Community Perceptions 2015
August 2015
Copyright CATALYSE® Pty Ltd © 2015
Image source: http://www.weekendnotes.com/im/008/09/tomato-lake-belmont-kewdale-picnic1.JPG
Contents
2
Strategic Insights 3
The study 13
Overall perceptions 17
Governance 20
Social 33
Built environment 50
Natural environment 61
Economic 69
Moving Forward 73
This document is Copyright. © 2015
Except under the conditions of the Copyright Act, no part of this document may be reproduced or used
without prior written permission and at all times remains the absolute property of CATALYSE Pty Ltd.
It is for the purposes of the named recipient/organisation only.
Strategic insights
3
Overall satisfaction with the City of Belmont
4
Image credit: http://www.bollig.com.au/images/portfolio/pf26_6.jpg
Place to live
92%
Governing Organisation
88%
Industry
average
Overall performance compared to other councils
5
67 64 64 63 63 63 61 59 59 58
55 54 54
43 41 40
61
54 51
45 40 40 39
34
26
61
Metro Councils
Regional Councils
City of Belmont
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8-10)
67
61
Industry High
52 Industry Average
Council score % very satisfied (8-10): average of ‘place to live’ and ‘governing organisation’
The City continues to perform above average, just 6%
points behind the Town of Mosman Park in the top spot.
Copyright CATALYSE® Pty Ltd. © 2015
Industry Leadership
6
The City of Belmont is leading in 14 areas:
• Governing organisation
• Council’s leadership
• Promoting the area as a great place
• Library
• Youth
• Families
• Seniors
• Disabilities
• How the community is informed about local issues
• Belmont Bulletin
• Website
• Graffiti removal
• Storm drainage
• Footpaths & cycleways
CATALYSE® Benchmark Matrix TM | How to read this chart
7
The CATALYSE® Benchmark Matrix TM (shown in detail overleaf) illustrates
how the community rates performance on individual measures, compared to
how other councils are being rated by their communities.
There are two dimensions. The vertical axis maps community perceptions of
performance for individual measures relative to the average score for all
measures. The horizontal axis maps performance relative to other councils.
Councils aim to be on the right
side of this line, with performance
ABOVE the Industry Average.
As this line represents Council’s
average performance for all
individual measures, around half
of the service areas will be
placed above the line (above
average), and around half will be
positioned below the line
(below average).
Copyright CATALYSE® Pty Ltd. © 2015
CATALYSE® Benchmark Matrix TM
8
Q. How satisfied are you with [SERVICE AREA]? Base: All respondents, excludes don’t know and
refused. Service areas are included when Industry Standards are available (i.e. three or more
Councils have asked the same question in the past 3 years).
Indicates Industry Leadership
Place to live
Governing
organisation
Rates
Leadership
Transparency
Customer
service
Street-
scapes
Park & sporting grounds
Rubbish
collections
Fortnightly
recycling
Verge-side bulk
Food, health & noise
Animal
& pest
Planning
& building
Housing mix &
diversity
Housing density & design
Community
buildings
Library
Sport & rec facilities Belmont Oasis
Youth
Families
Seniors
Disabilities
Consultation
Informing
Belmont Bulletin
Website
Safety & security
Graffiti,
vandalism
& anti-social
Graffiti removal Art, events
& culture
Promoting area/ Environment
Roads
Street lighting
Storm drainage
Traffic
Footpaths & cycleways
Economic development,
tourism & jobs
Education &
training
Swan River
History & heritage
ABOVE
Industry
Average
BELOW
Industry
Average
ABOVE
Council
Average
BELOW
Council
Average
Copyright CATALYSE® Pty Ltd. © 2015
Community Priorities Matrix TM
9
Priority (% mentions)
Q. How satisfied are you with [SERVICE AREA]: Base: All respondents, excludes refused and
don’t know(n = varies) Q. Which areas would you most like the City of Belmont to focus on
improving? Base: All respondents(n = 401)
Performance (% very satisfied)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Leadership
Transparency
Customer service
Streetscapes
Park & sporting grounds
Environment
Reduce water & energy
Rubbish collections
Fortnightly recycling
Verge-side bulk
food, health & noise
Animal & pest
Planning & building
Housing mix & diversity
Housing density & design
Community buildings
Library
Museum
Sport & rec facilities
Belmont Oasis
Youth
Families Seniors
Disabilities
Consultation
Informing
Belmont Bulletin
Website
Safety & security
Graffiti, vandalism
& anti-social
Graffiti removal
Art, events & culture
Promoting
the area
Roads
Street lighting Storm drainage
Traffic
Footpaths & cycleways
Economic development,
tourism & jobs
Education & training Home-based business
encouragement & support
Swan River
History &
heritage
TravelSmart
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Secondary priorities
Moderate performers
Highest priority
Overall performance | 61% very satisfied
The community is mostly concerned with safety
and security, followed by housing density,
streetscapes, parks & sporting grounds.
