image

image
2
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Background and objectives
Survey methodology and sampling
Further information
Key findings & recommendations
Summary of findings
Detailed findings
• Key core measure: Overall performance
• Key core measure: Customer service
• Key core measure: Council direction indicators
• Individual service areas
• Detailed demographics
Appendix A: Detailed survey tabulations
Appendix B: Further project information

image
3
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
75
71 71
Art centres & libraries
Waste management
Emergency & disaster management
78 53
80 58
82 61
Planning for
-25
-22
-21
population growth in
the area
Decisions made in
the interest of the
community
The condition of
local streets and
footpaths in your
area
Importance
Performance
Net differential
65 65 59
Results shown are index scores out of 100.
Council
Metropolitan State-wide

image
4
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Welcome to the report of results and recommendations
for the 2018 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey for Brimbank City Council.
Each year Local Government Victoria (LGV)
coordinates and auspices this State-wide Local
Government Community Satisfaction Survey throughout
Victorian local government areas. This coordinated
approach allows for far more cost effective surveying
than would be possible if councils commissioned
surveys individually.
Participation in the State-wide Local Government
Community Satisfaction Survey is optional. Participating
councils have various choices as to the content of the
questionnaire and the sample size to be surveyed,
depending on their individual strategic, financial and
other considerations.
The main objectives of the survey are to assess the
performance of Brimbank City Council across a range
of measures and to seek insight into ways to provide
improved or more effective service delivery. The survey
also provides councils with a means to fulfil some of
their statutory reporting requirements as well as acting
as a feedback mechanism to LGV.

image
5
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
This survey was conducted by Computer Assisted
Telephone Interviewing (CATI) as a representative
random probability survey of residents aged 18+ years
in Brimbank City Council.
Survey sample matched to the demographic profile of
Brimbank City Council as determined by the most
recent ABS population estimates was purchased from
an accredited supplier of publicly available phone
records, including up to 40% mobile phone numbers to
cater to the diversity of residents within Brimbank City
Council, particularly younger people.
A total of n=400 completed interviews were achieved in
Brimbank City Council. Survey fieldwork was
conducted in the period of 1
st
February – 30
th
March,
2018.
The 2018 results are compared with previous years, as
detailed below:
• 2017, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 30
th
March.
• 2016, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 30
th
March.
• 2015, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 30
th
March.
• 2014, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 31
st
January – 11
th
March.
• 2013, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 24
th
March.
• 2012, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 18
th
May – 30
th
June.
Minimum quotas of gender within age groups were
applied during the fieldwork phase. Post-survey
weighting was then conducted to ensure accurate
representation of the age and gender profile of the
Brimbank City Council area.
Any variation of +/-1% between individual results and
net scores in this report or the detailed survey
tabulations is due to rounding. In reporting, ‘—’
denotes not mentioned and ‘0%’ denotes mentioned by
less than 1% of respondents. ‘Net’ scores refer to two
or more response categories being combined into one
category for simplicity of reporting.

image
6
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Within tables and index score charts throughout this
report, statistically significant differences at the 95%
confidence level are represented by upward directing
blue and downward directing red arrows. Significance
when noted indicates a significantly higher or lower
result for the analysis group in comparison to the ‘Total’
result for the council for that survey question for that
year. Therefore in the example below:
• The state-wide result is significantly higher than the
overall result for the council.
• The result among 50-64 year olds is significantly
lower than for the overall result for the council.
Further, results shown in blue and red indicate
significantly higher or lower results than in 2017.
Therefore in the example below:
• The result among 35-49 year olds in the council is
significantly higher than the result achieved among
this group in 2017.
• The result among 18-34 year olds in the council is
significantly lower than the result achieved among
this group in 2017.
54
57 58
60
67
66
50-64 35-49
Metro
Brimbank
18-34
State-wide
Overall Performance – Index Scores
(example extract only)
Note: Details on the calculations used to determine statistically significant differences may be found in Appendix B.

image
7
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Further information about the report and explanations
about the State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey can be found in Appendix B,
including:
Background and objectives
Margins of error
Analysis and reporting
Glossary of terms
Contacts
For further queries about the conduct and reporting of
the 2018 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on
(03) 8685 8555.

image

image
9
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The
overall performance index score of 65
for
Brimbank City Council represents
a five point
significant
improvement
on the 2017 result, and
represents the highest score Council has achieved
since tracking commenced in 2012.
Brimbank City Council’s overall performance is
rated
statistically significantly higher
(at the 95%
confidence interval) than the average rating for
councils
State-wide
(index score of 59); and is
rated the same as the average rating for councils
in the
Metropolitan
group (index score of 65).
Residents aged
18 to 34 years
(index score of
72) are
significantly more
favourable in their view
of Council’s overall performance compared to
average. Conversely, residents aged
50 to 64
years
are
significantly less
favourable in their
view of Council’s overall performance.
Perceptions of overall performance among
males,
residents of
Sunshine
and those aged
18
to 34 years
are also
significantly higher
compared with 2017.
A majority of residents rate Brimbank City Council’s
overall performance as ‘very good’ or ‘good’ (55%), an
11 percentage point increase on 2017. Only 10% rate
overall performance as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’.
65 65 59
Results shown are index scores out of 100.
Council
Metropolitan State-wide

image
10
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Review of the core performance measures (as shown
on page 18) shows that Brimbank City Council’s
performance improved
on all measures compared to
Council’s own results in 2017.
Brimbank City Council’s performance on
sealed
local roads
(index score of 63) is
significantly
higher
compared to 2017 (index score of 58). This
measure is also rated
significantly higher
than the
State-wide
council average (index score of 53),
but is rated
significantly lower
than the
Metro
group council average (index score of 68).
Brimbank City Council’s performance on
overall
council direction
(index score of 64) is also
significantly higher
compared to 2017 (index
score of 59). This area is also rated
significantly
higher
than the
State-wide
and
Metro
group
council average (index scores of 52 and 54
respectively).
While not a
significant
increase, Council’s
performance on
advocacy
(index score of 57)
improved three points on its 2017 result (index
score of 54), and is rated
significantly higher
than
the
State-wide
council average (index score of
54).
There are also notable differences across
demographic cohorts within Brimbank City Council.
On the measure of
overall council direction
(index score of 64), residents aged
18 to 34 years
rate council
significantly higher
than average;
whereas residents aged
35 to 49 years
rate
council
significantly lower
than average (index
scores of 71 and 56 respectively).
On the measures of
advocacy
(57) and
making
community decisions
(58), residents aged
18 to
34 years
rate council
significantly higher
than
average (62 and 63 respectively); whereas
residents aged
50 to 64 years
rate council
significantly lower
than average (50 and 51
respectively).
In the area of
customer service
(index score of 72),
Brimbank City Council is rated similar to both the
State-wide
and
Metro
group council averages (index
scores of 70 and 72 respectively). This service area is
also Brimbank City Council’s best performing core
measure.

image
11
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Just over half
(55%) of Brimbank City Council
residents have had recent contact with Council, which
is not
significantly
different to 2017 (54%). The current
level of contact has remained relatively stable after
trending downward in recent years since its peak level
of 61% in 2014.
Residents aged
50 to 64 years
had the most contact
with council (60%) in 2018. Conversely, residents aged
18 to 34 years
had the least contact with council
(49%). While there are no
significant
differences in
contact across the demographic cohorts across
council, females had
significantly more
contact
compared to 2017.
Brimbank City Council’s
customer service
index of 72
is two points up on the result for 2017, but this is not a
significant
improvement. As mentioned previously,
performance on this measure is not
significantly
different to the
State-wide
and
Metro
group council
averages, with Council performing at a similar level.
A third of residents (33%) rate Council’s
customer service
as ‘very good’, with a further
39% rating it as ‘good’. This represents a (not
significant) 5 percentage point increase in ‘very
good’ ratings compared with 2017.
Review of index scores by demographic cohorts
does not reveal any
significant
differences across
council or compared to 2017.

image
12
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
While
customer service
is the core area where
Brimbank City Council has
performed most strongly
overall
(index score of 72), one of the most improved
core measures in 2018 is
overall council direction,
which is
significantly higher
compared to 2017 (up five
points).
Notably, the 2018 result for
overall council
direction
is rated
significantly higher
than the
State-wide
and
Metro
group council averages.
Driving positive opinion in this particular area are
residents of
Sunshine,
those aged
18 to 34
years
and
Males
whose perceptions are
significantly
more favourable compared to 2017.
Another core service area where Brimbank City
Council has
significantly
improved is
sealed local
roads.
With a five point increase in 2018, this area has
‘bounced back’ positively to equal its highest result
after experiencing a decline in recent years. While this
measure remains
significantly
lower than the
Metro
group council average, it is rated
significantly
higher
than in 2017 and compared with the
State-wide
council average for 2018.
Driving positive opinion in this area are residents
of
Sunshine, females
and those aged
18 to 34
years,
all
significantly higher
than 2017.
Outside of the core performance measures, the
top
three performing
service areas for Brimbank City
Council as rated by residents are:
Art centres and libraries
(index score of 75).
Waste management
(index score of 71).
Emergency and disaster management
(index
score of 71).
While not in the top three rated areas, additional
service areas that are performing comparatively well
are
planning permits, town planning and policies,
traffic management
and
parking permits
which are
all rated
significantly higher
than the
State-wide
and
Metro
group council averages.
Notably, perceptions of
emergency and disaster
management
(71),
family support services
(66),
traffic management
(61),
local streets
and footpaths
(61)
and parking facilities
(59)
are all
significantly higher
compared to 2017.

image
13
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Perceptions of Council did not experience any
significant declines
in performance index scores in
the past year. This is a positive result for Council
.
Moreover, nearly seven in ten residents (68%) think
Brimbank City Council is largely heading in the
right
direction
(21% definitely and 47% probably).
The regression analysis on pages 30-34 shows that the
individual service area with the strongest influence on
the overall performance rating is decisions made in the
interest of the community. Efforts on general town
planning and how well it informs the community also
have the capacity to lift Brimbank City Council’s overall
performance rating.
Otherwise, in terms of priorities for the coming 12
months to build on the largely positive community
perceptions, Council should focus attention on service
areas where current performance levels remain
significantly lower
than
State-wide
and
Metro
group
council averages.
The area that stands out as being most in need of
Council attention is
sealed local roads.
While
performance on this measure improved significantly
(63), it is still rated
significantly lower
than the
Metro
group council average (68).
Brimbank City Council should not only pay particular
attention to areas that are performing below
State-wide
and
Metro
group council averages, but also where
stated importance exceeds rated performance by more
than 20 points. Key priorities include:
Population growth
(margin of 25 points).
Community decisions
(margin of 22 points).
Local streets and footpaths
(margin of 21
points).
Consideration should also be given to residents aged
50
to 64 years,
who appear to be most driving negative
opinion in 2018.
On the positive side, Council should look to
maintain
and
build
on its improved performance across all core
measures over the next 12 months.
It is also important not to ignore, and to learn from, what
is working amongst other groups, especially residents
aged
18 to 34 years
, and use these lessons to build
performance experience and perceptions in other areas.

