Background and objectives - City of Whitehorse · 2019-06-07 · J00643 Community Satisfaction...

2

J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 - Whitehorse City Council

➢ Background and objectives

➢ Survey methodology and sampling

➢ Further information

➢ Key findings & recommendations

➢ Summary of findings

➢ Detailed findings

• Key core measure: Overall performance

• Key core measure: Customer service

• Key core measure: Council direction indicators

• Communications

• Individual service areas

• Detailed demographics

➢ Appendix A: Detailed survey tabulations

➢ Appendix B: Further project information

3


69 65 59

Results shown are index scores out of 100.

Council Metropolitan State-wide

77

77

76

Recreational facilities

Waste management

Art centres and libraries

7750

7958

7157

-27 -21 -13Planning and building permits

Decisions made in the interest of the community

PerformanceImportance Net differential

Community consultation and engagement

4


Welcome to the report of results and recommendations

for the 2018 State-wide Local Government Community

Satisfaction Survey for Whitehorse City Council.

Each year Local Government Victoria (LGV)

coordinates and auspices this State-wide Local

Government Community Satisfaction Survey throughout

Victorian local government areas. This coordinated

approach allows for far more cost effective surveying

than would be possible if councils commissioned

surveys individually.

Participation in the State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey is optional. Participating

councils have various choices as to the content of the

questionnaire and the sample size to be surveyed,

depending on their individual strategic, financial and

other considerations.

The main objectives of the survey are to assess the

performance of Whitehorse City Council across a range

of measures and to seek insight into ways to provide

improved or more effective service delivery. The survey

also provides councils with a means to fulfil some of

their statutory reporting requirements as well as acting

as a feedback mechanism to LGV.

5


This survey was conducted by Computer Assisted

Telephone Interviewing (CATI) as a representative

random probability survey of residents aged 18+ years

in Whitehorse City Council.

Survey sample matched to the demographic profile of

Whitehorse City Council as determined by the most

recent ABS population estimates was purchased from

an accredited supplier of publicly available phone

records, including up to 40% mobile phone numbers to

cater to the diversity of residents within Whitehorse

City Council, particularly younger people.

A total of n=400 completed interviews were achieved in

Whitehorse City Council. Survey fieldwork was

conducted in the period of 1st February – 30th March,

2018.

The 2018 results are compared with previous years, as

detailed below:

• 2017, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period

of 1st February – 30th March.




of 31st January – 11th March.



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

Whitehorse City Council area.

Any variation of +/-1% between individual results and

net scores in this report or the detailed survey

tabulations is due to rounding. In reporting, ‘—’

denotes not mentioned and ‘0%’ denotes mentioned by

less than 1% of respondents. ‘Net’ scores refer to two

or more response categories being combined into one

category for simplicity of reporting.

6


Within tables and index score charts throughout this

report, statistically significant differences at the 95%

confidence level are represented by upward directing

blue and downward directing red arrows. Significance

when noted indicates a significantly higher or lower

result for the analysis group in comparison to the ‘Total’

result for the council for that survey question for that

year. Therefore in the example below:

• The state-wide result is significantly higher than the

overall result for the council.

• The result among 50-64 year olds is significantly

lower than for the overall result for the council.

Further, results shown in blue and red indicate

significantly higher or lower results than in 2017.

Therefore in the example below:

• The result among 35-49 year olds in the council is

significantly higher than the result achieved among

this group in 2017.

• The result among 18-34 year olds in the council is

significantly lower than the result achieved among

this group in 2017.

54

57

58

60

67

66

50-64

35-49

Metro

Whitehorse

18-34

State-wide

Overall Performance – Index Scores (example extract only)

Note: Details on the calculations used to determine statistically significant differences may be found in Appendix B.

7


Further information about the report and explanations

about the State-wide Local Government Community

Satisfaction Survey can be found in Appendix B,

including:

➢ Background and objectives

➢ Margins of error

➢ Analysis and reporting

➢ Glossary of terms

Contacts

For further queries about the conduct and reporting of

the 2018 State-wide Local Government Community

Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on

(03) 8685 8555.

9


The overall performance index score of 69 for Whitehorse

City Council represents a two-point (not significant) increase

from the 2017 result. Overall performance ratings have been

largely stable over the past five years, dipping temporarily in

2014 (index score of 64) before increasing again.

➢ Whitehorse 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 the Metropolitan group (index scores of

59 and 65 respectively).

➢ Residents of postal codes 3132/3131/3133 (index

score of 73, six points higher than 2017) grew

significantly more favourable in the past year in their

view of Council’s overall performance. They also rate

Council significantly higher than the average for overall

performance.

➢ Overall performance ratings are otherwise largely

consistent across demographic and demographic

sub-groups, with no other significant differences

evident compared to Council’s average rating.

Positively, residents are much more likely to rate Whitehorse

City Council’s overall performance as ‘very good’ (15%) or

‘good’ (54%) than ‘poor’ (6%) or ‘very poor’ (1%). A further

23% sit mid-scale providing an ‘average’ rating.

69 65 59

Results shown are index scores out of 100.

Council Metropolitan State-wide

10


Review of the core performance measures (as shown

on page 19) shows that Whitehorse City Council’s

performance was relatively stable compared to

Council’s own results in 2017. Performance index

scores for core measures have been largely consistent

over the course of the past five years. Consultation

and engagement (index score of 57) is the only core

measure whose current rating is currently significantly

lower than a previously achieved result (index score of

63 in 2014).

➢ The results are in line with Metropolitan group

averages on most measures. The exception is

overall council direction (index score of 51)

where Whitehorse City Council’s performance

index is significantly lower than the Metropolitan

group average (three points lower).

➢ In addition to overall performance, Council

significantly exceeds State-wide averages for

councils on the measures of community

decisions (index score of 58, four points higher)

and sealed local roads (70, 17 points higher). It

is in line with State-wide averages for councils on

all other core measures.

➢ Performance on sealed local roads (index score

of 70) declined just slightly, by three index points,

in the past year. Most groups rated Council

similarly in this area compared to 2017 results

with the exception of women (index score of 67,

six points lower than 2017), residents aged 35 to

49 years (67, six points lower), and residents of

postal codes 3130/3151 (66, five points lower).

Customer service (index score of 73) is a top

performing area for Whitehorse City Council and is the

highest-rated core performance measure. In the area

of customer service, Whitehorse City Council’s rating is

in line with the State-wide and Metropolitan group

averages for councils (index score of 70 and 72

respectively).

11


Three in five (60%) Whitehorse City Council

residents have had recent contact with Council.

Those aged 18 to 34 years are least likely to have

contacted Council (51%). Conversely, residents aged

35 to 49 years are most likely to have done so (68%).

Customer service, with an index score of 73, is a

positive result for Council. Perceptions of customer

service have been stable over time.

➢ More than one-third (37%) rate Council’s

customer service as ‘very good’, with a further

31% rating customer service as ‘good’.

Newsletters, sent via mail (35%) and email (31%), are

the preferred way for Council to inform residents about

news, information and upcoming events. Demand for

emailed newsletters declined just slightly, while

preferences for emailed newsletters increased (by

seven percentage points) in the past year. For the first

time, preferences favour mailed over emailed

newsletters.

➢ The popularity of mailed communications

increased among both residents under (from 26%

in 2017 to 33% in 2018) and over (32% to 38%)

fifty years of age since 2017.