Strong performers
Copyright CATALYSE® Pty Ltd. © 2015
Key community variances
10
• Satisfaction levels tend to be HIGHER among:
• Seniors (55+ years)
• Longer term residents
• Renters
• Residents in Belmont – for governance
measures
• Satisfaction levels tend to be LOWER among:
• Home owners
• 18-54 year olds
• Families with younger children (0-11
years)
• Residents in Cloverdale and Kewdale –
for governance measures
• Residents in Redcliffe – for social
measures
• Residents in Ascot / Ascot Waters – for
natural environment measures
An overview of community variances
Overall performance
Place to live + - - + + - - + - -
Governing org. + - + + - Governance
Value from rates - - + + - + + - - + + +
Leadership + - - - + + - + + + -
Consultation - + - + + + - - + + - - +
Transparency - + - + - - + - + - - - + - +
Informing - + - + - + - - - + -
Belmont Bulletin - + - + + - - + +
Website - + - + + - -
Customer service + - + + - - + - + - - + + -
Promoting the area + - + - + + - - - + + Social
Art, events & culture - + - - + + + - - - + + -
Library + - + + + +
Museum - + - - - + - + - + - + - - + +
Sport & rec fac. - - + - - - +
Belmont Oasis - + + - + - - +
Youth + - + + - + - -
Families - - + - - + -
Seniors - + - + + -
Disabilities + - + + + - - + -
Safety & security + - - - + + - - - + - + + -
Graffiti, vand & ASB + - - + + + - - - + + - +
Graffiti removal + - - - + + - + - - + + +
TravelSmart + - + - + - + - + + +
Animal & pest - + - + - + + - - + - + +
Streetscapes + - + + + - - - + + +
Park & sports grounds -
0-11
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
12+ RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
Built environment
Planning & building + - - - + + - - + - - + + +
Housing diversity - + + - - + - + + + - - - + - + +
Housing density - + - - + + + - + - - +
History & heritage - + - + - + - + -
Community buildings + - - + + - + +
Roads + - + + + - - + +
Street lighting + + - - + + - - + - +
Storm drainage + - -
Traffic + + - + - - + - - + +
Footpaths & cycleways - + - + - + - + - +
Natural environment
Conservation & envir. - - + - + - +
Reduce water & energy - + - + - + + - + - + - + + +
Swan River + - + + - + - + - +
Weekly rubbish coll. + + + - + -
Fortnightly recycling - - + - - + - + +
Verge-side bulk + - - - + - - + + - + +
Food, health & noise - + - + - + - +
Economic
Economic development - + - + - + + - + - + + -
Education & training - + - + - + - + - - + + - + + +
Home business support + - + - + - - + - + + - - + + +
0-11
An overview of community variances
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
12+ RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
12
Lived in Area
The study
13
% of respondents
The study
14
In July-August the City of Belmont administered
the CATALYSE® Community Perceptions Survey.
Purpose: to evaluate community priorities and
measure Council’s performance against key
indicators in the Strategic Community Plan.
Methodology: 401 phone surveys were conducted
with a random and representative sample of
residents. Interviewing was completed by the
Edith Cowan University Survey Research Centre.
Quotas were set by age, gender and location and
the final dataset was weighted to match the ABS
Census population profile.
Sampling precision is ±5% at the 95% confidence
interval.
Analysis: Data has been analysed using SPSS.
Where sub-totals add to ±1% of the parts, this
is due to rounding errors to zero decimal
places.
