2021 Local
Government
Community
Satisfaction Survey
Brimbank City
Council
Coordinated by the Department of Jobs,
Precincts and Regions on behalf of
Victorian councils
Contents
2
Background and objectives
3
Key findings and recommendations
4
Detailed findings
12
Overall performance
13
Customer service
30
Council direction
36
Individual service areas
41
Community consultation and engagement 42
Lobbying on behalf of the community
46
Decisions made in the interest of the
community
50
Condition of sealed local roads
54
Informing the community
58
Condition of local streets and footpaths
62
Traffic management
66
Parking facilities
70
Enforcement of local laws
74
Family support services
78
Elderly support services
82
Disadvantaged support services
86
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Recreational facilities
90
Appearance of public areas
94
Art centres and libraries
98
Community and cultural activities
102
Waste management
106
Business and community development and
tourism
110
General town planning policy
114
Planning and building permits
118
Environmental sustainability
122
Emergency and disaster management
126
Planning for population growth
130
Response to Covid-19
134
Detailed demographics
138
Appendix A: Index scores, margins of error
and significant differences
145
Appendix B: Further project information
150
Background and objectives
3
The Victorian Community Satisfaction Survey
(CSS) creates a vital interface between the council
and their community.
Held annually, the CSS asks the opinions of local
people about the place they live, work and play and
provides confidence for councils in their efforts
and abilities.
Now in its twenty-second year, this survey provides
insight into the community’s views on:
• councils’ overall performance, with benchmarking
against State-wide and council group results
• value for money in services and infrastructure
• community consultation and engagement
• decisions made in the interest of the community
• customer service, local infrastructure, facilities,
services and
• overall council direction.
When coupled with previous data, the survey provides
a reliable historical source of the community’s views
since 1998. A selection of results from the last ten
years shows that councils in Victoria continue to
provide services that meet the public’s expectations.
Serving Victoria for 22 years
Each year the CSS data is used to develop this State
wide report which contains all of the aggregated
results, analysis and data. Moreover, with 22 years of
results, the CSS offers councils a long-term measure of
how they are performing – essential for councils that
work over the long term to provide valuable services
and infrastructure to their communities.
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.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Key findings and
recommendations
4
Compared to
State-wide average
Compared to
group average
Brimbank City Council
–
at a glance
5
Overall council performance
Results shown are index scores out of 100.
Council performance compared to
State-wide and group averages
The three areas where Council
performance is significantly
higher by the widest margin
Population growth
The three areas where Council
performance is significantly
lower by the widest margin
Brimbank
65
State-wide
61
Metropolitan
67
Sealed local roads
Building & planning
permits
Population growth
Building & planning
permits
Town planning policy
Appearance of public
areas
Appearance of public
areas
Recreational facilities
Sealed local roads
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Summary of core measures
6
Index scores
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
71
76
73
76
73
70
72
74
73
75
63
60
58
58
63
63
60
64
60
62
64
61
61
60
65
63
64
65
58
57
56
58
54
55
58
54
59
57
55
57
56
58
59
58
61
72
73
73
71
68
70
71
69
66
69
63
63
62
57
61
59
64
62
61
62
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Waste
management
Sealed
local
roads
Consultation &
engagement
Customer
service
Overall
council
direction
Overall
performance
Community
decisions
Summary of core measures
7
Core measures summary results (%)
16
9
7
18
28
41
40
32
38
41
33
30
33
33
28
24
26
16
6
13
9
13
6
7
3
2
4
4
4
4
2
10
14
1
3
2
Overall performance
Consultation & engagement
Community decisions
Sealed local roads
Waste management
Customer service
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Overall council direction
31
55
8 6
Improved
Stayed the same
Deteriorated
Can't say
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Services
Brimbank
2021
Brimbank
2020
Metro
2021
State-wide
2021
Highest
score
Lowest
score
Overall performance
65
64
67
61
Aged 65+
years,
Women
North
residents
Value for money
61
-
62
54
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Overall council direction
62
61
55
53
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Customer service
75
73
74
70
Women
North
residents
COVID-19 response
76
-
73
73
Aged 65+
years
North
residents
Art centres & libraries
72
75
73
73
Aged 65+
years
Aged 18-34
years, Men
Recreational facilities
71
65
75
71
Aged 65+
years
Aged 35-64
years
Emergency & disaster
mngt
71
64
70
71
South
residents,
Aged 65+
years
North
residents
Waste management
69
66
72
69
Aged 65+
years
Aged 18-34
years, Women
Family support services
67
65
67
66
Aged 65+
years
North
residents
Summary of Brimbank City Council performance
Significantly higher / lower than Brimbank City Council 2021 result at the 95% confidence interval.
8
Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Services
Brimbank
2021
Brimbank
2020
Metro
2021
State-wide
2021
Highest
score
Lowest
score
Community & cultural
67
66
66
65
Users
North
residents
Appearance of public
areas
67
64
74
73
Aged 65+
years, Aged
18-34 years
Aged 50-64
years
Elderly support services
67
64
66
69
Users
Aged 50-64
years
Enforcement of local
laws
65
59
66
64
Women, Aged
18-34 years
North
residents
Disadvantaged support
serv.
65
59
64
63
Men, Aged
65+ years
Women
Sealed local roads
64
60
68
57
Aged 65+
years
Aged 50-64
years
Environmental
sustainability
63
61
64
62
Aged 65+
years
North
residents
Traffic management
63
59
59
59
Aged 65+
years
North
residents,
Aged 35-54
years
Local streets & footpaths
63
58
65
59
Aged 18-34
years, Aged
65+ years
Aged 50-64
years
Informing the community
62
58
62
60
Users
North
residents,
Aged 50-64
years
Summary of Brimbank City Council performance
Significantly higher / lower than Brimbank City Council 2021 result at the 95% confidence interval.
9
Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Services
Brimbank
2021
Brimbank
2020
Metro
2021
State-wide
2021
Highest
score
Lowest
score
Bus/community
dev./tourism
61
55
60
61
Aged 65+
years
North
residents,
Aged 35-49
years
Community decisions
61
58
61
56
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Town planning policy
60
61
56
55
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Population growth
60
55
53
53
South
residents
North
residents
Consultation &
engagement
59
54
59
56
Aged 18-34
years
North
residents
Parking facilities
59
56
58
58
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Building & planning
permits
59
60
54
51
Aged 18-34
years
Aged 50-64
years
Lobbying
58
55
56
55
South
residents
North
residents
Summary of Brimbank City Council performance
Significantly higher / lower than Brimbank City Council 2021 result at the 95% confidence interval.
10
Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Focus areas for the next 12 months
11
Perceptions of Council performance improved over the past year on almost all measures
evaluated. This includes significant gains in 11 service areas. Council experienced the
highest ratings’ gains (six to seven point gains) in the areas of emergency and disaster
management, recreational facilities, law enforcement, disadvantaged support services,
and business and community development. These are strong results for Council.
Overview
Council should focus on improving services which have the greatest influence on overall
opinions: informing the community and making decisions in the community’s best interests
(positive driver of opinions) and the condition of local streets (negative driver of opinions).
It is important to note that both community decisions and local streets and footpaths are
viewed as highly important council areas, but large gaps (~20 points) currently exist
between rated importance and perceived job performance in these areas.
Key influences on
perceptions of overall
performance
Council performs significantly lower than Metropolitan group averages in just a handful of
areas: recreational facilities, waste management, appearance of public areas, and sealed
local roads. Otherwise, Council rates in line with or significantly higher than group
averages. Council rates lower than the State-wide average on only one service area: the
appearance of public areas.
Comparison to
state and area
grouping
In addition to the areas mentioned above, Council should look to maintain and build upon
its improved performance on sealed local roads and the appearance of public areas, which
have a strong influence on overall perceptions. Ratings for both are at their highest levels,
so at the very least, maintaining these highs will go a long way towards maintaining overall
positive perceptions. Residents in the North and those aged 50 to 64 years rate Council
lowest on most measures; particular attention should also be paid to these cohorts.
Maintain gains
achieved to date
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
DETAILED
FINDINGS
12
Overall
performance
13
Overall performance
14
The overall performance index score of 65 for
Brimbank City Council is in line with the 2020 result,
increasing by just one index point in the past year.
• Overall performance is at its equal highest level in
the last decade; a result previously only experienced
in 2018.
Brimbank City Council’s overall performance is rated
statistically significantly higher (at the 95% confidence
interval) than the average rating for councils State
wide, and in line with the Metropolitan group average
for councils (index scores of 61 and 67 respectively).
• Ratings among women are significantly higher than
in 2020 (index score of 68, up six index points from
2020).
• Overall performance ratings are higher in the South
(index score of 67) than in the North (index score of
60), but no groups are significantly higher or lower
than the Council average.
Half of residents (49%) rate the value for money they
receive from Council in infrastructure and services as
‘very good’ or ‘good’, three and a half times as many as
rate Council’s value for money as ‘very poor’ or ‘poor’
(14%). A further 32% rate Council as ‘average’ in terms
of providing value for money.
Overall performance
Results shown are index scores out of 100.
State-wide
61
Aged 65+ years and women rate
overall performance highest (68)
North residents rate overall
performance lowest (60)
Brimbank
65
Metropolitan
67
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
69
62
65
66
62
64
66
64
62
58
61
63
63
63
67
67
63
64
63
57
60
63
62
62
66
65
72
65
67
62
59
59
62
63
59
61
64
58
60
60
60
60
59
58
64
63
61
66
66
61
60
55
60
59
63
63
61
62
67
59
61
62
65
58
60
60
69
64
64
n/a
65
64
64
60
62
61
64
63
63
63
n/a
65
62
62
61
60
60
62
62
58
n/a
n/a
64
60
61
55
55
60
n/a
Overall performance
2021 overall performance (index scores)
68
68
67
67
66
65
63
63
63
61
q
60
65+
Women
South
Metro
18-34
Brimbank
Men
35-49
50-64
State-wide
North
15
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Overall performance
16
2021 overall performance (%)
16
15
15
15
12
10
15
13
13
9
11
15
12
17
13
19
12
17
13
21
40
39
36
40
32
41
33
42
39
39
39
47
39
39
40
40
45
35
35
39
33
35
37
33
39
36
37
35
35
35
34
29
27
37
35
31
34
28
42
32
6
6
6
8
10
7
9
8
9
11
10
6
13
2
6
5
2
13
4
5
3
4
4
2
4
5
5
2
3
5
4
2
6
2
4
2
3
4
4
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
4
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
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
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
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
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
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Value for money in services and infrastructure
2021 value for money (index scores)
65
64
63
63
62
61
59
57
56
55
54
q
18-34
65+
Women
South
Metro
Brimbank
Men
35-49
North
50-64
State-wide
17
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q3b. How would you rate Brimbank City Council at providing good value for money in infrastructure
and services provided to your community?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Value for money in services and infrastructure
18
2021 value for money (%)
12
8
12
10
12
10
13
8
15
9
16
37
31
39
29
40
36
39
49
29
29
34
32
34
32
34
32
33
31
30
28
38
36
10
15
9
12
10
13
7
7
17
14
7
4
8
3
8
2
4
4
1
8
7
3
4
4
5
6
3
3
5
5
2
4
5
2021 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q3b. How would you rate Brimbank City Council at providing good value for money in infrastructure
and services provided to your community?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Top performing service areas
19
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
COVID-19 response (index score of 76)
is the area where Council performed
best in 2021.
Council’s COVID-19 response (index score of 76) is
the area where Council performed best in 2021.
Council performs significantly higher than the
Metropolitan group and State-wide averages in this
area (index score of 73 each).
Art centres and libraries is Council’s next highest
rated service area (index score of 72, down three
points), followed by:
• Recreational facilities (index score of 71, up six
points)
• Emergency and disaster management (index
score of 71, up seven points).
Recreational facilities, while one of Council’s highest
rated service areas, is one of only a handful of
measures where Council rates significantly lower
than the Metropolitan group average.
• Impressions of recreational facilities improved by a
significant six points in the past year, with gains
occurring across almost all demographic and
geographic subgroups.
Impressions of Council performance increased from
2020 on almost all measures evaluated, with the
largest gain occurring in ratings of emergency and
disaster management services.
Council experienced only slight declines in just three
areas in 2021. These declines are not considered
significant and occurred in the areas of art centres
and libraries (index score of 72, down three points
from 2020), town planning (60, down one point), and
planning and building permits (59, down one point).
Council rates lowest – relative to its performance in
other areas in the area of lobbying (index score of
58).
• Council’s result for lobbying is statistically in line
with the Metropolitan group and significantly higher
than the State-wide average for councils (index
scores of 56 and 55 respectively).
