1. Satisfaction Ratings Distribution: A pie chart shows the distribution of satisfaction ratings among the respondents.
2. Facility Type Distribution: A bar chart displays the count of different facility types in the dataset.
3. Facility Level Distribution: A histogram illustrates the distribution of facility levels.

1. Improvement in Communication: Several respondents mentioned the need to improve communication channels and provide regular updates on activities.
2. Expansion and Membership: There were suggestions to put more effort into expanding membership and including more facilities.
3. Leadership and Proactivity: Some comments emphasized the need for strong, proactive leadership and vocal skills.
4. Financial Issues: Payment issues, especially related to NHIF, were highlighted as a major challenge.
5. Collaboration and Teamwork: Respondents expressed the importance of working as a team and involving members in decision-making processes.
6. Meetings and Engagement: Regular meetings and increased member involvement were suggested to strengthen the association.
7. Positive Feedback: There were also positive comments appreciating the efforts and wishing for a great future.

1. Satisfaction Ratings Distribution: A pie chart shows the distribution of satisfaction ratings among the respondents.

1. Satisfaction Levels: The chart shows the proportion of respondents who rated their satisfaction with KAPH and its services on a scale of 1 to 5.
2. Majority Satisfaction: The majority of respondents rated their satisfaction as 4 (Satisfied) or 5 (Very Satisfied), indicating a generally positive perception of KAPH's services.
3. Neutral and Unsatisfied: A smaller proportion of respondents rated their satisfaction as 3 (Neutral) or 2 (Unsatisfied), suggesting areas for improvement.
4. Low Dissatisfaction: Very few respondents rated their satisfaction as 1 (Very Unsatisfied), indicating that extreme dissatisfaction is rare.

Descriptive Statistics Summary

Facility Type Distribution

• Outpatient and Inpatient: 43
• Rehabilitation: 6
• Other (Please Specify Below): 5
• Outpatient Only: 5
• Dialysis Centre: 2

Facility Level Distribution

• Level 4: 26
• Level 3B: 14
• Level 5: 10
• Level 4B: 4
• Level 2: 3
• Level 3A: 2
• Level 6: 2

Satisfaction Ratings Distribution

• 4. Satisfied: 26
• 3. Neutral: 24
• 2. Unsatisfied: 6
• 5. Very Satisfied: 4
• 1. Very Unsatisfied: 1

Inferential Correlation Regression Analysis

Regression Analysis Summary

• Dependent Variable: Satisfaction Rating
• Independent Variable: First Service/Benefit Mentioned

• R-squared: 0.060
  • This indicates that approximately 6% of the variance in satisfaction ratings can be explained by the first service/benefit mentioned.
• Adj. R-squared: 0.044
  • This adjusted value accounts for the number of predictors in the model.
• F-statistic: 3.749
  • This value tests the overall significance of the model.
• Prob (F-statistic): 0.0576
  • This p-value indicates the significance level of the F-statistic. A value close to 0.05 suggests marginal significance.
• Intercept: 2.0965
  • This is the expected satisfaction rating when the first service/benefit code is zero.
• Service_Benefit_1_Code Coefficient: 0.0114
  • This coefficient indicates the change in satisfaction rating for a one-unit change in the service/benefit code.
  • The p-value for this coefficient is 0.058, suggesting marginal significance.

Interpretation

• The model suggests a weak positive relationship between the first service/benefit mentioned and the satisfaction rating.
• The low R-squared value indicates that other factors not included in the model may have a more significant impact on satisfaction ratings.
• The marginal significance of the F-statistic and the service/benefit coefficient suggests that while there is some relationship, it is not strongly significant.