Benchmarking: When 3+ councils ask comparable
questions, benchmarking results are provided.
Participating councils are listed overleaf.
51
49
37
34
29
18
25
61
8
23
16
16
13
24
69
19
12
11
1
12
27
32
41
Male
Female
18-34 years
35-54 years
55+ years
Child - 0-11 years
Child - 12+ years
Child - No children
Ascot / Ascot Waters
Belmont
Cloverdale
Kewdale
Redcliffe
Rivervale
Own / paying mortgage
Rent
Other
Disability or impairment
Aboriginal or Torres Strait…
CALD
Lived in area 0-10 years
Lived in area 11-20 years
Lived in area 21+ years
Weighted
44
56
15
43
43
Unweighted
Councils contributing to the Industry Standards*
15
Metropolitan Regional
*Industry Standards provided when 3+ Councils have asked the same question in the past 3 years
16
How to read this report
A priority box appears in
the top corner if the
community rates the area
as a high or secondary
priority.
Benchmarking shows
performance compared to
others. The Industry High
is the highest score
achieved by all
participating councils.
The Industry Avg is the
average score of all
participating councils.
The chart shows the level
of satisfaction in the
community. Respondents are
asked to rate satisfaction
out of 10:
Very satisfied 8-10
Satisfied 6-7
Neutral 5
Dissatisfied 0-4
Community variances show
how results vary across
the community based on the
Net Satisfaction Score (NSS)
NSS = satisfied – dissatisfied
The table highlights
variances that are
5% points above (+) or
below (-) the overall NSS.
Gender
Age of
children
Age
Where they
live
Disability or
impairment
Culturally and
linguistically diverse
background (CaLD)
Renter
Home
Owner
Time lived
in area
Overall Perceptions
17
65
26
5
3
100
Overall satisfaction with City of Belmont as a place to live
18
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
92% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
86
65
Industry High
65 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - + + - - + - -
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 400).
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
57 31
8
4
100
Overall satisfaction with the governing organisation
19
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
88% of respondents are satisfied, with the ‘very satisfied’ score setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
57
57
Industry High
39 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 383).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Governance and communications
20
43
35
14
8
100
Council’s leadership within the community
21
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
78% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
43
43
Industry High
26 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - - + + - + + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 258).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
44
35
11
10
100
Value for money from Council rates
22
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
79% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
46
44
Industry High
28 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- - + + - + + - - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 245).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
18
40
25
11
6
100
The City of Belmont has developed and communicated a clear
vision for the area
23 Base: All respondents, excludes ‘refused’ (n = 401).
Agree or disagree with statement
% of respondents
58% of respondents agree, trending up over recent years.
Benchmarking % agree
66
58
Industry High
43 Industry Avg.
Council score
Somewhat
agree
Neither /
don’t know
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
+ - + - + - + + - - + + +
Community variances
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
35
34
14
17
100
How the community is consulted about local issues
24
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
69% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
36
35
Industry High
22 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + + + - - + + - - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 317).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
17
42
30
7
4
100
Elected Members have a good understanding of our needs
25 Base: All respondents, excludes ‘refused’ (n = 401).
Agree or disagree with statement
% of respondents
58% of respondents agree.
Benchmarking % agree
63
58
Industry High
49 Industry Avg.
Council score
Somewhat
agree
Neither /
don’t know
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
- + - + + - - - + + +
Community variances
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
20
46
28
4 2
100
Staff have a good understanding of our needs
26 Base: All respondents, excludes ‘refused’ (n = 401).
Agree or disagree with statement
% of respondents
66% of respondents agree, trending up to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % agree