➢ But while younger adults (under fifty years of

age) divide evenly in their preferences (35%

mailed and 33% emailed newsletter), adults aged

over 50 years prefer to receive a newsletter via

mail (38%) to email (25%, six percentage points

lower than 2017) by a wider margin. The

popularity of an e-newsletter declined among

older residents in the past year.

➢ Demand for text message updates (6%) also

dropped considerably since 2017 (14%) among

residents under fifty years of age.

12


Whitehorse City Council performs most strongly in

the areas of art centres and libraries and waste

management (index score of 77 each).

Art centres and libraries have been rated highest for

performance relative to other service areas for the past

two years.

➢ Seven in ten residents (70%) rates Council’s

performance in the area of art centres and libraries

as ‘very good’ or ‘good’.

➢ Council performs in line with the Metropolitan

group (index score of 75) and significantly higher

than the State-wide average for councils (index

score of 74) in this area.

➢ Art centres and libraries, however, rates lower

(rating in the bottom three) in terms of perceived

importance relative to other service areas

evaluated (importance index score of 69).

In the area of waste management, Council not only

performs strongly, but it is the highest-rated

service area in terms of its importance (importance

index score of 84).

➢ Most (81%) residents rate Council’s performance

in the area of waste management as ‘very good’ or

‘good’.

➢ Council performs in line with the Metropolitan

group (index score of 75) and significantly higher

than the State-wide average for councils (index

score of 70) in this area.

Recreational facilities (performance index score of

76) is also an area where Council is rated more highly

compared to other service areas.

➢ Perceptions of this service area have increased

significantly in the last 12 months among residents

aged 18 to 34 years (from a performance index

score of 70 in 2017 to 75 currently).

➢ Council performs significantly higher than both the

Metropolitan group (index score of 74) and State-

wide average for councils (index score of 69) in

this area.

➢ Parks and gardens (14%), recreational and

sporting facilities (12%), and community facilities

(7%) are among the most frequently mentioned

best things about living in the council area.

13


Council’s performance ratings declined significantly

in only two areas in 2018: appearance of public

areas (index score of 73, four index points lower than

2017) and family support services (69, three points

lower).

➢ Much of the decline in the area of public areas

can be attributed to more critical ratings on this

issue from residents aged 18 to 49 years and

women.

➢ Impressions of family support services also

declined significantly among the youngest cohort

(residents aged 18 to 34 years) in the past year.

The area that stands out as being most in need of

Council attention is planning and building permits.

With a performance index score of 50, Council rates

lowest in this service area relative to other services

evaluated, though Council’s performance in this area

has stayed the same three years in a row.

➢ One-quarter of residents (25%) rate Council

performance in this service area as ‘poor’ or ‘very

poor’ combined.

➢ Council’s performance is in line with both the

Metropolitan group and State-wide average for

councils (index scores of 51 and 52 respectively)

on this measure despite being the lowest rated

service area.

➢ The importance of this service area is evidenced

by a high index score of 77.

➢ Feedback from residents on what they consider

Council most needs to do to improve its

performance in the next 12 months supports this

finding, with town planning/ permits /red tape

mentioned by 5% of residents.

14


Perceptions of Council declined significantly in only two

areas in the past year. This is a positive result for

Council, particularly given that Whitehorse City Council

does not have any service areas that are performing

significantly below the Metropolitan group or State-wide

average.

For the coming 12 months, Whitehorse City

Council should pay particular attention to the

service areas where stated importance exceeds

rated performance by more than 10 points. Key

priorities include:

➢ Planning & building permits (margin of 27

points)

➢ Community decisions (margin of 21 points)

➢ Consultation and engagement (margin of 13

points).

On the positive side, Council should maintain its

relatively strong performance in the area of

customer service, and aim to shore up service areas

that are currently rated higher than others, such as

waste management and recreational facilities.

15


An approach we recommend is to further mine the

survey data to better understand the profile of these

over and under-performing demographic groups. This

can be achieved via additional consultation and data

interrogation, self-mining the SPSS data provided, or

via the dashboard portal available to the council.

Please note that the category descriptions for the

coded open ended responses are generic summaries

only. We recommend further analysis of the detailed

cross tabulations and the actual verbatim responses,

with a view to understanding the responses of the key

gender and age groups, especially any target groups

identified as requiring attention.

A personal briefing by senior JWS Research

representatives is also available to assist in

providing both explanation and interpretation of

the results. Please contact JWS Research on 03

8685 8555.

16


Higher results in 2018(Significantly higher result than 2017) • No significant change

Lower results in 2018(Significantly lower result than 2017)

• Appearance of public areas

• Family support services

Most favourably disposed

towards Council

• None Applicable (Results largely

consistent across demographic

groups)

Least favourably disposed

towards Council • None Applicable

18


69

6467 67

69

61 63

56 57 5756

6057 56 5657

59 58

73 737072 72

7072 73

54 5350 51 51

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Sealed

Local

Roads

Community

Consultation

Customer

ServiceOverall

Council

Direction

Overall

PerformanceAdvocacy Making

Community

Decisions

19


Performance MeasuresWhitehorse

2018

Whitehorse

2017

Metro

2018

State-

wide

2018

Highest

score

Lowest

score

OVERALL PERFORMANCE 69 67 65 593132/

3131/

3133

Aged 50-

64 years

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION(Community consultation and

engagement)

57 57 57 553132/

3131/

3133

NA

ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the community)

56 56 56 54 NAAged 50-

64 years

MAKING COMMUNITY

DECISIONS (Decisions made in the

interest of the community)

58 59 58 54Aged 18-

34 years

Aged 50-

64 years

SEALED LOCAL ROADS (Condition of sealed local roads)

70 73 68 53 Men3130/

3151

CUSTOMER SERVICE 73 72 72 70

Aged 50+

years,

3132/

3131/

3133

3129/

3128/

3125/

3127

OVERALL COUNCIL DIRECTION 51 51 54 523130/

3151

Aged 50-

64 years

20


15

8

4

8

27

37

54

26

20

30

40

31

23

36

34

31

22

15

6

11

8

11

7

8

1

3

2

4

3

5

1

16

32

17

1

4

Overall Performance

Community Consultation

Advocacy

Making CommunityDecisions

Sealed Local Roads

Customer Service

% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say

Key Measures Summary Results

13 68 11 9Overall Council Direction

%Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

21


77

79

71

72

Planning & building permits

Community decisions

Consultation & engagement

Informing the community

50

58

57

62

Importance Performance Net Differential

Service areas where importance exceeds performance by 10 points or more,

suggesting further investigation is necessary:

-27

-21

-13

-10

22


81

78

79

76

76

75

73

72

75

71

72

71

66

64

59

81

78

79

76

76

73

74

75

74

74

72

75

69

68

62

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

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

77

n/a

n/a

69

71

71

73

n/a

71

n/a

66

n/a

60

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2018 Priority Area Importance

84

79

78

77

76

74

74

72

72

72

71

71

69

64

60

Waste management

Community decisions

Elderly support services


Sealed local roads

Family support services

Environmental sustainability


Appearance of public areas


Enforcement of local laws


Art centres & libraries

Lobbying

Community & cultural

Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 10Note: Please see page 6 for explanation of significant differences.