In the areas of lobbying (index score of 58, 22%
‘can’t say’), planning and building permits (index
score of 59, 27% ‘can’t say’), population growth
(index score of 60, 20% ‘can’t say’), and town
planning policy (index score of 60, 24% ‘can’t say’)
there is an issue with relatively poor ratings coupled
with high percentages of residents who are unfamiliar
with the services in these areas, i.e. an extent of both
displeasure and unfamiliarity. The same cannot be
said for parking facilities (equal second lowest rating
of 59 and just 4% can’t say), indicating there is
familiarity and displeasure.
Low performing service areas
20
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council rates lowest – relative to its
performance in other areas – in the
areas of lobbying (index score of 58).
76
72
71
71
69
67
67
67
67
65
65
64
63
63
63
62
61
61
60
60
59
59
59
58
COVID-19 response
Art centres & libraries
Recreational facilities
Emergency & disaster mngt
Waste management
Family support services
Community & cultural
Appearance of public areas
Elderly support services
Enforcement of local laws
Disadvantaged support serv.
Sealed local roads
Environmental sustainability
Traffic management
Local streets & footpaths
Informing the community
Bus/community dev./tourism
Community decisions
Town planning policy
Population growth
Consultation & engagement
Parking facilities
Planning & building permits
Lobbying
Individual service area performance
2021 individual service area performance (index scores)
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
21
n/a
75
65
64
66
65
66
64
64
59
59
60
61
59
58
58
55
58
61
55
54
56
60
55
n/a
73
63
67
69
66
67
65
64
60
61
63
63
61
58
59
57
59
59
54
58
57
58
57
n/a
75
66
71
71
66
67
62
64
60
63
63
63
61
61
58
58
58
60
53
56
59
62
57
n/a
72
64
65
70
62
64
61
63
60
60
58
62
54
55
56
58
56
58
52
55
55
60
54
n/a
68
63
64
68
65
67
61
66
59
61
58
57
57
54
58
57
57
56
55
54
57
59
57
n/a
68
66
66
71
64
65
62
63
62
60
60
61
57
53
61
59
55
59
57
58
59
59
54
n/a
72
66
68
73
67
66
59
64
61
61
63
62
58
60
61
55
57
59
56
56
60
60
54
n/a
69
65
65
73
65
67
59
67
64
61
n/a
64
55
55
62
57
n/a
59
58
57
60
62
56
n/a
n/a
65
n/a
72
65
n/a
62
65
57
61
n/a
n/a
54
55
n/a
57
n/a
55
n/a
58
56
59
55
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
Individual service area performance
22
2021 individual service area performance (%)
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
34
22
21
16
28
14
17
22
12
15
10
18
13
15
22
16
6
7
9
11
9
10
8
8
36
41
42
37
33
26
34
39
31
37
28
41
34
36
32
35
33
38
27
26
32
36
29
27
17
23
22
21
26
22
27
22
22
26
26
24
32
33
27
30
31
28
31
28
33
35
22
29
4
4
5
2
6
4
7
11
4
6
3
13
9
9
11
12
7
9
6
12
13
11
10
10
1
1
2
1
4
2
3
2
4
2
4
2
3
7
4
2
4
3
3
2
5
4
4
9
10
8
23
3
32
15
2
29
12
31
1
10
5
1
3
21
14
24
20
10
4
27
22
COVID-19 response
Art centres & libraries
Recreational facilities
Emergency & disaster mngt
Waste management
Family support services
Community & cultural
Appearance of public areas
Elderly support services
Enforcement of local laws
Disadvantaged support serv.
Sealed local roads
Environmental sustainability
Traffic management
Local streets & footpaths
Informing the community
Bus/community dev./tourism
Community decisions
Town planning policy
Population growth
Consultation & engagement
Parking facilities
Planning & building permits
Lobbying
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
84
81
80
82
79
79
77
78
n/a
79
76
77
74
75
76
78
76
72
71
72
68
72
65
63
83
83
82
82
78
79
78
80
n/a
76
76
80
74
79
76
79
74
69
70
70
69
69
64
61
83
82
82
82
80
82
77
79
n/a
78
76
77
75
77
78
78
75
71
69
71
69
67
64
61
80
80
83
83
80
81
72
77
n/a
76
78
74
74
77
78
79
75
72
71
71
67
70
63
63
83
80
80
79
78
80
77
76
n/a
77
76
75
73
77
74
78
73
73
73
72
70
71
65
64
82
81
80
81
79
77
76
78
n/a
77
76
76
75
77
76
76
73
71
73
71
72
70
66
64
79
80
80
80
77
77
73
75
n/a
75
79
74
74
77
72
75
73
72
71
68
67
67
66
64
81
82
81
83
n/a
n/a
76
79
n/a
77
78
78
75
80
77
79
73
70
72
71
69
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
n/a
85
84
82
81
79
79
78
78
78
78
77
77
76
76
75
74
73
72
72
72
71
70
66
64
Waste management
Elderly support services
Local streets & footpaths
Emergency & disaster mngt
Community decisions
Sealed local roads
Environmental sustainability
Family support services
COVID-19 response
Informing the community
Appearance of public areas
Disadvantaged support serv.
Recreational facilities
Enforcement of local laws
Population growth
Traffic management
Parking facilities
Planning & building permits
Consultation & engagement
Town planning policy
Art centres & libraries
Lobbying
Community & cultural
Bus/community dev./tourism
Individual service area importance
2021 individual service area importance (index scores)
23
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 34 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Individual service area importance
2021 individual service area importance (%)
40
47
50
48
37
38
36
39
38
35
35
33
43
34
28
37
31
27
23
29
25
24
18
17
48
41
38
32
42
41
42
38
39
43
42
42
33
39
42
33
37
39
44
35
38
38
40
37
12
9
11
12
16
18
17
16
17
15
21
21
14
20
24
22
27
26
27
25
28
26
32
31
5
3
2
3
3
2
3
2
3
5
4
4
6
4
5
5
5
5
4
8
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
4
2
7
1
3
Local streets & footpaths
Elderly support services
Waste management
Emergency & disaster mngt
Family support services
Sealed local roads
Informing the community
Environmental sustainability
Community decisions
Disadvantaged support serv.
Appearance of public areas
Recreational facilities
COVID-19 response
Enforcement of local laws
Parking facilities
Population growth
Traffic management
Consultation & engagement
Art centres & libraries
Planning & building permits
Lobbying
Town planning policy
Community & cultural
Bus/community dev./tourism
Extremely important
Very important
Fairly important
Not that important
Not at all important
Can't say
Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?
24
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 34 Councils asked group: 10
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
82
79
84
75
85
78
78
79
73
72
72
77
70
72
74
76
78
77
81
Local streets & footpaths
Community decisions
Elderly support services
Population growth
Waste management
Informing the community
Environmental sustainability
Sealed local roads
Parking facilities
Planning & building permits
Consultation & engagement
Disadvantaged support serv.
Lobbying
Town planning policy
Traffic management
Enforcement of local laws
Family support services
Appearance of public areas
Emergency & disaster mngt
63
61
67
60
69
62
63
64
59
59
59
65
58
60
63
65
67
67
71
Individual service areas importance vs performance
Note: Net differentials are calculated based on the un-rounded importance and performance scores, then rounded to the nearest whole
25
number, which may result in differences of +/-1% in the importance and performance scores and the net differential scores.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Importance (index scores)
Performance (index scores) Net Differential
Service areas where importance exceeds performance by 10 points or more,
suggesting further investigation is necessary.
-20
-19
-17
-16
-16
-15
-15
-15
-14
-13
-13
-12
-12
-11
-11
-11
-11
-10
-10
Influences on perceptions of overall performance
26
The individual service area that has the strongest
influence on the overall performance rating (based on
regression analysis) is:
• Informing the community.
Clear and consistent communication to residents
about key local issues provides the greatest
opportunity to drive up overall opinion of Council’s
performance.
Following on from that, other individual service areas
with a moderate to strong influence on the overall
performance rating are:
• Council’s COVID-19 response
• Condition of sealed local roads
• The appearance of public areas
• Decisions made in the interest of the community
• Waste management
• Condition of local streets.
Looking just at these key service areas, Council’s
COVID-19 response has a high performance index (76)
and a strong positive influence on the overall
performance rating, so maintaining this positive result
should remain a focus.
Other service areas that have a strong positive
influence on overall perceptions, but perform relatively
less well, are community decisions, the condition of
sealed local roads and the appearance of public areas
(performance index of 61, 63 and 67 respectively).
A focus on transparency about decisions Council
has made in the community’s interest and
continuing to attend to resident concerns about
local roads and public areas can also help to
increase Council’s overall performance rating.
Council's waste management is performing reasonably
well (performance index of 69) and has a more
moderate influence on the overall performance rating.
Maintaining efforts here can help to shore up overall
community opinion.
The condition of local streets (performance index of 63)
has a moderate negative influence on overall
performance. Improving perceptions in this area will
ensure opinion does not have an overly negative
impact on overall ratings of Council.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The regressions are shown on the following two charts.
1. The first chart
shows the results of a regression
analysis of
all
individual service areas selected by
Council.
2. The second chart
shows the results of a
regression performed on a smaller set of service
areas, being those with a moderate to strong
influence on overall performance. Service areas
with a weak influence on overall performance (i.e. a
low Standardised Beta Coefficient) have been
excluded from the analysis.
Key insights from this analysis are derived from
the second chart.
Regression analysis explained
27
We use regression analysis to investigate which
individual service areas, such as community
consultation, condition of sealed local roads, etc. (the
independent variables) are influencing respondent
perceptions of overall council performance (the
dependent variable).
In the charts that follow:
• The horizontal axis represents the council
performance index for each individual service.
Service areas appearing on the right-side of the
chart 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 service area
to the model. Service areas near the top of the chart
have a greater positive effect on overall performance
ratings than service areas located closer to the axis.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Influence on overall performance: all service areas
28
The multiple regression analysis model above (all service areas) has an R² value of 0.606 and adjusted R² value of 0.581, which means that
61% 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 = 24.13. This model should be interpreted with some caution as some data is not normally distributed
and not all service areas have linear correlations.
2021 regression analysis (all service areas)
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community
consultation
Lobbying
Informing the
community
Condition of
local streets
Traffic management
Parking facilities
Enforcement of local laws
Family support services
Elderly support
services
Disadvantaged
support services
Recreational
facilities
The appearance
of public areas
Art centres and libraries
Community and
cultural activities
Waste management
Business, community
dev. and tourism
Town planning
Planning and
building permits
Environmental
sustainability
Emergency
management
Planning for
population growth
Community decisions
Condition of
sealed local
roads
COVID-19
response
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Very Poor
Performance Index
Very Good
Greater positive influe
nce
on Overall Performance
Greater negative influe
nce
on Overall Performance
Influence on overall performance: key service areas
29
The multiple regression analysis model above (reduced set of service areas) has an R² value of 0.565 and adjusted R² value of 0.557, which
means that 56% 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 = 72.86.
2021 regression analysis (key service areas)
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Informing the
community
Condition of
local streets
The appearance
of public areas
Waste
management
Community
decisions
Condition of
sealed local
roads
COVID-19
response
-0.10
-0.05
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Greater positive influe
nce
on Overall Performance
Greater neg
ative influence
on Overall Performance
Very Poor
Performance Index
Very Good
Strong positive influence on overall
rating and should remain a focus – but
currently performing very well here.
Improvements will have only a moderate
impact on overall perceptions.
Currently a negative influence on
overall perceptions. Focus on
performance as improvements will
have a moderate influence on
overall perceptions.
Should remain a focus as currently
performing fairly well here and
improvements will have a stronger
influence on overall perceptions.
Customer
service
30
Customer service
Council’s customer service index of 75 is in line with
2020 results (index score of 73). Council is within one
index point of its highest rating achieved to date on this
measure (index score of 76 in 2015 and 2013).
Customer service is rated in line with the Metropolitan
group and significantly higher than the State-wide
average (index scores of 74 and 70 respectively).
Among those who have had contact with Council, 71%
provide a positive customer service rating of ‘very good’
or ‘good’.
• Despite relatively equal rates of contact with Council,
residents in the North (index score of 69) rate
customer service lower than residents in the South
(index score of 77).
• There is also somewhat of a disparity in customer
service ratings between women (index score of 80)
and men (index score of 70), despite comparable
levels of contact (59% and 58% respectively).
Contact with council and customer service
31
Contact with council
Fewer than three in five Council residents (58%) have
had contact with Council in the last 12 months. Rate of
contact is in line with last year.
• Residents aged 35 to 49 years are most likely to
have contacted Council in the past year (73%),
whereas by contrast just 51% of residents aged 18 to
34 years contacted Council.
