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
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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.
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).
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).
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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)
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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%
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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