Background and objectives - monash.vic.gov.au main objectives of the survey are to assess the performance of Monash City Council across a range of measures and to seek insight into

2J00533 Community Satisfaction Survey 2017 - Monash City Council

Background and objectives

Survey methodology and sampling

Further information

Key findings & recommendations

Summary of findings

Detailed findings

• Key core measure: Overall performance

• Key core measure: Customer service

• Key core measure: Council direction indicators

• Communications

• Individual service areas

• Detailed demographics

Appendix A: Detailed survey tabulations

Appendix B: Further project information


Welcome to the report of results and recommendations for the 2017 State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey for Monash City Council.

Each year Local Government Victoria (LGV) coordinates and auspices this State-wide Local

Government Community Satisfaction Survey throughout Victorian local government areas. This

coordinated approach allows for far more cost effective surveying than would be possible if councils

commissioned surveys individually.

Participation in the State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey is optional.

Participating councils have various choices as to the content of the questionnaire and the sample size

to be surveyed, depending on their individual strategic, financial and other considerations.

The main objectives of the survey are to assess the performance of Monash City Council across a

range of measures and to seek insight into ways to provide improved or more effective service delivery.

The survey also provides councils with a means to fulfil some of their statutory reporting requirements

as well as acting as a feedback mechanism to LGV.


This survey was conducted by Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) as a representative

random probability survey of residents aged 18+ years in Monash City Council.

Survey sample matched to the demographic profile of Monash City Council as determined by the most

recent ABS population estimates was purchased from an accredited supplier of publicly available

phone records, including up to 10% mobile phone numbers to cater to the diversity of residents within

Monash City Council, particularly younger people.

A total of n=400 completed interviews were achieved in Monash City Council. Survey fieldwork was

conducted in the period of 1st February – 30th March, 2017.

The 2017 results are compared with previous years, as detailed below:

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

Monash City Council area.

Any variation of +/-1% between individual results and net scores in this report or the detailed survey

tabulations is due to rounding. In reporting, ‘—’ denotes not mentioned and ‘0%’ denotes mentioned by

less than 1% of respondents. ‘Net’ scores refer to two or more response categories being combined

into one category for simplicity of reporting.

• 2016, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 1st February – 30th March.


• 2014, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 31st January – 11th March.


• 2012, n=400 completed interviews, conducted in the period of 18th May – 30th June.


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 2016.

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 2016.

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

among this group in 2016.

54

57

58

60

67

66

50-64

35-49

Metro

Monash

18-34

State-wide

Overall Performance – Index Scores (example extract only)

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


Further information about the report and explanations about the State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey can be found in Appendix B, including:

Background and objectives

Margins of error

Analysis and reporting

Glossary of terms

Contacts

For further queries about the conduct and reporting of the 2017 State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on (03) 8685 8555.

J00533 Community Satisfaction Survey 2017 - Monash City Council

77

76

72

Waste management

Art centres & libraries

Recreational facilities

75

5374

5677

60

-22 -18 -17

Population growth

PerformanceImportance

Parking facilities Traffic

management

Net differential

Council Metropolitan State-wide

66 64 59

Results shown are index scores out of 100.


The overall performance index score of 66 for Monash City Council represents a statistically

significant (at the 95% confidence interval) four point decline on the 2016 result. This is counter to the

upward trend in overall performance seen from 2015 to 2016. Overall performance had been close to

returning to the high seen in 2012 (index score of 71), but ratings are now at their lowest point to date.

Positively, Monash City Council’s overall performance is slightly higher than the average rating

for councils in Metropolitan areas and significantly higher than the average rating for

councils State-wide (index scores of 64 and 59 respectively).

Almost all demographic and geographic sub-groups rate Monash City Council’s overall

performance less favourably in 2017 than in 2016, with significant decreases in ratings occurring

among men, residents aged 18 to 34 years and Monash South-West residents.

Residents are much more likely to rate Monash City Council’s overall performance as ‘very good’

(12%) than ‘very poor’ (2%). Almost half of residents (47%) rate Council’s overall performance as

‘good’, while a further 33% sit mid-scale providing an ‘average’ rating. Only 4% rate Council’s overall

performance as ‘poor’.


Review of the core performance measures (as shown on page 19) shows that Monash City Council’s

performance on most measures has either remained stable or decreased slightly compared to

Council’s own results in 2016. However, the 2017 results are generally higher than the average for

Metropolitan councils and significantly higher than State-wide council averages.

Sealed local roads, advocacy and overall council direction comprise the only exceptions. In

the case of sealed local roads, Monash City Council’s performance index is significantly higher

than both the Metropolitan and State-wide council averages.

Ratings on overall council direction have seen a significant decline in the past year (down six

points to an index score of 55). However, Monash’s performance in this area is still slightly ahead

of Metropolitan and State-wide council averages (one point and two points ahead respectively).

