greater bendigo community satisfaction survey 2015

2

J00326 Community Satisfaction Survey 2015 – City of Greater Bendigo

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• Positives and areas for improvement• Communications• Individual service areas• Detailed demographics

Appendix A: Detailed survey tabulations Appendix B: Further project information

3


Welcome to the report of results and recommendations for the 2015 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey for the City of Greater Bendigo.

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 and participating councils have a range of 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 the City of Greater Bendigo 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.

4


This survey was conducted by Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) as a representative random probability survey of residents aged 18+ years in the City of Greater Bendigo.

Survey sample matched to the demographic profile of the City of Greater Bendigo as determined by the most recent ABS population estimates was purchased from an accredited supplier of publicly available phone records, including up to 10% mobile phone numbers to cater to the diversity of residents within the City of Greater Bendigo, particularly younger people.

A total of n=400 completed interviews were achieved in the City of Greater Bendigo. Survey fieldwork was conducted in the period of 1st February – 30th March, 2015.

The 2015 results are compared with previous years, as detailed below: • 2014, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 31st January – 11th March.• 2013, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 1st February – 24th March.• 2012, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 18th May – 30th June.

Minimum quotas of gender within age groups were applied during the fieldwork phase. Post-survey weighting was then conducted to ensure accurate representation of the age and gender profile of the City of Greater Bendigo.

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.

5


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 2014. 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 2014. The result among 18-34 year olds in the council is significantly lower than the result achieved among this

group in 2014.

54

5758

60

67

66

50-64

35-49

Regional Centres

Greater Bendigo City Council

18-34

State-wide

Overall Performance – Index Scores (example extract only)

Note: For details on the calculations used to determine statistically significant differences, please refer to Appendix B.

6


Further InformationFurther 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

ContactsFor further queries about the conduct and reporting of the 2015 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on (03) 8685 8555.

8


The core results for the City of Greater Bendigo are all lower than the 2014 results and on many issues, the results represent a significant decline in performance.

Following three years of identical measures of overall performance, the 2015 rating for the City of Greater Bendigo has now dropped by three points to an index score of 60. While this result is a decline on previous years, it is not a significant decline and it is is on par with the State-wide result and is two points higher than the Regional group average. The most notable shift in favour is from Seniors (residents aged 65 years and over),

whose rating of overall performance is the lowest in four years and has declined from an index score of 65 in 2014 down to 58 in 2015.

Throughout the report, the region of Heathcote is often flagged as the region providing the lowest approval of Council activity. While this region is certainly more critical than others within the Council jurisdiction, it should be noted that just 10 households from the Heathcote area were included in the total sample. While that region has been analysed as a separate region, as requested by Council, readers are requested to treat those results with caution given such a small base.

9


There is growing concern amongst residents about the overall direction that Council is taking. Rating of the overall direction of the City of Greater Bendigo (index score of 52) has dropped by six points in 2015 and is now at the lowest point in four years. The consequence of this shift is that the City of Greater Bendigo now sits slightly below both the State-wide and Regional group average whereas in 2014, the Council was five points ahead of the State average. The significantly weaker result for ‘overall direction’ is driven heavily by concerns

amongst women generally, residents aged 50-64 years and residents of Eaglehawk and Heathcote in particular.

While 26% of residents in 2014 believed that Council direction had improved in the previous 12 months, that figure has dropped to just 19% in 2015.

10


Making community decisions (in the interests of the community) is of particular concern for residents of the City of Greater Bendigo in 2015. The index score of 51 is significantly lower (a drop of eight points) than the 2014 score and it is also now significantly lower (by four points) compared with the State-wide average. Significant declines on performance on this issue were recorded across all demographic

groups. The differential between importance and performance ratings generally indicates areas in

need of improvement. This is particularly the case for ‘making decisions in the interest of the community’ (the 2nd most important service area in 2015), There is a gap of 30 points on this priority area, a spike of 11 points on the 2014 result and suggests consideration is required by Council on the issues underpinning this result.

Council performance on community consultation has also deteriorated in 2015. The index score of 52 is significantly lower compared with 2014 (down five points) which makes the performance rating for the City of Greater Bendigo significantly lower than the State-wide average.Women are more critical than ever before of Council performance on the core issues of

‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ with their index score on the issue dropping significantly from 59 in 2014 to 51 in 2015.

11


Of the core performance measures, the customer service rating is the highest (index score of 71), but that measure has also dropped four points since 2014. Whereas the City of Greater Bendigo previously exceeded the State-wide average for customer service by several points, Council is now equal with the Regional group average and just one point ahead of the State-wide average for customer service.

Beyond overall performance, residents were again asked to rate Council performance on 22 individual service areas. Sealed local roads was an individual service area asked for the first time of all Councils in

2015. While there is no result from 2014 to compare it with, it is pleasing to see that the City of Greater Bendigo (index score of 61) has well exceeded the State and Regional averages on this issue by six points.

Art centres and libraries once again rated highest with an index score of 82. Another traditionally strong performing area for the City of Greater Bendigo is the

appearance of public areas. While this rates highly again in 2015 (index score of 74), this result is three points lower than 2014.

12


Many other individual service areas did not fare so well in 2015 and in fact experienced significant declines compared with the performance indexes of 2014. The most significant declines in performance were in making decisions in the interest of

the community (down eight points), community consultation and engagement (down five points), informing the community (down five points), community and culture (down five points) and tourism development (down six points).

The declines in performance on these specific areas appear to be quite widespread across the community and are not isolated to any one demographic segment.

Communication channels continue to evolve. While the proportion of residents making contact with Council over the previous 12 months is up five points (to 64%), the proportion of contact by email is significantly lower (10% in 2015, down from 18% in 2014). A newsletter sent by mail remains the preferred method of contact.

13


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, or 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 the responses of the key gender and age groups, especially any target groups identified.

A complimentary 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.

14


• Enforcement of local lawsHigher results in 2015

• Overall performance• Overall Council direction• Making community decisions• Community consultation and engagement• Tourism development• Parking facilities• Slashing and weed control• Appearance of public areas• Customer service

Lower results in 2015

• Aged 18-34Most favourably disposed

towards Council

• Residents of Heathcote (however only 10 residents surveyed)Least favourably

disposed towards Council

16


Performance Measures Greater Bendigo

2012

Greater Bendigo

2013

Greater Bendigo

2014

Greater Bendigo

2015

Regional Centres

2015

State-wide2015

OVERALL PERFORMANCE 63 63 63 60 58 60

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION(Community consultation and engagement)

55 57 57 52 53 56

ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the community) 55 57 57 56 55 55

MAKING COMMUNITYDECISIONS (Decisions made in the interest of the community)

n/a n/a 59 51 52 55

SEALED LOCAL ROADS (Condition of sealed local roads) n/a n/a n/a 61 55 55

CUSTOMER SERVICE 74 75 75 71 71 70

OVERALL COUNCIL DIRECTION 55 54 58 52 53 53

17


Performance Measures Greater Bendigo

2015

vs Greater Bendigo

2014

vsRegional Centres

2015

vs State-wide2015

Highest score

Lowest score

OVERALL PERFORMANCE 60 3 points lower

2 points higher Equal 18-34 year

olds Heathcote*

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION(Community consultation and engagement)

52 5 points lower

1 points lower

4 points lower

18-34 year olds Heathcote*

ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the community) 56 1 points

lower1 points higher

1 points higher


MAKING COMMUNITYDECISIONS (Decisions made in the interest of the community)