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

23


46

36

33

35

31

20

30

28

26

22

24

22

20

18

12

44

45

47

40

43

50

40

42

42

45

43

42

43

36

30

10

17

17

18

23

26

23

25

25

31

28

31

29

30

45

1

1

4

1

1

4

3

5

2

5

3

7

10

11

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

2

Waste management

Community decisions



Sealed local roads









Lobbying


%

Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say

Individual Service Areas Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 10

24


2018 Priority Area Performance

79

77

76

74

77

69

73

72

68

65

61

59

57

56

50

74

74

75

73

74

70

73

69

64

65

61

57

56

57

50

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

63

60

n/a

77

71

74

72

74

72

n/a

71

66

66

n/a

n/a

61

56

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

77

77

76

75

73

70

70

69

65

65

62

58

57

56

50


Waste management





Sealed local roads





Community decisions


Lobbying


2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation of significant differences.

25


Individual Service Areas Performance

32

22

26

28

24

27

11

11

13

13

13

8

8

5

4

49

52

47

42

45

40

41

41

38

29

25

30

26

23

20

14

21

17

15

20

22

23

26

32

17

20

31

36

28

34

2

3

1

2

1

7

6

4

11

2

2

11

11

16

8

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

3

1

1

4

3

9

2

1

1

7

13

10

1

16

15

3

38

40

17

16

18

32

Waste management





Sealed local roads






Community decisions



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: 64 Councils asked group: 14

26


• Informing the community

• Family support services

• Recreational facilities

• Appearance of public areas

• Art centres & libraries

• Community & cultural

• Waste management

• Making community

decisions

• Sealed local roads

• None Applicable

Significantly Higher than

State-wide Average

Significantly Lower than

State-wide Average

27


Significantly Higher than

Group Average

Significantly Lower than

Group Average

• Elderly support services

• Recreational facilities

• Community & cultural

• None Applicable

28


Top Three Most Important Service Areas(Highest to lowest, i.e. 1. = most important)

Whitehorse City Council

1. Waste

management

2. Community

decisions

3. Elderly support

services

Metropolitan

1. Waste

management

2. Emergency &

disaster mngt

3. Community

decisions

Interface

1. Traffic

management

2. Emergency &

disaster mngt

3. Waste

management

Regional Centres

1. Emergency &

disaster mngt

2. Sealed roads

3. Community

decisions

Large Rural

1. Sealed roads

2. Unsealed roads

3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Small Rural

1. Emergency &

disaster mngt

2. Waste

management

3. Community

decisions

Bottom Three Least Important Service Areas (Lowest to highest, i.e. 1. = least important)


1. Community &

cultural

2. Lobbying

3. Art centres &

libraries

Metropolitan

1. Bus/community

dev./tourism

2. Community &

cultural

3. Slashing &

weed control

Interface

1. Tourism

development

2. Community &

cultural

3. Bus/community

dev./tourism

Regional Centres

1. Community &

cultural

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Lobbying

Large Rural

1. Community &

cultural

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Traffic

management

Small Rural

1. Community &

cultural

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Tourism

development

29


Top Three Performing Service Areas(Highest to lowest, i.e. 1. = highest performance)


1. Art centres & libraries

2. Waste management

3. Recreational facilities

Metropolitan


2. Waste management


Interface


2. Emergency & disaster mngt


Regional Centres


2. Appearance of public areas


Large Rural




Small Rural




Bottom Three Performing Service Areas (Lowest to highest, i.e. 1. = lowest performance)


1. Planning permits 2. Lobbying3. Consultation &

engagement

Metropolitan

1. Population growth

2. Planning permits 3. Town planning

policy

Interface

1. Unsealed roads2. Population

growth 3. Traffic

management

Regional Centres

1. Parking facilities 2. Community

decisions3. Unsealed roads

Large Rural

1. Unsealed roads2. Sealed roads 3. Planning permits

Small Rural

1. Unsealed roads2. Sealed roads 3. Population

growth

30


19

7

7

6

5

5

5

14

Development - Inappropriate

Community Consultation

Sealed Road Maintenance

Communication

Town Planning/Permits/Red Tape

Traffic Management

Informing The Community

Nothing

14

12

7

7

7

7

6

6

6

Parks and Gardens

Recreational/Sporting Facilities

Community Facilities

Generally Good - Overall/NoComplaints

Customer Service

Community/Public Events/Activities

Cultural Activities

Road/Street Maintenance

Waste Management

2018 Best Aspects 2018 Areas for Improvement

% %

Q16. Please tell me what is the ONE BEST thing about Whitehorse City Council? It could be about any of the issues or services we have covered in this survey or it could be about something else altogether? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7Q17. What does Whitehorse City Council MOST need to do to improve its performance?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 9

31


Best Things

Areas for

Improvement

• Parks and Gardens: 14% (down 1 point from 2017)

• Recreational/Sporting Facilities: 12% (equal points on 2017)

• Community Facilities: 7% (equal points on 2017)

• Generally Good - Overall/No Complaints: 7% (up 2 points from 2017)

• Customer Service: 7% (up 1 point from 2017)

• Community/Public Events/Activities: 7% (down 2 points from 2017)

• Development - Inappropriate: 19% (up 2 points from 2017)

• Community Consultation: 7% (down 1 point from 2017)

• Sealed Road Maintenance: 7% (up 2 points from 2017)

34


2018 Overall Performance

73

71

71

69

69

68

67

66

66

65

64

59

3132/ 3131/ 3133

18-34

65+

Men

Whitehorse

Women

35-49

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

Metro

50-64

State-wide

67

68

67

67

67

67

67

64

70

64

63

59

72

70

68

66

67

68

63

64

66

66

68

59

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

67

n/a

60

n/a

65

67

63

64

65

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

57

61

n/a

70

71

67

69

70

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

67

60

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

60

Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Whitehorse City Council, not just on one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

35


15

12

14

8

13

9

12

11

10

22

11

18

11

15

13

20

54

50

50

46

54

37

48

55

54

54

62

48

69

52

40

48

23

30

29

35

27

36

29

23

28

19

21

25

16

21

36

26

6

4

5

7

2

11

7

8

7

4

5

8

5

11

10

1

1

2

2

1

2

5

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

3

1

2

1

1

1

3

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2014 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Overall Performance

Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Whitehorse City Council, not just on one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

37


Overall contact with

Whitehorse City Council• 60%, down 4 points on 2017

Most contact with

Whitehorse City Council• Aged 35-49 years

Least contact with

Whitehorse City Council• Aged 18-34 years

Customer service rating • Index score of 73, up 1 point on 2017

Most satisfied with customer

service• Aged 50+ years

• 3132/ 3131/ 3133

Least satisfied with

customer service• 3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

38


2018 Contact with Council

%

68

65

64

63

61

61

60

58

57

54

54

51

35-49

Women

50-64

3132/ 3131/ 3133

State-wide

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Whitehorse

65+

Metro

3130/ 3151

Men

18-34

Q5. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with Whitehorse City Council? This may have been in person, in writing, by telephone conversation, by text message, by email or via their website or social media such as Facebook or Twitter?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 43 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

39


2018 Contact with Council

6057

49

64

60

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Have had contact

%

Q5. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with Whitehorse City Council? This may have been in person, in writing, by telephone conversation, by text message, by email or via their website or social media such as Facebook or Twitter?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 43 Councils asked group: 8

40


2018 Customer Service Rating

77

77

77

75

74

73

72

71

70

70

69

67

65+

50-64

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

3130/ 3151

Whitehorse

Metro

Women

18-34

State-wide

35-49

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

72

73

73

72

73

72

71

72

73

69

71

71

76

71

75

68

66

70

73

73

61

69

69

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

74

72

n/a

69

n/a

72

n/a

74

68

72

73

n/a

82

73

n/a

68

n/a

72

n/a

76

73

71

63

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Whitehorse City Council for customer service? Please keep in mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received. Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