Monash’s performance index for advocacy is in line with the group average for Metropolitan

councils and slightly ahead of the the State-wide average (two index points higher).

Of note, Monash City Council’s performance on community consultation and community decisions

is significantly higher than the group average for Metropolitan councils.

Monash City Council performs best in the area of customer service (index score of 75). Customer

service is the highest rated core performance measure. Again, in the area of customer service,

Monash City Council significantly outperforms averages for both Metropolitan (four index points

higher) and State-wide councils (six index points higher).


Half (51%) of Monash City Council residents have had recent contact with Council. Those

aged 50 to 64 years are more likely to have contacted Council (61%) than their counterparts, with

Monash South-West residents and those aged 18 to 34 years less likely to have done so (42%

each).

The main methods of contacting Council are by telephone, followed by in person (27% and 16%

respectively).

Newsletters, sent via mail (43%) or email (25%), are the preferred way for Council to inform

residents about news, information and upcoming events.

These are also the preferred forms of communication among adults aged under 50 and adults

aged over 50, noting that the preference for newsletters sent via mail is considerably higher for

adults aged over 50 (55% via mail compared to 15% via email).

Monash City Council’s customer service index of 75 is a positive result for Council. As

mentioned previously, it represents the Council’s strongest result on core measures and is

significantly higher than the Metropolitan group and State-wide averages.

One in three residents (34%) rate Council’s customer service as ‘very good’, with a further 38%

rating customer service as ‘good’.

Perceptions of customer service have remained fairly consistent among most demographic and

geographic sub-groups, with the exception of adults aged over 65 years. While declines among this

age cohort are not significant, Council should focus on improving relations with this group moving

forward.


Beyond customer service, another area where Monash City Council is performing relatively is

waste management. With a performance index score of 77, it is the highest rated individual service

area among residents.

Waste management has consistently been rated highest of the individual service areas, although

performance has fluctuated over time and reached a high of 80 in 2016.

Three-quarters of residents (76%) rate Council’s performance in the area of waste management

as ‘very good’ or ‘good’.

It is also considered the most important service area by residents (importance index score of 81).

Arts centres and libraries (performance index score of 76) is the second highest performing

individual service area tested, although arts centres and libraries are rated considerably lower in

importance (importance index of 64). Arts centres and libraries are rated second to last, ranking only

ahead of community and cultural activities in perceived importance.

Recreational facilities performs third among individual service areas (performance index of 72).

However recreational facilities also sits relatively low in terms of perceived importance (importance

index of 72), compared to other service areas.

Of note is Council’s performance on informing the community and general town planning

policy. While these are not Council’s highest performing areas, Council’s rating on these measures is

significantly higher than the average for both Metropolitan and State-wide councils. Both however are

rated relatively low in importance (importance index of ratings of 72 and 73 respectively).


Beyond overall performance, a total of five service areas experienced significant declines in

2017. These include planning for population growth (down five index points), enforcement of local

laws (down four points), informing the community (down four), the appearance of public areas

(down three) and waste management (down three).

Performance on all measures has fluctuated over time and are now at or close to their lowest levels

to date.

The three areas that stand out as being most in need of attention as Council’s worst performing areas

are planning for population growth (index score of 53) and parking facilities and advocacy (index

score of 56 each).

Planning for population growth and parking facilities sit mid-scale in terms of importance

(importance index scores of 75 and 74 respectively).

Feedback from residents on what they consider Council most needs to do to improve its

performance in the next 12 months supports this finding, with parking availability volunteered by

13% of residents and inappropriate development volunteered by 8%.

With a performance index score of 55 and a significant decline of six index points in the past year,

overall council direction is another area that Council should pay attention to.

Around one in six (17%) residents say that the overall council direction has improved in the last 12

months, a further 65% say it has stayed the same, whilst 8% say it has deteriorated.


For the coming 12 months, Monash City Council should pay particular attention to the service

areas where stated importance exceeds rated performance by 10 points or more. Key priorities

include:

Planning for population growth (margin of 22 points)

Parking facilities (margin of 18 points)

Traffic management (margin of 17 points)

General town planning policy (margin of 16 points)

Environmental sustainability (margin of 10 points)

Emergency and disaster management (margin of 10 points)

Consideration should also be given to residents aged 35 to 64 years, who appear to be most driving

negative opinion in 2017.

On the positive side, Council should maintain its relatively strong performance in the area of

customer service, and aim to shore up service areas that are currently rated higher than others, such

as waste management and arts centres and libraries.

It is also important to learn from what is working amongst other groups, especially residents aged

over 65 years and use these lessons to build performance experience and perceptions in other

areas.


An approach we recommend is to further mine the survey data to better understand the profile of these

over and under-performing demographic groups. This can be achieved via additional consultation and

data interrogation, self-mining the SPSS data provided, or via the dashboard portal available to the

council.