51 8 points lower

1 points lower

4 points lower


SEALED LOCAL ROADS (Condition of sealed local roads) 61 n/a 6 points

higher6 points higher Eaglehawk Heathcote*

CUSTOMER SERVICE 71 4 points lower Equal 1 points

higher65+ year

olds Heathcote*

OVERALL COUNCIL DIRECTION 52 6 points

lower1 points

lower1 points

lower Men Heathcote*

*Caution: small sample size < n=30

18


7

5

4

4

15

36

46

26

32

28

35

32

32

42

35

38

34

17

11

15

11

16

10

9

4

7

4

8

5

6

1

6

14

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

19 60 16 5Overall Council Direction

% Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

19


Sign

ifica

ntly

hig

her t

han

Stat

e-w

ide

aver

age

Significantly lower than State-w

ide average

-Enforcement of local laws-Art centres & libraries-Population growth -Unsealed roads-Sealed local roads

-Consultation & engagement -Informing the community -Parking facilities -Family support services -Elderly support services -Making community decisions

20


Sign

ifica

ntly

hig

her t

han

grou

p av

erag

e Significantly lower than group

average

-Art centres & libraries-Emergency & disaster management-Sealed local roads

-Slashing & weed control

21


Service areas where importance exceeds performance by 10 points or more, suggesting further investigation is necessary:Service Importance Performance Net differential

Making decisions in the interest of the community

81 51 -30

Consultation & engagement 74 52 -22

Maintenance of unsealed roads 72 51 -21

Parking facilities 73 53 -20

Planning for population growth 79 60 -19

Informing the community 75 57 -18

Town planning policy 74 56 -18

Condition of local streets & footpaths 73 56 -17

Slashing & weed control 70 54 -16

Elderly support services 79 64 -15

Traffic management 73 62 -11

Lobbying on behalf of the community 66 56 -10

Family support services 75 65 -10

22


Base: All respondents Councils asked State-wide: 55Note: Please see page 5 for explanation of significant differences

807879777975717475777274697372727269666464

83n/a8081n/a767472757974n/a75n/a7374n/a70n/a6665

81n/a8179n/a787776727777n/a73n/a7472n/a69n/a6362

2014 2013 20122015 Priority Area Importance8181

7979

787575

7474

737373

7272

707070

6664

6362

Emergency & disaster mngtCommunity decisions

Elderly support servicesPopulation growth

Waste managementInforming the communityFamily support services

Consultation & engagementTown planning policy

Local streets & footpathsTraffic management

Parking facilitiesEnforcement of local laws

Unsealed roadsRecreational facilities

Appearance of public areasSlashing & weed control

LobbyingTourism developmentArt centres & librariesCommunity & cultural

23


8477737175667272676663n/a59625758565857575459

797172n/a736870n/a666762n/a5660575955n/an/a57n/an/a

776972n/a736873n/a656662n/a6059555754n/an/a55n/an/a

2014 2013 2012

8274

7271

706969

6665

6462

6160

57565656

5453

525151

Art centres & librariesAppearance of public areasEmergency & disaster mngt

Waste managementCommunity & cultural

Enforcement of local lawsRecreational facilitiesTourism development

Family support servicesElderly support services

Traffic managementSealed roads

Population growthInforming the community

LobbyingLocal streets & footpaths

Town planning policySlashing & weed control

Parking facilitiesConsultation & engagement

Unsealed roadsCommunity decisions

Base: All respondents Councils asked State-wide: 69Note: Please see page 5 for explanation of significant differences

2015 Priority Area Performance

24


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

City of Greater Bendigo

1. Community decisions

2. Emergency & disaster mngt

3. Population growth

Metropolitan

1. Waste management


3. Elderly support services

Interface


2. Waste management

3. Local streets & footpaths

Regional Centres



3. Waste management

Large Rural


2. Unsealed roads3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Small Rural




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


1. Community & cultural

2. Art centres & libraries

3. Tourism development

Metropolitan

1. Bus/community dev./tourism


3. Slashing & weed control

Interface



3. Bus/community dev./tourism

Regional Centres




Large Rural



3. Parking facilities

Small Rural

1. Traffic management



25


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

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



2. Appearance of public areas


Metropolitan

1. Waste management


3. Recreational facilities

Interface

1. Waste management



Regional Centres



3. Waste management

Large Rural




Small Rural



3. Waste management



2. Unsealed roads3. Consultation &

engagement

Metropolitan

1. Planning permits

2. Population growth

3. Town planning policy

Interface

1. Unsealed roads2. Planning

permits 3. Slashing &

weed control

Regional Centres

1. Unsealed roads2. Community

decisions3. Parking facilities

Large Rural

1. Unsealed roads2. Sealed roads 3. Population

growth

Small Rural

1. Unsealed roads2. Slashing &

weed control 3. Sealed roads

26


Importance and Performance2015 Index Scores Grid

Note: The larger the circle, the larger the gap between importance and performance.Base: All respondents

Service Importance Performance

Consultation & engagement 74 52Lobbying on behalf of thecommunity 66 56

Making community decisions 81 51Informing the community 75 57Condition of local streets & footpaths 73 56

Traffic management 73 62Parking facilities 73 53Enforcement of local laws 72 69Family support services 75 65Elderly support services 79 64Recreational facilities 70 69Appearance of public areas 70 74Art centres & libraries 63 82Community & cultural activities 62 70

Waste management 78 71Town planning policy 74 56Emergency & disastermanagement 81 72

Planning for pop. growth 79 60Slashing & weed control 70 54Maintenance of unsealed roads 72 51

Tourism development 64 66

0

50

100

0 50 100

HIGH

IMPORTANCE

LOW

POOR PERFORMANCE GOOD

27


Importance and Performance2015 Index Scores Grid

(Magnified view)

Note: The larger the circle, the larger the gap between importance and performance.Base: All respondents

40

90

40 90

HIGH

IMPORTANCE

LOW

POOR PERFORMANCE GOOD

Service Importance Performance

Consultation & engagement 74 52Lobbying on behalf of thecommunity 66 56

Making community decisions 81 51Informing the community 75 57Condition of local streets & footpaths 73 56

Traffic management 73 62Parking facilities 73 53Enforcement of local laws 72 69Family support services 75 65Elderly support services 79 64Recreational facilities 70 69Appearance of public areas 70 74Art centres & libraries 63 82Community & cultural activities 62 70

Waste management 78 71Town planning policy 74 56Emergency & disastermanagement 81 72

Planning for pop. growth 79 60Slashing & weed control 70 54Maintenance of unsealed roads 72 51

Tourism development 64 66

28


BES

T TH

ING

SAR

EAS FOR

IMPR

OVEM

ENT

- Cultural activities: 10%(down 1 point from 2014)- Community/ public events/ activities: 10%(up 3 points from 2014)- Councillors: 9%(down from 12% from 2014)

- Community consultation: 16%(up 7 points from 2014)- Financial management: 10%(up 3 points from 2014)- Sealed roads: 8%(up 1 point from 2014)- Communication: 8%(down 4 points from 2014)

29


• Newsletter sent via mail (33)Overall preferred forms of communication

• Newsletter sent via mail (37)Preferred forms of

communication among over 50s

• Newsletter sent via mail (29)Preferred forms of

communication among under 50s

• Newsletter sent via mail (down 3 points) Greatest change since 2014

32


2015 Overall Performance

Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of the City of Greater Bendigo, 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: 69 Councils asked group: 7Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

64

64

62

63

61

58

64

65

60

n/a

65

64

64

63

64

63

60

59

61

60

61

n/a

67

69

66

64

62

63

60

57

64

59

63

n/a

64

73

2014 2013 2012

63

61

61

60

60

60

60

60

59

58

58

46*

18-34

Other

Men

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Eaglehawk

Women

50-64

35-49

Regional Centres

65+

Heathcote

33


Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of the City of Greater Bendigo, 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: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

7

13

11

11

10

8

6

12

7

7

9

3

9

6

46

40

41

46

39

36

46

44

29

46

45

49

54

39

39

32

35

39

29

35

38

33

25

29

34

31

30

21

40

40

11

7

6

9

10

11

10

11

43

11

11

11

17

8

8

4

3

3

4

4

5

3

8

3

5

2

4

4

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2015 Greater Bendigo




State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+% Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor Can't say