68
66
Industry High
54 Industry Avg.
Council score
Somewhat
agree
Neither /
don’t know
Strongly
agree
Somewhat
disagree
Strongly
disagree
- + - - + - + - - - + +
Community variances
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
33
31
14
22
100
How open and transparent Council processes are
27
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
64% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
37
33
Industry High
23 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - - + - + - - - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 235).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
44
32
12
12
100
How the community is informed about local issues
28
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
76% of respondents are satisfied, setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
44
44
Industry High
27 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + - - - + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 347).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
64
22
9
5
100
Council’s newsletter, the Belmont Bulletin
29
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
86% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
64
64
Industry High
42 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + + - - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 315).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
53 32
8
8
100
Council’s website
30
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
85% of respondents are satisfied, up 13% points to the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
53
53
Industry High
38 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + + - -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 190).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
57 26
8
9
100
The efficiency & effectiveness of customer service
31
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
83% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
61
57
Industry High
41 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + - - + - + - - + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 323).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
46
29
15
11
100
What the City of Belmont is doing to promote the area as a
desirable place to live
32
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
75% of respondents are satisfied, setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
46
46
Industry High
30 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + - + + - - - + +
Community variances
0-11
years
12+
years
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 317).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Social
33
54 30
11
5
100
Festivals, events, art and cultural activities
34
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
84% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
62
54
Industry High
43 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 348).
18 to
34
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
- + - - + + + - - - + + -
Community variances
35 to
54
77
18
4 1
100
The local library
35
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
94% of respondents are satisfied, setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
77
77
Industry High
60 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 300).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
59 24
8
9
100
The Belmont Museum
36
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
83% of respondents are satisfied, up 24% points.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
NA
59
Industry High
NA Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - - - + - + - + - + - - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 135).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
67
24
7
2
100
Sport and recreation facilities
37
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
91% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
72
67
Industry High
53 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- - + - - - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 353).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
69
22
3
6
100
The Belmont Oasis Leisure Centre
38
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
91% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
73
69
Industry High
55 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + + - + - - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 342).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
49
37
10
5
100
Services and facilities provided for youth across the City
39
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
86% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
49
49
Industry High
26 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + - + - -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 293).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
59 29
8
4
100
Services and facilities for families
40
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
88% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
59
59
Industry High
37 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- - + - - + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 309).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
60 29
7
4
100
Facilities, services and care available for seniors
41
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
89% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
60
60
Industry High
40 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 241).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
48
33
14
5
100
Access to services and facilities for people with disabilities
42
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
81% of respondents are satisfied, setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
48
48
Industry High
33 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + + - - + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 209).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
43
32
9
16
100
Safety and security
43
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
75% of respondents are satisfied. Although satisfaction is relatively high, this is the highest priority area to address.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
66
43
Industry High
36 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - - + + - - - + - + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 389).
High
Priority
High
Priority
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
38
34
10
17
100
The control of graffiti, vandalism & anti-social behaviour
44
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
72% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
63
38
Industry High
35 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - + + + - - - + + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 376).
High
Priority
Secondary
Priority
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
61 29
6
4
100
Graffiti removal services
45
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
90% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 6 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
61
61
Industry High
59 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - - + + - + - - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 309).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
52 33
7
7
100
Access to TravelSmart information on walking, cycling and public transport
46
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
85% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
NA
52
Industry High
NA Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + - + - + - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 300).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
45
38
9
8
100
Animal and pest control
47
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
83% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
56
45
Industry High
37 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + + - - + - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 302).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
42
35
12
11
100
Streetscapes
48
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
77% of respondents are satisfied, trending down. Satisfaction is lower among younger adults, in Cloverdale and Redcliffe, and residents who have lived in the area 11 to 25 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
52
42
Industry High
37 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + + - - - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 363).
High
Priority
Secondary
Priority
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
72
21
6 1
100
Park and sporting grounds
49
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
93% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
76
72
Industry High
57 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
-
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 388).
High
Priority
Secondary
Priority
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Built environment
50
31
31
20
19
100
Planning and building approvals
51
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
61% of respondents are satisfied. Satisfaction is lower among families with children and those living in Cloverdale, Kewdale and Rivervale.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
38
31
Industry High
23 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - - + + - - + - - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 226).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
37
32
15
15
100
The mix and diversity of housing types in your local area
52
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
69% of respondents are satisfied. Satisfaction is lower among home owners, females, 18-34 year olds, families with younger children and those in Cloverdale, Kewdale and Rivervale.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
42
37
Industry High
36 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + + - - + - + + + - - - + - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 354).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
30
32
13
24
100
The density and design of housing in your local area
53
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
63% of respondents are satisfied, down 9% points. Satisfaction is lower in Rivervale and among those with younger children or with disabilities.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
43
30
Industry High
39 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - - + + + - + - - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 358).