image
14
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
An approach we recommend is to further mine the
survey data to better understand the profile of these
over and under-performing demographic groups. This
can be achieved via additional consultation and data
interrogation, self-mining the SPSS data provided, or
via the dashboard portal available to the council.
A personal briefing by senior JWS Research
representatives is also available to assist in
providing both explanation and interpretation of
the results. Please contact JWS Research on 03
8685 8555.

image
15
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Higher results in 2018
(Significantly higher result than 2017)
• Overall performance
• Overall council direction
• Sealed local roads
Lower results in 2018
(Significantly lower result than 2017)
• None
Most favourably disposed
towards Council
• Aged 18 to 34 years
• Women
Least favourably disposed
towards Council
• Aged 50 to 64 years

image

image
17
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
60
62
64
61
61
60
65
58
57
56
58
54
55
56
55
56
54
54
57
54
57
57
55
56
58
63
60
58
58
63
71
76
73
76
73
70
72
63
63
62
57
61
59
64
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Sealed
Local
Roads
Community
Consultation
Customer
Service
Overall
Council
Direction
Overall
Performance
Advocacy
Making
Community
Decisions

image
18
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Performance Measures
Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Metro 2018 Statewide 2018 Highest score Lowest score
OVERALL PERFORMANCE
65
60
65
59
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 50-
64 years
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION
(Community consultation and
engagement)
56
55
57
55
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 50-
64 years
ADVOCACY
(Lobbying on behalf of the community)
57
54
56
54
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 50-
64 years
MAKING COMMUNITY
DECISIONS
(Decisions made in the
interest of the community)
58
56
58
54
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 50-
64 years
SEALED LOCAL ROADS
(Condition of sealed local roads)
63
58
68
53
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 50-
64 years
CUSTOMER SERVICE
72
70
72
70
Aged 65+
years
Aged 35-
49 years
OVERALL COUNCIL DIRECTION
64
59
54
52
Aged 18-
34 years Aged 35-
49 years

image
19
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
15
10 6 9 18
33
40
27
26 30
36
39
33
32
29
32
30
15
8
16
11
10
11 5
2
4
3
4
4 6
1
12
26 15
1 1
Overall Performance
Community Consultation
Advocacy
Making Community
Decisions
Sealed Local Roads
Customer Service
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Key Measures Summary Results
Overall Council Direction
33
52
7 7
%
Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

image
20
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
63
57
37
32
15
14
10
56
53
33
28
13
11
5
Recreational facilities
Art centres & libraries
Informing the community
Community & cultural
Consultation & engagement
Family support services
Elderly support services
Total household use
Personal use
%
Experience of Services
Q4. In the last 12 months, have you or has any member of your household used or experienced any of the following
services provided by Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 5

image
21
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
78 80 82 78 82 82 78 77 75 77 76 77 79 69 83 82 71
67
Population growth
Community decisions
Local streets & footpaths
Informing the community
Elderly support services
Sealed local roads
Traffic management
Enforcement of local laws
Parking facilities
Disadvantaged support serv.
Appearance of public areas
Environmental sustainability
Family support services
Consultation & engagement
Waste management
Emergency & disaster mngt
Town planning policy
Lobbying
53 58 61 58 64 63 61 60 59 63 62 63 66 56 71 71 60
57
Importance
Performance
Net Differential
Service areas where importance exceeds performance by 10 points or more,
suggesting further investigation is necessary:
-25 -22 -21 -20 -18 -18 -17 -17 -16 -14 -14 -14 -13 -12 -12 -12 -11 -10

image
22
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
80 83 80 83 81 80 77 78 79 76 77 72 74 78 74 75 71 72 67 71 70 63 63
83 79 80 80 80 78 76 74 78 77 77 77 75 76 73 73 72 73 70 73 71 65 64
82 81 81 80 77 79 78 76 76 77 77 76 76 76 75 73 71 71 72 73 70 66 64
79 80 80 80 77 77 75 72 75 75 77 73 74 79 74 73 68 72 67 71 67 66 64
81 83 82 81 n/a n/a 79 77 79 77 80 76 78 78 75 73 71 70 69 72 70 67 63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2018 Priority Area Importance
83 82 82 82 82 80 79 78 78 78 77 77 77 76 75 75
71 71 69 69 67 64
61
Waste management
Emergency & disaster mngt
Elderly support services
Local streets & footpaths
Sealed local roads
Community decisions
Family support services
Population growth
Traffic management
Informing the community
Enforcement of local laws
Environmental sustainability
Disadvantaged support serv.
Appearance of public areas
Recreational facilities
Parking facilities
Town planning policy
Planning & building permits
Art centres & libraries
Consultation & engagement
Lobbying
Community & cultural
Bus/community dev./tourism
Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation of significant differences.
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

image
23
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
47 43 46 43 51
39 37 40 40 36 37 33 31 30 37 34
23 24 20 22 20 18 16
39 42 40 42 30
42 42 38 37 41 38
42 45 45 38 37
41 41 43 40 37
34 32
13 12 12 14 14 16
18 17 17 18 18 19 21 21 21 23
25 25 29 30 30
34 35
2 2 1 2 1 3 2 3 2 4 3 2 3 2 6
6 6 6 7 8 10
13
1
1 1 2 1 1
1
1 1 1 2 2 3
1
1 2 1
1 2
5 3 1 2 1 2
Waste management
Local streets & footpaths
Elderly support services
Sealed local roads
Emergency & disaster mngt
Community decisions
Informing the community
Family support services
Population growth
Traffic management
Enforcement of local laws
Disadvantaged support serv.
Appearance of public areas
Recreational facilities
Environmental sustainability
Parking facilities
Town planning policy
Planning & building permits
Art centres & libraries
Consultation & engagement
Lobbying
Community & cultural
Bus/community dev./tourism
%
Extremely important
Very important
Fairly important
Not that important
Not at all important
Can't say
Individual Service Areas Importance
Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 10

image
24
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Priority Area Performance
72 70 65 64 64 62 63 58 62 60 61 60 54 55 58 60 55 56 58 56 54 55 52
68 68 64 67 63 65 66 58 57 61 61 59 57 54 56 59 57 57 57 58 57 54 55
68 71 66 65 66 64 63 60 61 60 62 59 57 53 59 62 59 55 59 61 54 58 57
72 73 68 66 66 67 64 63 62 61 59 60 58 60 59 61 60 57 55 61 54 56 56
69 73 65 67 65 65 67 n/a 64 61 59 62 55 55 59 64 60 n/a 57 62 56 57 58
n/a
72 n/a n/a 65 65 65 n/a n/a 61 62 59 54 55 55 57 56 n/a 57 n/a 55 58 n/a
75 71 71
67 66 66 64 63 63 63 62 62 61 61 60 60
59 58 58 58 57 56 53
Art centres & libraries
Waste management
Emergency & disaster mngt
Community & cultural
Recreational facilities
Family support services
Elderly support services
Sealed local roads
Environmental sustainability
Disadvantaged support serv.
Appearance of public areas
Planning & building permits
Traffic management
Local streets & footpaths
Town planning policy
Enforcement of local laws
Parking facilities
Community decisions
Bus/community dev./tourism
Informing the community
Lobbying
Consultation & engagement
Population growth
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation of significant differences.

image
25
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Individual Service Areas Performance
27 29
15 18 18 20 15 17 18 14 11 14 11
6 13 10 9 9 10 9 9 6 4
43 37
40 36 36 32 36 34 33
33 35 31 33
38 30 29 31 30 27
25 23 26 26
21 22
29 32 30
24 28 28 18 32
28 25 23 22 32
21 31 32 32
27 34 29 32
6 3 10 7 11
16 12 6
4
12
9 12
5 7
16
9
7 10 16
7 12
11 15
3 1 5 2 4 7 7
1
1
7
2 6
1 3
5
1
3 4 4
1
2 3 5
1 8 1 5 1 1 2
14
26
2
16 13
27 24
4
30 19 15 12
32 20 26 18
Waste management
Art centres & libraries
Appearance of public areas
Recreational facilities
Sealed local roads
Local streets & footpaths
Traffic management
Community & cultural
Emergency & disaster mngt
Parking facilities
Environmental sustainability
Enforcement of local laws
Family support services
Planning & building permits
Informing the community
Elderly support services
Town planning policy
Community decisions
Consultation & engagement
Disadvantaged support serv.
Bus/community dev./tourism
Lobbying
Population growth
%
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
26
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Significantly Higher than
State-wide Average
Significantly Lower than
State-wide Average
• Lobbying
• Local streets & footpaths
• Traffic management
• Parking facilities
• Town planning policy
• Planning permits
• Making community
decisions
• Sealed local roads
• Enforcement of local laws
• Elderly support services
• Recreational facilities
• Appearance of public areas

image
27
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Significantly Higher than
Group Average
Significantly Lower than
Group Average
• Traffic management
• Parking facilities
• Town planning policy
• Planning permits
• Population growth
• Informing the community
• Enforcement of local laws
• Elderly support services
• Recreational facilities
• Appearance of public areas
• Community & cultural
• Waste management
• Sealed local roads

image
28
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Top Three Most Important Service Areas
(Highest to lowest, i.e. 1. = most important)
Brimbank City
Council
1. Waste
management
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Elderly support
services
Metropolitan
1. Waste
management
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Community
decisions
Interface
1. Traffic
management
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Waste management
Regional Centres
1. Emergency &
disaster mngt
2. Sealed roads
3. Community
decisions
Large Rural
1. Sealed roads
2. Unsealed roads
3. Emergency &
disaster mngt
Small Rural
1. Emergency &
disaster mngt
2. Waste management
3. Community
decisions
Bottom Three Least Important Service Areas
(Lowest to highest, i.e. 1. = least important)
Brimbank City
Council
1. Bus/community
dev./tourism
2. Community &
cultural
3. Lobbying
Metropolitan
1. Bus/community
dev./tourism
2. Community &
cultural
3. Slashing & weed
control
Interface
1. Tourism
development
2. Community &
cultural
3. Bus/community
dev./tourism
Regional Centres
1. Community &
cultural
2. Art centres &
libraries
3. Lobbying
Large Rural
1. Community &
cultural
2. Art centres &
libraries
3. Traffic
management
Small Rural
1. Community &
cultural
2. Art centres &
libraries
3. Tourism
development