Please note that the category descriptions for the coded open ended responses are generic

summaries only. We recommend further analysis of the detailed cross tabulations and the actual

verbatim responses, with a view to understanding the responses of the key gender and age groups,

especially any target groups identified as requiring attention.

A personal briefing by senior JWS Research representatives is also available to assist in

providing both explanation and interpretation of the results. Please contact JWS Research on

03 8685 8555.


• None applicableHigher results in 2017

(Significantly higher result than 2016)

• Overall performance

• Overall council direction

• Informing the community

• Enforcement of local laws

• Appearance of public areas

• Waste management

• Planning for population

growth

Lower results in 2017

(Significantly lower result than 2016)

• Aged 65+ yearsMost favourably disposed

towards Council

• Aged 35-49 years


Least favourably disposed

towards Council


7170

73 73

7675

7169

6768

70

66

59

5654

58

62

59

55

60 60 60

6971

72

69

60

5756

59 59

5654

55 5557

61

55

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Customer Service

Overall Performance

Community Consultation

Making Community Decisions

Sealed Local Roads

Advocacy

Overall Council Direction


Performance MeasuresMonash

2017

Monash

2016

Metro

2017

State-

wide

2017

Highest

score

Lowest

score

OVERALL PERFORMANCE 66 70 64 59Aged 65+

years

Aged 50-

64 years

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION(Community consultation and

engagement)

59 62 57 55Aged 65+

years

Aged 35-

49 years

ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the community)

56 59 56 54Aged 65+

years

Aged 50-

64 years

MAKING COMMUNITY

DECISIONS (Decisions made in the

interest of the community)

60 60 58 54Monash

South-

West

Aged 50-

64 years

SEALED LOCAL ROADS (Condition of sealed local roads)

69 72 66 53

Monash

West,

Aged 65+

years

Monash

South-

West

CUSTOMER SERVICE 75 76 71 69Men, Aged

35-49

years

Women

OVERALL COUNCIL DIRECTION 55 61 54 53Monash

West

Aged 50-

64 years


12

10

7

8

18

34

47

31

25

35

50

38

33

28

32

31

22

16

4

11

10

9

6

7

2

4

4

4

2

2

1

15

22

13

1

3

Overall Performance


Advocacy

Making CommunityDecisions

Sealed Local Roads

Customer Service

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

Key Measures Summary Results

17 65 8 10Overall Council Direction

%Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say


75

74

77

73

74

78

Population growth

Parking facilities

Traffic management

Town planning policy

Environmental sustainability

Emergency & disaster mngt

53

56

60

57

64

68

Importance Performance Net Differential

-22

-18

-17

-16

-10

-10

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

suggesting further investigation is necessary:


78

76

77

77

74

73

74

72

73

72

71

71

71

72

65

59

79

72

76

76

74

75

73

72

72

72

71

72

71

72

68

60

80

74

77

77

72

n/a

n/a

72

71

72

68

72

71

72

66

59

81

76

79

78

74

n/a

n/a

71

73

n/a

73

73

71

72

68

60

81

78

76

78

75

n/a

n/a

71

72

n/a

73

73

73

70

69

61

81

78

78

77

77

77

75

74

74

73

73

73

72

72

64

61

Waste management


Local streets & footpaths

Elderly support services

Traffic management

Sealed local roads

Population growth


Parking facilities


Enforcement of local laws

Appearance of public areas


Informing the community


Community & cultural

2016 2015 2014 2013 20122017 Priority Area Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?

Base: All respondents. Councils asked state-wide: 32 Councils asked group: 12

Note: Please see page 5 for explanation of significant differences


38

34

31

33

42

31

28

29

32

22

33

24

23

27

13

13

49

48

49

45

35

48

47

44

41

49

36

45

45

40

41

33

11

16

16

18

15

18

21

22

19

26

23

26

28

24

35

40

2

2

2

4

2

4

4

5

2

6

4

3

4

9

10

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

4

1

2

Waste management

Local streets & footpaths


Traffic management


Sealed local roads

Parking facilities


Population growth








%

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

Individual Service Areas Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] be as a responsibility for Council?