• Residents of the North (60%) and South (57%)
contacted Council in relatively equal numbers.
Among those who have had contact
with Council, 71% provide a positive
customer service rating of ‘very
good’ or ‘good’, including 41% of
residents who rate Council’s
customer service as ‘very good’.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Contact with council
2021 contact with council (%)
Have had contact
54
53
61
58
57
54
55
57
58
58
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
32
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: 39 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
50
60
63
64
61
65
58
54
55
60
58
60
56
61
57
56
60
57
59
57
64
50
59
57
61
56
59
60
55
51
54
54
49
58
57
58
64
49
63
54
58
47
54
44
64
58
58
62
59
56
57
56
55
56
53
65
60
60
55
60
60
58
56
60
57
52
59
n/a
61
65
63
62
61
58
58
53
65
n/a
n/a
60
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
59
n/a
61
n/a
57
55
54
50
n/a
48
52
Contact with council
2021 contact with council (%)
73
p
62
61
60
59
59
58
58
57
53
51
35-49
Metro
State-wide
North
Women
50-64
Brimbank
Men
South
65+
18-34
33
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
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: 39 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
Note: Some data may be missing for 2012 and 2013 due to a change in demographic analysis
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
74
71
79
72
73
74
69
75
73
70
78
70
76
73
73
74
76
76
74
78
71
70
73
73
74
70
72
72
72
73
71
70
71
71
75
74
65
70
71
73
70
69
69
64
75
73
81
73
73
73
71
68
71
69
73
77
76
72
83
76
73
70
77
75
70
75
73
73
81
71
73
n/a
74
69
74
72
74
78
77
80
73
76
n/a
77
76
74
71
74
73
n/a
71
69
71
n/a
71
77
69
71
n/a
Customer service rating
34
2021 customer service rating (index scores)
80
77
77
76
75
74
73
73
70
70
q
69
Women
South
65+
35-49
Brimbank
Metro
18-34
50-64
Men
State-wide
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Customer service rating
35
2021 customer service rating (%)
41
37
40
33
28
32
37
36
37
31
32
37
34
43
37
46
37
45
42
42
30
31
33
39
41
42
34
36
38
41
35
34
29
31
28
32
28
31
24
35
16
19
16
15
17
14
17
16
17
16
17
16
17
15
19
13
17
10
25
16
7
6
4
5
5
5
5
7
6
6
8
7
8
7
11
4
10
10
4
4
4
4
7
6
6
5
3
4
1
6
6
4
8
2
5
3
3
4
6
3
2
2
1
2
1
4
1
1
1
2
3
1
3
6
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council direction
36
More than half of residents (55%) believe the direction
of Council’s performance has remained the same over
the past 12 months, in line with 2020 results (53%).
• Three in ten (31%) believe the direction has
improved (equal to 2020) in the last 12 months.
• Few than one in ten (8%) believe it has deteriorated
(10% in 2020).
• The most satisfied with Council direction are those
aged 18 to 34 years and South residents.
• The least satisfied with Council direction are those
aged 50 to 64 years and North residents, both with
an index score significantly lower than the average.
Council direction
37
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Overall council direction last 12 months
38
2021 overall council direction (index scores)
68
p
65
64
62
61
61
60
55
q
54
q
53
q
53
q
18-34
South
Women
Brimbank
65+
35-49
Men
Metro
North
50-64
State-wide
64
62
62
61
61
63
61
54
60
51
51
67
64
64
62
57
64
61
55
60
58
53
71
67
60
64
67
56
68
54
59
58
52
61
61
59
59
61
56
59
54
55
57
53
70
64
61
61
61
54
62
55
57
58
51
52
58
58
57
61
61
56
56
57
58
53
64
62
64
62
67
58
61
n/a
62
60
53
65
65
60
63
61
62
66
n/a
60
63
53
64
n/a
59
63
68
59
67
n/a
n/a
60
52
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Overall council direction last 12 months
2021 overall council direction (%)
31
31
31
33
24
32
23
30
33
33
18
19
19
35
28
34
40
28
17
30
55
53
55
52
58
52
62
58
56
54
63
66
58
55
56
54
47
62
64
55
8
10
8
7
8
10
10
7
7
8
13
9
12
6
9
7
6
7
11
9
6
6
5
7
9
6
5
5
5
5
5
6
11
4
8
5
7
4
8
7
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Improved
Stayed the same
Deteriorated
Can't say
Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Brimbank City Council’s overall performance?
39
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Right / wrong direction
40
2021 right / wrong direction (%)
18
21
27
21
19
21
21
19
24
18
20
12
21
17
18
10
24
18
22
58
49
43
47
45
47
45
51
48
51
55
53
60
59
58
81
47
40
50
7
11
10
10
12
10
10
9
7
10
7
7
7
5
8
3
9
9
8
5
6
6
6
7
8
9
8
7
10
7
7
4
7
4
3
8
8
4
12
12
14
16
17
15
15
13
14
11
11
20
9
11
13
3
12
26
16
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Definitely right direction
Probably right direction
Probably wrong direction
Definitely wrong direction
Can't say
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: 10 Councils asked group: 2
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Individual service
areas
41
Community consultation and engagement importance
42
2021 consultation and engagement importance (index scores)
77
76
75
74
73
70
76
70
72
71
74
72
62
73
80
74
74
78
72
74
70
71
70
70
68
64
74
80
72
74
79
69
72
68
72
69
70
69
62
78
74
75
74
75
72
75
72
72
71
70
71
63
79
77
71
75
77
77
78
75
73
73
69
69
69
77
75
74
74
75
75
73
74
72
73
72
72
70
78
76
71
74
77
72
70
72
n/a
71
68
69
66
77
77
71
73
77
72
72
72
n/a
72
72
71
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
78
78
p
76
75
p
75
75
74
73
73
72
70
69
65
q
50-64
Personal user
35-49
State-wide
Household user
Women
65+
South
Metro
Brimbank
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 29 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community consultation and engagement importance
43
2021 consultation and engagement importance (%)
27
25
23
22
22
29
24
23
22
32
27
25
29
21
34
13
36
38
32
21
16
39
42
42
40
45
40
45
41
45
41
41
41
38
42
37
42
38
38
38
70
68
26
21
26
30
28
25
24
29
27
22
25
22
29
29
23
36
20
20
23
9
16
5
7
6
7
4
4
3
4
4
3
4
10
4
7
4
9
6
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
2
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community consultation and engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community consultation and engagement performance
44
2021 consultation and engagement performance (index scores)
60
49
55
57
53
54
55
58
57
56
55
56
50
67
58
58
68
59
58
57
58
58
62
56
53
58
67
60
59
66
56
56
57
57
55
56
55
52
53
63
54
57
60
58
55
52
57
59
56
55
52
52
58
58
53
58
57
54
52
58
54
52
54
52
57
62
56
58
65
57
58
58
58
60
61
56
54
57
64
57
56
66
55
56
57
n/a
65
51
57
55
57
65
58
58
66
57
57
57
n/a
56
60
57
53
55
n/a
62
n/a
n/a
58
58
59
n/a
66
52
57
51
n/a
65
64
p
62
61
60
59
59
59
58
56
56
q
55
52
q
Household user
18-34
South
Personal user
Women
Brimbank
Men
Metro
65+
35-49
State-wide
50-64
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community consultation and engagement performance
45
2021 consultation and engagement performance (%)
9
8
10
10
7
6
8
8
8
8
9
10
5
11
9
10
8
11
6
10
10
17
32
25
28
27
27
28
33
27
28
33
30
32
25
35
32
33
45
22
30
28
40
41
33
36
31
32
32
35
30
36
34
27
32
32
34
32
35
31
36
32
27
32
29
26
13
12
14
16
13
16
9
13
14
14
15
12
19
11
12
15
6
21
20
12
12
11
2
8
3
4
6
4
7
4
3
4
6
4
4
1
3
1
1
3
4
4
3
10
13
14
12
14
11
13
11
12
14
8
11
13
9
10
10
5
12
14
14
4
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Lobbying on behalf of the community importance
46
2021 lobbying importance (index scores)
71
71
78
74
74
72
70
68
66
68
72
72
66
72
73
66
69
70
67
65
65
65
68
69
69
70
67
67
67
68
66
63
66
70
73
75
75
69
70
71
69
67
63
71
76
70
72
71
67
71
73
69
68
71
66
72
71
72
70
67
70
72
69
67
67
68
71
69
72
67
64
67
69
70
n/a
64
64
73
68
70
75
71
70
70
70
n/a
68
68
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70
n/a
n/a
n/a
74
p
73
72
71
71
70
70
69
67
q
66
q
66
Women
65+
50-64
35-49
North
Brimbank
South
State-wide
Metro
18-34
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 25 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Lobbying on behalf of the community importance
47
2021 lobbying importance (%)
25
28
23
20
22
27
23
23
24
24
21
30
22
21
29
14
37
29
26
38
37
37
37
43
37
41
35
42
39
39
32
42
36
41
40
30
39
44
28
23
27
30
24
25
24
25
25
27
28
27
29
31
25
43
19
18
23
5
7
5
8
7
8
8
11
7
7
8
8
4
7
3
3
10
7
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
4
1
4
3
3
2
3
5
2
3
3
3
4
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
4
4
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Lobbying on behalf of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 9
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Lobbying on behalf of the community performance
48
2021 lobbying performance (index scores)
55
60
53
54
55
56
57
53
54
53
55
57
52
60
58
57
57
57
60
52
54
57
57
54
62
58
57
55
56
54
50
54
56
57
61
55
56
54
53
56
54
49
54
50
55
57
59
60
57
54
56
54
55
53
60
56
57
55
53
54
55
58
51
55
55
52
54
59
55
53
54
55
n/a
52
49
56
54
56
51
59
57
56
55
n/a
59
52
55
57
n/a
58
61
54
55
57
n/a
51
49
55
n/a
61
60
60
59
58
57
56
56
55
55
q
52
q
South
65+
18-34
Women
Brimbank
Men
Metro
35-49
50-64
State-wide
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 51 Councils asked group: 12
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Lobbying on behalf of the community performance
49
2021 lobbying performance (%)
8
7
8
6
5
6
6
5
7
5
6
5
3
10
10
7
3
12
6
12
27
19
25
26
23
27
23
23
27
26
25
23
24
29
24
31
33
21
25
26
29
35
31
29
32
26
30
31
32
27
32
31
30
30
34
25
39
24
22
24
10
10
12
11
10
12
13
13
13
14
12
10
13
10
10
10
5
17
17
8
4
5
3
3
5
4
5
4
4
3
5
3
6
2
4
3
1
6
3
5
22
24
21
26
25
25
23
24
18
25
19
27
24
20
18
25
18
20
27
25
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 51 Councils asked group: 12
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Decisions made in the interest of the community
importance
50
2021 community decisions made importance (index scores)
81
79
80
79
78
78
79
80
78
80
79
80
81
80
78
79
78
78
80
76
77
75
82
81
80
79
79
79
80
79
81
82
79
81
84
79
79
79
77
80
81
81
82
77
79
81
80
79
79
81
78
78
74
74
74
84
82
80
80
79
80
79
81
75
79
77
81
78
79
n/a
77
79
77
78
74
77
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
81
81
81
80
79
79
79
79
78
77
77
50-64
Women
State-wide
Metro
South
65+
Brimbank
35-49
18-34
North
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 24 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Decisions made in the interest of the community
importance
51
2021 community decisions made importance (%)
38
38
36
39
38
34
38
34
42
40
40
37
36
41
37
40
42
35
39
41
44
42
45
45
44
41
40
40
34
42
38
41
36
38
35
48
17
17
14
16
14
17
14
21
14
15
21
16
20
14
21
17
18
10
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
1
4
3
3
3
1
4
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 24 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Decisions made in the interest of the community
performance
52
2021 community decisions made performance (index scores)
58
61
61
58
59
58
57
56
53
50
56
66
59
58
61
60
59
57
56
55
59
52
63
61
55
58
58
58
59
60
54
54
51
55
58
62
56
58
56
56
57
54
52
53
62
56
59
61
59
57
54
49
54
60
58
53
56
55
54
59
55
56
60
55
54
52
59
57
62
57
n/a
57
58
54
57
58
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
65
63
63
62
61
61
59
57
56
q
56
51
q
18-34
South
65+
Women
Metro
Brimbank
Men
35-49
State-wide
North
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Decisions made in the interest of the community
performance
53
2021 community decisions made performance (%)
7
11
11
9
9
9
8
9
8
9
5
9
7
8
6
6
9
10
38
26
28
30
24
30
26
30
32
36
34
39
37
39
49
31
24
38
28
36
33
32
34
31
34
30
32
29
28
28
28
27
25
34
18
30
9
7
9
10
12
11
10
15
13
9
12
8
9
9
5
8
26
6
4
7
5
4
5
6
7
3
6
4
7
2
6
2
2
6
6
4
14
14
14
15
16
13
15
14
9
13
15
14
13
16
14
15
17
12
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of sealed local roads in your area
importance
54
2021 sealed local roads importance (index scores)
80
79
85
79
79
79
80
80
79
77
77
80
82
82
79
77
79
81
80
78
77
75
83
81
82
80
80
82
83
81
83
78
81
81
83
83
78
81
81
82
81
82
77
79
83
79
79
78
78
80
81
80
79
76
78
79
80
80
76
75
77
80
76
79
75
73
79
76
82
77
76
77
78
78
75
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
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
82
81
80
79
79
79
79
79
79
78
74
q
65+
35-49
50-64
State-wide
Men
Brimbank
Women
South
North
Metro