2015 Overall Performance

35


• 64%, up 5 points on 2014 Overall contact with City of Greater Bendigo

• Aged 18-34 years• Other

Most contact with City of Greater Bendigo

• Heathcote• Aged 65+ years

Least contact with City of Greater Bendigo

• Index score of 71, down 4 points on 2014 Customer Service rating

• Aged 65+ years Most satisfied with Customer Service

• Heathcote Least satisfied with Customer Service

36


37

31

16

18

12

4

1

59

41

31

30

13

10

9

2

1

59

41

28

33

8

9

7

4

1

58

42

34

27

15

10

10

3

2

64

36

By telephone

In person

In writing

By email

Via website

By social media

By text message

TOTAL HAVE HAD CONTACT

TOTAL HAVE HAD NO CONTACT

Q5a. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with the City of Greater Bendigo in any of the following ways? 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: 16 Councils asked group: 2Note: Respondents could name multiple contacts methods so responses may add to more than 100%Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences

2014 2013 20122015 Method of Contact

%

37


40

29

8

14

5

4

n/a

36

34

9

10

8

2

1

35

43

4

9

4

4

n/a

40

32

9

9

5

3

2

By telephone

In person

In writing

By email

Via website

By social media

By text message

Q5b. What was the method of contact for the most recent contact you had with the City of Greater Bendigo?Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months. Councils asked State-wide: 16 Councils asked group: 2Note: Respondents could name multiple contacts methods so responses may add to more than 100%Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences* Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Most Recent Contact

%

38


80

77

75

78

75

n/a

75

72

72

75

69

73

81

83

74

77

75

n/a

75

71

74

73

75

84

78

76

76

74

74

n/a

74

71

74

75

67

51

78

76*

74

73

71

71

71

70

69

68

67

46*

65+

Eaglehawk

50-64

Women

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

State-wide

Men

35-49

18-34

Heathcote

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 69Councils asked group: 7Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences. *Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Customer Service Rating 2014 2013 2012

39


36

38

40

36

31

31

37

37

12

37

36

24

36

40

50

32

39

34

37

37

38

31

41

24

27

37

36

31

30

30

17

10

16

15

17

17

18

16

18

16

27

12

18

7

9

5

4

9

8

7

7

5

64

11

6

9

9

10

6

6

6

4

3

6

6

7

2

8

4

3

12

3

6

1

1

1

2

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk*

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

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

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 69Councils asked group: 7 *Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Customer Service Rating

40


73

81

71

66

76

82

n/a

75

73

71

73

73

90

50

75

73

67

72

71

84

100

72

79

67*

60*

58*

45*

94*

By telephone

In person

In writing

By email

Via website

By social media

By text message

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 16Councils asked group: 2Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Customer Service Rating

41


36

50

30

20

10

74

33

27

32

32

59

35

26

16

16

23

24

8

29

12

4

7

16

18

3

4

9

8

23

18

By telephone

In person

In writing*

By email*

Via website*

By social media*

By text message*


Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 16Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Customer Service Rating

43


• 60% stayed about the same, equal points on 2014• 19% improved, down 7 points on 2014• 16% deteriorated, up 5 points on 2014

Council Direction over last 12 months

• MenMost satisfied with Council Direction

• Heathcote*• Eaglehawk

Least satisfied with Council Direction

• 56% a lot of room for improvement• 37% a little room for improvement• 4% not much/ no room for improvement

Room for improvement

• 17% definitely headed in right direction• 53% probably headed in right direction• 20% headed in wrong direction

Direction City of Greater Bendigo is headed

*Caution: small sample size < n=30

44


57

53

n/a

57

56

59

58

55

59

63

63

58

55

53

n/a

54

48

63

54

54

53

52

55

43

55

52

n/a

55

53

57

55

55

56

56

50

71

54

53

53

53

53

53

52

52

50

49

48

31*

Men

State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

35-49

65+

Greater Bendigo

18-34

Women

50-64

Eaglehawk

Heathcote

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of the City of Greater Bendigo’s overall performance? Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Overall Direction 2014 2013 2012

45


19

26

20

21

20

23

20

21

6

22

17

17

23

16

20

60

60

64

64

63

57

63

48

40

59

62

66

56

61

58

16

11

13

11

13

17

14

24

36

15

16

13

18

17

15

5

4

4

3

5

3

4

7

19

4

5

4

3

5

7





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+% Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of the City of Greater Bendigo’s overall performance? Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Overall Direction

46


56

50

54

52

47

60

56

49

84

59

54

57

55

63

51

37

46

41

41

44

35

37

50

10

33

41

38

37

31

41

4

3

3

5

7

4

5

5

4

4

6

2

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

6

2

1

2

2

2





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+% A lot A little Not much Not at all Can't say

Q7. Thinking about the next 12 months, how much room for improvement do you think there is in the City of Greater Bendigo’s overall performance?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 8 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Room for Improvement

47


17

19

19

21

20

17

17

25

6

17

18

19

18

17

15

53

55

55

53

49

50

56

39

40

50

56

51

49

54

60

10

10

10

9

10

13

9

13

37

14

7

11

13

10

7

10

9

7

10

10

11

10

14

6

11

10

9

16

10

8

9

8

9

7

11

9

9

8

11

9

9

11

5

9

10





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

%Definitely right direction Probably right direction Probably wrong direction Definitely wrong direction Can't say

Q8. Would you say your local Council is generally heading in the right direction or the wrong direction?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Future Direction

48


8

14

13

10

10

12

9

1

18

7

10

15

5

8

4

25

33

31

34

23

24

25

21

24

24

25

30

20

25

22

27

24

23

25

22

22

26

33

16

26

28

28

30

23

26

23

16

18

16

26

24

24

25

6

25

22

19

23

27

26

17

13

14

15

18

18

16

20

36

19

15

9

20

18

22





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

%Definitely prefer rate rise Probably prefer rate rise Probably prefer service cuts Definitely prefer service cuts Can't say

Q10. If you had to choose, would you prefer to see council rate rises to improve local services OR would you prefer to see cuts in council services to keep council rates at the same level as they are now?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Rate Rise v Service Cut

50


16

10

8

8

7

4

4

4

4

7

Community Consultation

Financial Management

Sealed Road Maintenance

Communication

Parking Availability

Don`t know/ Refused tocomment

Business Development

Infrastructure

Waste Management

Nothing

10

10

9

8

8

8

8

6

5

5

7

Cultural activities

Community/PublicEvents/Activities

Councillors Positive

Community Facilities

Parks and Gardens

Recreational/Sporting Facilities

Tourism

Generally Good Overall/NoComplaints

Council Management

Road/Street Maintenance

Nothing

Q16. Please tell me what is the ONE BEST thing about the City of Greater Bendigo? 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 statewide: 19 Councils asked group: 2 Q17. What does the City of Greater Bendigo MOST need to do to improve its performance? Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 28 Councils asked group: 3

2015 Best Aspects 2015 Areas for Improvement

% %

52


Q13. If the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 22 Councils asked group: 4Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences

36

22

16

15

3

2

4

1

33

21

16

18

5

3

3

1

34

17

18

19

4

4

4

1

2014 2013 20122015 Best Form

33

22

16

14

5

5

4

1

A council newsletter sent via mail

A council newsletter sent viaemail

A council newsletter as an insertin a local newspaper

Advertising in a local newspaper

A text message

The council website

Other

Can't say

%

53


Q13. If the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 22 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences

30

26

18

14

5

2

5

1

29

24

13

15

8

4

5

n/a

27

21

19

20

6

4

4

n/a

2014 2013 20122015 Under 50s Best Form

29

26

15

11

8

5

6

0





A text message

The council website

Other

Can't say

%

54


Q13. If the City of Greater Bendigo 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: 22 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences

44

18

15

15

2

1

4

1

37

17

20

22

2

1

1

1

43

12

18

19

2

1

3

2

2014 2013 20122015 Over 50s Best Form

37

19

18

17

4

2

2

1





The council website

A text message

Other

Can't say

%

56


77

75

75

76

74

74

n/a

74

72

72

72

68

81

76

77

76

72

73

n/a

72

70

68

63

69

79

76

73

78

76

73

n/a

76

77

73

72

83

79

78

77

75

74

74

74

74

74

73

67

64*

50-64

35-49

Eaglehawk

Women

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

65+

Men

18-34

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Consultation Importance

57


31

30

25

28

29

31

30

35

30

26

35

19

39

43

25

38

40

43

48

42

39

39

34

21

44

33

36

37

30

48

25

25

27

21

24

25

25

26

24

21

28

38

22

22

15

5

4

4

2

3

4

5

24

7

3

6

3

2

6

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

2

1

2

4





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%

Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't sayQ1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Consultation Importance

58


57

58

n/a

56

59

57

58

55

59

57

55

59

57

58

n/a

58

61

57

57

58

57

56

54

66

57

58

n/a

55

57

55

55

60

55

49

55

60

56

54

53

53

53

52

52

52

51

51

48

43*

State-wide

18-34

Regional Centres

Men

65+

Greater Bendigo

Other

Eaglehawk

Women

50-64

35-49

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Consultation Performance 2014 2013 2012

59


5

7

9

8

7

6

4

9

5

5

4

4

4

6

26

33

30

27

31

28

27

16

27

24

27

28

28

23

24

42

38

38

40

32

36

42

43

36

50

34

45

37

47

39

15

12

11

16

14

16

15

14

19

13

17

13

17

12

18

7

4

5

4

6

6

6

7

18

5

9

4

13

7

4

6

6

8

5

9

8

5

12

3

9

6

1

6

9





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Consultation Performance

60


71

70

n/a

71

71

68

67

69

74

67

66

75

73

70

n/a

75

72

70

69

70

70

68

68

68

71

70

n/a

67

71

70

67

69

70

67

69

66

70

69

68

68*

68

67

67

66

66

64

64

63

50-64

State-wide

Regional Centres

Heathcote

Women

Other

65+

Greater Bendigo

35-49

Men

18-34

Eaglehawk

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Lobbying Importance

61


18

23

22

20

23

22

18

15

30

16

21

19

18

20

16

39

39

41

42

39

39

40

34

41

41

37

28

44

45

42

30

30

31

28

28

29

31

36

29

32

43

23

27

26

9

6

4

6

6

6

8

13

29

11

7

11

13

5

7

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

3

2

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

1

3

2

6





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%

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

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Lobbying Importance

62


59

53

57

58

57

58

57

58

56

n/a

52

55

61

60

57

57

58

56

54

61

55

n/a

58

52

60

54

55

55

57

54

51

54

55

n/a

63

54

59

57

56

56

56

56

56

56

55

55

52*

52

18-34

Eaglehawk

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

Women

50-64

65+

State-wide

Regional Centres

Heathcote

35-49

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Lobbying Performance 2014 2013 2012

63


4

5

6

5

6

6

4

3

6

4

3

4

6

6

32

30

29

29

26

27

31

37

24

31

33

43

32

24

25

35

37

32

36

32

36

36

28

43

40

31

40

27

36

36

11

9

12

13

12

13

11

17

6

10

13

6

13

15

12

4

3

3

4

4

4

4

11

4

4

2

10

1

2

14

15

19

14

20

14

14

15

10

12

17

8

14

18

19





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Lobbying Performance

64


80

82

79

80

78

79

n/a

74

77

74

76

74

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

84

83

82

82

81

80

80

80

80

78

78

67*

35-49

Women

Other

50-64

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

18-34

Men

65+

Heathcote

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: 2 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Community Decisions Importance

65


42

35

38

41

44

35

18

35

48

45

47

43

33

40

45

42

37

39

46

52

44

37

34

40

41

48

15

17

15

17

15

16

11

16

14

17

12

14

17

2

2

2

2

1

19

3

4

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

3

1

1

2

1

1



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

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

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Decisions made in the interest of the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 15 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Decisions Importance

66


57

n/a

63

57

59

59

58

60

58

62

58

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

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

52

52

52

51

51

51

51

51

50

48*

48

State-wide

Regional Centres

18-34

65+

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

Women

50-64

Eaglehawk

Heathcote

35-49

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: 69 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Decisions Performance 2014 2013 2012

67


4

8

7

6

3

8

5

3

2

3

8

3

28

34

31

28

28

26

48

24

33

30

31

23

28

38

41

33

36

40

24

23

43

32

40

29

40

40

16

9

14

17

16

19

18

14

13

19

18

15

8

4

6

7

7

12

29

6

10

6

13

8

6

6

5

9

6

6

10

5

7

8

4

4

8



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't sayQ2. 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: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Decisions Performance

68


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

n/a

n/a

n/a

68

65

64

63

61

61

61

60

55

55

55

45*

Eaglehawk

65+

18-34

Women

Greater Bendigo

Other

50-64

Men

State-wide

Regional Centres

35-49

Heathcote

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: 69 Councils asked group: 7 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Sealed Local Roads Performance 2014 2013 2012

69


15

11

12

15

23

14

16

21

8

15

14

35

33

32

34

40

34

37

33

28

35

35

43

34

29

30

37

14

30

30

38

38

32

34

31

10

16

17

9

13

17

11

8

6

16

10

7

5

10

9

5

3

19

7

4

4

9

5

2

1

1

1

7

1

2

2

1

3


State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


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: 69 Councils asked group: 7*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Sealed Local Roads Performance

70


76

78

77

n/a

74

75

75

75

74

73

76

73

79

79

80

n/a

76

76

75

75

75

73

72

77

75

82

78

n/a

76

78

75

78

78

74

80

78

81

77

77

76

76

75

75

75

75

74

74

73*

Eaglehawk

Women

50-64

Regional Centres

35-49

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Other

65+

Men

18-34

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Informing the Community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Informing Community Importance

71


33

32

32

34

30

34

31

48

17

31

34

34

31

37

30

43

42

44

47

44

41

43

34

59

43

42

38

46

40

47

19

23

19

17

22

20

20

14

24

19

19

21

19

20

16

3

3

2

2

3

3

4

3

3

4

2

4

2

5

2

2

1

1

2

2

3

4

1

1

1

1

1

2





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Informing the Community’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Informing Community Importance

72


62

63

62

n/a

56

62

63

62

64

62

62

58

61

60

60

n/a

59

60

60

66

59

57

60

63

60

58

61

n/a

61

59

59

62

55

60

61

64

61

60

59

58

58

57

57

57

56

55

54

53*

State-wide

Men

18-34

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

Greater Bendigo

Other

65+

50-64

35-49

Women

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Informing the Community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Informing Community Performance 2014 2013 2012

73


9

12

12

11

12

10

8

12

6

12

6

9

7

9

11

31

40

34

37

38

34

31

39

23

34

28

34

29

29

32

41

33

33

32

31

35

44

20

48

38

44

40

45

43

36

13

10

12

15

12

15

13

11

23

12

14

13

10

13

17

4

3

4

3

4

5

4

11

3

5

2

7

5

4

1

2

4

2

2

2

1

5

3

2

1

1

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Informing the Community’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 35 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Informing Community Performance

74


81

77

n/a

78

79

77

77

76

73

75

81

72

82

78

n/a

80

81

79

78

79

81

77

83

74

78

77

n/a

80

80

77

77

78

79

75

90

75

78

77

77

76

76

73

73

73

72

70

67*

66

35-49

State-wide

Regional Centres

Women

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Other

65+

Eaglehawk

Men

Heathcote

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Streets and Footpaths Importance