High
Priority
Secondary
Priority
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
39
34
13
14
100
How local history and heritage is preserved and promoted
54
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
73% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
62
39
Industry High
40 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + - + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 261).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
46
37
11
5
100
Community buildings, halls and toilets
55
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
84% of respondents are satisfied, trending up over recent years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
55
46
Industry High
35 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - + + - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 334).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
50
34
9
7
100
Road maintenance
56
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
83% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
59
50
Industry High
36 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + + - - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 389).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
53
28
9
10
100
Street lighting
57
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
81% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
56
53
Industry High
46 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ + - - + + - - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 398).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
56 32
9
4
100
Storm water drainage
58
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
87% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years and setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
56
56
Industry High
34 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 328).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
39
37
11
14
100
The management and control of traffic on local roads
59
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
76% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
53
39
Industry High
33 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ + - + - - + - - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 379).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
52
30
9
9
100
Footpaths and cycleways
60
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
82% of respondents are satisfied, setting the industry standard.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
52
52
Industry High
37 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 397).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Natural environment
61
46
42
8
4
100
Conservation and environmental management
62
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
88% of respondents are satisfied, the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
54
46
Industry High
35 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- - + - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 293).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
38
37
15
11
100
Council’s efforts to reduce water and energy usage
63
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
75% of respondents are satisfied, up 8% points to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
NA
38
Industry High
NA Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + + - + - + - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 241).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
44
39
10
7
100
Efforts to maintain and enhance the Swan River
64
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
83% of respondents are satisfied, up 7% points to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
58
44
Industry High
37 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + + - + - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 292).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
83
12
3 2
100
Weekly rubbish collections
65
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
95% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
88
83
Industry High
76 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ + + - + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 400).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
77
14
6
2
100
Fortnightly recycling collections
66
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
92% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
85
77
Industry High
69 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- - + - - + - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 396).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
74
16
5
5
100
Verge-side bulk rubbish collection the blue or green mini-skip
bins that you can request up to four times per year
67
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
90% of respondents are satisfied.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
78
74
Industry High
54 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - - - + - - + + - + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 356).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
40
38
12
10
100
Enforcement of local laws relating to food, health and noise
68
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
78% of respondents are satisfied, up 9% points to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
49
40
Industry High
32 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + - +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 290).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Economic
69
29
42
21
9
100
Economic development, tourism and job creation
70
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
70% of respondents are satisfied, up 8% points.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
36
29
Industry High
19 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + + - + - + + -
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 229).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
32
43
12
12
100
Education and training opportunities
71
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
75% of respondents are satisfied, up 8% points to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
40
32
Industry High
27 Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
- + - + - + - + - - + + - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 231).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
29
37
18
15
100
What is being done to encourage and support home-based
businesses in the local area
72
Level of satisfaction
% of respondents
67% of respondents are satisfied, up 16% points to the highest score over the past 10 years.
Benchmarking % very satisfied (8+)
NA
29
Industry High
NA Industry Avg.
Council score
Satisfied
(6-7)
Neutral
(5)
Very Satisfied
(8-10)
Dissatisfied
(0-4)
+ - + - + - - + - + + - - + + +
Community variances
Base: All respondents, excludes ‘don’t know’ and ‘refused’ (n = 156).
18 to
34
35 to
54
55
+
ASCOT
BEL
CLO
KEW
RED
RIV
0 to
10
11 to
25 26+
Lived in Area
0-11 12+
Moving forward
73
Strategic Priorities
74
Moving forward, the community would
like the Council and City to focus
on four priorities:
1.Safety and security, with
reductions in home and car break-
ins, vandalism and anti-social
behaviour, especially around shops
and bus stops.
2.Housing density, with strategies
to reduce parking congestion on
residential streets.
3.Streetscape beautification.
4.Enhancing parks & sporting grounds
with improved maintenance and
facilities.
CATALYSE® empowering decision makers © 2015
CATALYSE® Pty Ltd ABN 20 108 620 855 a: Office 3, 996 Hay Street,
Perth WA 6000 p: PO Box 8007,
Cloisters Square WA 6850 t: +618 9226 5674 f: +618 9226 5676 e: [email protected] w: catalyse.com.au
Top Related