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 24 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of sealed local roads in your area
importance
55
2021 sealed local roads importance (%)
38
38
38
43
40
36
36
32
38
33
39
36
38
38
29
49
39
39
41
43
44
42
46
49
43
45
43
45
38
45
40
43
42
31
42
51
18
16
14
14
13
13
18
20
16
18
21
17
21
16
26
18
17
9
2
3
4
1
1
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 24 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of sealed local roads in your area
performance
56
2021 sealed local roads performance (index scores)
65
67
59
60
60
60
57
58
61
59
54
60
69
60
65
63
61
68
60
68
60
56
62
68
64
62
63
64
66
63
63
60
53
64
66
57
59
58
57
55
59
60
58
53
63
67
56
60
58
57
59
51
63
60
54
60
69
61
60
60
60
60
60
58
59
55
68
n/a
62
64
63
63
65
60
65
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
68
68
p
65
65
64
64
63
63
62
61
57
q
65+
Metro
South
Men
Brimbank
Women
18-34
35-49
North
50-64
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of sealed local roads in your area
performance
57
2021 sealed local roads performance (%)
18
18
22
18
15
13
13
18
13
21
13
19
19
16
15
19
14
23
41
29
33
36
31
37
38
38
34
43
40
40
40
41
41
42
39
39
24
30
24
30
31
26
30
26
28
23
28
23
23
25
24
15
29
29
13
15
15
11
14
17
10
12
15
9
12
14
14
12
16
15
13
6
4
6
5
4
8
7
7
5
9
3
4
3
3
4
2
7
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Informing the community importance
58
2021 informing community importance (index scores)
80
79
78
79
79
78
77
75
76
80
72
79
78
77
78
78
74
76
76
79
75
79
76
73
76
74
75
78
79
80
78
79
80
75
80
76
73
77
77
80
79
77
75
76
77
77
74
78
76
73
74
73
78
81
79
75
77
79
77
76
78
73
74
76
73
78
78
77
76
77
79
76
75
76
73
73
76
75
78
77
75
74
75
75
76
75
77
75
n/a
75
73
77
82
76
79
77
76
76
75
78
78
n/a
76
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
82
82
p
80
78
78
77
77
77
77
76
75
q
74
73
q
50-64
Women
65+
35-49
Brimbank
South
Household user
State-wide
Personal user
North
Metro
18-34
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 27 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Informing the community importance
59
2021 informing community importance (%)
36
38
34
37
35
35
30
30
33
35
31
41
32
32
40
32
37
45
35
34
33
42
42
39
42
41
43
46
44
43
41
41
31
48
37
47
43
36
39
48
47
48
17
17
23
18
20
17
20
21
21
19
23
20
16
24
10
17
24
11
13
12
12
3
3
3
3
4
4
1
4
1
3
4
4
3
5
2
7
1
1
2
5
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 27 Councils asked group: 9
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Informing the community performance
60
2021 informing community performance (index scores)
66
66
60
56
60
58
56
58
62
57
59
60
52
64
62
59
60
58
61
60
59
62
57
60
57
58
62
62
60
67
53
59
55
58
61
57
59
51
54
62
62
59
56
61
56
55
56
61
57
59
56
52
60
61
57
62
61
55
54
58
63
61
59
54
60
67
67
62
60
65
60
63
61
64
61
61
55
59
66
65
62
61
67
64
60
61
n/a
59
62
60
60
68
67
63
60
60
61
64
62
n/a
63
61
63
60
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
60
n/a
n/a
69
p
69
p
65
65
63
63
62
62
62
62
60
55
55
q
Personal user
Household user
South
18-34
65+
Men
35-49
Brimbank
Metro
Women
State-wide
50-64
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 35 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Informing the community performance
61
2021 informing community performance (%)
16
12
11
13
9
11
16
14
15
13
14
11
18
15
17
13
23
11
17
22
22
35
33
35
30
32
31
33
35
34
36
37
28
37
34
35
44
27
31
32
43
44
30
31
30
32
34
37
29
32
33
31
31
32
31
35
25
34
29
22
31
24
22
12
12
15
16
15
14
14
13
13
12
11
17
11
10
15
5
14
26
12
5
6
4
8
4
5
5
3
5
3
2
5
3
7
2
3
4
3
5
3
3
3
4
3
3
4
4
5
4
4
3
3
3
4
5
2
3
4
1
1
8
5
3
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Informing the community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 10
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area
importance
62
2021 streets and footpaths importance (index scores)
87
82
83
81
79
80
79
79
78
75
78
84
82
83
85
84
82
79
82
78
79
77
84
81
80
84
84
82
80
82
79
81
78
86
84
84
86
84
83
80
83
78
81
77
81
78
81
86
82
80
75
81
78
77
77
81
80
82
83
82
80
77
80
77
77
77
83
79
81
82
82
80
78
81
n/a
77
77
85
81
85
86
83
81
76
81
n/a
74
78
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
77
86
84
83
83
82
82
82
81
80
q
80
79
q
50-64
North
35-49
Women
65+
Brimbank
Men
South
Metro
18-34
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 25 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area
importance
63
2021 streets and footpaths importance (%)
40
41
44
43
46
40
38
40
41
38
38
46
36
38
42
33
45
53
38
48
41
40
42
42
44
47
43
43
42
45
43
51
49
46
55
41
34
53
12
15
15
12
11
13
13
15
12
17
15
11
13
12
12
13
14
11
9
3
1
2
1
2
1
2
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 25 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area
performance
64
2021 streets and footpaths performance (index scores)
54
61
64
59
57
58
57
58
60
61
56
61
56
65
59
56
58
56
59
61
58
52
66
58
64
60
61
61
62
58
60
59
56
54
59
62
57
55
55
54
57
56
56
54
58
55
63
52
53
54
55
57
55
48
53
53
55
64
55
54
53
51
58
52
54
51
66
61
n/a
62
59
60
58
58
62
59
52
61
52
n/a
58
55
55
53
58
56
55
50
59
58
n/a
60
n/a
55
51
57
n/a
54
50
66
66
65
64
63
63
61
59
q
59
59
55
18-34
65+
Metro
Men
South
Brimbank
Women
State-wide
North
35-49
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 32 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area
performance
65
2021 streets and footpaths performance (%)
22
16
17
20
12
11
10
17
15
15
15
20
18
22
25
18
20
26
15
23
32
31
29
32
31
32
30
36
28
34
35
39
31
33
29
35
35
28
28
34
27
30
28
24
32
28
32
27
29
20
28
26
26
28
27
27
33
15
31
27
11
14
17
16
14
18
17
14
16
20
14
11
14
10
11
11
8
13
12
12
7
9
8
7
10
10
11
7
11
11
7
4
9
6
7
8
2
16
14
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 32 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Traffic management importance
66
2021 traffic management importance (index scores)
78
82
81
77
77
78
73
73
82
75
78
81
79
79
80
80
79
75
73
77
79
78
78
82
79
77
77
78
76
74
79
74
78
80
82
80
82
79
79
76
72
79
76
76
80
83
78
79
78
78
75
72
78
73
76
80
76
79
81
77
76
74
71
75
76
69
79
78
78
73
74
75
n/a
70
77
72
73
78
81
80
81
78
79
n/a
72
79
76
75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
81
p
76
76
75
74
74
74
73
72
72
67
q
65+
Women
50-64
35-49
South
Brimbank
Metro
State-wide
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 10 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Traffic management importance
67
2021 traffic management importance (%)
31
38
39
36
39
38
36
31
38
29
29
29
31
25
38
14
38
36
46
37
42
43
41
40
39
38
43
42
40
41
36
38
42
33
45
29
34
36
27
15
14
18
17
19
19
22
16
25
25
31
26
29
25
38
26
27
14
4
4
3
2
2
3
5
4
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
5
2
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Traffic management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 10 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Traffic management performance
68
2021 traffic management performance (index scores)
60
57
59
58
59
60
60
60
58
59
58
60
65
60
60
61
62
57
58
62
58
58
56
67
61
60
61
61
57
58
59
57
57
61
52
54
55
54
52
50
54
53
56
59
58
59
57
55
57
58
56
53
55
56
59
60
54
57
58
57
56
53
61
57
57
60
59
62
59
60
58
56
54
56
56
n/a
60
58
56
55
55
55
56
53
56
56
n/a
60
59
57
n/a
56
54
52
50
51
n/a
n/a
58
65
64
64
63
63
63
60
60
60
59
q
59
q
65+
18-34
South
Men
Brimbank
Women
50-64
35-49
North
Metro
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 13 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Traffic management performance
69
2021 traffic management performance (%)
15
11
12
15
10
9
10
11
10
9
10
10
11
16
15
14
13
13
16
17
36
32
40
36
29
35
36
35
31
34
37
37
32
39
34
38
39
33
33
37
33
36
26
28
32
32
30
29
35
30
31
33
39
29
36
29
38
34
28
26
9
11
12
12
18
17
13
16
14
17
13
12
10
8
9
9
4
13
15
8
3
5
6
7
8
5
8
5
8
8
5
4
3
4
2
5
3
3
5
4
5
5
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
6
4
4
5
3
4
4
8
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Traffic management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Parking facilities importance
70
2021 parking importance (index scores)
78
79
78
75
75
76
71
71
74
80
75
78
76
77
75
75
74
71
73
71
70
68
77
79
76
75
73
75
71
73
70
74
73
79
78
79
76
77
75
70
73
72
74
69
78
78
76
75
72
73
70
72
68
70
70
75
76
75
75
74
73
70
72
71
71
71
76
75
75
74
70
73
70
n/a
70
71
71
75
77
76
74
74
73
71
n/a
69
72
70
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
80
p
77
p
75
75
75
73
72
72
70
69
66
q
65+
Women
50-64
South
35-49
Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
Men
North
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 15 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Parking facilities importance
71
2021 parking importance (%)
28
35
33
34
32
29
27
25
25
27
26
23
30
20
36
15
33
31
38
42
39
37
37
40
42
45
43
46
39
42
40
42
46
38
42
40
42
45
24
22
23
23
22
21
22
27
25
26
25
27
23
27
21
33
22
23
15
4
3
6
6
4
6
5
3
3
6
6
7
4
5
4
6
6
3
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Parking facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Parking facilities performance
72
2021 parking performance (index scores)
57
54
56
56
55
56
57
54
55
55
56
63
54
55
57
55
55
60
53
56
61
53
63
56
60
59
57
55
62
56
56
58
56
59
53
54
55
53
53
58
55
55
56
52
58
60
55
57
54
54
54
61
56
61
56
62
60
57
59
60
55
58
57
57
62
55
65
60
62
60
60
n/a
61
56
57
58
57
62
59
58
60
63
n/a
62
53
57
64
58
61
53
n/a
56
53
n/a
59
57
56
n/a
50
63
61
59
59
59
58
58
58
58
57
53
18-34
Women
South
Brimbank
35-49
Metro
Men
65+
State-wide
North
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 19 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Parking facilities performance
73
2021 parking performance (%)
10
12
11
14
11
10
10
15
13
9
10
10
9
10
11
9
11
9
6
11
36
30
34
33
31
34
40
33
36
39
35
36
34
36
33
40
38
39
32
33
35
32
31
32
31
35
30
32
32
24
32
32
35
36
35
35
39
32
32
33
11
16
13
12
16
14
11
12
11
18
14
13
12
11
12
10
6
12
16
12
5
8
8
7
8
5
7
6
5
8
6
5
6
5
7
3
2
6
8
6
4
2
4
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
3
4
4
3
3
5
3
3
5
4
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Parking facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Enforcement of local laws importance
74
2021 law enforcement importance (index scores)
76
77
80
76
75
75
73
71
74
70
73
77
81
81
80
80
79
77
73
78
71
78
79
76
75
77
78
77
78
73
77
71
77
77
81
76
79
79
77
73
72
74
71
77
79
80
77
78
76
77
75
71
75
70
78
78
80
79
79
80
77
75
72
75
71
74
82
80
77
77
71
77
74
n/a
77
70
79
77
81
76
78
83
80
78
n/a
81
71
80
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70
n/a
82
p
79
77
77
77
76
73
71
q
70
q
70
q
69
q
65+
Women
50-64
South
35-49
Brimbank
Men
Metro
North
State-wide
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 25 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Enforcement of local laws importance
75
2021 law enforcement importance (%)
34
36
43
37
36
36
35
36
42
25
27
28
36
29
40
21
44
42
39
39
36
35
38
42
39
41
38
39
38
38
32
42
39
39
41
28
36
47
20
20
16
18
16
20
19
22
14
28
26
34
15
23
17
28
21
16
12
4
4
3
4
4
3
1
2
4
6
6
3
5
5
4
8
6
1
1
3
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
2
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Enforcement of local laws performance
76
2021 law enforcement performance (index scores)
57
56
65
59
59
63
59
61
62
61
58
59
65
64
59
60
64
58
55
59
61
62
60
64
64
61
60
64
56
62
54
61
59
60
62
64
61
60
64
61
57
61
61
60
62
62
64
58
59
63
56
59
59
57
62
63
61
66
62
62
66
61
66
62
62
63
60
60
n/a
58
61
66
61
62
58
61
64
63
67
n/a
64
64
65
64
66
57
65
65
58
62
n/a
n/a
57
65
57
55
51
56
n/a
67
67
66
65
65
64
64
64
63
63
62
Women
18-34
Metro
South
Brimbank
State-wide
65+
35-49
50-64
Men
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 34 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Enforcement of local laws performance
77
2021 law enforcement performance (%)
15
14
12
14
11
10
13
14
17
7
12
12
11
15
12
17
13
15
17
16
37
28
33
31
30
35
35
32
35
36
39
40
34
39
39
34
45
37
28
30
26
31
30
25
31
29
25
27
26
25
26
26
29
25
25
27
24
22
28
30
6
8
7
12
11
13
8
14
11
12
7
6
5
7
9
3
4
7
8
9
4
8
7
6
3
4
6
4
4
7
3
2
5
3
4
4
3
6
5
3
12
11
10
13
13
10
13
9
7
12
12
14
16
10
10
15
11
13
15
12