41


37

35

31

31

35

31

33

33

35

42

41

35

28

38

44

42

31

33

39

41

35

36

38

25

42

28

30

31

34

24

31

35

15

19

15

13

15

18

16

18

10

15

12

16

13

16

14

16

8

6

10

9

5

8

6

11

6

5

6

9

12

8

6

3

5

5

5

4

7

6

5

7

6

4

5

5

3

10

4

3

4

2

1

1

3

1

2

6

6

6

3

10

4

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2014 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Customer Service Rating

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Whitehorse City Council for customer service? Please keep in mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received. Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

43


Council direction

Most satisfied with council direction

Least satisfied with council direction

• 68% stayed about the same, equal points on 2017

• 13% improved, equal points on 2017

• 11% deteriorated, equal points on 2017

• 3130/ 3151

• Aged 18-34 years

• Aged 50-64 years

• 3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

44


2018 Overall Direction

55

54

54

52

52

52

51

51

51

51

47

44

3130/ 3151

Metro

18-34

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

State-wide

Men

Whitehorse

65+

Women

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

50-64

54

54

56

48

51

53

50

51

51

51

48

45

46

55

59

43

54

51

49

50

46

50

48

48

n/a

56

n/a

n/a

n/a

53

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

59

53

n/a

53

50

53

49

56

n/a

47

n/a

n/a

61

45

n/a

53

52

54

55

55

n/a

52

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

52

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Whitehorse City Council’s overall performance? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

45


13

13

12

15

17

19

19

12

15

12

11

14

16

16

6

10

68

68

68

67

69

60

64

58

75

71

70

65

68

62

69

73

11

11

12

10

10

15

11

18

6

8

9

12

8

12

17

8

9

8

8

8

4

5

6

12

4

9

9

8

8

10

8

10

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2014 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

% Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

2018 Overall Direction

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Whitehorse City Council’s overall performance? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

47


Note: Website and text message formats again did not rate as highly as other modes of communication, although

further analysis is recommended to understand the demographic preference profiles of the various different forms of

communication.

Greatest change since

2017 • Newsletter sent via mail (+7)

Overall preferred forms of

communication

Preferred forms of

communication among

over 50s

Preferred forms of

communication among

under 50s

• Newsletter sent via mail (35%)

• Newsletter sent via email (31%)


• Newsletter sent via email (35%)


48


28 28

35

31

35

31

16

1011

1311

12

4

9

53

42

32

32

1 1

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

2018 Best Form

Council

Newsletter

via Mail

Council

Newsletter

via Email

Text

Message

Council

Newsletter as

Local Paper

Insert

Advertising

in a Local

Newspaper

Can’t

Say

?Other

%

Council

Website

Q13. If Whitehorse City Council was going to get in touch with you to inform you about Council news and information and upcoming events, which ONE of the following is the BEST way to communicate with you?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 6

49


2018 Under 50s Best Form

2726

33

36

38

35

13

7

10

8 8

10

6

14

6

45

2

4

233

1

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

%

Council

Newsletter

via Mail

Council

Newsletter

via Email

Text

Message

Council

Newsletter as

Local Paper

Insert

Advertising

in a Local

Newspaper

?Council

WebsiteCan’t

Say

Other

Q13. If Whitehorse City Council was going to get in touch with you to inform you about Council news and information and upcoming events, which ONE of the following is the BEST way to communicate with you?Base: All respondents aged under 50. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 6

50


2018 Over 50s Best Form

29

32

38

25

31

25

20

15

12

19

15 15

2 24

2 21

2 24

12 2

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

%

Council

Newsletter as

Local Paper

Insert

Council

Newsletter

via Mail

Council

Newsletter

via Email

Text

Message

Advertising

in a Local

Newspaper

?Council

WebsiteCan’t

Say

Other

Q13. If Whitehorse City Council was going to get in touch with you to inform you about Council news and information and upcoming events, which ONE of the following is the BEST way to communicate with you?Base: All respondents aged over 50. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 6

52


2018 Consultation and Engagement Importance

78

76

74

73

72

72

72

71

70

69

67

64

50-64

3130/ 3151

State-wide

65+

Women

Metro

35-49

Whitehorse

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Men

3132/ 3131/ 3133

18-34

76

70

74

75

74

72

71

71

71

68

71

65

76

76

75

75

76

73

79

75

74

73

75

71

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community consultation and engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 6 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

53


22

24

30

30

26

19

29

18

18

25

11

22

37

24

42

40

44

40

41

44

45

37

42

42

39

42

37

48

31

29

22

24

27

30

23

38

33

29

39

33

24

24

3

4

2

4

5

4

1

3

3

2

5

1

1

3

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

3

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

%Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't say

2018 Consultation and Engagement Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community consultation and engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 6

54


2018 Consultation and Engagement Performance

60

59

58

58

57

57

57

56

56

56

56

55

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

18-34

65+

Whitehorse

Metro

35-49

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

50-64

Women

3130/ 3151

State-wide

57

56

64

54

57

57

54

56

53

58

58

55

62

55

60

55

56

58

54

52

56

58

55

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

58

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

56

n/a

61

64

65

63

n/a

64

n/a

56

64

n/a

57

n/a

58

59

63

61

n/a

62

n/a

59

63

n/a

57

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

57

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

55


8

5

4

9

8

8

9

8

8

8

7

8

6

10

6

8

26

31

32

40

36

30

29

26

25

28

31

22

27

23

29

26

36

34

34

27

36

32

32

35

36

38

40

33

45

29

35

33

11

9

12

8

7

15

13

13

11

9

10

12

5

18

13

9

3

5

3

3

3

7

5

3

6

1

2

4

3

1

4

5

16

15

15

13

11

9

11

15

16

17

11

21

14

19

13

18

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2014 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Consultation and Engagement Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

56


2018 Lobbying Importance

69

69

68

67

66

64

64

64

63

63

62

60

3130/ 3151

Women

State-wide

50-64

Metro

Whitehorse

65+

35-49

18-34

3132/ 3131/ 3133

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Men

67

67

69

66

67

64

64

63

64

62

65

60

71

71

69

64

68

68

65

70

72

67

67

65

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

67

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

57


18

16

22

23

21

16

23

16

14

22

18

16

25

16

36

38

38

37

36

31

39

38

34

38

34

40

33

37

30

32

30

27

29

34

29

28

32

29

34

27

30

27

10

10

7

8

9

13

6

12

14

7

10

11

12

9

3

3

1

2

3

3

2

4

5

2

3

4

1

3

2

1

2

2

2

3

1

2

2

2

1

7

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Lobbying Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7

58


2018 Lobbying Performance

58

58

58

58

56

56

56

55

55

55

54

53

65+

Men

3132/ 3131/ 3133

18-34

Whitehorse

Metro

3130/ 3151

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

35-49

Women

State-wide

50-64

52

56

56

63

56

56

57

55

50

55

54

54

59

55

59

59

57

56

56

55

53

59

53

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

58

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

62

58

n/a

65

60

n/a

n/a

n/a

59

62

56

52

59

55

n/a

59

56

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

58

55

51

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

59


4

3

4

5

5

5

5

5

6

3

5

4

6

3

4

5

20

26

25

30

25

24

24

21

17

21

22

18

21

15

20

23

34

30

26

33

33

32

31

32

33

35

34

33

39

36

31

26

8

10

9

5

8

13

10

9

8

6

6

9

8

4

12

7

2

3

3

2

3

5

4

4

2

2

2

1

3

3

2

32

29

33

25

25

20

26

29

34

34

31

34

24

40

30

37

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2014 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Lobbying Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