80

76

74

74

71

72

71

70

69

65

68

63

60

62

59

59

57

58

77

75

74

73

71

71

68

69

67

63

63

61

60

58

56

59

55

53

78

76

73

71

69

69

62

68

67

65

60

64

55

54

59

56

59

n/a

77

77

74

70

66

n/a

68

68

67

65

63

64

n/a

56

n/a

57

61

n/a

79

78

74

71

69

n/a

71

71

68

67

65

66

n/a

59

n/a

60

62

n/a

77

76

72

71

69

69

68

68

65

64

64

60

60

59

57

56

56

53

Waste management





Sealed local roads






Traffic management

Community decisions

Consultation & engagement


Lobbying

Parking facilities

Population growth

2017 Priority Area Performance 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] over the last 12 months?


Note: Please see page 5 for explanation of significant differences


Individual Service Areas Performance

33

24

23

18

24

15

17

15

8

9

10

14

8

10

10

8

7

7

43

47

46

50

42

41

38

36

42

39

33

29

35

32

31

31

25

23

17

17

25

22

25

26

30

27

29

29

32

23

31

20

28

26

32

30

4

2

4

6

4

3

6

7

14

6

15

3

9

3

11

12

10

14

2

2

1

1

5

4

3

1

8

1

4

1

4

6

4

6

2

10

1

4

13

4

12

4

16

2

30

13

35

15

18

22

19

Waste management



Sealed local roads





Traffic management


Parking facilities


Community decisions


Consultation & engagement


Lobbying

Population growth

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

Q2. How has Council performed on [RESPONSIBILITY AREA] over the last 12 months?



Sig

nif

ica

ntl

y h

igh

er

tha

n s

tate

-wid

e

ave

rag

e

Sig

nific

an

tly lo

we

r tha

n s

tate

-wid

e

ave

rag

e

-Consultation &

engagement

-Informing the community

-Art centres & libraries

-Waste management

-Town planning policy

-Making community

decisions

-Sealed local roads

-None Applicable


Sig

nif

ica

ntl

y h

igh

er

tha

n g

rou

p

ave

rag

e Sig

nific

an

tly lo

we

r tha

n g

rou

p

ave

rag

e

-Informing the community

-Traffic management

-Parking facilities

-Town planning policy

-Sealed local roads

-None Applicable


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

Monash City

Council

1. Waste

management

2. Emergency &

disaster mngt

3. Local streets &

footpaths

Metropolitan

1. Waste

management

2. Community

decisions

3. Local streets &

footpaths

Interface

1. Emergency &

disaster mngt

2. Population

growth

3. Local streets &

footpaths

Regional Centres

1. Community

decisions

2. Sealed roads

3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Large Rural

1. Unsealed roads

2. Sealed roads

3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Small Rural

1. Emergency &

disaster mngt

2. Community

decisions

3. Waste

management

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

Monash City

Council

1. Community &

cultural

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Informing the

community

Metropolitan

1. Bus/community

dev./tourism

2. Community &

cultural

3. Slashing &

weed control

Interface

1. Tourism

development

2. Community &

cultural

3. Art centres &

libraries

Regional Centres

1. Art centres &

libraries

2. Community &

cultural

3. Planning

permits

Large Rural

1. Art centres &

libraries

2. Community &

cultural

3. Traffic

management

Small Rural

1. Community &

cultural

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Tourism

development


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

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

Monash City

Council

1. Waste

management

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Recreational

facilities

Metropolitan

1. Waste

management

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Recreational

facilities

Interface

1. Art centres &

libraries

2. Waste

management

3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Regional Centres

1. Art centres &

libraries

2. Appearance of

public areas

3. Emergency &

disaster mngt

Large Rural

1. Appearance of

public areas

2. Emergency &

disaster mngt

3. Art centres &

libraries

Small Rural

1. Emergency &

disaster mngt

2. Art centres &

libraries

3. Community &

cultural

Monash City

Council

1. Population

growth

2. Parking facilities

3. Lobbying

Metropolitan

1. Planning

permits

2. Population

growth


Interface

1. Unsealed roads

2. Planning

permits

3. Population

growth

Regional Centres


2. Community

decisions

3. Unsealed roads

Large Rural

1. Unsealed roads

2. Sealed roads

3. Slashing &

weed control

Small Rural

1. Unsealed roads

2. Sealed roads

3. Planning

permits


13

9

8

8

7

7

7

11

Parking Availability

Communication

Development - inappropriate

Town Planning/Permits/Red Tape


Traffic Management

Footpaths/Walking Tracks

Nothing

2017 Areas for Improvement

%

Q17. What does Monash City Council MOST need to do to improve its performance?



AR

EA

S F

OR

IMP

RO

VE

ME

NT

- Parking Availability: 13%

(up 1 point from 2016)

- Communication: 9%

(up 2 points from 2016)

- Development -

inappropriate: 8%

(up 1 point from 2016)

- Town

Planning/Permits/Red

Tape: 8%

(up 6 points from 2016)


69

67

66

66

66

66

66

65

65

64

64

59

65+

35-49

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Monash

Women

Monash West

18-34

Metro

50-64

State-wide

71

70

69

75

72

70

69

69

72

66

64

59

70

68

67

65

69

68

68

72

68

67

66

60

69

62

65

67

63

67

70

69

71

n/a

63

61

69

68

69

70

69

69

68

63

72

n/a

64

60

71

68

70

72

70

71

73

73

75

n/a

68

60

2017 Overall Performance 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Monash City Council, not just on

one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor?