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 34 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Family support services importance
78
2021 family support importance (index scores)
85
88
82
78
79
76
78
80
80
75
75
75
76
84
84
83
79
81
79
80
79
82
74
75
78
79
83
85
81
79
78
75
79
79
81
74
75
76
81
85
82
80
73
78
78
77
79
77
73
73
74
76
79
74
81
77
76
76
76
76
74
73
73
70
75
84
83
83
76
78
78
78
78
78
73
72
73
77
83
85
79
77
78
73
75
71
78
72
n/a
72
72
85
87
82
78
80
81
79
77
79
73
n/a
75
77
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
89
p
88
p
82
p
80
80
79
78
77
77
76
76
74
q
74
Household user
Personal user
Women
65+
South
35-49
Brimbank
50-64
18-34
State-wide
Metro
Men
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Family support services importance
79
2021 family support importance (%)
37
36
41
40
35
34
36
32
38
34
33
31
39
28
45
29
45
36
39
56
57
42
44
39
38
42
38
41
40
41
40
41
41
41
43
41
52
33
38
40
42
36
16
13
15
17
19
20
19
20
16
20
20
18
15
21
11
13
16
19
17
3
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
2
4
2
2
5
5
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
3
3
1
1
4
1
3
1
2
2
2
2
3
1
2
3
3
6
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Family support services performance
80
2021 family support performance (index scores)
69
67
63
66
65
69
61
67
69
66
73
67
62
61
69
65
66
66
62
67
64
69
67
64
67
65
71
61
67
68
66
59
70
68
68
66
70
65
62
69
69
63
64
62
64
61
58
68
67
70
62
59
71
68
63
65
65
65
69
59
69
66
67
67
66
73
69
65
63
64
62
60
68
68
67
74
63
65
75
69
69
66
67
63
68
68
n/a
68
76
66
69
66
69
67
66
65
64
64
65
n/a
67
63
63
64
n/a
66
66
n/a
65
59
67
65
n/a
67
n/a
63
n/a
70
69
69
68
67
67
67
67
67
66
66
66
65
Household user
65+
Men
South
Brimbank
50-64
18-34
35-49
Metro
State-wide
Personal user
Women
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 29 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Family support services performance
81
2021 family support performance (%)
14
13
13
11
9
10
13
15
12
9
11
10
8
16
16
13
9
20
17
15
30
38
26
28
30
33
28
32
29
28
33
32
31
27
25
27
26
26
34
16
20
28
35
33
22
24
21
23
26
23
24
28
29
22
21
21
19
24
22
22
23
25
20
19
4
3
4
6
5
5
6
7
7
3
7
6
5
4
4
4
3
5
2
7
4
4
19
13
2
3
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
3
1
7
10
32
26
27
27
28
28
24
25
18
29
31
37
42
27
32
32
31
30
35
33
4
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Family support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Elderly support services importance
82
2021 elderly support importance (index scores)
86
86
84
83
88
81
81
83
79
79
80
79
78
91
90
86
82
88
83
85
80
82
82
80
80
79
90
90
86
85
84
82
80
87
82
80
79
78
79
86
81
82
81
85
80
79
81
81
75
78
77
77
86
90
85
84
84
80
81
78
80
76
78
75
78
85
92
85
84
85
81
82
80
81
77
79
77
78
82
86
84
83
84
80
81
80
80
77
79
77
n/a
83
86
85
85
84
82
83
81
85
78
79
79
n/a
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
90
p
90*
p
87
p
87
86
84
84
83
83
82
82
q
81
81
q
Household user
Personal user
Women
65+
50-64
Brimbank
South
North
35-49
18-34
State-wide
Men
Metro
2020 2019 2018 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: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
*Caution: small sample size < n=30
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Elderly support services importance
83
2021 elderly support importance (%)
47
42
45
46
40
40
44
40
43
43
41
44
46
38
55
38
49
51
53
64
65
41
44
40
40
42
42
39
41
43
42
42
44
41
45
37
50
36
38
37
29
31
9
8
11
12
16
14
14
13
12
12
14
10
9
12
6
10
9
9
7
6
4
4
1
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
1
2
1
3
1
1
2
1
3
3
1
2
3
1
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 7
*Caution: small sample size < n=30
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Elderly support services performance
84
2021 elderly support performance (index scores)
70
71
61
68
64
61
64
66
67
65
63
63
67
64
68
65
68
64
66
64
63
67
62
64
63
60
63
63
66
68
65
61
64
63
67
65
64
62
61
75
69
59
68
67
61
63
71
67
64
59
59
66
78
78
71
68
64
69
66
68
69
64
57
68
66
71
66
61
69
63
62
63
65
69
64
63
63
64
71
66
65
70
67
64
64
71
n/a
64
62
62
61
71
69
68
69
69
67
67
71
n/a
66
64
64
65
n/a
n/a
65
69
67
n/a
65
70
n/a
n/a
66
64
61
71*
70
69
69
69
68
67
67
66
66
66
66
65
Personal user
Household user
18-34
State-wide
Men
North
Brimbank
65+
Metro
South
35-49
Women
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
*Caution: small sample size < n=30
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Elderly support services performance
85
2021 elderly support performance (%)
12
13
12
10
12
13
11
13
14
10
16
11
10
13
13
12
7
18
12
14
33
27
31
23
28
29
21
32
30
26
34
29
32
28
31
31
28
34
40
18
27
34
39
42
22
25
23
21
22
21
20
27
25
18
20
19
21
23
23
21
21
26
24
18
15
13
4
6
6
9
7
7
8
6
5
6
5
4
1
6
2
7
1
7
5
5
8
12
2
3
4
1
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
4
6
3
29
31
28
30
35
26
28
26
20
36
26
36
35
27
33
25
31
30
30
25
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user*
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 8
*Caution: small sample size < n=30
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Disadvantaged support services importance
86
2021 disadvantaged support importance (index scores)
81
78
77
75
77
74
74
77
78
77
76
81
82
82
76
80
75
74
82
79
75
77
75
81
76
77
77
74
72
77
77
78
73
78
76
75
74
74
71
71
72
71
71
71
75
79
76
73
75
73
73
73
77
72
70
77
80
78
77
76
74
73
75
74
73
71
75
78
76
75
74
n/a
72
77
70
72
71
76
80
78
80
78
n/a
73
78
79
78
76
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
82
82
p
78
78
77
77
77
76
75
75
73
q
50-64
Women
South
65+
Brimbank
Metro
State-wide
18-34
35-49
North
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 8 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Disadvantaged support services importance
87
2021 disadvantaged support importance (%)
35
32
41
33
30
30
34
29
35
34
34
29
37
27
42
28
37
44
35
43
47
37
42
39
44
38
42
43
41
41
45
42
43
43
48
40
39
41
15
13
16
19
26
18
22
22
17
19
18
17
14
21
10
20
13
10
14
3
4
3
3
2
5
4
2
2
3
3
5
2
4
2
2
6
2
4
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
1
1
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
5
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Disadvantaged support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 8 Councils asked group: 4
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Disadvantaged support services performance
88
2021 disadvantaged support performance (index scores)
59
62
60
59
62
54
58
62
64
60
59
62
63
60
61
62
62
63
63
57
62
60
64
60
63
63
65
65
62
61
57
61
61
62
68
61
60
56
57
59
62
62
61
57
57
64
59
61
57
61
65
62
62
61
65
60
63
60
60
67
54
60
63
57
62
60
63
66
62
61
53
64
59
n/a
59
64
59
64
62
61
61
61
61
60
n/a
58
62
57
61
66
n/a
61
60
61
n/a
n/a
56
63
60
67
67
65
65
64
64
64
64
64
63
63
Men
65+
South
Brimbank
35-49
18-34
North
Metro
50-64
State-wide
Women
2020 2019 2018 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: 12 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Disadvantaged support services performance
89
2021 disadvantaged support performance (%)
10
8
10
9
7
7
8
9
9
7
8
7
6
12
11
8
4
14
14
11
28
23
23
25
26
28
23
22
28
25
27
26
31
26
29
28
39
17
21
29
26
23
27
27
25
27
28
30
25
21
22
21
24
27
23
29
25
32
26
21
3
8
7
7
8
7
6
8
10
7
5
4
3
3
4
2
4
8
3
2
3
3
1
2
2
3
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
3
1
1
2
31
35
30
32
33
30
32
31
25
38
36
41
35
30
33
30
29
31
30
35
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Disadvantaged support services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Recreational facilities importance
90
2021 recreational facilities importance (index scores)
75
78
77
78
78
74
74
74
74
72
72
72
71
72
76
76
79
77
74
75
74
74
72
72
72
70
77
77
77
74
77
75
76
75
77
73
73
73
75
76
75
75
75
75
73
73
74
74
72
73
72
71
74
74
78
73
75
75
77
73
70
69
73
73
71
75
75
76
77
75
78
73
75
71
74
72
72
74
77
77
76
75
76
74
74
74
74
72
n/a
72
71
77
76
75
77
76
74
77
75
76
75
n/a
72
72
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
81
78
78
78
77
77
77
76
75
75
74
74
74
50-64
Household user
Women
35-49
Personal user
South
65+
Brimbank
North
Men
Metro
State-wide
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 33 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Recreational facilities importance
91
2021 recreational facilities importance (%)
33
29
25
30
25
27
29
30
27
26
27
36
31
29
37
30
36
42
30
34
36
42
44
49
45
48
46
42
39
49
46
46
34
47
44
40
39
38
43
50
43
43
21
22
22
21
22
21
26
28
21
24
23
25
18
23
18
26
23
13
14
21
19
3
4
3
3
4
4
2
2
2
3
3
3
2
2
3
5
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 33 Councils asked group: 10
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Recreational facilities performance
92
2021 recreational facilities performance (index scores)
70
74
58
67
67
67
64
70
65
66
61
67
71
69
75
59
63
64
63
62
70
63
65
64
64
65
66
74
68
69
69
65
69
69
66
64
68
66
64
70
73
60
65
66
65
66
70
64
62
62
64
67
66
73
61
66
65
60
60
69
63
67
69
62
66
72
74
65
67
68
66
66
70
66
66
66
66
61
73
n/a
65
68
68
66
67
71
66
65
67
66
61
70
n/a
66
66
66
65
64
70
65
65
64
63
62
66
n/a
67
n/a
n/a
n/a
65
70
65
65
n/a
62
63
77
p
75
p
72
72
72
71
71
71
71
70
70
66
66
65+
Metro
18-34
Household user
Personal user
South
Men
State-wide
Brimbank
Women
North
35-49
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 42 Councils asked group: 11
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Recreational facilities performance
93
2021 recreational facilities performance (%)
21
18
14
18
17
15
17
19
19
16
23
27
22
21
20
22
11
25
17
32
18
20
42
38
38
36
37
36
39
40
34
40
43
44
37
44
47
37
58
28
41
35
52
51
22
28
31
32
29
31
32
25
31
27
22
19
23
23
19
25
21
24
23
23
19
19
5
7
10
7
11
10
6
10
9
10
6
3
5
4
4
6
11
11
1
5
4
2
5
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
3
1
3
1
4
3
1
1
8
4
3
5
4
5
3
2
4
5
4
5
10
7
7
9
10
7
5
8
5
5
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 42 Councils asked group: 11
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The appearance of public areas importance
94
2021 public areas importance (index scores)
79
78
80
79
77
76
75
73
74
74
71
81
77
75
79
77
76
76
74
73
75
71
81
80
80
77
78
76
75
74
74
73
73
80
81
81
76
78
78
75
75
74
74
77
75
80
75
77
80
76
76
74
74
71
73
79
80
76
76
77
76
75
73
73
71
72
80
80
75
81
78
79
81
n/a
73
77
76
79
81
79
79
79
78
77
n/a
74
74
75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
n/a
n/a
82
81
p
79
79
78
77
77
76
75
q
74
74
50-64
Women
North
35-49
65+
Brimbank
South
Metro
State-wide
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 31 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The appearance of public areas importance
95
2021 public areas importance (%)
35
33
30
31
35
31
29
36
31
28
29
39
33
27
44
23
43
45
37
42
43
46
45
42
44
46
43
48
47
47
38
45
44
39
50
30
38
43
21
19
20
21
20
22
22
19
18
23
22
21
19
26
15
25
24
15
15
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
3
3
2
2
3
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘The appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 31 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The appearance of public areas performance
96
2021 public areas performance (index scores)
73
72
70
58
62
64
64
66
65
65
69
74
72
69
66
63
63
65
66
68
62
60
73
71
65
61
61
62
62
64
64
64
62
72
71
69
56
58
62
61
65
60
65
60
72
71
66
61
64
60
61
58
62
57
61
73
72
65
60
60
61
62
63
62
63
60
n/a
72
62
60
57
58
59
62
61
57
58
n/a
71
61
58
57
58
59
61
61
60
60
n/a
71
65
65
60
n/a
62
64
n/a
56
61
74
p
73
p
70
70
68
68
67
66
65
63
62
Metro
State-wide
65+
18-34
Women
South
Brimbank
Men
North
35-49
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 40 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The appearance of public areas performance
97
2021 public areas performance (%)
22
22
18
15
15
12
16
17
13
13
27
28
23
21
21
24
21
25
15
26
39
30
38
40
35
38
36
32
35
40
46
48
35
42
44
35
47
28
38
40
22
34
28
29
30
33
32
26
31
31
19
18
20
23
18
26
17
23
29
23
11
8
11
10
14
11
10
18
13
11
5
4
14
10
12
10
12
16
11
5
3
5
3
5
3
4
5
6
7
4
2
1
5
2
4
2
6
5
4
2
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
1
3
3
1
2