60


2018 Community Decisions Made Importance

83

82

81

80

80

79

79

79

78

78

77

76

50-64

Women

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

35-49

State-wide

Metro

Whitehorse

3130/ 3151

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

18-34

Men

83

79

78

78

79

79

78

78

77

78

75

76

79

79

77

81

80

79

78

80

77

79

77

77

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

80

80

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

79

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 6 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

61


36

32

35

39

38

40

34

34

30

42

30

40

47

33

45

48

44

42

42

42

50

43

47

42

48

41

39

48

17

17

15

15

16

17

13

21

21

14

22

19

11

14

1

1

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Community Decisions Made Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 6

62


2018 Community Decisions Made Performance

63

61

60

59

58

58

57

56

55

55

54

52

18-34

Men

3132/ 3131/ 3133

65+

Whitehorse

Metro

3130/ 3151

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Women

35-49

State-wide

50-64

66

58

61

55

59

58

62

54

59

56

54

54

62

55

63

56

57

59

55

51

58

53

54

52

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

59

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

57

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

63


8

7

6

6

8

8

8

6

9

6

10

7

6

7

30

34

29

30

32

28

25

35

33

26

36

23

26

30

31

30

32

34

32

33

33

27

30

31

29

27

32

35

11

10

8

14

10

12

8

11

6

15

10

14

13

7

4

4

6

7

5

6

5

1

5

3

1

4

9

4

17

16

18

9

13

13

20

19

17

18

13

25

14

18

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Community Decisions Made Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

64


2018 Sealed Local Roads Importance

80

78

78

78

78

77

76

76

75

75

75

74

State-wide

50-64

Women

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Metro

65+

Whitehorse

18-34

3130/ 3151

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

35-49

Men

78

81

78

77

77

76

76

75

76

76

75

74

78

73

76

74

76

76

76

73

77

77

80

75

76

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

77

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

65


31

30

28

38

33

30

29

33

31

31

40

25

32

25

43

47

50

44

46

40

43

46

37

49

27

49

49

55

23

20

19

15

18

29

24

17

30

17

32

23

17

16

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Sealed Local Roads Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 7

66


2018 Sealed Local Roads Performance

73

73

72

72

71

70

70

68

67

67

66

53

Men

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

50-64

18-34

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Whitehorse

65+

Metro

Women

35-49

3130/ 3151

State-wide

72

74

73

74

72

73

70

66

73

73

71

53

74

73

72

77

75

73

72

67

73

71

72

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

67


27

27

26

11

20

30

18

31

34

20

32

21

29

25

40

43

47

31

44

39

42

38

38

41

39

40

37

42

22

21

20

28

23

22

25

19

18

25

17

27

25

20

7

5

4

17

8

7

8

7

6

8

7

8

8

7

3

2

1

12

4

4

5

3

3

5

3

4

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Sealed Local Roads Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

68


2018 Informing Community Importance

75

74

74

73

73

72

72

71

71

71

71

69

State-wide

Women

3130/ 3151

Metro

65+

50-64

Whitehorse

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

18-34

Men

74

75

72

73

73

76

71

68

72

70

70

68

76

79

75

74

75

77

74

70

74

74

76

70

75

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

69


26

23

29

32

29

27

31

21

21

31

29

23

27

25

42

47

46

41

41

36

42

47

42

42

38

41

42

48

25

24

18

22

24

29

20

25

28

22

23

32

24

21

5

6

5

4

5

4

7

4

6

4

7

1

7

5

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Informing Community Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

70


2018 Informing Community Performance

64

63

63

62

62

62

61

61

61

61

60

59

18-34

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Women

65+

Whitehorse

3130/ 3151

Men

35-49

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

50-64

State-wide

60

63

63

63

61

61

58

62

59

61

58

59

66

67

62

60

61

59

60

56

57

63

60

59

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

64

n/a

61

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

62

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

61

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

60

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

71


13

11

10

11

12

10

11

16

11

14

13

14

12

12

38

37

40

36

37

39

39

35

36

40

39

36

38

39

32

34

32

31

31

30

34

32

38

27

34

33

28

31

11

10

10

13

12

14

8

11

10

12

8

16

14

7

3

4

3

5

4

2

4

3

2

3

1

1

4

5

3

5

5

3

3

4

4

3

3

4

5

3

6

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Informing Community Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 9

72


2018 Law Enforcement Importance

74

73

73

73

73

72

72

71

71

69

68

68

Women

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

3130/ 3151

18-34

65+

Whitehorse

State-wide

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

35-49

74

70

73

72

69

72

75

72

71

72

69

69

75

74

74

71

73

75

71

72

70

71

70

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

76

71

71

n/a

67

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

73


24

25

26

24

27

30

24

27

21

20

27

33

12

26

22

43

43

44

42

37

39

45

43

41

39

46

31

51

46

48

28

25

22

27

27

24

29

24

31

35

23

30

34

23

24

5

6

5

6

6

6

2

6

6

5

4

7

1

5

4

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Law Enforcement Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

74


2018 Law Enforcement Performance

69

68

66

65

65

65

65

64

64

63

62

62

18-34

3132/ 3131/ 3133

65+

Men

Whitehorse

Women

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

State-wide

3130/ 3151

35-49

50-64

70

67

60

64

65

65

66

64

64

59

62

65

71

65

64

64

65

65

64

64

63

65

56

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

66

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

68

65

66

68

n/a

n/a

65

n/a

63

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

65

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

75


11

14

12

11

12

12

11

10

13

11

12

13

8

9

14

41

38

33

43

39

39

43

35

44

43

39

54

38

35

32

23

21

25

23

25

24

25

23

20

22

23

18

22

28

25

6

9

5

6

8

7

7

9

4

5

7

6

5

7

7

3

3

3

2

3

4

2

2

3

4

2

2

5

4

1

16

14

22

15

12

14

11

21

16

15

17

7

21

18

21

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Law Enforcement Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 9

76


2018 Family Support Importance

78

77

75

75

74

74

74

74

73

72

72

70

Women

18-34

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

Whitehorse

3132/ 3131/ 3133

65+

State-wide

3130/ 3151

50-64

35-49

Men

78

81

75

73

75

74

72

73

77

73

71

72

78

77

73

73

73

76

70

73

71

74

73

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

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

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

67

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

74

73

n/a

71

68

63

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘family support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

77


28

30

27

19

30

32

28

25

30

20

35

31

29

27

24

42

44

45

49

40

40

46

41

39

44

41

48

32

42

46

25

20

20

24

23

22

23

29

24

30

20

20

34

27

21

3

4

3

4

5

4

1

3

5

5

2

2

3

5

3

1

2

3

1

1

1

2

1

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

3

5

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Family Support Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘family support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 7

78


2018 Family Support Performance

72

71

71

70

70

69

69

68

67

66

66

65

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Women

3130/ 3151

35-49

65+

18-34

Whitehorse

Metro

Men

State-wide

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

73

73

74

69

70

75

72

68

70

67

70

69

71

71

66

70

73

67

69

69

68

66

66

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

68

n/a

67

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

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

73

74

72

71

n/a

69

67

67

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

67

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘family support services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

79


13

13

10

11

11

10

13

12

13

12

14

19

10

12

8

25

30

34

41

31

29

23

25

26

24

25

17

34

25

24

20

17

17

16

21

20

27

20

13

25

15

27

14

23

14

2

2

2

2

4

3

3

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

3

40

38

36

30

32

37

33

41

45

37

43

33

40

36

52

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Family Support Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘family support services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 8