Note: Please see page 5 for explanation about significant differences


2017 Overall Performance

12

16

14

12

15

18

9

12

9

14

15

13

12

9

15

10

16

47

56

51

52

50

54

36

44

52

44

44

48

46

50

44

43

48

33

22

29

28

28

24

37

33

32

35

32

32

35

32

36

41

26

4

3

4

4

3

2

10

6

4

3

4

4

3

3

4

2

6

2

2

1

3

2

1

5

2

2

2

3

3

2

4

1

3

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

2

3

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Monash City Council, not just on

one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good, good, average, poor or very poor?



Overall contact with Monash City Council

Most contact with Monash City Council

Least contact with Monash City Council

Customer service rating

Most satisfied with customer service

Least satisfied with customer service

• Women


• Men

• Index score of 75, down 1 point on 2016


• Monash South-West


• 51%, down 1 point on 2016


61

61

61

55

55

54

53

52

51

50

42

42

State-wide

Metro

50-64

Monash East

35-49

65+

Monash West

Women

Monash

Men

Monash South-West

18-34

2017 Contact with Council

%

Q5a. Have you or any member of your household had any recent contact with Council in any of the following ways?




2017 Contact with Council

5149

47

51 52 51

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Have had contact

%




2017 Method of Contact

%



Note: Respondents could name multiple contacts methods so responses may add to more than 100%

27

16

11

10

5

2

1

By telephone

In person

In writing

By email

Via website

By social media

By text message


2017 Most Recent Contact

%

Q5b. What was the method of contact for the most recent contact you had with Monash City Council?

Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months.

Councils asked state-wide: 19 Councils asked group: 7

41

25

15

11

5

2

By telephone

In person

In writing

By email

Via website

By social media

By text message


77

77

76

76

75

75

73

73

73

72

71

69

35-49

Men

65+

Monash West

Monash South-West

Monash

Monash East

50-64

18-34

Women

Metro

State-wide

74

76

82

77

79

76

75

71

75

76

73

69

77

72

77

80

71

73

70

78

62

74

73

70

73

71

80

74

73

73

72

69

66

74

n/a

72

69

73

76

76

67

70

69

71

65

66

n/a

71

69

70

79

82

73

71

63

72

65

71

n/a

71

2017 Customer Service Rating2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Monash City Council for customer service? Please keep in

mind we do not mean the actual outcome but rather the actual service that was received.





34

39

32

31

27

29

30

33

39

33

28

41

28

25

42

33

38

38

35

44

41

37

40

36

36

32

39

45

32

43

46

30

39

35

16

15

12

16

17

16

18

17

23

15

7

15

18

12

19

14

20

7

6

6

7

10

8

8

8

3

10

5

7

6

7

4

11

5

2

3

5

3

4

4

6

5

2

1

4

2

3

3

2

2

2

3

2

1

2

5

3

2

2

1

1

12

4

2

7

2

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Customer Service Rating






88*

85*

78

73*

73

68

By social media

Via website

In person

By email

By telephone

In writing

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Customer Service Rating2016 2015 2014 2013 2012






*Caution: small sample size < n=30


54

48

32

46

33

24

46

45

50

18

38

29

6

11

27

14

28

1

3

11

10

2

7

2

4

2

8

By social media*

Via website*

In person

By email*

By telephone

In writing


2017 Customer Service Rating





*Caution: small sample size < n=30


• Monash East

• Monash West

• 65% stayed about the same, up 2 points on 2016

• 17% improved, down 11 points on 2016

• 8% deteriorated, up 1 point on 2016

Least satisfied with Council Direction from Q6

Most satisfied with Council Direction from Q6

Council Direction from Q6


58

56

56

56

55

55

55

55

54

54

53

53

Monash West

35-49

18-34

Women

Monash

65+

Men

Monash South-West

Metro

Monash East

State-wide

50-64

62

53

68

59

61

61

63

61

55

60

51

55

55

56

60

59

57

59

56

62

56

56

53

51

56

53

59

57

55

55

52

56

n/a

53

53

46

51

51

59

57

55

54

53

56

n/a

55

53

54

55

51

55

55

54

58

54

54

n/a

54

52

53

2016 2015 2014 2013 20122017 Overall Direction

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Monash City Council’s overall performance?




17

28

22

17

17

16

19

17

19

14

20

17

17

19

15

14

19

65

63

65

66

70

70

62

65

67

69

56

66

65

62

70

68

62

8

7

8

9

8

8

13

11

5

8

11

8

7

8

4

9

10

10

2

5

7

6

6

6

7

10

9

13

10

11

10

12

10

9

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

% Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say

2017 Overall Direction

Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Monash City Council’s overall performance?



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

communication, although further analysis is recommended to understand the demographic preference

profiles of the various different forms of communication.