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘The appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 40 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Art centres and libraries importance
98
2021 art centres and libraries importance (index scores)
72
73
72
71
70
72
68
68
68
69
64
63
65
75
70
74
69
68
69
70
69
67
67
67
69
65
74
72
74
71
70
73
68
69
67
70
66
64
65
72
71
72
72
69
66
70
67
67
61
63
64
64
77
75
76
71
68
69
70
70
68
70
64
70
66
80
76
77
72
70
73
74
72
69
69
67
71
65
74
71
72
70
71
71
69
67
n/a
66
64
62
66
75
72
73
72
69
75
70
69
n/a
69
67
64
66
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
66
76
p
75
p
75
p
74
74
72
72
71
70
69
68
67
q
67
q
Personal user
Women
Household user
65+
50-64
35-49
South
Brimbank
Metro
North
Men
18-34
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 22 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Art centres and libraries importance
99
2021 art centres and libraries importance (%)
23
20
22
20
18
27
27
20
19
19
21
20
23
20
26
16
28
30
23
28
26
44
43
40
43
39
38
41
40
43
40
43
40
45
37
51
43
42
36
52
48
48
27
27
30
29
35
23
21
30
32
31
27
33
24
35
18
37
20
26
19
22
23
5
6
7
6
5
8
7
7
4
8
6
5
6
7
4
5
9
4
3
1
2
2
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
3
4
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Art centres and libraries performance
100
2021 art centres and libraries performance (index scores)
78
79
79
76
74
75
74
75
75
74
75
73
72
77
78
75
75
74
76
74
75
73
72
70
72
73
80
80
77
73
73
75
74
74
75
74
77
76
75
75
76
79
72
73
75
73
73
72
74
69
71
66
70
70
76
70
69
74
72
68
68
63
67
65
66
70
70
73
68
68
75
73
69
68
70
66
68
63
76
76
79
72
69
n/a
75
72
72
75
73
72
67
72
72
75
69
71
n/a
73
69
69
73
69
69
63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
77
p
76
p
76
75
74
73
73
72
72
71
71
68
q
68
Household user
Personal user
65+
Women
50-64
Metro
State-wide
South
Brimbank
35-49
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 28 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Art centres and libraries performance
101
2021 art centres and libraries performance (%)
22
30
26
29
22
17
19
23
22
22
22
21
23
17
26
16
24
24
26
29
28
41
36
43
37
44
43
40
44
35
42
41
34
43
44
37
44
32
40
46
48
50
23
21
18
22
18
21
25
20
30
20
19
25
23
22
24
27
25
22
15
19
17
4
4
5
3
6
9
7
6
6
3
3
4
4
7
1
5
4
2
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
10
8
8
8
10
8
7
7
6
13
14
16
6
7
12
6
12
12
10
1
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community and cultural activities importance
102
2021 community and cultural activities importance (index scores)
71
73
65
65
66
62
68
65
61
64
62
64
62
67
66
64
65
61
66
63
64
60
66
61
64
63
68
69
67
64
65
64
65
64
61
63
61
61
64
63
64
67
65
66
62
64
63
61
60
61
59
60
65
64
68
65
63
64
66
65
62
66
62
62
64
71
70
69
70
66
63
63
66
62
70
62
63
62
67
69
68
68
65
64
67
66
n/a
67
62
64
62
71
72
68
67
69
67
65
67
n/a
65
62
65
66
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
62
n/a
n/a
75
p
74
p
70
p
69
69
68
66
66
64
64
64
63
60
q
Household user
Personal user
Women
South
35-49
65+
50-64
Brimbank
Metro
18-34
State-wide
Men
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 22 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community and cultural activities importance
103
2021 community and cultural activities importance (%)
18
14
16
18
15
19
17
16
14
15
15
12
19
11
25
15
24
14
17
30
29
40
41
35
34
36
35
39
39
44
37
36
34
43
41
38
38
35
42
45
45
48
32
33
38
34
36
33
36
36
35
36
37
38
30
36
29
36
30
34
29
19
18
8
9
7
10
10
10
7
6
6
9
9
13
6
9
6
10
8
7
6
6
5
1
1
3
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
3
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community and cultural activities performance
104
2021 community and cultural activities performance (index scores)
72
74
71
68
68
66
65
63
66
70
70
68
64
72
73
71
69
69
67
66
66
67
70
66
69
63
73
73
64
69
65
67
69
69
67
70
66
69
64
67
69
69
66
67
64
62
57
67
70
69
69
62
72
72
68
67
70
67
63
66
66
71
67
69
66
73
74
72
67
67
65
63
57
69
71
66
69
62
71
72
69
65
65
66
66
60
72
n/a
68
70
67
71
73
71
68
67
67
67
63
69
n/a
68
69
65
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
68
n/a
79
p
79
p
71
69
68
67
67
67
66
66
66
65
62
q
Household user
Personal user
65+
South
Women
Brimbank
Men
18-34
35-49
Metro
50-64
State-wide
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 28 Councils asked group: 9
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Community and cultural activities performance
105
2021 community and cultural activities performance (%)
17
18
19
17
12
17
15
14
16
13
12
12
19
16
17
16
18
13
18
33
35
34
32
37
34
36
35
35
41
37
38
37
25
36
35
32
39
28
30
34
49
45
27
30
24
28
26
27
29
27
30
28
27
31
26
28
27
36
23
25
22
12
14
7
7
9
6
8
6
8
8
6
7
7
10
6
7
7
6
12
7
3
3
3
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
15
12
9
14
16
12
10
8
10
13
16
22
12
13
17
3
19
24
22
2
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Personal user
Household user
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 9
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Waste management importance
106
2021 waste management importance (index scores)
87
84
86
85
83
84
84
87
83
82
82
86
83
85
83
83
83
83
81
81
81
80
84
84
84
86
83
83
83
83
81
81
83
81
81
85
81
81
80
81
79
76
79
79
87
84
82
83
83
83
82
82
82
80
79
83
82
84
83
82
82
81
82
80
79
81
79
83
82
81
79
79
n/a
79
75
79
80
84
84
83
85
80
81
n/a
83
77
79
78
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
78
n/a
87
86
86
85
85
85
85
85
83
82
q
82
q
Women
65+
50-64
35-49
South
Brimbank
Metro
North
18-34
State-wide
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 32 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Waste management importance
107
2021 waste management importance (%)
50
47
47
47
39
47
44
36
41
44
49
50
51
43
58
49
49
49
53
38
42
39
39
45
40
40
46
44
42
40
39
37
44
32
33
40
44
40
11
9
12
13
15
11
13
16
15
12
10
10
11
13
9
18
9
5
6
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 10
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Waste management performance
108
2021 waste management performance (index scores)
68
68
70
70
67
66
62
65
66
64
66
69
70
73
66
68
69
67
68
71
67
71
72
74
75
69
71
71
74
70
72
69
71
75
71
75
70
70
70
70
71
70
69
67
75
66
76
71
67
68
65
70
69
70
65
74
74
77
71
72
71
71
72
69
68
69
79
74
n/a
73
74
73
69
73
71
72
73
81
73
n/a
70
73
73
72
71
72
72
72
76
72
n/a
68
n/a
72
69
72
n/a
71
74
74
73
72
p
70
69
69
69
69
68
65
65
65+
Men
Metro
50-64
South
Brimbank
35-49
State-wide
North
Women
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 66 Councils asked group: 15
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Waste management performance
109
2021 waste management performance (%)
28
21
24
27
24
22
26
25
26
22
23
27
28
27
30
27
25
29
23
35
33
40
39
43
44
44
41
49
46
53
42
43
31
34
36
29
27
33
42
34
26
24
25
21
22
20
21
18
19
16
20
19
25
27
25
26
31
24
24
22
6
8
6
6
8
10
6
5
5
6
8
6
10
5
5
8
8
6
7
4
4
5
4
3
2
3
3
2
2
2
4
2
4
4
1
7
6
6
1
2
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Waste management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Business and community development and tourism
importance
110
2021 business/development/tourism importance (index scores)
67
63
65
62
71
63
63
58
57
63
66
65
64
64
62
60
65
61
57
56
58
59
66
63
61
62
62
63
61
59
60
59
60
67
68
63
66
62
66
63
60
63
59
59
67
66
64
65
63
65
64
60
64
62
62
67
66
67
67
68
64
64
59
62
62
61
67
66
67
67
64
63
64
n/a
65
63
61
67
63
65
64
63
66
63
n/a
62
64
62
66
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70
p
67
67
67
65
65
64
62
62
62
58
q
State-wide
Women
65+
South
50-64
35-49
Brimbank
Metro
18-34
Men
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 22 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Business and community development and tourism
importance
111
2021 business/development/tourism importance (%)
17
16
15
16
15
18
21
18
15
24
13
12
19
12
22
12
18
20
21
37
34
31
32
39
35
28
35
33
39
35
36
36
39
35
39
35
38
36
31
32
36
35
30
32
35
33
41
29
36
27
34
33
29
31
34
27
30
11
13
12
13
12
11
12
11
8
6
11
20
7
12
9
16
9
9
6
2
2
4
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
4
1
3
1
1
4
3
3
3
1
2
1
3
3
2
3
1
2
2
3
1
4
1
2
2
5
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Business and community development and tourism’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Business and community development and tourism
performance
112
2021 business/development/tourism performance (index scores)
59
56
53
59
54
55
56
59
59
53
54
60
59
56
61
60
57
55
60
57
57
54
60
58
60
60
58
58
58
60
57
56
59
68
60
55
61
59
58
57
60
59
55
54
62
56
57
60
61
57
54
62
60
54
60
62
59
59
61
59
59
59
62
58
59
59
61
54
55
62
58
55
53
n/a
54
54
57
56
56
57
62
55
57
60
n/a
58
58
59
59
n/a
60
62
59
57
55
n/a
49
57
n/a
64
61
61
61
61
61
60
60
59
58
58
65+
South
18-34
State-wide
Women
Brimbank
Men
Metro
50-64
35-49
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 28 Councils asked group: 7
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Business and community development and tourism
performance
113
2021 business/development/tourism performance (%)
6
5
10
9
6
7
8
5
9
4
11
7
4
7
6
6
3
6
5
9
33
25
22
23
28
25
26
27
26
33
33
31
32
33
37
30
39
31
28
30
31
34
30
34
31
35
35
34
33
33
32
32
30
32
30
32
34
33
30
26
7
9
14
12
11
12
10
13
15
12
10
8
6
7
7
7
3
11
11
6
2
4
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
3
3
2
4
1
3
1
3
3
1
21
23
22
20
22
20
19
17
15
16
12
21
23
20
17
24
17
16
26
28
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Business and community development and tourism’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 7
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council’s general town planning policy importance
114
2021 town planning importance (index scores)
73
74
79
72
75
73
71
72
76
70
67
70
71
74
73
74
72
69
70
70
68
63
74
73
75
73
73
73
70
71
74
70
67
75
70
74
72
76
73
72
71
70
72
64
76
75
75
73
71
72
73
72
69
68
68
73
71
72
72
74
72
70
71
71
70
66
74
68
75
72
67
n/a
67
68
68
67
60
75
74
75
73
74
n/a
72
71
71
69
66
n/a
n/a
n/a
72
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
78
p
75
75
74
74
74
72
72
71
68
q
64
q
65+
Women
50-64
State-wide
35-49
Metro
South
Brimbank
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 14 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council’s general town planning policy importance
115
2021 town planning importance (%)
24
26
19
23
22
28
21
20
21
29
29
24
23
20
28
14
26
32
30
38
41
43
41
40
34
42
39
40
40
39
34
40
35
41
29
44
36
45
26
22
26
25
28
26
22
27
29
23
24
29
25
31
22
43
21
18
14
4
6
3
6
3
5
5
7
3
3
3
2
5
6
2
6
4
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
4
1
7
5
7
5
6
5
8
5
7
4
4
9
7
8
7
8
5
8
8
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Council’s general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 14 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council’s general town planning policy performance
116
2021 town planning performance (index scores)
61
63
60
63
61
60
62
55
56
54
58
61
59
60
59
59
61
59
56
59
55
53
65
60
57
61
60
58
64
53
61
54
53
55
60
57
64
58
60
58
53
54
53
56
59
56
58
59
56
51
55
54
57
52
56
54
60
59
65
59
63
59
55
58
54
57
62
58
60
62
59
57
59
n/a
61
55
56
61
61
59
54
59
61
60
n/a
57
55
57
58
n/a
54
56
55
54
56
n/a
n/a
54
51
64
p
62
62
62
60
59
59
56
q
55
q
55
q
53
q
18-34
South
Women
65+
Brimbank
35-49
Men
Metro
North
State-wide
50-64
2020 2019 2018 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: 21 Councils asked group: 8
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Council’s general town planning policy performance
117
2021 town planning performance (%)
9
11
6
9
10
6
8
8
9
4
6
7
6
10
10
7
6
11
6
11
27
25
31
31
23
26
29
27
26
29
28
27
20
29
21
34
36
24
20
23
31
30
31
31
30
29
28
34
33
30
30
30
35
29
31
30
36
28
27
28
6
8
8
7
11
13
9
6
10
12
12
11
8
5
7
5
2
7
16
5
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
4
2
4
5
5
5
3
4
3
1
6
5
4
24
24
21
19
22
23
22
22
20
21
18
20
26
23
26
21
19
24
26
30
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Council’s general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning and building permits importance
118
2021 planning and building permits importance (index scores)
74
78
73
74
71
72
71
76
75
71
65
