2025 Muni Customer Satisfaction Survey Supporting Documentation - Accessible Materials

Share this:

This page provides accessible interpretations of charts and graphs within the 2025 Muni Customer Satisfaction Survey Executive Summary and Questionnaire.

Overall Rating of Muni Service
Trending: Overall Rating of Muni Service
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Map
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Total
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Usage of Muni-Currently
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Trip Purpose
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Income
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Household Size
Overall Rating by Subgroup - Zone
Usage of Muni
Trip Purpose
Attribute Chart
Service Attributes
Harassment
Mode Selection
Trip's Main Purpose When Muni Not Selected
Incentives for Muni Use
Information Sources
Online Sources
App Sources
How informed do you feel about Muni projects
Familiarity with SFMTA Responsibilities
Satisfaction with the SFMTA
 

Overall Rating of Muni Service

Found on page 1

Ratings Percentage
Excellent 27%
Good 51%
Only Fair 18%
Poor 4%

A circle surrounds the excellent and good ratings for a combined score of 78%

Trending: Overall Rating of Muni Service

Found on page 2

Excellent and Good Ratings Combined

Year Combined Rating
2001 48%
2002 57%
2003 68%
2004 64%
2005 65%
2006 53%
2007 55%
2010 52%
2011 57%
2012 62%
2014 64%
2015 66%
2016 70%
2017 70%
2018 63%
2019 59%
2021 57%
2022 66%
2024 72%
2025 78%

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Map

Found on page 2

Overall City Rating – 78% Excellent/Good

Zone 1 – 75% Excellent/Good

  • South of Market
  • Parts of the Financial District
  • Castro/Upper Market
  • Mission District
  • Bernal Heights
  • Potrero Hill
  • Mission Bay

Zone 2 – 80% Excellent/Good

  • Marina District
  • Russian Hill
  • North Beach
  • Pacific Heights
  • Western Addition/Panhandle/Haight-Ashbury
  • Downtown/Civic Center
  • Nob Hill
  • Chinatown
  • Parts of the Financial District

Zone 3 – 76% Excellent/Good

  • Presidio
  • Seacliff/Outer Richmond
  • Inner Richmond/Presidio Heights
  • Golden Gate Park/Outer Sunset/Inner Sunset

Zone 4 – 71% Excellent/Good

  • Parkside
  • Lakeshore/Ocean View
  • West of Twin Peaks/Diamond Heights
  • Noe Valley/Twin Peaks/Glen Park

Zone 5 – 81% Excellent/Good

  • Balboa Park/Outer Mission/
  • Excelsior/Visitacion Valley
  • Bayview

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Details

The following tables communicate data found on page 3

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Total

Satisfaction Rating by Total Excellent/Good Fair Poor
All riders (n = 535) 78% 18% 4%

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Usage of Muni-Currently

Satisfaction Rating by Usage of Muni – Currently^ Excellent/Good Fair Poor
5 or more days/week (n = 151) 71% 22% 7%
Several times a week (n = 174) 81% 18% 1%
Once a week (n = 42) 87% 8% 5%
Three times a month or less (n = 169) 79% 16% 7%

^ Surveyed respondents have all used Muni in the past 3 years

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Trip Purpose

Satisfaction Rating by Trip Purpose Excellent/Good Fair Poor
Work / School (n = 307) 72% 22% 6%
Personal Business (n = 24) 77% 23% <1%
Other Purpose (n = 518) 81% 16% 3%

Note: More than one response was allowed for the trip purpose categories.

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Income

Satisfaction Rating by Income Excellent/Good Fair Poor
Less than $25,000 (n = 41) 75% 18% 8%
$25,000 - $49,999 (n = 57) 83% 16% 1%
$50,000 - $74,999 (n = 108) 80% 19% 1%
$75,000 - $99,999 (n = 56) 62% 31% 6%
$100,000 or more (n = 266) 80% 16% 5%

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Household Size

Satisfaction Rating by Household Size Excellent/Good Fair Poor
1 person (n = 178) 78% 20% 2%
2 people (n = 183) 76% 20% 4%
3-4 people (n = 137) 79% 16% 5%
5 or more people (n = 33) 93% 7% <1%

Overall Rating by Subgroup - Zone

Satisfaction Rating by Zone Excellent/Good Fair Poor
1 (n = 122) 75% 20% 5%
2 (n = 171) 80% 17% 3%
3 (n = 98) 76% 16% 8%
4 (n = 72) 71% 25% 4%
5 (n = 76) 81% 16% 3%

Usage of Muni

Found on page 4.

Frequency of Usage % in 2025
Several times a week 61%
About once a week 8%
1-3 times a month 19%
Less than once a month 14%
Frequency of Usage % in 2024
Several times a week 59%
About once a week 9%
1-3 times a month 19%
Less than once a month 13%
Frequency of Usage % in 2022
Several times a week 52%
About once a week 12%
1-3 times a month 21%
Less than once a month 14%
Frequency of Usage % in 2021
Several times a week 37%
About once a week 15%
1-3 times a month 21%
Less than once a month 27%

Trip Purpose

Found on page 4.

Trip Purpose %
Commute to work/Work Related 48%
Eat Out/Social/ Recreation/Entertainment 48%
Shopping 30%
Personal/Medical Appointments 24%
School/University 9%

Attribute Chart

Found on page 5.