80


2018 Elderly Support Importance

81

81

79

79

78

78

78

78

78

77

76

75

65+

Women

State-wide

Metro

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Whitehorse

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

50-64

3130/ 3151

18-34

35-49

Men

79

82

78

77

81

79

77

81

79

78

78

76

79

82

78

78

79

79

80

81

77

79

77

74

n/a

n/a

79

78

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

79

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

79

81

79

n/a

n/a

77

n/a

80

n/a

75

74

72

n/a

n/a

80

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

81


33

37

33

31

38

36

33

34

33

27

38

31

30

35

37

47

43

49

48

43

44

47

45

48

47

47

49

44

43

50

17

18

13

17

16

16

15

19

18

24

12

17

22

19

12

1

1

2

4

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

3

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Elderly Support Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 8

82


2018 Elderly Support Performance

73

73

73

71

70

70

70

70

68

68

67

66

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

35-49

Women

Whitehorse

Men

3130/ 3151

18-34

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

State-wide

Metro

50-64

73

71

66

68

69

70

70

68

66

68

67

67

75

73

60

73

70

67

70

70

68

68

69

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

77

n/a

68

74

72

69

n/a

71

n/a

69

n/a

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

83


13

14

13

13

14

10

12

12

15

11

15

11

10

11

22

29

25

27

33

32

27

29

29

28

32

26

30

25

31

29

17

18

16

17

19

18

21

15

15

19

15

20

11

21

16

2

4

3

2

5

4

2

2

2

2

2

1

4

4

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

1

2

1

38

39

40

34

29

40

35

40

40

36

40

38

53

31

28

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Elderly Support Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 9

84


2018 Recreational Facilities Importance

76

74

74

73

73

73

72

72

72

71

70

69

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

35-49

State-wide

Metro

Women

Whitehorse

Men

18-34

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

75

72

72

74

72

73

72

72

72

68

73

73

76

71

76

77

73

73

77

75

72

75

71

77

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

n/a

71

72

n/a

75

71

66

68

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

85


20

22

29

21

25

23

19

23

19

22

19

22

19

26

16

50

47

45

45

46

48

56

50

45

48

53

42

55

53

55

26

28

23

29

25

25

21

24

32

27

26

33

26

19

23

1

2

3

4

3

3

1

2

1

2

1

2

5

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Recreational Facilities Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

86


2018 Recreational Facilities Performance

79

78

78

77

76

76

75

75

74

74

72

69

3132/ 3131/ 3133

65+

Men

3130/ 3151

50-64

Whitehorse

35-49

18-34

Women

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

State-wide

75

78

75

74

79

76

79

70

76

73

78

70

78

80

74

73

76

75

71

76

77

73

75

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

79

73

n/a

74

74

72

74

75

n/a

n/a

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

87


26

27

27

25

22

26

21

28

29

25

26

22

30

27

25

47

49

46

49

42

45

47

44

50

55

40

49

43

49

48

17

16

17

20

22

20

23

17

13

13

21

20

18

19

12

1

4

3

2

7

4

3

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

3

7

5

6

4

4

5

5

10

7

6

9

7

5

4

13

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Recreational Facilities Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10

88


2018 Public Areas Importance

77

74

74

74

74

73

72

71

71

70

70

69

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

State-wide

Metro

Women

65+

Whitehorse

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

3130/ 3151

Men

18-34

75

74

74

75

74

77

75

74

76

73

76

73

74

74

74

74

76

74

74

74

72

75

71

72

n/a

n/a

73

73

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

77

n/a

74

n/a

75

75

73

73

n/a

n/a

71

69

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

89


22

26

25

24

26

25

25

20

21

18

26

21

18

29

23

45

49

47

47

46

48

47

44

43

45

44

36

47

49

51

31

23

26

26

24

24

27

33

34

35

28

40

36

21

24

2

2

2

3

2

2

2

3

2

1

3

1

2

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Public Areas Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

90


2018 Public Areas Performance

75

75

74

74

73

73

73

73

72

71

71

71

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

18-34

65+

Whitehorse

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

Women

35-49

State-wide

3130/ 3151

78

76

79

74

77

73

76

72

78

79

71

76

80

73

76

74

74

75

72

72

74

70

71

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

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

n/a

73

76

77

74

70

n/a

n/a

74

72

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 10 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

91


22

32

27

25

24

24

26

17

24

21

24

21

16

26

29

52

47

47

50

45

49

49

52

54

59

45

57

59

47

41

21

17

20

19

21

20

18

24

21

17

24

21

19

20

23

3

3

3

4

6

5

4

5

1

2

4

1

4

4

4

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Public Areas Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 10

92


2018 Art Centres & Libraries Importance

74

71

70

70

69

69

67

67

67

65

65

63

Women

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

65+

3130/ 3151

18-34

Whitehorse

Metro

50-64

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

State-wide

Men

70

68

68

66

65

66

67

66

67

65

64

62

74

68

68

69

71

69

68

67

68

69

66

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

65

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

66

n/a

68

n/a

71

n/a

62

66

n/a

72

62

n/a

66

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

66

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

93


20

13

21

17

16

18

22

18

20

13

27

22

14

25

20

43

47

46

41

39

42

45

48

36

39

46

42

47

30

48

29

30

21

32

34

31

26

30

30

36

22

26

36

36

20

7

8

10

7

9

7

4

3

11

9

4

10

3

7

6

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Art Centres & Libraries Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 8

94


2018 Art Centres & Libraries Performance

81

79

79

78

78

77

76

75

75

75

74

74

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Women

18-34

3130/ 3151

Whitehorse

Men

Metro

35-49

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

State-wide

50-64

80

82

78

78

75

79

79

75

79

78

73

78

78

77

77

73

71

74

71

74

72

74

72

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

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

75

n/a

81

n/a

79

78

n/a

77

75

n/a

72

n/a

73

78

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

95


28

30

24

28

25

26

26

29

29

22

33

29

23

22

36

42

47

42

42

42

41

44

40

42

44

40

45

48

42

32

15

12

20

18

18

19

18

15

12

16

14

16

14

17

13

2

2

2

1

4

3

3

1

1

2

2

3

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

13

10

11

10

10

10

8

15

16

16

11

10

11

15

18

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Art Centres & Libraries Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8

96


2018 Community Activities Importance

64

64

61

61

61

60

60

60

60

59

56

54

18-34

Women

3130/ 3151

Metro

State-wide

50-64

Whitehorse

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Men

35-49

60

63

59

61

61

57

59

58

58

61

55

62

66

66

65

62

62

66

62

61

62

61

58

58

n/a

n/a

n/a

62

62

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

62

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

60

63

n/a

n/a

62

61

60

63

n/a

n/a

56

56

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

62

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

97


12

8

12

10

12

12

10

12

12

8

15

19

3

13

10

30

37

37

36

34

34

31

33

27

27

33

32

27

26

35

45

40

41

40

40

41

44

42

48

47

43

37

55

50

42

11

11

7

10

10

11

13

12

10

15

8

10

14

9

12

1

2

2

3

2

2

2

1

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Community Activities Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 8

98


2018 Community Activities Performance

78

78

77

76

75

75

74

74

73

73

70

69

Women

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

3130/ 3151

Whitehorse

50-64

18-34

65+

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Men

Metro

State-wide

76

75

75

74

74

74

74

74

74

73

70

69

76

71

73

74

73

76

74

72

72

70

71

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

70

74

72

n/a

n/a

72

72

66

79

n/a

69

n/a

69

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

68

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

99


24

22

20

19

17

18

19

28

27

17

31

22

27

24

24

45

45

44

44

42

42

48

39

46

49

41

50

45

46

37

20

17

18

23

25

24

21

19

19

24

16

22

16

20

20

1

3

3

3

5

4

2

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

10

12

14

9

9

11

9

12

8

10

9

5

11

8

16

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Community Activities Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 23 Councils asked group: 8