77
74
72
74
71
69
69
71
70
67
62
75
77
69
74
71
71
70
72
74
73
65
75
76
71
76
72
72
72
74
71
73
66
76
77
76
74
71
73
73
76
73
70
68
74
74
71
74
71
71
72
70
70
72
70
75
73
74
n/a
71
72
73
70
71
70
70
74
74
71
n/a
71
70
70
74
71
70
63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
82
p
76
75
75
p
73
72
72
72
72
70
64
q
65+
50-64
Women
Metro
State-wide
Brimbank
South
35-49
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 23 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning and building permits importance
119
2021 planning and building permits importance (%)
29
27
21
24
25
29
24
23
22
28
33
29
28
26
33
18
29
36
41
35
39
44
41
40
40
41
44
42
39
37
36
35
35
36
30
37
35
40
25
23
22
25
27
22
28
25
25
24
23
24
26
27
23
42
25
14
9
5
6
8
6
5
6
4
4
6
4
4
6
4
5
4
6
6
4
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
1
2
1
3
1
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
4
4
3
2
2
5
4
4
1
1
7
8
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Planning and building permits’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning and building permits performance
120
2021 planning and building permits performance (index scores)
59
58
60
60
59
61
60
62
54
63
51
61
60
58
58
58
56
55
58
53
55
52
67
60
63
62
63
65
60
61
51
54
52
58
60
62
60
61
59
64
56
49
57
51
65
62
58
59
56
57
55
62
50
57
50
58
61
57
59
60
57
62
62
53
59
54
65
60
61
60
58
60
58
58
n/a
54
53
62
61
63
62
64
62
59
61
n/a
60
55
64
56
n/a
59
56
61
58
n/a
n/a
51
54
63
60
60
59
58
58
58
56
54
q
53
51
q
18-34
Women
South
Brimbank
35-49
Men
65+
North
Metro
50-64
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 29 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning and building permits performance
121
2021 planning and building permits performance (%)
8
10
7
6
8
8
8
7
10
7
6
6
11
6
9
6
5
10
8
9
29
25
26
38
28
31
24
28
28
24
23
23
26
30
27
31
41
25
22
20
22
28
27
22
28
25
31
29
31
27
27
25
18
24
22
22
23
24
23
20
10
6
10
7
7
10
8
8
6
6
13
12
12
9
11
8
8
9
17
9
4
5
3
3
4
4
2
3
2
4
8
6
9
2
5
3
1
6
7
5
27
26
27
24
25
22
27
25
23
32
23
27
25
28
25
28
21
26
24
37
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
2012 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Planning and building permits’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 6
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Environmental sustainability importance
122
2021 environmental sustainability importance (index scores)
82
77
76
73
77
79
82
76
76
74
72
81
79
80
76
78
78
77
75
76
74
75
80
77
79
76
77
76
75
74
77
73
74
75
73
71
73
72
72
74
73
71
72
70
81
77
79
74
77
77
74
74
76
73
72
80
76
76
72
76
74
79
74
75
73
71
77
73
73
73
73
73
75
n/a
72
73
69
78
75
75
76
76
78
76
n/a
78
72
75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
71
n/a
84
p
79
79
79
78
78
77
77
76
74
q
73
q
Women
South
18-34
65+
Brimbank
35-49
50-64
Metro
North
State-wide
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 26 Councils asked group: 10
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Environmental sustainability importance
123
2021 environmental sustainability importance (%)
39
37
40
37
26
36
32
28
30
35
37
35
41
30
49
41
44
34
37
38
40
37
38
43
40
43
40
47
37
38
38
39
40
37
36
33
45
44
16
17
18
21
25
18
20
26
19
21
18
21
15
20
12
22
15
15
12
3
4
3
2
4
4
3
3
3
5
4
2
3
5
1
2
4
3
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
3
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
3
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 10
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Environmental sustainability performance
124
2021 environmental sustainability performance (index scores)
66
61
62
63
62
61
63
60
60
54
59
63
64
63
63
64
63
57
62
61
65
63
61
66
64
66
64
63
61
63
60
63
62
68
62
62
62
64
62
59
64
62
60
61
64
57
56
56
64
57
62
63
57
52
59
63
63
62
64
65
61
61
64
60
59
61
66
65
62
61
n/a
62
62
64
60
62
63
63
62
65
62
n/a
64
66
64
65
64
62
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
64
n/a
n/a
n/a
67
66
65
65
64
63
63
62
61
60
58
q
65+
Men
South
35-49
Metro
Brimbank
50-64
State-wide
Women
18-34
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 34 Councils asked group: 11
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Environmental sustainability performance
125
2021 environmental sustainability performance (%)
13
10
14
11
9
7
12
11
12
11
13
9
15
16
11
7
18
13
18
34
32
29
35
33
31
32
34
36
36
35
28
36
35
33
37
30
31
34
32
37
34
28
31
30
31
37
32
31
30
34
32
32
32
40
27
30
27
9
5
10
9
9
13
9
8
8
9
7
12
7
7
10
9
11
8
6
2
5
1
2
2
4
4
1
1
3
2
3
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
10
11
12
16
17
15
12
9
12
11
13
14
9
9
12
5
12
16
14
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 34 Councils asked group: 11
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Emergency and disaster management importance
126
2021 emergency and disaster management importance (index scores)
84
80
86
82
80
82
82
78
83
83
80
85
81
79
83
81
82
83
79
80
83
79
85
84
78
81
81
82
86
80
85
81
80
86
82
81
82
80
83
82
77
83
86
79
84
79
81
79
80
79
79
76
79
77
74
87
80
82
79
80
81
80
77
82
81
75
84
82
78
81
80
80
83
n/a
78
76
76
85
80
81
82
80
83
83
n/a
84
87
81
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
80
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
86
p
85
82
82
81
81
80
79
77
76
75
q
Women
65+
50-64
South
State-wide
Brimbank
18-34
Metro
North
35-49
Men
2020 2019 2018 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: 19 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Emergency and disaster management importance
127
2021 emergency and disaster management importance (%)
48
50
48
51
50
41
49
46
49
47
44
41
50
38
59
47
47
46
52
32
31
34
30
34
39
28
32
35
34
34
33
33
36
29
32
27
36
36
12
11
14
14
11
14
15
16
12
13
15
17
10
15
8
12
13
13
9
5
5
2
2
2
4
5
3
2
3
4
6
5
9
2
9
7
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
5
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Emergency and disaster management’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 4
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Emergency and disaster management performance
128
2021 emergency and disaster management performance (index scores)
64
68
62
64
68
64
66
64
63
63
65
68
69
71
67
72
67
70
67
65
61
67
72
67
73
73
71
71
69
69
75
65
69
66
70
62
66
70
65
68
64
67
66
65
64
70
63
62
69
64
68
65
60
65
62
64
68
65
68
70
66
69
63
66
65
68
68
74
72
69
71
68
n/a
67
63
59
68
64
69
64
65
70
65
n/a
66
68
63
67
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
70
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
73
72
71
71
71
70
70
68
68
65
q
South
65+
18-34
Men
State-wide
Brimbank
Metro
Women
35-49
50-64
North
2020 2019 2018 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: 25 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Emergency and disaster management performance
129
2021 emergency and disaster management performance (%)
16
11
16
18
12
9
13
15
12
19
12
7
18
16
16
13
17
17
17
37
27
27
33
30
31
32
30
33
39
35
41
37
39
36
47
33
30
33
21
26
23
18
23
21
19
21
22
20
19
22
21
20
22
19
26
16
21
2
4
5
4
4
6
5
4
7
4
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
8
1
1
3
2
1
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
4
1
1
4
2
1
23
28
27
26
28
30
28
28
23
16
29
24
22
23
22
19
19
28
28
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Emergency and disaster management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning for population growth in the area importance
130
2021 population growth importance (index scores)
76
76
80
76
76
77
76
75
77
75
73
77
76
76
77
76
79
75
77
76
75
72
75
79
82
77
78
78
76
78
81
78
78
78
81
80
76
78
80
78
75
80
76
76
78
79
78
76
74
76
74
75
74
69
68
77
77
80
75
76
80
76
74
76
75
70
75
75
76
75
72
77
72
n/a
72
70
65
75
78
79
75
77
83
75
n/a
79
75
71
n/a
n/a
n/a
75
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
79
78
77
76
75
75
75
75
75
73
72
65+
Women
50-64
State-wide
Brimbank
35-49
South
Metro
North
Men
18-34
2020 2019 2018 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: 15 Councils asked group: 4
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning for population growth in the area importance
131
2021 population growth importance (%)
37
37
37
40
40
37
35
29
36
37
36
41
35
33
41
33
40
37
39
33
36
34
37
37
30
39
37
37
36
35
25
35
33
33
28
31
38
39
22
17
20
17
18
22
19
25
19
19
20
25
21
26
18
31
21
18
13
6
7
6
3
3
7
4
5
4
4
5
6
6
6
5
6
7
5
4
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
2
3
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
4
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
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: 15 Councils asked group: 4
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning for population growth in the area performance
132
2021 population growth performance (index scores)
55
50
57
59
55
54
59
56
56
52
51
53
55
54
54
54
53
50
53
55
52
52
54
55
53
53
53
53
53
50
52
50
52
54
53
54
50
52
50
59
47
49
51
52
54
58
53
52
55
57
57
53
57
51
51
57
57
57
58
57
57
61
53
57
54
54
58
59
54
54
56
58
59
52
54
n/a
54
58
58
59
59
58
56
58
57
58
n/a
54
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
52
62
61
61
60
60
58
58
58
54
q
53
q
53
q
South
18-34
Men
35-49
Brimbank
Women
65+
50-64
North
Metro
State-wide
2020 2019 2018 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: 18 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Planning for population growth in the area performance
133
2021 population growth performance (%)
11
8
7
4
7
7
11
9
9
7
6
9
11
12
10
6
19
10
10
26
23
24
26
22
28
23
24
30
26
23
18
30
28
23
31
22
26
23
28
35
32
32
28
31
29
29
25
30
33
29
27
22
34
36
27
18
24
12
11
14
15
18
14
11
12
15
16
15
13
12
12
13
8
13
16
14
3
5
6
5
6
5
6
5
3
7
5
5
2
4
2
6
4
3
20
17
17
18
20
15
20
20
17
15
19
26
18
23
18
18
14
27
26
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
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: 18 Councils asked group: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
COVID-19 response importance
134
2021 COVID-19 response importance (index scores)
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
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
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
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
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
84
p
83
p
79
78
77
77
74
73
72
q
71
q
71
q
Women
65+
South
Brimbank
18-34
50-64
35-49
North
Men
State-wide
Metro
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘COVID-19 response’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
COVID-19 response importance
135
2021 COVID-19 response importance (%)
43
33
31
33
45
35
50
38
46
43
45
33
32
34
37
32
30
37
37
24
30
40
14
20
20
13
15
19
9
22
13
14
6
5
9
9
11
2
9
1
4
9
7
1
3
4
4
3
3
4
2
7
3
3
2
3
3
3
2
3
1
1
4
5
2021 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘COVID-19 response’ be as a responsibility for Council?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
COVID-19 response performance
136
2021 COVID-19 response performance (index scores)
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
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
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
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
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
81
p
79
77
77
76
76
74
73
q
73
q
72
70
q
65+
South
18-34
Women
Brimbank
Men
35-49
State-wide
Metro
50-64
North
2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘COVID-19 response’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 5
Note: Please see Appendix A for explanation of significant differences.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
COVID-19 response performance
137
2021 COVID-19 response performance (%)
34
27
26
25
37
29
38
30
36
30
38
36
39
36
36
35
42
29
45
25
33
35
17
18
20
22
15
17
18
16
22
18
14
4
4
4
9
2
3
4
2
9
4
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
1
5
9
9
11
7
9
8
9
6
9
9
12
2021 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
Very good
Good
Average
Poor
Very poor
Can't say
Q2. How has Council performed on ‘COVID-19 response’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Detailed
demographics
138
Gender and age profile
139
2021 gender
2021 age