75


26

32

37

34

34

34

26

20

36

21

31

19

36

33

19

45

46

43

43

43

44

46

51

10

47

43

40

43

42

55

24

20

17

19

19

19

24

22

30

25

23

32

18

22

23

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

6

19

5

4

3

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

6

1

1

2





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%

Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't sayQ1. Firstly, how important should ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Streets and Footpaths Importance

76


59

58

n/a

50

60

58

59

53

55

56

62

54

61

58

n/a

53

60

59

59

57

59

57

59

56

57

57

n/a

54

60

57

58

58

56

55

59

57

62

58

58

58

58

56

56

56*

56

55

55

54

65+

State-wide

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

Men

Greater Bendigo

Other

Heathcote

50-64

Women

18-34

35-49

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 40 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Streets and Footpaths Performance 2014 2013 2012

77


9

13

11

15

13

13

10

5

6

10

9

8

10

8

10

33

34

36

30

34

34

31

50

34

36

30

28

32

34

40

36

29

33

33

28

30

39

12

43

36

36

43

29

37

34

12

15

14

14

15

15

12

20

11

14

13

16

10

10

7

7

5

8

7

7

7

6

11

6

8

6

11

9

2

2

1

1

1

3

1

1

8

6

1

3

2

1

2

4





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 40 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Streets and Footpaths Performance

78


68

74

70

72

73

74

n/a

67

73

70

71

64

75

77

71

74

74

73

n/a

74

76

72

70

71

78

76

74

77

77

77

n/a

75

80

73

77

69

77

77

74

73

73

73

72

72

72

71

66

61*

35-49

50-64

Men

Greater Bendigo

Other

65+

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

Women

State-wide

18-34

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Traffic Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Traffic Management Importance

79


24

20

28

30

25

24

25

16

11

23

25

13

30

34

23

49

49

42

51

41

45

48

63

30

54

44

49

50

44

51

21

26

27

15

26

25

21

15

49

17

26

28

17

18

21

6

3

3

2

6

5

6

6

10

6

5

11

3

4

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Traffic Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 17 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Traffic Management Importance

80


57

64

63

65

63

n/a

64

60

62

61

60

62

66

64

62

65

62

n/a

61

60

61

60

58

68

52

66

63

60

62

n/a

63

58

61

56

64

69

68

65

63

63

62

62

61

60

60

60

58

55*

Eaglehawk

65+

Women

18-34

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

State-wide

Men

50-64

35-49

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Traffic Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Traffic Management Performance 2014 2013 2012

81


10

13

11

12

10

11

10

15

6

12

8

13

10

7

10

38

39

37

41

40

40

38

45

30

32

44

38

30

43

42

39

32

38

29

31

34

39

35

48

42

36

40

42

36

36

8

12

9

11

12

10

9

3

8

8

4

15

8

5

3

2

2

4

5

3

3

11

5

1

4

2

5

1

2

2

4

2

3

2

2

3

4

1

3

1

1

6





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Traffic Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Traffic Management Performance

82


76

74

n/a

74

75

73

74

72

76

70

71

71

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

76

76

74

74

74

74

73

73

71

70

70

61*

Women

65+

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

50-64

Greater Bendigo

35-49

18-34

State-wide

Men

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Parking Facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Parking Importance

83


28

28

24

28

28

34

10

23

34

30

27

25

31

43

41

41

44

44

41

23

43

42

36

45

48

44

23

26

27

23

23

14

67

28

20

23

24

24

23

4

3

6

3

4

11

5

4

9

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Parking Facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Parking Importance

84


57

55

58

58

54

61

57

n/a

61

56

60

52

57

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

56

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

57

55

54

54

54

54

53

53

53*

53

51

46

State-wide

35-49

Other

Men

18-34

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Heathcote

Women

65+

Eaglehawk

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Parking Facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Parking Performance 2014 2013 2012

85


8

14

9

8

8

11

11

6

15

4

7

6

30

30

36

31

31

26

36

28

33

21

38

36

28

34

32

32

33

36

19

40

34

34

32

38

33

34

18

19

15

19

18

23

24

19

18

28

11

13

19

8

5

6

8

6

19

8

7

4

7

11

9

1

1

3

1

1

1

2

1

1

3



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Parking Facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Parking Performance

86


69

73

62

69

n/a

64

73

70

69

69

74

65

76

77

73

75

n/a

81

76

71

74

76

74

72

76

76

72

73

n/a

81

73

70

73

78

68

70

75

75

73

72

72

72*

72

71

71

71

71

68

Eaglehawk

Women

35-49

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Heathcote

65+

State-wide

Other

18-34

50-64

Men

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Law Enforcement Importance

87


27

20

28

27

25

27

27

27

24

19

35

30

28

28

22

39

44

45

44

41

41

37

51

53

44

34

36

40

36

44

28

30

22

23

27

26

30

17

11

29

27

23

29

31

28

5

5

2

4

5

5

4

5

11

5

4

8

3

5

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

1

1

2

4





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 25 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Law Enforcement Importance

88


59

70

65

66

67

67

65

n/a

70

66

66

63

70

73

64

68

68

68

68

n/a

64

65

65

69

68

70

66

68

66

68

70

n/a

68

65

68

65

75

73

70

69

69

68

68

67

67*

66

66

64

Eaglehawk

18-34

35-49

Greater Bendigo

Women

Other

Men

Regional Centres

Heathcote

State-wide

50-64

65+

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Law Enforcement Performance 2014 2013 2012

89


14

13

16

15

13

15

11

30

43

16

12

15

18

11

12

44

41

40

43

40

41

47

30

11

42

46

60

37

43

33

25

26

26

28

26

27

27

19

11

25

25

17

28

27

31

4

7

6

6

6

6

3

6

30

5

4

2

4

4

7

1

2

1

1

3

2

1

2

2

2

12

11

11

7

12

10

12

14

4

10

13

6

13

13

16





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 36 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Law Enforcement Performance

90


67

70

75

73

71

n/a

71

71

72

72

69

67

67

71

78

76

74

n/a

77

72

73

75

71

70

78

82

81

80

77

n/a

76

74

73

76

76

72

83*

81

79

77

75

75

75

75

73

73

72

70

Heathcote

Eaglehawk

Women

18-34

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

35-49

50-64

State-wide

Other

65+

Men

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Family Support Services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 27 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Family Support Importance

91


30

26

29

30

28

31

28

40

41

22

37

40

27

34

15

45

40

44

47

42

42

44

47

47

48

41

36

51

34

57

19

24

22

18

23

21

20

6

11

17

20

15

17

27

17

5

6

4

3

5

4

5

6

8

1

6

3

4

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

1

2

3

1

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

6





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Family Support Services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 27 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Family Support Importance

92


57

68

68

n/a

67

68

68

66

68

67

65

63

65

70

67

n/a

66

66

68

64

69

64

62

61

62

67

67

n/a

65

66

65

65

69

60

63

71

70

69

67

66

65

65

65

65

64

64

62

51*

Eaglehawk

65+

State-wide

Regional Centres

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

Women

18-34

50-64

35-49

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Family Support Services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 37 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Family Support Performance 2014 2013 2012

93


9

13

11

11

11

11

9

13

7

11

11

9

6

11

36

33

35

37

34

35

36

35

36

38

34

34

36

38

36

33

27

23

27

21

27

34

29

30

34

32

40

33

35

22

4

5

6

5

4

4

3

30

4

4

4

6

3

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

3

1

17

22

23

18

29

20

17

23

4

17

17

11

13

17

29





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Family Support Services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 37 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Family Support Performance

94


80

83

84

78

n/a

79

79

78

78

78

79

73

80

83

79

79

n/a

80

79

80

79

78

83

77

83

84

83

83

n/a

81

80

81

82

81

80

78

84

83

82*

81

80

79

79

78

78

77

77

73

50-64

Women

Heathcote

Eaglehawk

Regional Centres

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Other

65+

18-34

35-49

Men

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Elderly Support Services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Elderly Support Importance

