents made positive comments about it. However, 22.3%
thought it was too expensive and 14.0% thought that the atmosphere was in need of
improvement. About 30.0% had not yet visited the Hub.

Similarly to 2005, the majority of respondents claimed to not have seen any of the college
shop promotions. However, the college shop was the most used outlet on campus in
which 69.3% used it to buy lunch and snacks.

Respondents thought that there needed to be more variety on campus, especially in the
college shop which was also seen as in need of expansion and renovation. The long
queues in the college shop were seen as problematic and an extension of the shop as well
as more staff at the tills may help to alleviate this problem.

In general, the outlets were seen as expensive, particularly the Hub and college shop,
with the majority of respondents rating ‘value for money’ as ‘average’. An exception to
this was the Tapas Bar, where a high percentage rated it as ‘excellent’.

The results show a similar pattern to the findings in 2005, with the exception of
Kingswood which clearly indicates a decrease in the ratings. Comments made by
respondents reflect this, in which Kingswood was seen by some as offering poor variety
and low quality food.

To summarise, the results clearly identify that overall the results are similar to last year’s
results; the Hub was seen by the majority as a success albeit expensive; the college shop
and Kingswood for various reasons already highlighted were in need of improvement.

29