image
29
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Top Three Performing Service Areas
(Highest to lowest, i.e. 1. = highest performance)
Brimbank City
Council
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Waste
management
3. Emergency &
disaster mngt
Metropolitan
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Waste
management
3. Recreational
facilities
Interface
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Recreational
facilities
Regional Centres
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Appearance of
public areas
3. Emergency &
disaster mngt
Large Rural
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Appearance of
public areas
Small Rural
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Appearance of
public areas
Bottom Three Performing Service Areas
(Lowest to highest, i.e. 1. = lowest performance)
Brimbank City
Council
1. Population growth
2. Consultation &
engagement
3. Lobbying
Metropolitan
1. Population growth
2. Planning permits
3. Town planning
policy
Interface
1. Unsealed roads
2. Population growth
3. Traffic
management
Regional Centres
1. Parking facilities
2. Community
decisions
3. Unsealed roads
Large Rural
1. Unsealed roads
2. Sealed roads
3. Planning permits
Small Rural
1. Unsealed roads
2. Sealed roads
3. Population growth

image
30
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
To predict a respondent’s score on a question related
to overall performance, based on knowledge of their
performance scores for individual areas, we use
regression analysis
. For example, suppose we are
interested in predicting which areas of local
government responsibility could influence a person’s
opinion on overall council performance. The
independent variables
would be areas of responsibility
tested (e.g. community consultation, traffic
management, etc.) and the
dependent variable
would
be overall performance.
The stronger the correlation between the dependent
variable (overall opinion) and individual areas of
responsibility, the closer the scores will fall to the
regression line and the more accurate the prediction.
Multiple regression can predict one variable on the
basis of several other variables. Therefore, we can test
perceptions of council’s overall performance to
investigate which set of areas are influencing
respondents' opinions.
In the chart of the regression results, the horizontal
axis represents the council performance index for each
area of responsibility. Areas plotted on the right-side
have a higher performance index than those on the
left.
The vertical axis represents the Standardised Beta
Coefficient from the multiple regression performed.
This measures the contribution of each variable (i.e.
each area) to the model, with a larger Beta value
indicating a greater effect on overall performance.
Therefore areas of responsibility located near the top
of the following chart are more likely to have an impact
on respondent’s overall rating, than the areas closest
to the axis.
The regressions are shown on the following three
charts. The first chart shows a regression analysis of
all
the service areas chosen by the Council. However,
this model should be interpreted with caution because
some of the data are not normally distributed and not
all items have linear correlations.
Therefore, in the charts that follow, a significant
regression model of fewer items with a Standardised
Beta score close to or higher than ±0.1 was run to
determine the key predictors that have a moderate to
strong influence on overall performance perceptions.
The third chart is an enlarged version of the second
chart, with key findings highlighted.
The results are then discussed according to the
findings of these key service areas. Some findings
from the full regression list may be included in the
discussion if they are of interest.

image
31
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The multiple regression analysis model of all question items above has an R-squared value of 0.641 and adjusted R-square value of 0.619, which means that 64% of the variance in
community perceptions of overall performance can be predicted from these variables. The overall model effect was statistically significant at p = 0.0001, F = 29.15). However, this
model should be interpreted with caution because the data were not normally distributed and not all items had reasonably linear correlations. We recommend you use the
regression model of six factors which were determined after conducting exploratory factor analysis on the following two slides.

image
32
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The performance questions were analysed using Exploratory Factor Analysis to determine six factors or ‘themes’ to emerge from
the questions. Questions with reasonable
linearity and low correlations were selected from each theme and a multiple regression model was performed on these seven items against the overall performance ratings of 400
responses. The multiple regression analysis model above has an R-squared value of 0.606 and adjusted R-square value of 0.599, which means that 60% of the variance in
community perceptions of overall performance can be predicted from these variables. The overall model effect was statistically significant at p = 0.0001, F = 86.06).

image
33
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The performance questions were analysed using Exploratory Factor Analysis to determine six factors or ‘themes’ to emerge from
the questions. Questions with reasonable
linearity and low correlations were selected from each theme and a multiple regression model was performed on these seven items against the overall performance ratings of 400
responses. The multiple regression analysis model above has an R-squared value of 0.606 and adjusted R-square value of 0.599, which means that 60% of the variance in
community perceptions of overall performance can be predicted from these variables. The overall model effect was statistically significant at p = 0.0001, F = 86.06).

image
34
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The individual service area that has the strongest
influence on the overall performance rating is:
Decisions made in the interest of the community
Other key areas with a positive influence on overall
performance include:
Informing the community
Council’s general town planning
The appearance of public areas
Recreational facilities
The condition of sealed roads (includes local
streets and roads managed by each council but
excluding highways and main roads that are
managed by VicRoads)
Community and cultural activities
In terms of the key service areas, community and
cultural activities as well as recreational facilities have
the strongest positive performance index and a
positive relationship to the overall performance rating.
Currently, Brimbank City Council is performing
reasonably well
in these areas (performance index of
67 and 66 respectively) and, while they should remain
a focus, there is greater work to be done elsewhere.
Brimbank City Council’s decisions made in the interest
of the community, general town planning, and how well
it informs the community have lower (though still
positive) performance ratings overall. Continuing
efforts in these areas have the capacity to lift Brimbank
City Council’s overall performance rating. These areas
are among the Council’s lower rated performance
areas (performance indices of 58-60).
While Council planning and building permits have a
reasonable performance index rating (62), this is an
area that can potentially negatively influence overall
performance ratings and needs to be monitored.
Good communication and transparency with residents
about the decisions the Council has made in the
Brimbank community’s interest; town planning; and
how well it informs the community could help improve
opinion in these areas and drive up overall opinion of
the Council’s performance.

image

image

image
37
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Overall Performance
72
67 66 65 65
62 62 62 62 59
59
18-34 Men
Sunshine
Metro
Brimbank
Keilor
Women
35-49 65+ 50-64
State-wide
58 60 61 64 60 58 59 60 63 60 59
66 60 61 66 61 63 63 55 64 60 59
59 62 62 67 61 60 61 65 63 58 60
65 64 64 n/a 64 64 64 60 69 62 61
65 62 63 n/a 62 62 63 61 63 60 60
64 61 n/a n/a 60 n/a 58 55 62 55 60
Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Brimbank City Council, not just on one
or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

image
38
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
15 12 10 15 13 13 9 9 12 12 17 20
10 20 13 12 12
40
32 41 33 42 39
39 37 48 39 41 38
42
48
39
31 37
33
39 36 37 35 35
35 36 29 38 31 32
34
27
33
41 36
8 10 7 9 8 9 11
11 7 7 8 7 9 3 14
9 7
2 4 5 5 2 3 5 5 3 3 2 2 2 1 6 4
1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1 4
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Overall Performance
Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Brimbank City Council, not just on one or
two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image

image
40
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Overall contact with
Brimbank City Council
• 55%, up 1 point on 2017
Most contact with Brimbank
City Council
• Aged 50-64 years
Least contact with Brimbank
City Council
• Aged 18-34 years
Customer service rating
• Index score of 72, up 2 points on 2017
Most satisfied with customer
service
• Aged 65+ years
Least satisfied with
customer service
• Aged 35-49 years

image
41
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Contact with Council
%
61
60 59 59 57
56 55 54 54
51 49
State-wide
50-64
Women
35-49
Metro
Keilor
Brimbank
Sunshine
65+ Men 18-34
Q5. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with Brimbank City Council? This may have been in
person, in writing, by telephone conversation, by text message, by email or via their website or social media such as Facebook or Twitter?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 43 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
42
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Contact with Council
54
53
61
58
57
54
55
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Have had contact
%
Q5. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with Brimbank City Council? This may have
been in person, in writing, by telephone conversation, by text message, by email or via their website or social media such as Facebook or
Twitter?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 43 Councils asked group: 8

image
43
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Customer Service Rating
74
73 73 73
72 72 72
71 71
70 70
65+ 50-64
Women
Sunshine
18-34
Metro
Brimbank
Men
Keilor
35-49
State-wide
74 70 71 75 73 71 70 69 64 65 69
81 68 75 73 71 73 73 71 73 73 69
72 77 77 76 70 73 76 75 75 83 70
81 69 73 73 74 n/a 73 74 74 71 72
80 76 78 77 77 n/a 76 74 74 73 71
71 77 73 n/a 71 n/a 71 69 n/a 69 71
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Brimbank City Council for customer service? Please keep
in mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received.
Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months.
Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
44
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
33 28 32 37 36 37 31 31 33 31 35 32 34
26 32 38 42
39 41 42 34 36 38 41
36 38 35 41 40 39 50
36 31 35
15 17 14 17 16 17 16
18 16 20 13 14 16 15
18 19 7
5 5 5 5 7 6 6
8 6 6 4 6 4 6
2 5 9
6 6 5 3 4 1 6 6 5 5 7 7 5 3
10 5 7
1 2 1 4 1 1 1 2 2
1 2 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Customer Service Rating
Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Brimbank City Council for customer service? Please
keep in mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received.
Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months.
Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image

image
46
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Council direction
Most satisfied with council
direction
Least satisfied with council
direction
• 52% stayed about the same, down 6 points on 2017
• 33% improved, up 9 points on 2017
• 7% deteriorated, down 1 point on 2017
• Aged 18-34 years
• Men
• Aged 35-49 years
• Aged 50-64 years
Direction headed
• 68% right direction (21% definitely and 47% probably)
• 16% wrong direction (10% probably and 6% definitely)

image
47
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Overall Direction
71
68 67 67 64
60 59 58 56
54
52
18-34 Men 65+
Sunshine
Brimbank
Women
Keilor
50-64 35-49
Metro
State-wide
61 59 61 61 59 59 55 57 56 54 53
70 62 61 64 61 61 57 58 54 55 51
52 56 61 58 57 58 57 58 61 56 53
64 61 67 62 62 64 62 60 58 n/a 53
65 66 61 65 63 60 60 63 62 n/a 53
64 67 68 n/a 63 59 n/a 60 59 n/a 52
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Brimbank City Council’s overall performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
48
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
33 24 32
23 30 33 33
19 19 27 36 41
26 41
23 27 40
52
58 52 62 58 56 54
60 64 58 49 46
59
49
60 56 44
7 8 10 10 7 7 8 15 11 10 6 8 7 2 11 12 8
7 9 6 5 5 5 5 5 6 5 8 6 8 9 7 5 7
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Improved
Stayed the same
Deteriorated
Can't say
2018 Overall Direction
Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Brimbank City Council
’s overall performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
49
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
21 19 21 21 19 24 17 20 15 24 27
15 27
16 16 22
47 45 47 45 51 48
47 47 51 44 39 54 53
45 36 48
10 12 10 10 9 7 14 11 10 9 11 8
8
14
13
4
6 7 8 9 8 7 11 9 9 5 7 5
8
15 6
16 17 15 15 13 14 11 13 16 17 16 17 12 18 20 20
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Definitely right direction Probably right direction Probably wrong direction Definitely wrong direction Can't say
2018 Future Direction
Q8. Would you say your local Council is generally heading in the right direction or the wrong direction?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 9 Councils asked group: 3