95


37

36

36

37

36

38

36

37

53

25

48

36

35

47

32

42

47

48

50

44

44

41

51

23

48

36

38

42

44

43

18

14

14

10

16

15

18

12

24

20

15

21

20

8

19

2

3

1

1

2

2

3

5

4

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

4





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Elderly Support Services’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 29 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Elderly Support Importance

96


70

69

n/a

67

61

66

69

64

68

67

60

71

69

74

n/a

67

66

67

68

66

61

66

66

69

69

69

n/a

67

63

66

68

64

66

66

63

61

69

67

66

65

65

64

64

64

63

63

58

52*

State-wide

65+

Regional Centres

Other

18-34

Greater Bendigo

Men

Women

35-49

50-64

Eaglehawk

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Elderly Support Services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 40 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Elderly Support Performance 2014 2013 2012

97


12

15

13

14

15

14

13

9

6

11

14

11

9

14

17

32

33

35

36

34

35

33

26

16

30

33

36

26

33

31

26

25

23

27

19

25

27

15

49

30

22

28

31

23

21

8

7

6

7

4

6

6

16

18

5

10

8

7

10

6

2

2

2

1

2

2

2

3

1

2

4

3

21

17

21

16

26

19

20

31

11

22

19

17

27

16

22





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Elderly Support Services’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 40 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Elderly Support Performance

98


75

75

74

72

n/a

74

72

72

72

69

70

70

73

74

77

72

n/a

74

73

72

74

71

73

67

81

74

73

72

n/a

75

74

74

71

72

71

76

75*

75

73

72

72

71

70

70

70

70

69

65

Heathcote

35-49

50-64

State-wide

Regional Centres

Women

Greater Bendigo

Other

Eaglehawk

Men

65+

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Recreational Facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 33 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Recreational Facilities Importance

99


20

20

24

23

23

24

19

25

42

20

21

21

23

24

13

46

51

46

52

46

43

48

38

16

47

45

30

58

45

54

28

24

27

22

26

28

28

25

43

27

29

38

16

30

27

5

3

2

2

3

4

4

11

5

4

11

3

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Recreational Facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 33 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Recreational Facilities Importance

100


69

78

71

71

72

72

n/a

72

73

64

73

77

66

75

72

70

68

70

n/a

71

71

69

69

67

68

71

74

70

72

73

n/a

74

77

70

72

66

73

72

71

70

70

69

69

68

67

67

66

60*

Eaglehawk

65+

Men

State-wide

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

18-34

35-49

Women

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Recreational Facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 47 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Recreational Facilities Performance 2014 2013 2012

101


21

24

20

25

22

21

19

33

19

23

19

26

17

15

22

41

48

49

47

43

44

43

33

21

40

43

30

42

55

43

27

20

22

22

23

24

28

18

42

31

23

32

25

24

25

6

5

5

4

6

7

4

11

18

2

9

11

5

5

1

2

2

2

1

2

2

3

1

4

2

4

1

2

3

2

2

2

3

2

3

4

3

4

6

1

6





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Recreational Facilities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 47 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Recreational Facilities Performance

102


n/a

73

68

74

70

75

73

72

73

71

71

70

n/a

74

75

75

74

74

77

74

73

72

70

77

n/a

73

70

74

72

73

76

72

73

71

71

71

74

73

73

73

72

71

71

70

70

68

68

61*

Regional Centres

State-wide

Eaglehawk

Women

65+

35-49

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

18-34

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘The appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Public Areas Importance

103


21

23

23

21

24

27

20

27

6

17

24

23

21

20

18

43

46

51

51

47

46

44

37

34

43

43

30

47

47

52

33

29

24

24

25

25

32

36

60

35

32

43

28

32

29

3

2

1

3

2

2

3

5

1

4

4

2

1

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘The appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 30 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Public Areas Importance

104


75

82

77

76

77

70

77

76

72

n/a

75

82

64

73

72

68

71

64

73

74

71

n/a

73

71

65

73

69

68

69

64

70

72

71

n/a

67

71

76

76

75

75

74

73

73

73

72

72

71

67*

18-34

35-49

Other

Women

Greater Bendigo

Eaglehawk

Men

50-64

State-wide

Regional Centres

65+

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘The appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 42 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Public Areas Performance 2014 2013 2012

105


27

31

25

22

24

24

28

23

11

25

28

28

36

23

21

48

47

44

42

47

47

48

52

46

47

49

51

40

55

47

18

18

23

25

20

21

18

16

43

22

15

19

16

17

21

4

3

6

7

5

6

3

8

3

5

2

4

4

5

2

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

3

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

4





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘The appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 42 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Public Areas Performance

106


68

n/a

64

64

66

68

68

64

64

61

59

61

68

n/a

65

67

66

70

69

66

66

63

61

63

52

n/a

64

64

66

68

65

63

64

58

57

59

74*

66

66

66

65

65

64

63

62

61

60

56

Heathcote

Regional Centres

35-49

65+

State-wide

Women

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Other

Eaglehawk

Men

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Art Centres & Libraries Importance

107


14

15

16

12

16

17

14

9

24

11

16

9

18

13

15

37

38

42

40

40

40

36

43

46

35

40

28

38

43

43

37

34

33

35

33

33

38

31

30

40

35

47

34

34

32

10

9

7

10

8

8

9

16

12

8

15

8

6

9

2

2

2

2

2

1

2

1

3

1

2

2

4

1

1

1

1

1

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 21 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Art Centres & Libraries Importance

108


84

86

81

85

85

84

84

82

86

n/a

75

72

74

80

77

80

80

79

78

78

82

n/a

73

70

79

76

79

78

77

77

75

78

76

n/a

73

66

88

84

84

84

83

82

82

81

80

75

73

50*

Eaglehawk

Women

35-49

50-64

Other

Greater Bendigo

18-34

Men

65+

Regional Centres

State-wide

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Art Centres & Libraries Performance 2014 2013 2012

109


44

51

35

32

24

28

44

51

6

40

47

40

52

46

37

38

34

45

41

44

44

40

24

11

39

37

45

27

42

37

10

9

13

16

18

17

9

9

49

13

8

6

14

6

15

3

2

2

4

4

4

2

23

2

3

4

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

6

3

4

6

9

6

4

16

11

6

6

4

6

3

9





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 26 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Art Centres & Libraries Performance

110


68

58

65

n/a

74

64

62

63

60

64

66

59

69

62

68

n/a

61

65

62

65

64

64

63

60

67

66

61

n/a

64

62

62

62

63

63

62

57

65

64*

64

63

63

62

62

62

62

61

60

58

Women

Heathcote

35-49

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

Greater Bendigo

State-wide

Other

65+

50-64

18-34

Men

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community and Cultural Activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Community Activities Importance

111


12

12

12

10

11

12

11

21

23

9

15

15

14

8

12

35

39

42

41

37

39

38

19

23

33

37

28

36

42

37

42

39

39

37

40

39

40

49

48

41

42

45

44

40

37

8

9

4

10

10

8

8

10

13

4

9

6

7

12

2

1

2

2

2

1

2

6

3

1

4

3

1

1

1

1

1

1





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%

Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't sayQ1. Firstly, how important should ‘Community and Cultural Activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Activities Importance

112


77

74

76

73

75

75

70

n/a

75

76

74

71

74

73

73

74

73

73

69

n/a

73

73

71

63

78

75

71

76

73

73

68

n/a

72

74

71

72

72

72

71

71

70

70

69

69

69

69

69

61*

Eaglehawk

Men

50-64

65+

Greater Bendigo

Other

State-wide

Regional Centres

Women

18-34

35-49

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community and Cultural Activities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Activities Performance 2014 2013 2012