• Newsletter sent via mail (43%) Overall preferred forms of

communication

• Newsletter sent via mail (55%) Preferred forms of

communication among over 50s

• Newsletter sent via mail (35%)Preferred forms of

communication among under 50s

• Newsletter sent via mail (-8) Greatest change since 2016


2017 Best Form

38

41

49

41

51

43

22 23

17

29

2325

16

13 14

9 911

19

16

1113

119

2 35

2 2

5

2 2 2 2 13

1 1 2 2 3 21 2

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

A council newsletter sent via mail

A council newsletter sent via email

Advertising in a local newspaper

A council newsletter as an insert ina local paper

A text message

The council website

Other

Can't say

Q13. If Monash City Council was going to get in touch with you to inform you about Council news and information and

upcoming events, which ONE of the following is the BEST way to communicate with you?



2017 Under 50s Best Form

32

36

47

35

48

35

28

24

17

37

26

32

18

12

16

8 911

18 17

10 11 10 9

2

5

8

4 3

7

24

2 31

42 2 3 21

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017





A text message

The council website

Other

Can't say





2017 Over 50s Best Form

47 46

51 51

56 55

14

22

16

19 19

1514 13 12 11

8

11

21

1513

16

13

8

2 1 1

4

1 1 1 1 1 22 1

5

1 2 32 1 1 2

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017





A text message

The council website

Other

Can't say





66

62

60

60

59

59

58

58

57

57

55

55

65+

Monash South-West

Women

Monash West

Monash

18-34

Men

Monash East

50-64

Metro

35-49

State-wide

64

69

60

60

62

63

63

60

62

58

58

54

63

53

58

64

58

58

59

58

54

58

57

56

56

59

57

56

54

53

50

50

46

n/a

57

57

55

57

56

56

56

59

57

55

52

n/a

58

57

60

60

60

56

59

64

58

58

55

n/a

53

57

2017 Consultation and Engagement Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?




10

11

9

7

7

9

7

7

10

10

9

10

10

10

6

5

18

31

37

31

25

30

28

29

31

34

28

35

28

35

30

28

34

36

28

31

37

39

38

35

32

31

24

31

29

30

27

27

33

31

22

11

9

12

13

13

10

15

13

10

13

8

10

11

9

13

13

9

4

3

3

6

4

3

6

5

6

4

3

5

4

6

5

3

3

15

9

8

10

10

15

10

13

15

14

16

17

13

18

15

13

12

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Consultation and Engagement Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community consultation and engagement’ over the last 12 months?



61

59

58

58

58

56

56

55

54

54

53

51

65+

18-34

Monash West

Monash South-West

Men

Monash

Metro

Women

Monash East

State-wide

35-49

50-64

61

60

55

64

58

59

56

60

60

53

57

54

60

63

59

61

57

59

58

60

57

55

54

53

55

56

57

60

51

56

n/a

60

52

56

59

51

56

62

58

58

57

57

n/a

57

56

55

54

54

59

66

65

60

59

60

n/a

61

58

55

56

54

2017 Lobbying Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?




7

7

6

5

4

8

5

5

9

6

6

9

5

7

5

4

12

25

25

30

25

26

24

24

24

24

22

30

25

24

34

21

12

26

32

37

29

36

35

32

31

30

36

33

25

33

31

26

37

42

25

10

8

8

12

7

6

13

11

7

15

7

10

10

9

12

10

10

4

2

3

3

2

2

5

3

4

3

6

4

5

4

5

4

4

22

20

24

20

26

27

22

27

21

21

26

19

25

20

21

27

22

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Lobbying Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘lobbying on behalf of the community’ over the last 12 months?



63

62

61

61

60

60

58

58

58

58

56

54

Monash South-West

18-34

Men

65+

Monash West

Monash

35-49

Women

Metro

Monash East

50-64

State-wide

64

65

60

61

60

60

58

61

59

59

52

54

59

65

61

61

63

60

56

59

59

59

53

55

59

56

52

57

58

55

57

58

n/a

51

48

57

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Community Decisions Made Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?




8

9

8

6

6

7

7

8

8

8

7

6

7

6

12

35

35

33

32

29

32

36

32

40

40

31

44

33

28

30

31

31

35

33

34

32

36

30

28

30

33

30

31

36

29

9

11

7

12

14

11

7

13

4

8

9

4

12

10

11

4

3

4

7

7

4

4

4

5

4

4

5

4

5

3

13

10

11

10

10

14

10

13

15

10

16

10

13

15

15

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Community Decisions Made Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the last 12 months?



80

78

78

77

77

77

77

77

76

76

76

74

35-49

State-wide

65+

Women

Metro

Monash South-West

Monash East

Monash

Monash West

Men

50-64

18-34

74

78

76

76

76

72

72

73

76

70

78

68

75

76

77

76

75

74

76

75

75

74

71

77

n/a

77

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Sealed Local Roads Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?