100


2018 Waste Management Importance

85

85

85

85

84

84

84

84

83

83

82

81

65+

50-64

35-49

Women

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Whitehorse

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

Metro

Men

18-34

State-wide

83

81

78

82

80

81

81

82

81

80

81

79

82

81

82

83

81

81

80

83

82

79

80

80

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

81

n/a

n/a

79

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

79

82

86

80

82

n/a

80

n/a

n/a

n/a

78

76

79

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

78

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

101


46

40

38

38

42

46

46

42

48

45

46

43

45

48

48

44

44

50

46

43

42

42

51

42

44

45

42

48

43

44

10

15

11

14

13

11

11

7

10

11

8

15

7

9

6

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Waste Management Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 9

102


2018 Waste Management Performance

81

79

78

77

77

77

77

76

76

75

75

70

65+

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Whitehorse

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

35-49

Women

3130/ 3151

18-34

Metro

State-wide

78

78

78

77

75

75

80

77

79

76

75

71

77

76

75

74

72

74

69

74

72

76

76

70

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

77

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

72

n/a

74

71

65

n/a

70

69

n/a

77

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

103


32

34

29

28

24

29

33

29

34

35

30

31

26

35

39

49

44

44

43

45

48

47

51

48

46

51

46

58

45

46

14

16

21

16

18

16

12

13

17

16

13

19

11

16

10

2

4

5

8

7

4

4

2

1

1

4

3

4

3

1

1

1

3

3

2

1

3

1

2

1

3

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

3

2

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Waste Management Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 10

104


2018 Planning & Building Permits Importance

81

80

79

77

77

77

77

77

74

74

73

71

50-64

Women

65+

35-49

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Whitehorse

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

Metro

Men

18-34

State-wide

84

78

79

75

72

76

77

81

76

73

69

72

80

78

79

80

75

76

79

74

74

74

70

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘planning and building permits’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

105


35

35

33

26

32

38

36

33

32

38

28

33

46

40

40

38

41

39

38

38

37

45

39

41

43

44

34

37

18

21

20

25

22

15

22

18

20

16

22

21

18

10

4

3

2

6

5

7

3

1

6

2

5

1

3

5

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

1

1

3

1

7

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Planning & Building Permits Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘planning and building permits’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 18 Councils asked group: 5

106


2018 Planning & Building Permits Performance

55

53

52

52

51

51

50

50

49

48

46

43

18-34

3132/ 3131/ 3133

State-wide

65+

Men

Metro

3130/ 3151

Whitehorse

Women

50-64

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

35-49

57

54

51

45

53

49

51

50

47

51

46

46

59

55

50

51

52

50

54

50

48

48

42

39

n/a

n/a

54

n/a

n/a

53

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

53

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘planning and building permits’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 6 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

107


5

6

5

5

5

4

6

6

5

6

5

1

7

8

23

25

25

24

25

24

23

23

25

22

32

19

21

18

28

23

22

27

27

27

26

32

26

31

31

30

25

27

16

16

17

13

14

17

19

12

17

14

14

19

18

12

9

10

9

8

9

14

8

6

7

11

4

14

12

8

18

20

23

23

21

14

18

22

20

16

14

16

17

26

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Planning & Building Permits Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘planning and building permits’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 6

108


2018 Environmental Sustainability Importance

79

79

74

74

74

74

74

73

73

72

68

68

18-34

Women

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

Whitehorse

65+

State-wide

3132/ 3131/ 3133

50-64

Men

35-49

79

76

73

73

74

73

70

72

73

70

69

70

79

79

74

71

73

74

72

73

76

75

68

69

n/a

n/a

74

n/a

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

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

71

72

n/a

75

67

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 9 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

109


30

30

31

25

31

32

32

33

26

25

35

39

22

31

27

40

42

42

44

39

40

38

35

47

34

46

39

40

36

46

23

20

19

24

23

22

22

26

21

30

16

19

29

23

22

4

6

5

4

5

4

3

5

5

7

2

1

7

7

3

1

2

2

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

1

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Environmental Sustainability Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 9

110


2018 Environmental Sustainability Performance

68

68

66

66

65

65

65

64

64

64

64

63

3132/ 3131/ 3133

65+

35-49

Women

Whitehorse

50-64

Men

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

Metro

3130/ 3151

18-34

State-wide

70

67

66

66

68

66

71

66

64

70

72

64

67

66

62

66

64

67

63

62

64

63

64

63

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

65

n/a

n/a

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

64

n/a

69

66

66

66

66

67

n/a

n/a

n/a

65

64

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

64

2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 10 Note: Please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences.

111


11

13

13

12

10

10

12

8

12

8

13

7

11

12

15

41

41

35

42

37

38

32

48

45

42

41

46

42

38

36

26

20

29

29

30

28

35

16

24

27

24

28

19

31

25

4

5

6

5

8

7

6

5

2

6

3

5

4

5

2

3

1

3

1

2

2

1

7

2

1

5

3

4

2

3

15

19

15

11

12

14

13

17

16

16

14

12

19

12

18

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2018 Environmental Sustainability Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 24 Councils asked group: 10

2J00643 Community Satisfaction Survey 2018 – Whitehorse City Council

51

48

49

56

62

42

54

43

57

54

30

31

33

27

25

35

29

40

26

26

18

20

18

17

13

23

17

18

18

20

Whitehorse

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

%MAINTAIN & IMPROVE SERVICE LEVELS WITH A CPI INCREASE IN RATES

REDUCE SERVICE LEVELS WITH WITH NO INCREASE IN RATES

DON'T KNOW / CAN'T SAY

Rate and Service Trade-Off

WH1. Over the last few years, the State Government has implemented legislation that caps council rate increases at CPI. Council believes that to maintain or improve current levels of local services, it would need to increase rates by the CPI amount. With this in mind, would you prefer council to maintain and improve current service levels by implementing a CPI increase to council rates OR hold rates with no increase at their current level but with reduced service levels?Base: All respondents.

113


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.

48%52%

Men

Women

10%

23%

25%

18%

24%

18-24

25-34

35-49

50-64

65+

Gender Age

S3. [Record gender] / S4. To which of the following age groups do you belong?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 64 Councils asked group: 14

114


13

9

2

3

21

28

18

5

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 athome

Married or living with partner, no children

Married or living with partner with children 16 orunder at home

Married or living with partner with children but none16 or under at home

Do not wish to answer

2018 Household Structure

%

S6. Which of the following BEST describes your household? Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 9 Councils asked group: 6

115


13

18

12

9

14

18

15

13

73

64

74

78

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

2013 Whitehorse

% 0-5 years 5-10 years 10+ years Can't say

2018 Years Lived in Area

S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4

116


13

18

12

12

15

20

10

9

19

7

26

11

5

3

14

18

15

15

15

17

14

11

15

13

22

16

4

7

25

22

31

23

23

19

23

32

21

29

24

31

29

17

23

20

19

21

22

28

23

19

22

24

23

26

33

13

25

21

24

29

26

16

30

30

24

27

5

15

29

60

2018 Whitehorse

2017 Whitehorse

2016 Whitehorse

State-wide

Metro

3129/ 3128/ 3125/ 3127

3130/ 3151

3132/ 3131/ 3133

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

% 0-5 years 5-10 years 10-20 years 20-30 years 30+ years Can't say

2018 Years Lived in Area

S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 4 Note: For 2016, the code frame expanded out “10+ years”, to include “10-20 years”,”20-30 years” and “30+ years”. As such, this chart presents the last three years of data only.