Sample Comments and Suggestions

1. Let us create structures and give KAPH a strong foundation.
2. Leaders must not allow themselves to dine and wine with the enemy.
3. Put more efforts to expand membership.
4. NONE
5. Wishing us a great future on the health systems.
6. Marketing for KAPH - we need to enhance our media presence.
7. Need to improve on communication channels in reaching out to members.
8. Thanks
9. Well done. We shall make KAPH strong together.
10. No

Detailed Analysis of Comments and Suggestions

Sentiment Analysis

1. Positive Comments: Many comments have a positive polarity, indicating a generally positive sentiment towards KAPH and its initiatives. Examples include:
   • "Let us create structures and give KAPH a strong foundation."
   • "Put more efforts to expand membership."
   • "Wishing us a great future on the health systems."
   • "Well done. We shall make KAPH strong together."
2. Constructive Feedback: Some comments provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement. Examples include:
   • "Need to improve on communication channels in reaching out to members."
   • "Marketing for KAPH - we need to enhance our media presence."
   • "Make at least a meeting on each chapter even if it is quarterly."
3. Neutral Comments: A few comments are neutral, with a polarity close to zero, indicating neither positive nor negative sentiment. Examples include:
   • "Leaders must not allow themselves to dine and wine with the enemy."
   • "Nhif payments."
4. Negative Comments: A small number of comments have a negative polarity, indicating areas of dissatisfaction. Examples include:
   • "Need to improve on communication channels in reaching out to members."
   • "Make at least a meeting on each chapter even if it is quarterly."

Summary

• Overall Sentiment: The overall sentiment is positive, with many respondents expressing support and optimism for KAPH's future.
• Areas for Improvement: Key areas for improvement include communication channels, marketing efforts, and regular updates to members.
• Constructive Feedback: The constructive feedback provided by respondents can be used to guide future initiatives and improvements.

Common Themes in Comments and Suggestions

1. KAPH (Count: 12)
   • Many comments mention KAPH directly, indicating a focus on the organization itself.
2. Members (Count: 9)
   • Comments frequently refer to members, suggesting a focus on membership and member-related issues.
3. Work (Count: 6)
   • The term "work" appears often, indicating a focus on the work being done or needed.
4. Need (Count: 6)
   • The word "need" is common, highlighting areas where respondents feel there are needs to be addressed.
5. Team (Count: 5)
   • The term "team" suggests a focus on teamwork and collaboration.
6. Association (Count: 5)
   • The word "association" indicates a focus on the association itself.
7. Good (Count: 4)
   • The term "good" appears in positive comments.
8. Support (Count: 4)
   • The word "support" suggests a focus on providing or receiving support.
9. Thank (Count: 4)
   • The term "thank" appears in expressions of gratitude.
10. NHIF (Count: 4)
    • The term "NHIF" indicates a focus on the National Hospital Insurance Fund.
11. Strong (Count: 4)
    • The word "strong" suggests a focus on strengthening the organization.

Summary of Sentiment Analysis Results

1. Polarity: The polarity score ranges from -1 (very negative) to 1 (very positive). The comments have a mix of positive, neutral, and negative sentiments.
   • Positive Sentiments: Many comments have a positive polarity, indicating a generally positive sentiment towards KAPH and its initiatives. Examples include comments about creating structures, expanding membership, and expressing gratitude.
   • Neutral Sentiments: Some comments have a neutral polarity, indicating neither positive nor negative sentiment. Examples include factual statements or brief comments like "Nhif payments" and "No".
   • Negative Sentiments: A few comments have a negative polarity, indicating areas of dissatisfaction. Examples include comments about the need to improve communication channels and the need for more frequent meetings.
2. Subjectivity: The subjectivity score ranges from 0 (very objective) to 1 (very subjective). The comments vary in subjectivity, with some being more opinion-based and others being more factual.
   • Objective Comments: Some comments are more objective, providing factual information or straightforward suggestions without much personal opinion.
   • Subjective Comments: Other comments are more subjective, expressing personal opinions, feelings, or experiences.

Key Insights

• Overall Sentiment: The overall sentiment is positive, with many respondents expressing support and optimism for KAPH's future.
• Areas for Improvement: Key areas for improvement include communication channels, marketing efforts, and regular updates to members.
• Constructive Feedback: The constructive feedback provided by respondents can be used to guide future initiatives and improvements.