31

21

25

35

32

26

32

34

30

31

29

38

29

26

48

53

51

44

47

53

48

41

46

49

45

42

47

60

18

22

22

18

18

20

14

23

20

17

19

19

20

14

2

3

1

2

3

4

2

2

2

5

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

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

2017 Sealed Local Roads Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?



71

71

70

70

69

68

68

68

68

67

66

53

Monash West

65+

Men

35-49

Monash

Monash East

Women

50-64

18-34

Monash South-West

Metro

State-wide

72

72

73

67

72

73

72

70

77

72

67

54

73

70

73

71

71

71

69

72

72

69

69

55

70

72

69

67

69

69

70

65

71

68

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Sealed Local Roads Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?




18

23

18

22

11

19

18

21

15

22

15

16

22

19

19

50

49

54

44

32

43

54

46

50

45

54

54

45

44

52

22

22

21

21

28

24

22

23

21

22

23

16

25

29

23

6

4

4

9

16

9

4

9

7

9

4

12

2

4

4

2

1

2

2

12

4

1

2

4

1

4

1

5

3

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Sealed Local Roads Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the last 12 months?



74

74

74

73

73

72

72

72

72

70

70

70

State-wide

Women

50-64

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

65+

Monash

18-34

35-49

Monash South-West

Men

76

75

77

74

73

71

75

72

70

69

71

69

75

75

79

73

72

71

74

72

69

72

76

70

75

77

72

n/a

74

71

74

72

68

76

73

67

75

77

75

n/a

78

71

72

72

74

67

71

67

75

74

78

n/a

71

70

75

70

62

71

70

66

2017 Informing Community Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?




23

23

24

25

23

19

30

27

24

24

20

20

27

22

25

26

22

45

44

45

44

46

49

43

43

48

43

43

45

44

45

38

47

51

28

29

29

26

26

26

23

24

24

30

29

29

26

29

32

25

22

3

3

1

3

4

5

4

5

3

3

3

4

2

3

3

2

4

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Informing Community Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘informing the community’ be as a responsibility for Council?



69

65

65

64

64

64

64

64

63

62

61

59

65+

Women

Monash South-West

Monash

Monash East

Monash West

50-64

35-49

Men

18-34

Metro

State-wide

70

69

74

68

67

67

65

64

67

71

63

59

63

62

61

63

62

66

60

59

64

67

64

61

65

63

65

60

59

61

55

63

58

58

n/a

62

65

62

63

63

65

57

59

65

64

64

n/a

61

66

67

62

65

66

64

58

60

63

70

n/a

60

2017 Informing Community Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?




17

18

13

14

13

16

11

12

17

16

18

17

16

17

14

14

23

38

46

39

31

41

40

35

37

37

38

40

36

40

35

38

40

41

30

26

32

37

32

30

32

32

30

30

28

30

29

33

37

27

19

6

7

10

12

8

6

13

12

8

7

3

9

4

6

3

10

8

5

2

3

3

4

4

5

4

5

5

7

6

5

8

5

3

4

4

2

3

3

3

4

3

4

4

3

4

3

5

2

2

6

5

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Informing Community Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘informing the community’ over the last 12 months?



81

81

81

80

79

78

78

78

77

77

76

75

65+

Monash East

35-49

Women

50-64

Monash

Metro

Monash South-West

State-wide

Men

Monash West

18-34

78

75

77

80

79

77

78

75

77

73

80

74

77

77

76

79

78

76

77

76

77

72

73

73

81

77

81

79

79

77

n/a

79

77

75

75

71

80

79

78

82

84

79

n/a

80

78

76

77

76

79

79

76

79

82

76

n/a

75

77

73

77

72

2017 Streets and Footpaths Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?




34

29

28

30

36

27

34

36

28

41

31

30

39

30

39

33

37

48

50

48

49

45

55

42

43

50

43

53

50

45

43

48

53

50

16

19

21

21

17

16

19

18

18

14

15

17

14

23

12

11

12

2

1

2

1

2

2

2

2

4

2

1

3

2

4

2

3

11

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Streets and Footpaths Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’ be as a responsibility for Council?



81

79

79

78

77

77

77

76

75

74

73

72

Women

Monash South-West

35-49

65+

Monash East

Monash

18-34

Metro

Monash West

50-64

Men

State-wide

76

78

75

76

74

74

72

75

72

74

72

72

77

76

71

72

74

74

76

74

71

74

70

71

76

77

73

74

72

72

68

n/a

69

75

68

70

77

73

72

74

74

74

72

n/a

76

77

70

72

78

73

74

79

76

75

72

n/a

78

74

71

73

2017 Traffic Management Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘traffic management’ be as a responsibility for Council?