image

image
51
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Consultation and Engagement Importance
80
79
74 74
72
72 72 70 69 69 69 68
62
Personal user
Household user
50-64
State-wide
Metro
65+ 35-49 Keilor
Women
Brimbank
Men
Sunshine
18-34
74 75 78 74 72 75 75 70 72 71 71 72 63
77 77 79 75 73 78 71 69 77 73 69 75 69
75 75 77 74 72 73 74 72 75 73 72 74 70
76 77 78 74 n/a 70 71 68 72 71 69 72 66
77 77 77 73 n/a 72 71 72 72 72 71 72 68
n/a
n/a
n/a
73 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘community consultation and engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
52
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
22 22 29 24 23 22 30 26 24 21 22 22
9
31 30 27 32 33
40 45 40 45
41 45 40 41
39 40 41 38
42
34 44
39
60 57
30 28 25 24 29 27 24 27
29 30 27 33
39 28 19 26
5 5
7 4 4 3 4 4 4 5 6 7 8 5 10 6 4 4 4 5
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2
1 1 2 2 2 3 1 1 2
1
1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Consultation and Engagement Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘community consultation and engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 6

image
53
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Consultation and Engagement Performance
67
66
60 59 57 57 56 56 56 55 55
53 52
Household user
Personal user
18-34
Sunshine
Metro
Men
Brimbank
Women
35-49
State-wide
65+ Keilor 50-64
63 60 54 57 57 52 55 58 56 55 59 52 52
58 58 58 53 58 52 54 57 52 54 54 57 52
62 65 56 58 58 58 58 57 61 56 60 57 54
64 66 57 56 n/a 57 56 55 51 57 65 57 55
65 66 58 58 n/a 57 57 57 60 57 56 55 53
n/a
n/a
62 n/a n/a 59 58 58 52 57 66 n/a 51
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
54
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
10 7 6 8 8 8 8 8 9 7 12 12 9 9 12 7 13 22 25
27 27 28 33 27 28 33 30 29
22 29 29
24 34 29
19 19
32 31
32 32 35 30 36 34 27 32 32
39 27 27 36 38
22
34 31
32 30
16 13 16 9 13 14 14 15 13 15 16 18 13 10
20 16 18
13 14
4 6 4 7 4 3 4 7 5 5 4 5 3 2 6
6 5
12 14 11 13 11 12 14 9 11 12 12 8 15 7 11 18 14 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Consultation and Engagement Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
55
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Lobbying Importance
70
69 69
68 68
67 67 67
66 66
63
35-49 65+ 50-64
Women
State-wide
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
Metro
Men
18-34
75 73 75 70 69 71 70 69 67 71 63
71 70 72 76 69 73 71 67 68 66 71
70 71 72 72 69 72 70 67 67 68 67
67 69 72 71 70 69 67 64 n/a 64 64
75 68 70 73 70 70 70 71 n/a 68 68
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
56
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
20 22 27 23 23 24 23 21 22 20
17 24
11 28 24 25
37 43 37 41 35 42 37
36 36 38 39 36
37
34 39 40
30 24 25 24
25 25 27
29 29 31 29 32
43 25 25 20
8 7 8 8 11 7 8 9 10 8 10 6 7 10 10
7
2 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 2
1 1 5
2 3 3 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 2 2 2 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Lobbying Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7

image
57
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Lobbying Performance
62
58 57 57 56 56 55
54 54 54
50
18-34
Women
Sunshine
Brimbank
Metro
Keilor
Men
65+ 35-49
State-wide
50-64
55 56 57 54 56 50 53 61 54 54 49
59 60 55 57 56 60 54 57 54 53 55
55 53 56 54 58 52 55 57 51 55 55
55 53 54 54 n/a 54 55 59 52 56 49
59 57 56 56 n/a 57 55 51 59 55 52
61 54 n/a 55 n/a n/a 57 58 51 55 49
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
58
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
6 5 6 6 5 7 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 6 3 6 7
26 23 27 23 23 27 26 24 24 24 27 28 24 33
26 13 26
29 32 26 30 31 32
27 32 31 28 29 25 32 35
24
26
27
11 10 12 13 13 13
14 13 10 14 9 14 8 3
13 20 13
3 5 4 5 4 4
3 5 4 2 4 5
2 2
4 3 6
26 25 25 23 24 18 25 20 26 27 25 22
29 22 30
32 21
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Lobbying Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
59
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Community Decisions Made Importance
82 82
81 81
80 80
79 79 79 79 79
Keilor
50-64
Women
18-34
Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Men
35-49
Sunshine
65+
82 81 84 81 80 79 79 77 81 79 77
74 79 81 74 78 80 79 74 78 79 81
79 84 82 75 79 80 80 77 81 79 80
77 81 78 74 77 79 n/a 77 78 77 79
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
60
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
39 38 34 38 34 39 38 45
35 35 42 41 35 42 35
42 45 45 44
41 42 42 40
44 46 39 43
42 42
42
16 14 17 14 21 15 16 12 18 15 17 15 19 14
17
1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2
1 3
1 1 1
1 1
2 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2
4 1 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Community Decisions Made Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 6

image
61
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Community Decisions Made Performance
63
61 60 59 58 58 58
55 54 54
51
18-34
Sunshine
35-49 Men
Brimbank
Metro
Women
65+ Keilor
State-wide
50-64
55 58 57 56 56 58 56 62 52 54 53
62 56 49 54 57 59 61 59 60 54 58
53 56 60 56 55 59 54 55 54 55 52
59 57 54 58 57 n/a 57 62 58 57 55
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
62
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
9 9 9 8 9 6 8 9 8 11 6 12 7 5 8
30 24 30 26 30 30 32 23 34 32
29
37
32
22 25
32
34 31 34 30 34 32
35 31 28
37
28
31
39 35
10 12 11 10 15 14 10 13 8 10 10 7
9 12 14
4 5 6 7 3 7 5 6 3 6 3 3
2 8 4
15 16 13 15 14 9 13 14 15 13 16 12 19 14 14
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Community Decisions Made Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
63
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Sealed Local Roads Importance
83 83 83
82 82
81 81 81
80 80
78
Women
Keilor
65+ 50-64
Brimbank
35-49
Sunshine
18-34 Men
State-wide
Metro
82 82 81 83 81 83 81 79 81 78 77
81 79 83 79 80 79 80 78 78 78 76
80 79 79 80 77 80 76 73 75 76 75
78 75 79 82 77 76 78 73 76 77 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
64
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
43 40 36 36
32 38 33 47 40 40 46 41 45 42 44
42 46 49
43 45 44
46
38
44 42 43
43 39 46 43
14 13 13
18 20 15 18 13 14 17 10 15 14 13 12
1 1 2 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2
1
1 1 12
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Sealed Local Roads Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7

image
65
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Sealed Local Roads Performance
68
66 64 64 63 63 63 62 62
60
53
Metro
18-34
Women
Sunshine
Brimbank
35-49 Keilor 65+ Men 50-64
State-wide
66 55 57 57 58 59 60 64 59 58 53
67 59 57 56 58 51 63 63 60 60 54
69 60 60 61 60 60 58 60 60 59 55
n/a
65 63 62 63 60 65 68 64 61 55
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
66
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
18 15 13 13 18 11 20 16 19 22 15 20 17 18 19
36
31 37 38 38
31
44
37 35 30 41 37 36 34 34
30
31 26 30 26
28
23
29 30 29 30 33
31 24 28
11
14 17 10 12
17
8 15 9 12 11 7 11
15 14
4 8 7 7 5 12 4 2 5 6 2 3 4 7 4
1 1 1 2 2 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Sealed Local Roads Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
67
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Informing Community Importance
80 80 80
79 79
78 78
77 77
76
75 75
73
Personal user
Household user
35-49 65+
Sunshine
Women
Brimbank
Men
18-34 Keilor 50-64
State-wide
Metro
78 77 75 77 77 79 76 73 74 76 80 74 73
78 77 75 79 79 81 77 73 76 73 78 76 74
76 76 76 77 79 78 77 75 76 73 78 75 73
77 76 74 75 75 77 75 73 75 75 78 75 n/a
78 76 79 76 76 82 77 73 76 78 77 75 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
75 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
68
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
37 35 35 30 30 33 32 29 34 38 34 39 37 39 34 37 38 39
42 41 43 46
44 43 41
41 42 42 48 36 38 44
41 49 47 46
18 20 17 20 21 21 22
24 18 18 12 23 22 15
19 11 12 12
3 4 4 1 4 1 4 5 5 2 4 2 3 1 5 3 3 3
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 2
1 2 1
1 1 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Informing Community Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

image
69
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Informing Community Performance
67
62 62 61
60 59 59 58 57 55
54 53 51
18-34
Household user
Personal user
Metro
Sunshine
Men
State-wide
Brimbank
Women
35-49 Keilor 65+ 50-64
56 62 62 61 59 56 59 56 57 55 52 61 56
62 61 60 63 57 55 59 58 61 54 60 61 54
60 67 67 64 62 60 61 61 61 63 59 65 55
61 65 66 n/a 62 64 62 61 59 60 60 67 60
60 67 68 n/a 63 61 61 62 63 64 60 60 63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
60 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
70
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
13 9 11 16 14 15 11 12 9 15 16 9 20
9 6 11 14 16
30 32 31 33 35 34 36 37
27 31 30
30
34
31
26 25
39 37
32 34 37 29 32 33 31 31
36 30 26 39
34
28 36 32
26 26
16 15 14 14 13 13 13 12
19 15 19 14 9
22 18 18 15 14
5 5 3 5 3 2 5 4 5 4 5 5
5 8 9 3 3
4 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 5 4 4 3 5 6 5 4 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Informing Community Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 9

image
71
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Streets and Footpaths Importance
84 84 84
82 82
81 81
80 80
79
78
65+
Women
50-64
Sunshine
Brimbank
18-34 Keilor 35-49 Men
Metro
State-wide
84 86 86 83 83 81 84 84 80 78 77
82 86 81 81 80 77 78 81 75 78 77
82 83 81 80 80 77 80 82 77 77 77
82 82 83 81 80 77 79 81 78 n/a 77
83 86 85 81 81 74 81 85 76 n/a 78
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
77
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
72
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
43 46 40 38 40 41
35 36 42 44 40 46 44 42 45 41
42 42
44 47 43 43
43 44 40 43
42 42 38
39 43 53
12 11 13 13 15 12
18 17 15 11
14 11 15 15 11 4
2 1 2 1 2 3 3 2 2 1 3 1 3 1
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Streets and Footpaths Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 6