Men
51%
Women
49%
Brimbank
8%
27%
25%
15%
25%
Brimbank
18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+
Men
49%
Women
51%
Metro
Men
49%
Women
51%
State-wide
8%
27%
25%
14%
25%
Metro
18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+
6%
19%
23%
18%
34%
State-wide
18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+
S3. [Record gender] / S4. To which of the following age groups do you belong?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 66 Councils asked group: 15
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.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Household structure
2021 household structure (%)
16
12
3
3
23
18
20
3
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
S6. Which of the following BEST describes your household?
140
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 8
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Years lived in area
141
2021 years lived in area (%)
15
10
14
8
9
11
9
10
13
11
13
13
17
11
17
14
10
7
75
76
73
75
79
72
77
79
80
1
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
2015 Brimbank
2014 Brimbank
2013 Brimbank
0-5 years 5-10 years 10+ years Can't say
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: 5
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Years lived in area
2021 years lived in area (%)
15
10
14
8
9
11
14
22
8
16
17
12
28
16
5
1
11
13
13
17
11
17
16
16
4
13
12
9
13
20
5
2
18
17
21
24
19
24
22
20
23
16
16
20
17
31
17
6
21
19
20
22
24
18
19
19
31
18
21
21
36
15
20
9
36
40
32
29
36
30
30
24
35
37
34
37
6
18
53
83
2021 Brimbank
2020 Brimbank
2019 Brimbank
2018 Brimbank
2017 Brimbank
2016 Brimbank
State-wide
Metro
North
South
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
142
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: 5
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 five years of data only.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Languages spoken at home
143
2021 languages spoken at home (%)
Languages other
than English
52%
English only
48%
9
5
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
<1
<1
24
VIETNAMESE
ITALIAN
CHINESE
GREEK
HINDI
SPANISH
ARABIC
JAPANESE
CROATIAN
FRENCH
GERMAN
HUNGARIAN
DUTCH
RUSSIAN
OTHER
Q11. What languages, other than English, are spoken regularly in your home?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 8 Councils asked group: 6
Note: Respondents could name multiple languages so responses may add to more than 100%
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
56
47
41
19
17
12
11
48
37
36
16
12
7
8
Recreational facilities
Art centres & libraries
Informing the community
Community & cultural
Consultation & engagement
Elderly support services
Family support services
Total household use
Personal use
Personal and household use and experience of council
services
2021 personal and household use and 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?
144
Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 11 Councils asked group: 3
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Appendix A:
Index scores,
margins of error
and significant
differences
145
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.
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.
Appendix A:
Index Scores
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
146
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
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Demographic
Actual
survey
sample
size
Weighted
base
Maximum
margin of error
at 95%
confidence
interval
Brimbank City
Council
401
400
+/-4.9
Men
172
202
+/-7.5
Women
229
198
+/-6.5
North
127
121
+/-8.7
South
268
270
+/-6.0
18-34 years
62
139
+/-12.5
35-49 years
78
99
+/-11.2
50-64 years
96
60
+/-10.1
65+ years
165
101
+/-7.6
The sample size for the 2021 State-wide Local
Government Community Satisfaction Survey for
Brimbank City Council was n=401. 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 n=401 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 163,800 people aged 18
years or over for Brimbank City Council, according to
ABS estimates.
Appendix A:
Margins of error
147
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – 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
green (
) 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 green and red indicate
significantly higher or lower results than in 2020.
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 2020.
• The result among 18-34 year olds in the council is
significantly lower than the result achieved among
this group in 2020.
Appendix A:
Significant difference reporting notation
2021 overall performance (index scores)
(example extract only)
148
58
54
q
57
58
60
66
67
p
65+
50-64
35-49
Metro
Brimbank
18-34
State-wide
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Appendix A:
Index score significant difference calculation
149
The test applied to the Indexes was an Independent
Mean Test, as follows:
Z Score = ($1 - $2) / Sqrt (($5
^2 / $3) + ($6^2 / $4))
Where:
• $1 = Index Score 1
• $2 = Index Score 2
• $3 = unweighted sample count 1
• $4 = unweighted sample count 2
• $5 = standard deviation 1
• $6 = standard deviation 2
All figures can be sourced from the detailed cross
tabulations.
The test was applied at the 95% confidence interval, so
if the Z Score was greater than +/- 1.954 the scores are
significantly different.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Appendix B:
Further project
information
150
Further information about the report and explanations
about the State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey can be found in this section
including:
• Background and objectives
• Analysis and reporting
• Glossary of terms
Detailed survey tabulations
Detailed survey tabulations are available in supplied
Excel file.
Contacts
For further queries about the conduct and reporting of
the 2021 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on
(03) 8685 8555
or via email:
admin@jwsresearch.com
Appendix B:
Further information
151
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
The 2021 results are compared with previous years, as
detailed below:
• 2020, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 30
th
January – 22
nd
March.
• 2019, n=402 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 30
th
March.
• 2018, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period
of 1
st
February – 30
th
March.
• 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.
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 60% mobile phone numbers to
cater to the diversity of residents within Brimbank City
Council, particularly younger people.
A total of n=401 completed interviews were achieved in
Brimbank City Council. Survey fieldwork was
conducted in the period of 2
nd
February – 20
th
March,
2021.
Appendix B:
Survey methodology and sampling
152
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
All participating councils are listed in the State-wide
report published on the DELWP website. In 2021, 66 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 2012-2021 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, Hobsons Bay, Kingston, Knox,
Manningham, Maroondah, Melbourne, Moreland,
Port Phillip, Stonnington and Whitehorse.
Wherever appropriate, results for Brimbank City
Council for this 2021 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.
Appendix B:
Analysis and reporting
153
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – 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
2012-2021 have been made throughout this report as
appropriate.
Appendix B:
2012 survey revision
154
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Core, optional and tailored questions
Over and above necessary geographic and
demographic questions required to ensure sample
representativeness, a base set of questions for the
2021 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey was designated as ‘Core’ and
therefore compulsory inclusions for all participating
Councils.
These core questions comprised:
• Overall performance last 12 months (Overall
performance)
• Value for money in services and infrastructure (Value
for money)
• Contact in last 12 months (Contact)
• Rating of contact (Customer service)
• Overall council direction last 12 months (Council
direction)
• Community consultation and engagement
(Consultation)
• Decisions made in the interest of the community
(Making community decisions)
• Condition of sealed local roads (Sealed local roads)
• Waste management
Reporting of results for these core questions can
always be compared against other participating
councils in the council group and against all
participating councils state-wide. Alternatively, some
questions in the 2021 State-wide Local Government
Community Satisfaction Survey were optional. Councils
also had the ability to ask tailored questions specific
only to their council.
Appendix B:
Core, optional and tailored questions
155
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Appendix B:
Analysis and reporting
156
Reporting
Every council that participated in the 2021 State-wide
Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey
receives a customised report. In addition, the state
government is supplied with this State-wide summary
report of the aggregate results of ‘Core’ and ‘Optional’
questions asked across all council areas surveyed,
which is available at:
https://www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au/our
programs/council-community-satisfaction-survey
Tailored questions commissioned by individual councils
are reported only to the commissioning council and not
otherwise shared unless by express written approval of
the commissioning council.
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
Core questions
: Compulsory inclusion questions for all
councils participating in the CSS.
CSS
: 2021 Victorian Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey.
Council group
: One of five classified groups,
comprising: metropolitan, interface, regional centres,
large rural and small rural.
Council group average
: The average result for all
participating councils in the council group.
Highest / lowest
: The result described is the highest or
lowest result across a particular demographic sub
group e.g. men, for the specific question being
reported. Reference to the result for a demographic
sub-group being the highest or lowest does not imply
that it is significantly higher or lower, unless this is
specifically mentioned.
Index score
: A score calculated and represented as a
score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale). This score is
sometimes reported as a figure in brackets next to the
category being described, e.g. men 50+ (60).
Optional questions
: Questions which councils had an
option to include or not.
Percentages
: Also referred to as ‘detailed results’,
meaning the proportion of responses, expressed as a
percentage.
Sample
: The number of completed interviews, e.g. for
a council or within a demographic sub-group.
Significantly higher / lower
: The result described is
significantly higher or lower than the comparison result
based on a statistical significance test at the 95%
confidence limit. If the result referenced is statistically
higher or lower then this will be specifically mentioned,
however not all significantly higher or lower results are
referenced in summary reporting.
State-wide average
: The average result for all
participating councils in the State.
Tailored questions
: Individual questions tailored by
and only reported to the commissioning council.
Weighting
: Weighting factors are applied to the sample
for each council based on available age and gender
proportions from ABS census information to ensure
reported results are proportionate to the actual
population of the council, rather than the achieved
survey sample.
Appendix B:
Glossary of terms
157
J00967 Community Satisfaction Survey 2021 – Brimbank City Council
THERE ARE
OVER
6 MILLION
PEOPLE IN
VICTORIA...
FIND OUT
WHAT THEY'RE
THINKING.
Contact us
03 8685 8555
John Scales
Founder
jscales@jwsresearch.com
Katrina Cox
Director of Client Services
kcox@jwsresearch.com
Follow us
@JWSResearch
Mark Zuker
Managing Director
mzuker@jwsresearch.com