113


22

24

21

24

18

19

21

27

6

24

19

21

22

19

23

42

50

48

44

43

43

41

47

52

41

44

40

42

52

38

24

19

20

22

25

25

26

13

24

27

22

28

23

20

25

4

2

4

4

5

5

4

18

3

6

4

4

4

5

2

1

1

2

2

9

2

3

2

4

3

1

5

5

6

5

7

6

5

4

4

6

4

4

3

9





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Community and Cultural Activities’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 28 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Community Activities Performance

114


81

82

n/a

79

79

79

73

77

81

80

79

75

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

78

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

86*

81

80

79

79

78

78

78

78

78

77

74

Heathcote

50-64

Regional Centres

State-wide

65+

Greater Bendigo

Eaglehawk

Men

Women

35-49

Other

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Waste Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 33 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Waste Management Importance

115


31

37

35

37

30

29

60

30

32

28

27

41

30

50

42

46

45

51

54

23

55

46

45

57

44

56

18

20

16

16

18

17

17

13

22

25

16

14

13

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

11



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Waste Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 33 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Waste Management Importance

116


73

72

70

72

72

71

n/a

67

66

72

73

76

71

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

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

72

72

72

72

71

71

71

70

70

69

56*

State-wide

Other

Men

18-34

65+

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

35-49

Eaglehawk

Women

50-64

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Waste Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 45 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Waste Management Performance 2014 2013 2012

117


24

23

25

22

24

24

11

27

21

28

23

20

22

46

48

47

48

47

43

24

43

48

40

50

47

47

20

22

17

21

19

17

53

22

19

17

18

23

24

6

4

6

6

6

8

5

8

11

4

6

4

2

2

3

2

1

3

11

2

1

5

3

1

2

1

2

1

2

5

1

4

4

2

2



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Waste Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 45 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Waste Management Performance

118


78

78

75

75

75

n/a

74

75

72

69

70

71

76

80

75

74

75

n/a

76

74

73

71

80

73

76

76

73

74

72

n/a

70

73

72

65

68

71

77

76

75

75

74

73

73

73

72

70

69

59*

35-49

50-64

Other

Women

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Men

65+

State-wide

18-34

Eaglehawk

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Council's general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Planning Importance

119


31

27

28

24

25

26

33

20

11

28

33

34

33

32

24

35

45

44

45

41

40

36

31

29

36

35

19

43

43

41

24

20

22

24

25

26

22

40

36

25

23

32

19

20

24

5

2

2

4

4

4

5

1

19

5

5

11

3

2

3

1

1

1

1

4

5

4

2

4

4

4

8

6

5

4

4

3

2

8





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Council's general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Planning Importance

120


59

58

49

56

58

n/a

56

54

55

57

57

53

58

56

60

55

54

n/a

55

56

55

51

62

52

50

59

67

54

54

n/a

53

53

54

50

51

52

63

62

59*

56

56

55

55

55

54

54

54

52

Eaglehawk

18-34

Heathcote

Greater Bendigo

Women

Regional Centres

Other

Men

State-wide

50-64

65+

35-49

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Council's general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 31 Councils asked group: 5 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Planning Performance 2014 2013 2012

121


5

5

4

5

5

6

5

9

6

4

6

4

5

6

32

34

30

29

28

29

32

36

36

31

34

40

31

30

26

35

30

34

35

31

34

36

26

64

42

30

32

37

36

38

10

12

12

16

12

12

11

9

11

9

2

16

11

13

6

6

5

5

6

5

7

1

6

6

4

9

7

5

11

14

14

10

17

14

10

19

4

17

15

4

11

12





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Council's general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 31 Councils asked group: 5*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Planning Performance

122


83

85

81

80

n/a

71

78

79

80

80

74

81

78

87

85

83

n/a

82

85

81

80

83

78

79

87

86

84

81

n/a

80

82

77

80

81

77

79

85*

83

82

81

81

81

81

81

80

80

78

78

Heathcote

Women

18-34

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Eaglehawk

35-49

50-64

State-wide

Other

Men

65+

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Emergency and Disaster Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 16 Councils asked group: 2 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Disaster Management Importance

123


44

45

51

43

44

45

45

40

47

37

51

53

45

46

31

37

34

34

41

35

36

35

44

47

42

32

30

35

35

48

14

16

11

12

15

14

14

16

6

15

14

11

18

16

14

3

5

3

2

4

3

3

3

2

4

2

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

6





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Emergency and Disaster Management’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 16 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Disaster Management Importance

124


63

74

73

74

71

74

74

71

71

69

71

n/a

65

76

72

73

69

72

72

71

70

70

70

n/a

72

77

72

73

73

69

72

72

70

77

67

n/a

81*

73

72

72

72

72

71

71

70

70

70

68

Heathcote

18-34

Greater Bendigo

Women

35-49

65+

Other

Men

State-wide

Eaglehawk

50-64

Regional Centres

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Emergency and Disaster Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 3 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Disaster Management Performance 2014 2013 2012

125


18

21

18

22

17

18

17

24

30

18

19

19

22

17

16

43

45

42

44

39

38

43

34

60

41

44

53

35

39

42

23

20

21

18

19

22

23

27

22

23

19

27

25

21

4

3

2

5

5

6

3

7

4

4

3

4

3

4

3

1

1

1

2

2

1

13

11

16

10

18

14

13

8

6

14

11

4

14

15

18





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Emergency and Disaster Management’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 22 Councils asked group: 3*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Disaster Management Performance

126


81

79

77

77

77

77

72

73

n/a

75

76

76

83

85

81

81

80

81

78

79

n/a

75

78

76

84

79

79

79

77

80

77

81

n/a

75

78

77

83

81

79

79

79

79

78

77

76

75

75*

74

50-64

35-49

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

Women

18-34

Eaglehawk

Regional Centres

State-wide

Heathcote

65+

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 4 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Population Growth Importance

127


40

36

42

38

34

34

41

38

30

39

41

40

47

48

25

37

40

41

40

38

40

37

32

41

38

35

34

31

37

46

20

18

14

18

21

21

19

29

29

20

21

23

19

14

22

2

4

2

2

4

3

2

1

2

2

2

3

3

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+%

Extremely important Very important Fairly important Not that important Not at all important Can't sayQ1. Firstly, how important should ‘Planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 4*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Population Growth Importance

128


62

n/a

48

58

60

59

60

56

60

60

54

55

61

n/a

54

53

59

56

56

58

60

54

54

52

68

n/a

68

60

59

60

60

62

61

56

52

57

69

61

61*

61

61

60

60

60

60

56

54

53

18-34

Regional Centres

Heathcote

Men

65+

Greater Bendigo

Other

Eaglehawk

Women

50-64

State-wide

35-49

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 3 Councils asked group: 16Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Population Growth Performance 2014 2013 2012

129


9

10

8

11

7

10

8

17

6

10

8

17

4

5

8

36

34

28

36

28

36

35

32

54

34

37

42

25

38

36

35

29

31

27

30

31

38

13

28

35

34

30

46

33

30

9

12

13

12

14

10

8

23

10

8

2

13

15

10

4

4

4

4

6

3

3

3

11

3

5

2

6

5

3

7

10

16

10

15

10

7

13

7

8

6

6

5

13





State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 3 Councils asked group: 16*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Population Growth Performance

130


73

76

75

68

74

72

n/a

73

75

81

68

68

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

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

76

74

73

72

71

70

70

70

70

67*

67

65

35-49

Women

State-wide

Eaglehawk

50-64

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

65+

Heathcote

Men

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Roadside slashing and weed control’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 10 Councils asked group: 2 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Weed Control Importance

131


24

24

28

23

23

36

6

19

29

17

36

27

19

40

46

40

39

40

33

57

40

39

38

37

37

46

29

24

26

31

30

15

37

31

27

34

20

31

30

7

4

5

6

5

16

9

4

11

6

5

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Roadside slashing and weed control’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 10 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Weed Control Importance

