Study · Public services

Additional Study: Survey on the Perception of Public Services in Nosara – 2025

E. Gutiérrez · October 25, 2025 · 6 min read

Leer en español →

Introduction

This report summarizes the main indicators from the survey on citizen perception of public services in the Nosara district, Nicoya canton.

The objective is to identify which services are rated highest and lowest by the local population, as well as territorial and thematic gaps that can guide future community, institutional, or local planning actions.

The data collection is part of the follow-up process for the 2024 Nosara Census, which aims to complement representative evidence on the district’s social, environmental, and infrastructure conditions.

Methodology

The information comes from 115 valid surveys conducted in businesses, public spaces, and households in Arenales de Nosara in June 2025. The survey was administered in person by students from the National University as part of community outreach and student workshop activities.

The sample was random and geographically concentrated on people who transit or work in Nosara Center and Arenales but reside in different communities across the district. The instrument included closed-ended questions on a 1–5 scale (where 1 means very poor and 5 means very good), as well as open-ended questions about priorities and observations.

Procedure and Analysis

Data were processed using spreadsheets and consistency checks. Averages were calculated based on valid responses (N) for each indicator, excluding empty or not applicable values.

Standard deviation (σ) values are also included to estimate response variability.

General Results

The average ratings (1–5 scale, where 5 = “very good”) and the number of valid responses per indicator were:

Notes:

• Averages are calculated on the valid cases (N) indicated in the table; in particular, questions related to EBAIS have a lower N (possible non-response or “not applicable” from some respondents, due to not being insured, not using EBAIS, or accessing other private medical services).
• Standard deviations show moderate variability in most indicators, suggesting heterogeneous perceptions across neighborhoods and sectors.
• General interpretation: waste collection is the highest-rated service, while road infrastructure and electrical stability are the areas with the highest levels of dissatisfaction.

Note on Standard Deviation

Standard deviation indicates how much opinions deviate from the average:

• If low (≈0.5–1.0), opinions are similar among respondents.
• If high (≥1.2), there are notable differences between communities or sectors.

For example:

• Electrical service (1.37) shows high dispersion, indicating that some areas of Nosara may have stable electricity while others experience frequent outages.
• In contrast, waste collection (0.89) shows more uniform perceptions, with generally positive satisfaction.

In summary, this measure allows distinguishing between services with generalized problems and those where the main challenge is territorial inequality in service provision.

Interpretative Analysis

The results allow establishing three levels of performance for public services in Nosara:

Well-Rated Services

• Waste collection (4.37): the highest-rated service in the study, with low dispersion. Most communities report regular service, suggesting relatively stable municipal management.
• Water quality (3.47): perceived as acceptable, though with variability between communities. Some areas report issues with pressure or turbidity, but overall coverage is good.

Intermediate Performance Services

• Availability of medications (3.31): mixed results; reflects both progress in supply and shortages of specific drugs.
• Emergency response (2.79): most people consider response times slow or irregular, especially outside working hours.

Low-Rated Services

• EBAIS care (2.60): main criticisms include lack of medical staff, long waiting times, and limited hours.
• Road conditions (2.37): road infrastructure is a major complaint, with potholes, poor drainage, and insufficient maintenance.
• Electrical service stability (2.27): lowest average rating and highest dispersion, reflecting unequal electricity supply quality depending on the area.

Evaluation of Service Frequencies and Quality

Road conditions in the community

• Frequency of observing potholes, holes, or ditches on main roads:
  • Options: Sometimes; Frequently; Rarely; Always
  • Most marked option: Always
• Frequency of maintenance on their street or nearby streets:
  • Options: Almost never; Twice a year; Monthly; Never; Quarterly; Once a year
  • Most marked option: Almost never

EBAIS care and reasons for non-attendance

• Frequency of difficulty obtaining a medical appointment in the last 6 months:
  • Options: Sometimes; Frequently; I don’t go to EBAIS; Not applicable; Never; Rarely; Always
  • Most marked option: Always
• Reasons for not attending EBAIS (from questionnaires):
  • Goes to private clinics
  • Private care
  • Difficult to get an appointment
  • Has not needed care since moving to the community
  • Service is very poor
  • Is a foreigner
  • Registered at another location
  • Poor attention
  • Has not needed it
  • No appointments available or long delays
  • Does not consider it necessary
  • No specialized medicine
  • No time and would waste more if attended
  • Never needed it
  • Too slow
  • Care is not very good
  • Has no health issues
  • Private
  • Long-term resident
  • Very poor service in Nosara
  • Goes to private because public service is poor
  • Goes to a private clinic

29% of respondents residing in Nosara do not attend EBAIS or it is not applicable.

Waste Collection

• Frequency of garbage truck passing in the area:
  • Options: Never; Once a week; Twice a week
  • Most marked option: Twice a week
• Frequency of observing garbage accumulation on sidewalks, streets, drains, or river dikes:
  • Options: Sometimes; Frequently; Never; Rarely; Always
  • Most marked option: Sometimes

Emergency Services

• People who reported needing emergency services in the last year:
  • Options: Yes; No
  • Results: Yes: 88 (77%), No: 27 (23%)
• People who reported needing a service and answered the question “How long did it take to receive attention?”
  • Options: 15–30 minutes; 30 minutes–1 hour; More than 1 hour; Less than 15 minutes; Did not receive attention
  • Results: 30% Did not receive attention; 30% More than 1 hour; 15% Between 15–30 minutes; 19% Between 30 minutes–1 hour; 7% Less than 15 minutes

Potable Water Service

• Frequency of water supply interruptions at home:
  • Options: Sometimes; Frequently; Very frequently; Never; Rarely
  • Most marked option: Rarely
• Frequency of low pressure or dirty water:
  • Options: Sometimes; Frequently; Very frequently; Never; Rarely
  • Most marked option: Rarely

Electricity Service

• Frequency of power outages in the last 3 months:
  • Options: Once; 2–3 times; 4–5 times; More than 5 times; None
  • Most marked option: More than 5 times
• Frequency of voltage spikes or daily outages:
  • Options: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 15
  • Average: 6 times per day

Institutional Responsibility for Public Services

For each analyzed public service, the following institutions are responsible for provision, supervision, and tariff regulation:

Conclusions and Recommendations

1. Road infrastructure, emergency response, and electrical supply are the main weaknesses and priorities for intervention.
2. Primary health care (EBAIS) requires strengthening in staff coverage, physical space, and delivery of expanded and integrated services.
3. Emergency response times reveal a significant gap due to limited capacity and resources in the district.
4. Annual monitoring of these indicators is recommended.
5. Exercise rights to file complaints with ARESEP and the oversight offices of each institution, and actively participate in improving public services. Support ASADAS, Health Committees, Red Cross Committees, and local representation to implement improvements and ensure quality service coverage.
6. Population growth generates rapidly increasing demand for public services, which do not respond with the required speed or depth, resulting in service gaps and inequalities.

Study Limitations

• Survey data reflect subjective perceptions, not technical measurements of institutional performance.
• The sample consists of 115 responses; results are indicative and do not statistically represent the entire population.
• Variations between communities may arise from differences in coverage, accessibility, and local conditions.

Citation instructions: Gutiérrez, E. (2025, October). Supplementary Study: Survey on Citizen Perception of Public Services in Nosara. Nosara Census.