image
73
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Streets and Footpaths Performance
66
64
62
61 61
60 60
59
58
58
56
18-34
Metro
Women
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
Men
35-49
State-wide
65+ 50-64
54 62 54 55 55 56 57 56 57 59 54
58 63 55 53 54 55 52 48 57 55 53
53 64 51 54 53 52 55 54 58 55 51
66 n/a 58 59 60 62 62 59 58 61 52
61 n/a 53 55 55 56 58 55 58 52 50
59 n/a 51 n/a 55 n/a 60 54 57 58 50
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
74
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
20 12 11
10 17 15 15 14 18 17 22 21 20 28 19
13 17
32
31 32 30 36
28 34 34 39 35 30 30 33 31
30 33 33
24
32 28 32 27
29 20 28 26
25 24 22 26 23
25 28 23
16 14 18 17 14
16 20 14 11 18
15 17 15 14 19
17 15
7 10 10 11 7 11 11 7 4 5 8 8 5 5 6 9 10
1 1 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Streets and Footpaths Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 7

image
75
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Traffic Management Importance
82
79 79
78 78 78
77 77
76
74
74
Women
Keilor
50-64 65+
Brimbank
18-34
Sunshine
35-49
Metro
State-wide
Men
82 79 80 80 79 76 79 82 76 72 76
83 78 78 80 78 76 78 79 75 72 73
76 75 79 80 76 69 77 81 74 71 76
78 77 78 79 75 73 74 73 n/a 70 72
81 79 80 78 79 75 78 81 n/a 72 76
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘traffic management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
76
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
36 39 38 36 31 38 31 34 39 35
28 45
34 36 41 36
41 40 39
38 43 42
40 42 39 42
43
39
42 40 37 44
18 17 19
19 22 16
22 20 16 19
22
15
21 18 17 15
2 2 3 5 4 2 5 3 3 2 4
2 1 4 3
1
1 1
1 1 1
1 1
2
1
2
1 1
1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Traffic Management Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘traffic management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 6

image
77
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Traffic Management Performance
67
61 61 61 60
59 58
57
57 57
56
18-34
Sunshine
Women
Brimbank
Men
Keilor
35-49
Metro
50-64
State-wide
65+
52 54 52 54 55 53 54 56 50 59 61
59 57 58 57 55 55 53 56 56 59 58
54 57 56 57 58 57 61 57 53 60 60
62 59 56 58 60 56 56 n/a 54 60 59
56 55 56 55 55 56 56 n/a 53 60 58
57 n/a 52 54 56 n/a 51 n/a 50 58 59
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘traffic management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 14 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
78
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
15 10 9 10 11 10 9 10 10 13 16 18 13 21 13 12 12
36
29 35 36 35 31 34 36 37 38 35 32 40 39
38 31 33
28
32 32 30 29 35 30 30 29 26 29 28 28 29
24 33
26
12 18 17 13 16 14 17 15 15 15 10 13 11 7
13 15
16
7 8 5 8 5 8 8 7 7 7 6 8 6 3
10 7 9
2 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 2 3 1 2 2 5
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Traffic Management Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘traffic management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 14 Councils asked group: 6

image
79
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Parking Importance
79
77
76
75 75
74
73 73 73
71
70
Women
65+ 50-64
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
35-49
Metro
18-34
State-wide
Men
78 79 79 76 75 74 77 73 69 70 72
78 78 76 75 73 70 72 72 70 70 68
76 75 75 75 73 71 74 72 71 70 71
75 76 75 74 73 71 70 n/a 71 70 70
77 75 76 74 73 72 74 n/a 70 71 69
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘parking facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 16 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
80
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
34 32 29 27 25 25 27 29 31 35 27 41 35 34 34 33
37 40 42 45
43 46 39 40 39 36
39
34
30 34 42 48
23 22 21 22 27 25
27 25 25 21
23
22
29 22 21 13
6 4 6 5 3 3 6 4 4 7 11 1 6 7 4 5
1
1 1
1
1
1
1
1 1
1 1 1 1
1 1
1
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Parking Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘parking facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 16 Councils asked group: 7

image
81
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Parking Performance
63
62
60
59
58
57
56 56 56
56
55
18-34 Men
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
35-49
Women
50-64
State-wide
65+
Metro
59 58 54 55 56 53 53 52 55 55 53
58 54 55 57 61 54 60 56 56 61 54
62 58 57 59 62 60 60 55 57 57 55
65 61 62 60 58 60 60 57 57 56 n/a
62 62 58 60 64 63 59 58 57 53 n/a
61 59 n/a 56 n/a 53 53 50 56 57 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘parking facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
82
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
14 11 10 10 15 13 9 9 9 10 16 18 9 17 13 11 12
33 31 34 40 33 36 39
35 34 36 32 34
33
40
33 29 27
32
31 35 30 32 32
24 31 32 36 29 28
36
26
32 37 37
12 16 14 11 12 11
18 15 15 10 13 10 14 11
10 15 13
7 8 5 7 6 5 8 8 8 7 7 8 7 5 11 6 8
2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 3 1 2 2 2 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Parking Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘parking facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 6

image
83
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Law Enforcement Importance
79
78 78
77 77 77 77
76
75
73
71
65+ 35-49 Men
Sunshine
Brimbank
18-34 Keilor
Women
50-64
Metro
State-wide
77 79 73 79 77 77 74 81 76 72 71
79 76 75 78 77 78 75 80 77 71 70
78 80 75 79 77 74 75 80 79 72 71
82 71 74 77 77 79 77 80 77 n/a 70
77 83 78 78 80 80 81 81 76 n/a 71
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
84
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
37 36 36 35 36 42
27 30 34 39 39 35 36 42
31 39
38 42 39 41 38 39
37 39 42 37 36 41 38 34
44 39
18 16 20 19 22 14
27 24 17 19 19 17 21 16 19 15
4 4 3 1 2 4 6 6 4 4 3 5 4 5 2 4
1 1
2 1
2 1 1 1 1 1
1 2 1
1 1 1 1 2
1 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Law Enforcement Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

image
85
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Law Enforcement Performance
64
64 64
62
61 61
60 60
59
56
54
Metro
18-34
State-wide
35-49
Sunshine
Men
Brimbank
Women
Keilor
65+ 50-64
64 62 64 57 61 61 60 60 60 61 61
64 62 63 59 58 57 59 62 62 56 59
66 61 66 66 62 62 62 63 63 61 62
n/a
60 66 62 58 61 61 60 64 61 58
n/a
67 65 66 64 65 64 63 65 64 57
n/a
62 65 55 n/a 56 57 58 n/a 57 51
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
86
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
14 11 10 13 14 17 7 12 12 13 14 15 12 18 15 10 8
31 30 35 35 32 35
36 39 39 29 33 34
29
38
30
23 30
25 31 29 25 27 26
25 25 24
28 23 21 28 23
26
30 20
12 11 13 8 14 11
12 8 7
11 13 12 12 12
8
14 15
6 3 4 6 4 4
7 3 4 6 5 7 4 5
6 7 5
13 13 10 13 9 7 12 12 14 14 12 11 15 5 15
17 21
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Law Enforcement Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 9

image
87
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Family Support Importance
85
83
81 81 81
79 79 79 78
76 75 75
74
Personal user
Household user
Women
18-34 Keilor 65+
Brimbank
50-64
Sunshine
Men
35-49 Metro
State-wide
82 85 80 77 76 73 77 79 78 74 78 73 73
74 79 81 74 75 77 76 76 76 70 76 73 73
83 84 83 78 77 76 78 78 78 73 78 72 73
85 83 79 78 72 77 75 71 78 72 73 n/a 72
87 85 82 79 77 78 79 77 80 75 81 n/a 73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘family support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
88
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
40 35 34 36 32 38
30 32 45 38 35 46 50
32 40 36 55 49
38 42
38 41 40 41
40 40
35 40
40 36 28
47 38 44
30 39
17 19
20 19 20 16
23 22 17 17 18 16 21 14 19 12 11 10
2 2 3 3 3 3 5 4 1 3 5
6 1 4 3 2
1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
1 1 4 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1
2 4
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Family Support Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘family support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7

image
89
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Family Support Performance
71 70 70
68 68 68 67 66 66 65
62
61 59
Household user
Personal user
18-34 35-49 Metro
Sunshine
Men
State-wide
Brimbank
Women
Keilor
65+ 50-64
69 70 61 58 68 64 63 67 62 62 59 69 64
71 67 69 59 69 65 63 66 65 67 66 68 65
73 74 60 68 68 63 65 67 64 63 65 69 62
75 76 68 68 n/a 66 69 68 67 66 69 69 63
66 63 64 65 n/a 66 67 67 65 63 64 69 64
n/a
n/a
67 65 n/a n/a 66 67 65 63 n/a 66 59
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘family support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
90
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
11 9 10 13 15 12 9 11 10 6 14 12 10 14 13 6 9 20 24
33 28 32 29 28 33 32 31 29
30
35 38
28
45
31
24 23
45 41
23
26 23 24 28 29
22 21 20
23
23 24
22
25
21
19 26
30 27
5 6 7 7 3 7
6 4
3 8
4 4
7
3
6
9 6
4 6
1 2 1 2 1 1
1 2
1
2 1
1
2 3
27 28 28 24 25 18
29 32 37 34 23 21
32 14
29
39 33
2 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Family Support Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘family support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 8

image
91
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Elderly Support Importance
90*
90
87
86
85 84
82 82
80 80 79
79
78
Personal user
Household user
Keilor
Women
65+ 50-64
Brimbank
35-49 18-34
Sunshine
State-wide
Metro
Men
81 86 81 82 81 85 80 81 75 79 78 77 77
90 86 78 85 84 84 80 80 76 81 78 78 75
92 85 80 85 84 85 81 81 77 82 79 78 77
86 82 80 84 83 84 80 80 77 81 79 n/a 77
86 83 81 85 85 84 82 85 78 83 79 n/a 79
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
80 n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.
*Caution: small sample size < n=30

image
92
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
46 40 40 44 40 43 38 36 55
41 38 54
42 45 47 50 63 60
40
42 42 39 41 43
43 44
36
42 43
37
40 40 40 39
35 39
12 16 14 14 13 12 16 16 8
14 15 9
15 11 12 6 3 1
2 1 1 3 2 1 2 2 3 3 2 4 2
1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 2
1
1 2 1 3 1 1 1 1
1
1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user*
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Elderly Support Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 8
*Caution: small sample size < n=30

image
93
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Elderly Support Performance
68
67
66
65 65
64 64
63 63 63*
62
61 61
State-wide
Metro
18-34 Men
Sunshine
Brimbank
35-49
Household user
65+
Personal user
Women
Keilor
50-64
68 67 59 67 64 63 59 69 71 75 59 61 66
68 69 71 64 64 66 57 78 68 78 68 69 66
69 69 61 63 64 63 63 66 65 71 63 62 64
70 n/a 65 67 64 64 62 66 71 71 62 64 61
69 n/a 68 69 66 67 64 69 71 71 64 67 65
69 n/a 65 67 n/a 65 66 n/a 70 n/a 64 n/a 61
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.
*Caution: small sample size < n=30