132


n/a

68

53

55

51

58

59

57

58

54

53

52

n/a

n/a

n/a

56

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

58

56

56

55

55

54

54

54

54

52

50

39*

Regional Centres

18-34

35-49

State-wide

Eaglehawk

Greater Bendigo

Other

Men

Women

50-64

65+

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Roadside slashing and weed control’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 2 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Weed Control Performance 2014 2013 2012

133


8

14

10

10

8

9

6

9

8

11

13

6

2

29

30

32

34

30

25

6

29

28

30

28

29

28

37

31

30

35

37

38

29

35

38

34

36

37

39

14

16

16

12

13

11

60

15

13

13

14

17

14

8

6

9

6

9

7

9

8

9

9

8

9

4

3

2

4

3

11

3

4

4

3

8



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Roadside slashing and weed control’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Weed Control Performance

134


78

68

74

76

75

74

73

n/a

72

74

69

74

81

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

80

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

78

77

74*

73

73

73

72

72

72

72

71

68

State-wide

35-49

Heathcote

Women

50-64

65+

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Men

18-34

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Maintenance of unsealed roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 1 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Unsealed Roads Importance

135


25

29

39

25

25

21

19

23

26

19

28

33

20

43

36

39

43

43

44

57

43

44

40

50

33

49

26

26

18

26

25

35

24

30

23

34

21

27

23

3

6

3

3

4

2

4

4

6

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

3

1

2

2

1

3

1

6



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Maintenance of unsealed roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 13 Councils asked group: 1*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Unsealed Roads Importance

136


56

58

54

52

54

54

n/a

51

56

52

45

46

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

44

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

46

n/a

53

53

52

52

52

51

51

51

50

48

45

31*

Eaglehawk

18-34

Other

Women

65+

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

50-64

Men

35-49

State-wide

Heathcote

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Maintenance of unsealed roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 1 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Unsealed Roads Performance 2014 2013 2012

137


4

7

5

4

4

1

5

3

6

3

4

2

27

28

22

27

26

34

30

25

29

28

35

20

24

32

34

30

32

34

24

33

30

34

19

45

29

17

10

22

17

18

12

34

20

15

17

25

16

12

7

9

15

7

6

8

36

7

7

6

11

5

5

13

13

7

13

13

21

11

15

8

7

10

27



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Maintenance of unsealed roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 20 Councils asked group: 1*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Unsealed Roads Performance

138


66

68

65

65

68

69

66

n/a

66

63

63

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

68

68

66

65

65

65

64

64

64

64

60

50*

Eaglehawk

50-64

65+

State-wide

Women

35-49

Greater Bendigo

Regional Centres

Other

Men

18-34

Heathcote

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Tourism development’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 6 Councils asked group: 1 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2014 2013 20122015 Tourism Development Importance

139


14

15

19

14

14

19

14

15

13

11

22

12

39

41

36

39

39

44

23

39

39

26

51

38

44

36

36

32

36

37

26

54

34

38

49

27

33

33

9

7

10

9

9

11

23

12

6

13

9

7

7

1

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘Tourism development’ be as a responsibility for Council?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 6 Councils asked group: 1*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Tourism Development Importance

140


74

73

n/a

72

77

71

72

66

64

71

69

66

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

69

68

67

67

67

67

66

65

63

63*

62

60

65+

50-64

Regional Centres

Other

Women

35-49

Greater Bendigo

Men

State-wide

Heathcote

18-34

Eaglehawk

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Tourism development’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 2 Note: Please see slide 5 for explanation about significant differences*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Tourism Development Performance 2014 2013 2012

141


15

22

12

18

17

8

14

17

9

20

15

19

40

43

35

39

40

39

47

39

41

43

39

43

37

28

23

28

29

28

25

47

31

26

30

25

29

29

5

4

9

6

5

3

5

5

4

6

5

4

3

1

3

2

3

10

3

4

6

4

1

2

8

7

13

6

7

15

6

9

7

8

6

7

9



State-wide

Regional Centres

Other

Eaglehawk

Heathcote*

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q2. How has Council performed on ‘Tourism development’ over the last 12 months?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 12 Councils asked group: 2*Caution: small sample size < n=30

2015 Tourism Development Performance

143


48%52%MenWomen

11%

18%

25%21%

25%18-2425-3435-4950-6465+

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.

S3. [Record gender] / S4. To which of the following age groups do you belong?Base: All respondents. Councils asked State-wide: 69 Councils asked group: 7

Gender Age

146


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 the City of Greater Bendigo 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 2012-2015 have been made throughout this report as appropriate.

147


Demographic Actual survey sample size

Weighted base

Maximum margin of error at 95% confidence

intervalGreater Bendigo City Council 400 400 +/-4.9

Men 169 193 +/-7.6Women 231 207 +/-6.5Other 345 341 +/-5.3Eaglehawk 45 45 +/-14.8Heathcote 10 13 +/-32.718-34 years 47 117 +/-14.435-49 years 69 98 +/-11.950-64 years 132 84 +/-8.665+ years 152 101 +/-8.0

The sample size for the 2015 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey for Greater Bendigo City Council was n=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 n=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 81,000 people aged 18 years or over for the City of Greater Bendigo, according to ABS estimates.

148


All participating councils are listed in the State-wide report published on the DELWP website. In 2015, 69 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 in 2012, 2013 and 2014 vary slightly to those participating in 2015.

Council GroupsCity of Greater Bendigo is classified as a Regional Centres council according to the following classification list:

Metropolitan, Interface, Regional Centres, Large Rural & Small Rural

Councils participating in the Regional Centres group are: Ballarat, Greater Bendigo, Greater Geelong, Greater Shepparton, Latrobe, Mildura and Warrnambool.

Wherever appropriate, results for the City of Greater Bendigo for this 2015 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey have been compared against other participating councils in the Regional Centres group and on a State-wide basis. Please note however, that council groupings have changed for 2015. As such, comparisons to previous council group results can not be made within the reported charts. For comparisons with previous groupings, please contact JWS Research.

149


Index ScoresMany 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 benchmark survey and measured against the State-wide result and the council group, an ‘Index Score’ has been calculated for such measures.

The Index Score is calculated and represented as a score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale), with ‘can’t say’ responses excluded from the analysis. The ‘% RESULT’ for each scale category is multiplied by the ‘INDEX FACTOR’. This produces an ‘INDEX VALUE’ for each category, which are then summed to produce the ‘INDEX SCORE’, equating to ‘60’ in the following example.

SCALE CATEGORIES % RESULT INDEX FACTOR INDEX VALUE

Very good 9% 100 9Good 40% 75 30Average 37% 50 19Poor 9% 25 2Very poor 4% 0 0Can’t say 1% -- INDEX SCORE 60

150


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 36Stayed the same 40% 50 20Deteriorated 23% 0 0Can’t say 1% -- INDEX SCORE 56

151


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.

152


Core, Optional and Tailored QuestionsOver and above necessary geographic and demographic questions required to ensure sample representativeness, a base set of questions for the 2015 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 2015 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey were optional. Councils also had the ability to ask tailored questions specific only to their council.

153


ReportingEvery council that participated in the 2015 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 www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au.

http://www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au/

154


Core questions: Compulsory inclusion questions for all councils participating in the CSS.CSS: 2015 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 thiswill be specifically mentioned, however not all significantly higher or lower results are referenced in summary reporting.State-wide average: The average result for all participating councils in the State.Tailored questions: Individual questions tailored by and only reported to the commissioning council.Weighting: Weighting factors are applied to the sample for each council based on available age and gender proportions from ABS census information to ensure reported results are proportionate to the actual population of the council, rather than the achieved survey sample.

greater bendigo community satisfaction survey 2015

Documents