117


78

22

11

2

1

1

1

1

1

5

English only

Languages other than English

CHINESE

ITALIAN

FRENCH

GERMAN

GREEK

HINDI

JAPANESE

OTHER

2018 Languages Spoken

%

73

27

6

5

2

1

1

1

1

9

Australia

Countries other than Australia

CHINA

UNITED KINGDOM

INDIA

OTHER ASIAN

HUNGARY

CANADA

NEW ZEALAND

OTHER

2018 Countries of Birth

%

Q11. What languages, other than English, are spoken regularly in your home?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 4 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Respondents could name multiple languages so responses may add to more than 100%Q12. Could you please tell me which country you were born in?Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 3 Councils asked group: 3

120


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 Whitehorse

City Council according to the most recently

available Australian Bureau of Statistics population

estimates, whereas the results were previously not

weighted.

➢ The service responsibility area performance

measures have changed significantly and the

rating scale used to assess performance has also

changed.

As such, the results of the 2012 State-wide Local

Government Community Satisfaction Survey should be

considered as a benchmark. Please note that

comparisons should not be made with the State-wide

Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey

results from 2011 and prior due to the methodological

and sampling changes. Comparisons in the period

2012-2018 have been made throughout this report

as appropriate.

121


Demographic

Actual

survey

sample

size

Weighted

base

Maximum

margin of error

at 95%

confidence

interval

Whitehorse City

Council 400 400 +/-4.9

Men184 192 +/-7.2

Women216 208 +/-6.7

3129/ 3128/ 3125/

3127 126 137 +/-8.8

3130/ 3151126 116 +/-8.8

3132/ 3131/ 3133148 147 +/-8.1

18-34 years61 129 +/-12.6

35-49 years73 102 +/-11.5

50-64 years113 72 +/-9.3

65+ years153 97 +/-7.9

The sample size for the 2018 State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey for Whitehorse City Council

was 400. Unless otherwise noted, this is the total sample

base for all reported charts and tables.

The maximum margin of error on a sample of approximately

400 interviews is +/-4.9% at the 95% confidence level for

results around 50%. Margins of error will be larger for any

sub-samples. As an example, a result of 50% can be read

confidently as falling midway in the range 45.1% - 54.9%.

Maximum margins of error are listed in the table below,

based on a population of 135,000 people aged 18 years or

over for Whitehorse City Council, according to ABS

estimates.

122


All participating councils are listed in the State-wide

report published on the DELWP website. In 2018, 64 of

the 79 Councils throughout Victoria participated in this

survey. For consistency of analysis and reporting

across all projects, Local Government Victoria has

aligned its presentation of data to use standard council

groupings. Accordingly, the council reports for the

community satisfaction survey provide analysis using

these standard council groupings. Please note that

councils participating across 2012-2018 vary slightly.

Council Groups

Whitehorse City Council is classified as a Metropolitan

council according to the following classification list:

➢ Metropolitan, Interface, Regional Centres, Large

Rural & Small Rural

Councils participating in the Metropolitan group are:

Banyule, Boroondara, Brimbank, Glen Eira, Greater

Dandenong, Frankston, Kingston, Knox, Manningham,

Maroondah, Melbourne, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Whitehorse.

Wherever appropriate, results for Whitehorse City

Council for this 2018 State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey have been compared

against other participating councils in the Metropolitan

group and on a state-wide basis. Please note that

council groupings changed for 2015, and as such

comparisons to council group results before that time

can not be made within the reported charts.

123


Index Scores

Many questions ask respondents to rate council

performance on a five-point scale, for example, from

‘very good’ to ‘very poor’, with ‘can’t say’ also a

possible response category. To facilitate ease of

reporting and comparison of results over time, starting

from the 2012 survey and measured against the state-

wide result and the council group, an ‘Index Score’ has

been calculated for such measures.

The Index Score is calculated and represented as a

score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale), with ‘can’t say’

responses excluded from the analysis. The ‘%

RESULT’ for each scale category is multiplied by the

‘INDEX FACTOR’. This produces an ‘INDEX VALUE’

for each category, which are then summed to produce

the ‘INDEX SCORE’, equating to ‘60’ in the following

example.

SCALE

CATEGORIES% RESULT

INDEX

FACTORINDEX 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

124


Similarly, an Index Score has been calculated for the

Core question ‘Performance direction in the last 12

months’, based on the following scale for each

performance measure category, with ‘Can’t say’

responses excluded from the calculation.

SCALE

CATEGORIES

%

RESULT

INDEX

FACTOR

INDEX

VALUE

Improved 36% 100 36

Stayed the same 40% 50 20

Deteriorated 23% 0 0

Can’t say 1% --INDEX

SCORE 56

125


Index scores are indicative of an overall rating on a

particular service area. In this context, index scores

indicate:

a) how well council is seen to be performing in a

particular service area; or

b) the level of importance placed on a particular

service area.

For ease of interpretation, index score ratings can be

categorised as follows:

INDEX

SCORE

Performance

implication

Importance

implication

75 – 100Council is performing

very well

in this service area

This service area is

seen to be

extremely important

60 – 75

Council is performing

well in this service area,

but there is room for

improvement


seen to be

very important

50 – 60

Council is performing

satisfactorily in this

service area but needs

to improve


seen to be

fairly important


poorly



seen to be

somewhat important


very poorly



seen to be

not that important

126


The test applied to the Indexes was an Independent

Mean Test, as follows:

Z Score = ($1 - $2) / Sqrt (($3*2 / $5) + ($4*2 / $6))

Where:

➢$1 = Index Score 1

➢$2 = Index Score 2

➢$3 = unweighted sample count 1

➢$4 = unweighted sample count 1

➢$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.

127


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

2018 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)

➢ Lobbying on behalf of community (Advocacy)

➢ Community consultation and engagement

(Consultation)

➢ Decisions made in the interest of the community

(Making community decisions)

➢ Condition of sealed local roads (Sealed local roads)

➢ Contact in last 12 months (Contact)

➢ Rating of contact (Customer service)

➢ Overall council direction last 12 months (Council

direction)

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 2018 State-wide Local Government Community

Satisfaction Survey were optional. Councils also had

the ability to ask tailored questions specific only to their

council.

128


Reporting

Every council that participated in the 2018 State-wide

Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey

receives a customised report. In addition, the state

government is supplied with a state-wide summary

report of the aggregate results of ‘Core’ and ‘Optional’

questions asked across all council areas surveyed.

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.

The overall State-wide Local Government Community

Satisfaction Report is available at

http://www.delwp.vic.gov.au/local-

government/strengthening-councils/council-community-

satisfaction-survey.

http://www.delwp.vic.gov.au/local-government/strengthening-councils/council-community-satisfaction-survey

129


Core questions: Compulsory inclusion questions for all

councils participating in the CSS.

CSS: 2018 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.

Statewide 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.

Contact Us:03 8685 8555

John ScalesManaging Director

Mark ZukerManaging Director

Background and objectives - City of Whitehorse · 2019-06-07 · J00643 Community Satisfaction...

Documents

Transcript of Background and objectives - City of Whitehorse · 2019-06-07 · J00643 Community Satisfaction...