The attribute chart divides into four quadrants which represent the respondent's rating of the service attributes on the x axis and the impact of importance that rating has on their overall satisfaction score:

  • The upper left quadrant represents attributes with "Low Rating/High Impact (Opportunities for Improvement)"
  • The upper right quadrant represents attributes with "High Rating/High Impact (Doing Well)"
  • The lower left quadrant represents attributes with "Low Rating/Low Impact (Lower Priority)"
  • The lower right quadrant represents attributes with "High Rating/Low Impact (Exceeding Expectations)"

The list below breaks out where the attributes fit in each quadrant and includes the percentage of respondents saying that service attribute was excellent or good.

Low Rating/High Impact (Opportunities for Improvement)

  • Providing reliability (on-time performance) - 63%
  • Vehicle Cleanliness - 61%

High Rating/High Impact (Doing Well)

  • Trips taking a reasonable amount of time - 71%
  • Providing frequent service - 64%
  • Providing accurate arrival predictions - 70%

Low Rating/Low Impact (Lower Priority)

  • Managing Crowding - 47%
  • Safety and security from crime while onboard or waiting for Muni - 53%
  • Communicating with the public - 56%

High Rating/Low Impact (Exceeding Expectations)

  • Helpful drivers/operators - 76%
  • Providing access for people with disabilities - 84%

Service Attributes

Found on page 6.

The table below shows how the Muni service attributes have rated over the past three years the survey has been conducted.

Service Attribute % in 2025 % in 2024 % in 2022 % in 2021
Providing access for people with disabilities 84% 81% 81% 79%
Helpful drivers/operators^ 76% 75% 73% 70%
Trips take a reasonable amount of time 71% 69% 65% 57%
Providing accurate arrival estimates^ 70% 64% 49% 45%
Providing frequent service^ 64% 63% 51% 45%
Providing reliability (on-time performance)^ 63% 60% 47% 42%
Cleaning Muni vehicles. 61% 58% 57% 60%
Communicating with the public. 56% 52% 51% 50%
Safety and security from crime while onboard or.. waiting for Muni 53% 44% 42% 38%
Managing crowding on Muni vehicles. 47% 42% 37% 38%

^ In 2022, these were phrased as “Operator (driver) helpfulness”, “Accurate arrival predictions”, “Frequency of service”, “Reliable / On-Time performance”.

Harassment

Found on page 7.

Have you seen or experienced harassment while using Muni in the past year?

Response %
No 54%
Yes, I saw it happen to others 27%
Yes, it’s happened to me and I saw it happen to others 13%
Yes, it’s happened to me 6%

Mode Selection

Found on page 8.

What mode(s) of transportation are you using now instead of Muni?

Mode %
Drive 83%
Walk 26%
Other public transit (e.g. BART, SamTrans) 15%
Ride hailing (e.g. Uber/Lyft) 13%
Bicycle 7%
Taxi 5%
Carpool 1%

Base – Have not ridden Muni in the past three years (n=28)

Trip's Main Purpose When Muni Not Selected

Found on Page 8.

Think of a recent trip when you could have used Muni, but did not, what was the main purpose of your trips?

Purpose %
Eat out/Social/Recreation/Entertainment 41%
Work 21%
Shopping 17%
Medical 11%
Personal Business/Errands 5%
School 5%

Base – All respondents (n=563)

Incentives for Muni Use

Found on Page 9.

What could Muni do to get you to try transit for this type of trip?*

Incentives %
Increased frequency 26%
More direct routes/coverage of city/Fewer transfers 24%
Faster trips 15%
More on-time/reliable 12%
Safer from crime onboard/at stop 10%
Make it easier to carry groceries/tools/personal material 7%
Less crowding onboard 6%
Prefer to drive/walk/bike/was given a ride (general) 6%
Cleaner onboard/at stops 5%
Closer stops 5%
Expanded hours 3%

*Partial list, only responses 3% or greater overall are shown.

Information Sources

Found on page 10.

If you needed information about Muni, how would you obtain this information?*

Sources %
Check online 56%
Use an app 48%
Ask a Muni driver or Station agent 12%
Visit the SFMTA Customer Service Center 10%
Call 311 or fill out an online form 10%

*Partial list, only responses 5% or greater overall are shown

Online Sources

Found on page 10.

Online Sources^ %
SFMTA Website 51%
Google Maps website 44%
Internet search 4%
Next Bus/Umo website 3%
Market Street Railway 1%

App Sources

Found on page 10.

App Sources^^ %
Google Maps app 27%
MuniMobile 25%
Next Bus/Umo App 21%
Transit 16%
Apple Maps app 11%
Routsey 7%

^Partial list, only responses 1% or greater overall are shown, see crosstabulated tables for complete list

^^Partial list, only responses 7% or greater overall are shown, see crosstabulated tables for complete list

How informed do you feel about Muni projects, enhancements, and service updates?

Found on page 10.

How informed %
Very informed 18%
Somewhat informed 37%
Not too informed 27%
Not at all informed 18%

Familiarity with SFMTA Responsibilities

Found on page 11.

  • In 2025, nearly three-quarters (71%) are very/somewhat familiar with the SFMTA and its responsibilities.
  • Nearly two thirds of respondents (62%) were at least somewhat satisfied with SFMTA’s management of transportation in San Francisco.
How familiar %
Very familiar 31%
Somewhat familiar 41%
Not too familiar 20%
Not at all familiar 9%

Satisfaction with the SFMTA

Found on page 11.

How satisfied are you with the job SFMTA does with managing transportation in San Francisco?

Satisfaction Rating %
Very Satisfied 18%
Somewhat Satisfied 44%
Neutral 19%
Somewhat Dissatisfied 13%
Very Dissatisfied 7%