image
94
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
10 12 13 11 13 14 10 14 10 7 11 11 9 12 7 7 13 19 20
29 21 32 30 26 34
29 32
27 23 33 30 28 31
27 27 32 37 33
21 22 21 20 27 25
18 19
18 24 20 18 25 22
19 26 20
22 25
9 7 7 8 6 5
6 5
4 7
9 8 9 9
8 6 12
19 18
1 2 2 3 2 2
2 2
1 1
1 1 1
2
3
3 1
30 35 26 28 26 20
36 29
40 37 26 32 28 27
39 32 20
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user*
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Elderly Support Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 9
*Caution: small sample size < n=30

image
95
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Disadvantaged Support Importance
81
78
77 77 77 77
76
75
74
73
72
Women
Keilor
65+ 18-34 35-49
Brimbank
Sunshine
50-64
Metro
Men
State-wide
76 71 74 72 71 74 75 78 71 71 71
79 72 73 73 77 75 76 75 73 70 73
80 73 77 75 74 76 78 77 74 71 73
78 72 75 77 70 74 76 75 n/a 71 72
80 78 80 78 79 78 78 76 n/a 76 73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘disadvantaged support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
96
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
33 30 30 34 29 35 27 29 38 31
27 40 33 36
30 34
42
39 44 38 42 43
41 42 39
44
42
43
46 38 43 42
19 26 18 22 22 17
24 23 16 20
24 14 18
18 20 20
3 2 5 4 2 2 4 4 4 2 5 1 3 2 5 1
1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2
1
2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 1 2 2 2
4 2 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Disadvantaged Support Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘disadvantaged support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 6

image
97
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Disadvantaged Support Performance
65 65
64
63 63
62
61 61 61
60
57
35-49 18-34 Men
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
Women
Metro
State-wide
65+ 50-64
56 57 62 61 60 59 57 62 61 68 62
57 61 57 59 61 65 65 62 61 64 62
67 54 60 60 60 60 60 63 62 63 57
53 64 63 62 61 59 59 n/a 64 66 59
61 61 64 61 61 60 57 n/a 62 62 58
60 61 61 n/a 61 n/a 60 n/a 63 66 56
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘disadvantaged support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
98
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
9 7 7 8 9 9 7 6 6 8 10 9 9 10 12 4 10
25 26 28 23 22 28 25
25 23 21 27 28 21 30 21
19
26
27 25 27 28 30 25
21 23 23 23 29 24
29
33
21
27
21
7 8 7 6 8 10
7 6 5 6
7 5
9
4
7 7 11
1 2 2 3 1 2
2 2 2 1
1
1
2
3
32 33 30 32 31 25
38 38 43 42 26 32 32 22
39 41 30
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Disadvantaged Support Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘disadvantaged support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7

image
99
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Recreational Facilities Importance
77 77 77 77 77
76
75 75 75
74
73 73
73
Household user
Women
50-64
Personal user
Keilor
65+
Brimbank
18-34
Sunshine
35-49 Men
State-wide
Metro
75 75 76 75 74 73 74 71 73 75 72 72 73
74 78 74 75 70 77 73 71 75 73 69 73 73
75 76 75 75 71 73 75 74 78 77 74 72 72
77 76 77 76 74 74 74 71 74 75 72 72 n/a
76 75 77 76 76 77 75 72 74 77 75 72 n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
72 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
100
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
30 25 27 29 30 27 25 23 30 30 24 35 32
24 34 29 32 31
45 48 46 42 39 49
46 48 49 43
51 40 40
51 43 49 46 48
21 22 21 26 28 21 25 25 20
22 18 24 23 21 20 20 21 19
3 4 4 2 2 2 3 3 1 4 5 1 5 1 1 3 2 1
1 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1 1 1
1
1
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Recreational Facilities Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

image
101
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Recreational Facilities Performance
74
69
69 69 69 68 68
66 66 66 65
64 64
Metro
State-wide
Personal user
Household user
Men
18-34 Keilor 35-49
Brimbank
65+
Sunshine
50-64
Women
73 70 66 65 66 60 62 64 64 70 65 67 62
73 69 65 66 60 61 69 62 63 66 60 66 67
74 70 68 67 66 65 66 66 66 72 66 61 66
n/a
71 68 68 67 65 67 66 66 73 66 61 65
n/a
70 66 66 64 66 64 63 65 70 65 62 65
n/a
70 n/a n/a 65 67 n/a 62 65 66 n/a 63 65
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
102
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
18 17 15 17 19 19 16 22 26 21 17 24
13 18 19 17 19 25 24
36 37 36 39 40 34 40 42 45
35 36 32
39 38 36 33 34 36 37
32 29 31 32 25 31 27 22 20
28 34 35
29 32 31
35 30 28 29
7 11 10 6 10 9 10 7 4 8 6 4
10 7 7 7 6 8 7
2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 4 3 1 2
5 4 5 3 2 4 5 4 5 6 4 3 7 5 5 5 7 2 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Recreational Facilities Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10

image
103
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Public Areas Importance
81
80
80
78
77
76
75
74
74
73 73
50-64 Keilor
Women
65+ 35-49
Brimbank
Sunshine
State-wide
Metro
Men
18-34
80 81 81 78 76 78 75 74 75 74 77
75 75 80 80 77 76 76 74 74 71 73
79 76 80 77 76 76 75 73 73 71 72
80 75 80 78 81 79 81 73 n/a 77 76
79 79 81 79 79 78 77 74 n/a 74 75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73 n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
104
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
31 35 31 29 36 31
26 25 38
28 25 37
28 29 39 32
45 42 44 46 43 48
46 48
44
46 45 45
39 48 45
50
21 20 22 22 19 18 24 24 18 23
26 16
30 20 14 14
2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2
3 3 1 3 1 1 3
1 1 1
1
1
1
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Public Areas Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

image
105
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Public Areas Performance
73
71
65 64 64 64
62 62 62 61 61
Metro
State-wide
65+ 35-49 Keilor Men
Brimbank
Sunshine
50-64
Women
18-34
72 71 69 65 60 65 61 62 60 58 56
72 71 66 57 62 58 61 60 61 64 61
73 72 65 63 62 63 62 61 60 60 60
n/a
72 62 57 61 62 59 58 58 57 60
n/a
71 61 60 61 61 59 58 60 57 58
n/a
71 65 56 n/a 64 62 n/a 61 60 65
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
106
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
15 15 12 16 17 13 13 24 24 20
13 17 13 9 21 16 17
40 35 38 36 32 35 40
45 49
39
40 39 41
43
37
37 41
29 30 33 32
26 31 31
21 20
22 33 28 30 35 21 30 28
10 14 11 10
18 13 11 6 5
14 8 11 8 7 13 11 8
5 3 4 5 6 7 4 2 2 5 6 4 7 6 6 6 4
1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Public Areas Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 10

image
107
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Art Centres & Libraries Importance
74
74
73 72
71 70 70
69 68
67 66
65
64
Personal user
Household user
35-49
Women
65+ Keilor 50-64
Brimbank
Sunshine
Metro
Men
State-wide
18-34
72 72 66 71 72 61 69 67 70 67 63 64 64
77 76 69 75 71 70 68 70 70 68 64 66 70
80 77 73 76 72 69 70 72 74 69 67 65 71
74 72 71 71 70 66 71 67 69 n/a 64 66 62
75 73 75 72 72 69 69 69 70 n/a 67 66 64
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
66 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
108
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
20 18 27 27 20 19
16 18 22 19 17 23
13 30
20 20 23 24
43 39 38 41
40 43
39 42 42 44 43 43
42
40
48 46 50 50
29 35 23 21 30 32
34 31 30 28 29 29
36 23 24 27 26 25
6 5 8 7 7 4 9 7 4 7 8 4 7 5 6 4 2 1
1 2 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1
1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Art Centres & Libraries Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 8

image
109
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Art Centres & Libraries Performance
80
80
77 77
76
75 75 75
74 74 74
73 73
Personal user
Household user
65+ Keilor Men Metro 18-34
Brimbank
State-wide
35-49
Sunshine
50-64
Women
76 75 79 69 71 75 66 72 73 74 73 73 72
70 70 76 67 65 74 66 68 72 63 68 69 70
70 70 73 66 68 75 63 68 73 70 69 68 68
76 76 79 73 72 n/a 67 72 75 75 72 69 72
72 72 75 69 69 n/a 63 69 73 73 69 71 69
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73 n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
110
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
29 22
17 19 23 22 25 26 28 30 32 26 34
25 27 28 41 40
37 44
43 40 44
35 42 41 44 34 37
38 34
44 34 39
39 41
22 18
21 25 20 30 18 19 18
23 21 22 24 21
20 18
14 14
3 6 9 7 6 6 4 3 2 4 3 4 3 4
6 1
3 3
1 1 2 2 1 1 1
1 1 1
1
8 10 8 7 7 6 10 10 8 8 7 9 3 7 13 14 2 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Art Centres & Libraries Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8

image
111
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Community Activities Importance
69
68
67
65 65
64 64 64 64
63
61
61
61
Personal user
Household user
Women
35-49 50-64 65+
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
18-34 Metro
State-wide
Men
64 63 67 66 64 62 65 63 60 60 61 61 59
64 65 68 63 66 64 65 65 64 66 62 62 62
70 71 69 66 63 63 70 66 62 70 62 62 63
69 67 68 65 67 64 68 66 62 67 n/a 62 64
72 71 68 69 65 67 67 67 66 65 n/a 62 65
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
62 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
112
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
18 15 19 17 16 14 12 12 17 19 15 21 18 19 21 15 21 20
34 36 35 39 39 44
34 34 34 34
32 36
32 38 30 37 41 40
34 36 33 36 36 35
40 41 40 31
36 32
34 33 35 36 32 31
10 10 10 7 6 6 10 11 6 12
12 8 13 5 10 9 5 7
2 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 2 4 1 2 5 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 3 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Community Activities Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

image
113
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Community Activities Performance
73
73
70
69 69 69 69
67 67 66
65 64 64
Household user
Personal user
Metro
18-34 Men
Sunshine
State-wide
Brimbank
35-49 50-64
Women
65+ Keilor
67 69 70 57 62 66 69 64 67 69 67 69 62
72 72 71 66 63 67 69 67 66 67 70 68 66
73 74 71 57 63 67 69 65 69 66 67 72 62
71 72 n/a 60 66 65 70 66 72 68 65 69 67
71 73 n/a 63 67 68 69 67 69 68 67 71 65
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
68 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
114
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
17 12 17 15 14 16 17 18 12 20 20 14 23 13 14 15 26 28
34 36 35 35 41 37 42 42
30
36 33
35 32
40 32 31
40 38
28 26 27 29 27 30 25 24
32 25 27
28 31
23 28
27
29 29
6 8 6 8 8 6 5 4
8 5 6 6 4
8 2 9
3 3
1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1
2 1 2 1
3 2
14 16 12 10 8 10 9 11 17 13 14 15 9 15
20 17 3 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Personal user
Household user
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Community Activities Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8

image
115
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Waste Management Importance
86
84 84 84
83 83 83 83 83
81
81
35-49 50-64
Women
65+ Keilor
Brimbank
Sunshine
Metro
Men
State-wide
18-34
81 85 81 81 79 80 81 81 79 79 76
83 82 87 84 82 83 83 82 79 80 82
83 84 83 82 82 82 82 81 81 79 80
81 82 79 83 79 79 79 n/a 80 79 75
85 83 84 84 83 81 80 n/a 78 79 77
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
78 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
116
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
47 39 47 44
36 41 42 46 45 49 45 50 44 53 47 47
39
45 40 40
46 44 43 42 45 36 41 37
36
39 43 42
13 15 11 13 16 15 13 11 11 14 13 13
21 8 9 10
1 3 2
1 1
1 1
1 1
11
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Waste Management Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

image
117
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Waste Management Performance
75
74 74
72 72
71 71 71
70
69 69
Metro
Men
35-49 Keilor 65+
Brimbank
18-34
Sunshine
State-wide
50-64
Women
75 71 70 70 75 70 67 70 71 70 69
76 66 65 69 75 68 65 67 70 71 70
77 74 71 69 74 71 69 72 72 71 68
n/a
74 69 71 79 73 73 74 73 73 72
n/a
73 72 72 81 73 72 73 71 70 72
n/a
72 69 n/a 76 72 74 n/a 72 68 71
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
118
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
27 24 22 26 25 26 22 24 29 22 29 30 23 27 28 26 24
43 44 44 41 49 46 53 45 48
51 38 42
44 42 44
39 48
21 22 20 21 18 19 16
18 16 19
22 21
21 24 19
23 18
6 8 10 6 5 5 6 7 4 5 6 5 6 5 6 7 4
3 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 4 1 5 3 1 4 4
1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Waste Management Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10

image
119
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Business/Development/Tourism Importance
66
63 63
62 62
61 61
60 60
59 59
State-wide
Women
35-49
Sunshine
50-64 65+
Brimbank
Keilor
18-34 Men
Metro
67 68 66 66 62 63 63 59 63 59 60
67 66 65 65 63 64 64 62 64 62 60
67 66 64 67 68 67 64 61 62 62 59
67 66 63 67 64 67 64 61 65 63 n/a
67 63 66 64 63 65 63 62 62 64 n/a
66 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘business and community development and tourism’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
120
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
16 15 18 21 18 15 21 12 15 17 16 16 19 14 15 14
32 39 35 28 35 33 36
30 33 31 31 32 22 41 34 33
35 30 32 35 33 41 31
39 31 37 32 37
39 28 34 37
13 12 11 12 11 8 9 14 18 10
15 11 13 13 13 12
3 2 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 5 1 5 2 2 2
2 1 3 3 2 3 1 1
2 1 2 1 1 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Business/Development/Tourism Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘business and community development and tourism’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 6

image
121
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Business/Development/Tourism Performance
60 60 60 60
59
58 58 58 58
57
56
State-wide
65+
Metro
18-34 Keilor Men
Brimbank
Sunshine
Women
50-64 35-49
61 68 60 55 54 57 58 60 59 59 55
60 62 62 57 60 54 57 56 61 60 54
61 62 62 59 59 59 59 59 59 58 59
62 61 n/a 55 57 53 55 54 58 54 54
62 56 n/a 57 59 60 57 56 55 58 58
62 59 n/a 60 n/a 55 57 n/a 59 49 57
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘business and community development and tourism’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
122
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
9 6 7 8 5 9 4 10 8 7 11 12 7 12 8 6 10
23 28 25 26 27 26 33 33 28
22 24 22 25 25
21 21 26
34 31 35 35 34 33 33 31
31 39 31 35 33 40
27 36 29
12 11 12 10 13 15 12 10
9 8 13 14
9
12
14 10 10
2 2 2 2 3 2 3 4
2 1 3 2
2
1
3 1 2
20 22 20 19 17 15 16 12
22 22 19 16 24 10
27 26 23
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Business/Development/Tourism Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘business and community development and tourism’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 6

image
123
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Town Planning Importance
75
74 74
73 73 73 73
71
70 70
67
50-64 Keilor 65+ 35-49
Women
State-wide
Metro
Brimbank
Sunshine
Men
18-34
74 70 75 76 70 72 73 71 72 72 64
75 69 76 71 75 73 72 72 73 68 68
72 71 73 74 71 72 72 71 70 70 66
75 68 74 67 68 72 n/a 68 67 67 60
75 71 75 74 74 73 n/a 71 72 69 66
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
72 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘council’s general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
124
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
23 22 28 21 20 21 27 27 29
20 21 26 18 25 29 24
41 40 34 42
39 40 40 40 39
42 42 40
38 41 42 47
25 28 26 22 27 29 24 24 21 27 25 25
34 25 18 16
6 3 5 5 7 3 4 4 6 6 7 4 7 4 5 6
1 2 2 2
1 1
1
5 6 5 8 5 7 3 4 4 5 4 5 3 5 5 7
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Town Planning Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘council’s general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 4

image
125
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Town Planning Performance
65
64 61 61
60 60 58 57
54
53
53
18-34 Men 65+ Keilor
Brimbank
Sunshine
35-49
Women
State-wide
Metro
50-64
55 58 64 54 58 60 60 57 53 53 56
59 55 59 57 56 56 51 58 52 54 56
54 59 65 58 59 60 63 59 54 55 57
62 59 62 61 59 58 57 60 55 n/a 56
61 60 54 57 59 61 61 59 55 n/a 57
58 56 56 n/a 55 n/a 54 54 54 n/a 51
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘council’s general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
126
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
9 10 6 8 8 9 4 5 5 9 8 13 4 12 6 4 11
31 23
26 29 27 26 29 27 26 31 31 36
25
37
30
24 27
31
30 29 28 34 33 30 31
29 29 32 27
35
30
30
36 28
7
11 13 9 6 10 12 13
12 6 8 9
6
6
11 8 5
3 4 3 4 4 2 4 7 6 4 3 3
4
1
2 7 4
19 22 23 22 22 20 21 18 21 21 18 13
25 13 21 21
24
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Town Planning Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘council’s general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 6

image
127
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Planning & Building Permits Importance
77
75 74
74 73
72 71 71
70 69
65
50-64 65+
Metro
Keilor
Men
35-49
Brimbank
State-wide
Sunshine
Women
18-34
76 75 76 71 73 74 72 72 72 71 66
77 76 74 73 70 76 73 71 73 76 68
74 74 74 70 72 70 71 71 72 71 70
73 75 n/a 71 70 70 72 71 73 74 70
74 74 n/a 71 70 74 70 71 70 71 63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71 n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘planning and building permits’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
128
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
24 25 29 24 23 22 26 32 31
21 25 24
15 26 35 28
41 40 40 41 44
42 39 38 37
43 45
37
37
41 40 47
25 27 22 28 25 25 25 22 25
25 21
29 39 20 17 15
6 5 6 4 4 6 6 5 5 6 5 7 5 8 3 6
1 1 1
1 1 2 1
1
1 1
2
3 3 3 2 4 4 2 2 1 4 4 2 2 5 3 3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Planning & Building Permits Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘planning and building permits’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 5

image
129
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Planning & Building Permits Performance
67
65 63 63 62 61
60 60
54
52
51
18-34 Men
Sunshine
35-49
Brimbank
Keilor
65+
Women
50-64
State-wide
Metro
58 59 62 61 60 56 64 60 57 51 49
65 57 58 56 59 62 55 62 57 50 50
58 57 57 60 59 62 62 61 59 54 53
65 60 61 58 60 58 58 60 54 53 n/a
62 62 63 64 62 61 59 61 60 55 n/a
64 61 n/a 56 59 n/a 58 56 51 54 n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘planning and building permits’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
130
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
6 8 8 8 7 10 7 5 5 3 8 10 3 8 7 5 4
38 28 31
24 28 28
24 24 25 37 39 39
37
49
38
23 35
22
28 25 31 29 31
27 27 27 23 21 20
23
20
19
28 21
7 7 10 8 8 6
6 13 14 6 7 6 8 7
1 11 10
3 4 4 2 3 2
4 8 9 3 3 3 3
7 6 2
24 25 22 27 25 23
32 23 21 28 22 22 26 17
28 28 28
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Planning & Building Permits Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘planning and building permits’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 6

image
131
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Environmental Sustainability Importance
80
79
77 77 77
76 76
75
74
74
73
Women
18-34
Sunshine
Brimbank
Keilor
35-49 65+ 50-64
Metro
Men
State-wide
75 71 73 72 71 72 73 74 73 70 72
81 79 77 77 76 77 74 74 74 72 73
80 76 76 76 75 74 72 79 74 71 73
77 73 73 73 72 73 73 75 n/a 69 73
78 75 75 76 78 78 76 76 n/a 75 72
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
132
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
37
26 36 32 28 30 31 32 38 36 33 40 41 36 32 34
38
43 40 43
40 47 39 40 34 40 39 37 33 40
42 41
21 25 18 20 26 19
23 22 24 19 21 20 25 18 21
16
2 4 4 3 3 3 5 4 2 2 4
2 2 5
1 1 1 1 1
2 2 1 1 2
2 2 2
1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Environmental Sustainability Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 9

image
133
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Environmental Sustainability Performance
66 66
64 64
63 63 63
62
61 61
60
35-49 Men
Sunshine
Metro
18-34
Brimbank
State-wide
Keilor
65+ 50-64
Women
62 62 62 64 60 62 64 61 68 59 62
56 57 56 64 52 57 63 59 64 62 57
64 63 62 65 59 61 64 61 63 61 60
61 65 62 n/a 62 62 64 63 66 62 60
62 62 65 n/a 64 64 64 62 63 66 65
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
64 n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
134
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
11 9 7 12 11 12 10 10 8 13 13 9 9 14 8 12
35 33
31 32 34 36 37 38 41 31 39
31 38 34
35 31
28 31
30 31 37 32 30 28 25
30 22
34 33 22
24 32
9 9 13 9 8 8 8 7
12 7 9 8 9
5 8 13
2 2 4 4 1 1 2 2 2
2 1 3
3 4
1
16 17 15 12 9 12 12 14 12 18 16 16 12
21 20 11
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Environmental Sustainability Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 10

image
135
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Disaster Management Importance
86
85 85
84
82
81 81 81
80 80
78
18-34
Women
Keilor
65+
Brimbank
State-wide
Sunshine
35-49 Men
Metro
50-64
82 86 83 82 83 80 82 86 79 77 81
79 84 79 79 79 80 79 77 74 76 81
80 87 82 80 81 80 79 81 75 77 82
83 84 78 82 80 80 81 76 76 n/a 78
83 85 84 80 83 80 82 87 81 n/a 81
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
80 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘emergency and disaster management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
136
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
51 50
41 49 46 49 48 45 56 49 47 56 60
48 43 49
30 34
39 28 32 35 33
32 29 31
32 29 24
34
31
38
14 11 14
15 16 12 14
17 12 15 16 13 15 13
22 6
2 2 4 5 3 2 3 4 2 2 3 2 1 2 2 4
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 2
2 2
1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1
1
3
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Disaster Management Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘emergency and disaster management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 4

image
137
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Disaster Management Performance
75
73 73
72
71 71
69 69 69
67
65
35-49 18-34 Men
Sunshine
Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Women
65+ 50-64
67 62 66 66 65 70 68 65 64 70 66
60 63 62 64 64 69 68 62 65 70 65
66 65 68 64 66 70 69 68 63 68 65
63 72 69 68 68 71 n/a 68 67 74 59
68 64 65 64 65 70 n/a 67 66 69 63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘emergency and disaster management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
138
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
18 12 9 13 15 12 18 12 12 21 21 15 23 18
11 17
33
30 31 32 30 33 39
35 35 32 34
32
43
34
24 23
18
23 21 19 21 22
19
19 24 15 16
20
15
17
19 24
4 4
6 5 4 7 4
3 2 5 2 6
4
1
4
7
1 3 3 3 2 2 2
1 1 2 2
2
2
1
26 28 30 28 28 23 18
29 26 26 25 27 13
31 39 27
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Disaster Management Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘emergency and disaster management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 4

image
139
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Population Growth Importance
82
81
79
78 78 78 78 78
77
76
75
50-64 Keilor
Women
Metro
Brimbank
18-34 35-49 Men
State-wide
Sunshine
65+
80 80 81 75 78 76 80 76 76 78 78
78 74 79 75 74 68 76 69 76 74 78
80 76 77 74 76 70 80 75 75 76 77
76 72 75 n/a 72 65 77 70 75 72 75
79 79 78 n/a 77 71 83 75 75 75 75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
75 n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
140
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
40 40 37 35
29 36 39 41 48
36 37 43 35 43 47 38
37 37
30 39
37 37 36 36 37
37 40 34 41 34 37
35
17 18
22 19
25 19 18 17 8
21 17 17 22 14 9
19
3 3 7 4 5 4 4 3 4 2 3 3 1
2 5 3
2 1 2 2 2
1 1 2 2 1 2
5
3
1 1 2 1 2 3 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say
2018 Population Growth Importance
Q1.
Firstly, how important should ‘planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4

image
141
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
2018 Population Growth Performance
55
54
53 53 53 53 53
52 52
50
50
18-34
Sunshine
Men
Brimbank
35-49 65+
Women
State-wide
Keilor
Metro
50-64
53 54 54 52 50 59 50 52 49 51 47
58 54 53 55 52 57 57 51 57 51 53
57 57 57 57 58 61 57 54 57 54 53
59 58 54 56 54 59 58 54 54 n/a 52
58 58 59 58 59 58 56 54 58 n/a 57
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
52 n/a n/a n/a
2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 14 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

image
142
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
4 7 7 11 9 9 8 4 3 5 5 4 3 4 5 7
26 22 28 23 24 30 24
23 25 27 27 26 28 31 23 20
32 28 31 29 29 25
30 32 35 30 31 32 35 32
28 28
15 18 14 11 12 15 16
17 16 15 14 17 11 15
18 19
5 6 5 6 5 3 8 8 5 4 6 4 3 6
8 3
18 20 15 20 20 17 14 16 16 20 18 19 20 13 19
23
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
%
Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
2018 Population Growth Performance
Q2. How has Council performed on
‘planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 14 Councils asked group: 5

image

image
144
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Please note that for the reason of simplifying reporting, interlocking age and gender reporting has not
been included in this report. Interlocking age and gender analysis is still available in the dashboard
and data tables provided alongside this report.
50%
50%
Men
Women
11% 24%
26%
21% 19%
18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Gender
Age
S3. [Record gender] / S4. To which of the following age groups do you belong?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

image
145
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
14
9
3
6
16
28
22
2
Single person living alone
Single living with friends or housemates
Single living with children 16 or under
Single with children but none 16 or under living at
home
Married or living with partner, no children
Married or living with partner with children 16 or
under at home
Married or living with partner with children but none
16 or under at home Do not wish to answer
2018 Household Structure
%
S6. Which of the following BEST describes your household?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 9 Councils asked group: 6

image
146
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
8
9
11
9
10
13
17
11
17
14
10
7
75
79
72
77
79
80
1
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
% 0-5 years 5-10 years 10+ years Can't say
2018 Years Lived in Area
S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4

image
147
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
8 9 11 12 15
5 9 8 7 15 7
2 2
17 11 17 15 15
13 20 21
14
24
26
8 3
24
19
24 23 23
30 21 20
28
28 33
20
10
22
24
18 21 22 24 21 23 22
31
10
25
19
29 36 30 29 26 29 29 28 30
3
24
46
66
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Keilor
Sunshine
Men
Women
18-34 35-49 50-64 65+
% 0-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years 20-30 years 30+ years Can't say
2018 Years Lived in Area
S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4
Note: For 2016, the code frame expanded out “10+ years”, to include “10
-
20 years”,”20
-
30 years” and “30+ years”. As such,
this chart presents the last three years of data only.

image
148
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
51 49
7 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 1
21
English only
Languages other than English
VIETNAMESE
GREEK
ARABIC
CHINESE
ITALIAN
CROATIAN
HINDI
SPANISH
GERMAN
OTHER
2018 Languages Spoken
- Top Mentions Only -
%
Q11. What languages, other than English, are spoken regularly in your home?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 4 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Respondents could name multiple languages so responses may add to more than 100%

image

image

image
151
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
The survey was revised in 2012. As a result:
The survey is now conducted as a representative
random probability survey of residents aged 18
years or over in local councils, whereas previously
it was conducted as a ‘head of household’ survey.
As part of the change to a representative resident
survey, results are now weighted post survey to
the known population distribution of Brimbank City
Council according to the most recently available
Australian Bureau of Statistics population
estimates, whereas the results were previously not
weighted.
The service responsibility area performance
measures have changed significantly and the
rating scale used to assess performance has also
changed.
As such, the results of the 2012 State-wide Local
Government Community Satisfaction Survey should be
considered as a benchmark. Please note that
comparisons should not be made with the State-wide
Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey
results from 2011 and prior due to the methodological
and sampling changes.
Comparisons in the period
2012-2018 have been made throughout this report
as appropriate.

image
152
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Demographic
Actual
survey
sample
size
Weighted
base
Maximum
margin of error
at 95%
confidence
interval
Brimbank City
Council
400
400
+/-4.9
Men
178
201
+/-7.4
Women
222
199
+/-6.6
Keilor
163
141
+/-7.7
Sunshine
237
259
+/-6.4
18-34 years
68
141
+/-12.0
35-49 years
85
102
+/-10.7
50-64 years
131
83
+/-8.6
65+ years
116
74
+/-9.1
The sample size for the 2018 State-wide Local Government
Community Satisfaction Survey for Brimbank City Council
was 400. Unless otherwise noted, this is the total sample
base for all reported charts and tables.
The maximum margin of error on a sample of approximately
400 interviews is +/-4.9% at the 95% confidence level for
results around 50%. Margins of error will be larger for any
sub-samples. As an example, a result of 50% can be read
confidently as falling midway in the range 45.1% - 54.9%.
Maximum margins of error are listed in the table below,
based on a population of 160,000 people aged 18 years or
over for Brimbank City Council, according to ABS estimates.

image
153
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
All participating councils are listed in the State-wide
report published on the DELWP website. In 2018, 64 of
the 79 Councils throughout Victoria participated in this
survey. For consistency of analysis and reporting
across all projects, Local Government Victoria has
aligned its presentation of data to use standard council
groupings. Accordingly, the council reports for the
community satisfaction survey provide analysis using
these standard council groupings. Please note that
councils participating across 2012-2018 vary slightly.
Council Groups
Brimbank City Council is classified as a Metropolitan
council according to the following classification list:
Metropolitan, Interface, Regional Centres, Large
Rural & Small Rural
Councils participating in the Metropolitan group are:
Banyule, Boroondara, Brimbank, Glen Eira, Greater
Dandenong, Frankston, Kingston, Knox, Manningham,
Maroondah, Melbourne, Port Phillip, Stonnington and
Whitehorse.
Wherever appropriate, results for Brimbank City Council
for this 2018 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey have been compared against other
participating councils in the Metropolitan group and on
a state-wide basis. Please note that council groupings
changed for 2015, and as such comparisons to council
group results before that time can not be made within
the reported charts.

image
154
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Index Scores
Many questions ask respondents to rate council
performance on a five-point scale, for example, from
‘very good’ to ‘very poor’, with ‘can’t say’ also a
possible response category. To facilitate ease of
reporting and comparison of results over time, starting
from the 2012 survey and measured against the state
wide result and the council group, an ‘Index Score’ has
been calculated for such measures.
The Index Score is calculated and represented as a
score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale), with ‘can’t say’
responses excluded from the analysis. The ‘%
RESULT’ for each scale category is multiplied by the
‘INDEX FACTOR’. This produces an ‘INDEX VALUE’
for each category, which are then summed to produce
the ‘INDEX SCORE’, equating to ‘60’ in the following
example.
SCALE
CATEGORIES
% RESULT
INDEX
FACTOR
INDEX VALUE
Very good
9%
100
9
Good
40%
75
30
Average
37%
50
19
Poor
9%
25
2
Very poor
4%
0
0
Can’t say
1%
--
INDEX SCORE
60

image
155
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Similarly, an Index Score has been calculated for the
Core question ‘Performance direction in the last 12
months’, based on the following scale for each
performance measure category, with ‘Can’t say’
responses excluded from the calculation.
SCALE
CATEGORIES
% RESULT INDEX FACTOR
INDEX
VALUE
Improved
36%
100
36
Stayed the same 40%
50
20
Deteriorated
23%
0
0
Can’t say
1%
--
INDEX
SCORE 56

image
156
J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Brimbank City Council
Index scores are indicative of an overall rating on a
particular service area. In this context, index scores
indicate:
a) how well council is seen to be performing in a
particular service area; or
b) the level of importance placed on a particular
service area.
For ease of interpretation, index score ratings can be
categorised as follows:
INDEX
SCORE
Performance
implication
Importance
implication
75 – 100
Council is performing
very well
in this service area
This service area is
seen to be
extremely important
60 – 75
Council is performing
well
in this service area,
but there is room for
improvement
This service area is
seen to be
very important
50 – 60
Council is performing
satisfactorily
in this
service area but needs
to improve
This service area is
seen to be
fairly important