33

25

30

25

27

25

27

33

30

32

37

27

39

32

38

29

32

45

49

40

44

46

51

41

43

44

48

42

44

47

46

43

42

50

18

22

23

25

21

21

24

19

22

16

15

24

12

21

15

23

11

2

3

6

5

6

3

6

4

2

2

3

4

1

1

2

4

3

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Traffic Management Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘traffic management’ be as a responsibility for Council?



63

62

61

61

61

60

60

59

59

59

56

56

50-64

Monash West

Monash East

65+

Women

Monash

Men

35-49

18-34

State-wide

Monash South-West

Metro

61

66

62

65

64

63

62

60

65

59

61

56

56

67

60

63

63

61

59

58

63

60

56

57

59

70

61

67

66

64

62

64

64

60

59

n/a

60

57

67

62

63

64

65

65

68

60

65

n/a

59

67

66

67

68

66

65

60

74

58

66

n/a

2017 Traffic Management Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘traffic management’ over the last 12 months?




8

9

12

12

13

12

10

9

11

8

4

7

10

5

10

11

9

42

44

40

43

45

50

38

35

45

40

40

44

40

45

41

40

41

29

33

30

29

28

24

30

30

25

33

27

27

31

28

28

33

29

14

8

11

7

9

8

13

17

11

13

19

13

15

19

14

9

10

3

2

5

4

3

1

5

6

4

1

3

4

2

5

3

4

4

4

3

5

4

4

3

3

3

4

7

6

3

3

3

5

7

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Traffic Management Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘traffic management’ over the last 12 months?



78

76

76

75

74

74

74

73

73

73

71

70

65+

Women

35-49

Monash East

50-64

Monash South-West

Monash

Monash West

Metro

Men

18-34

State-wide

79

76

71

73

75

75

73

73

72

70

69

70

75

76

73

71

75

74

72

72

72

67

67

70

75

75

74

72

75

71

71

69

n/a

67

64

70

75

79

69

72

78

74

73

72

n/a

67

71

71

76

77

68

71

75

72

72

74

n/a

67

70

71

2017 Parking Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘parking facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?




28

25

26

22

25

22

25

28

28

29

26

26

29

21

34

30

29

47

47

38

44

46

46

39

43

44

46

50

44

49

45

43

46

54

21

23

30

29

22

27

28

24

21

21

20

24

18

30

16

18

15

4

4

4

5

6

2

6

4

6

3

2

5

2

4

6

4

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Parking Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘parking facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?



58

57

57

56

56

56

55

55

55

55

55

53

Monash West

65+

Women

18-34

Monash

35-49

Monash East

State-wide

Men

Monash South-West

50-64

Metro

56

52

57

64

57

55

58

56

58

58

55

54

60

55

55

53

55

56

55

57

55

47

56

55

63

56

57

64

59

59

58

57

62

57

54

n/a

59

58

59

60

61

67

61

57

63

61

58

n/a

64

61

63

66

62

60

61

56

61

62

58

n/a

2017 Parking Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘parking facilities’ over the last 12 months?




10

8

8

12

14

12

10

8

11

11

9

7

13

11

10

5

16

33

36

32

34

34

41

33

29

34

32

33

37

29

35

33

34

27

32

34

35

33

35

30

32

34

34

30

34

29

35

30

31

39

31

15

15

16

13

10

12

16

18

13

16

15

16

14

15

17

13

15

8

4

7

4

5

3

8

8

6

9

8

8

8

9

7

6

7

2

3

2

3

2

2

2

2

2

2

2

3

1

2

4

3

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Parking Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘parking facilities’ over the last 12 months?



77

77

76

75

73

73

72

71

71

70

70

69

Monash South-West

Women

35-49

65+

Monash West

Monash

Metro

50-64

State-wide

18-34

Monash East

Men

68

73

70

72

73

71

71

71

70

71

71

69

73

74

73

72

72

71

72

70

71

70

70

69

72

71

70

73

68

68

n/a

71

70

62

67

66

74

75

69

68

75

73

n/a

74

71

78

70

70

72

77

71

76

75

73

n/a

73

70

71

73

69

2017 Law Enforcement Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?




33

20

24

22

26

27

27

29

34

28

40

30

35

34

40

24

31

36

51

43

39

44

42

38

40

32

38

38

30

42

29

32

44

43

23

22

28

27

25

24

26

24

25

25

15

29

16

25

20

26

18

6

5

4

7

4

5

6

5

7

6

4

8

5

8

7

5

3

2

1

1

3

1

1

2

1

1

3

3

3

1

4

1

1

2

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Law Enforcement Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘enforcement of local laws’ be as a responsibility for Council?



66

65

65

65

65

64

64

64

64

64

64

63

Monash South-West

18-34

65+

Women

Monash

Monash West

Men

Monash East

Metro

50-64

State-wide

35-49

72

70

68

68

69

69

69

67

64

64

63

69

67

72

67

66

67

70

69

66

66

61

66

64

65

71

68

67

67

69

66

66

n/a

63

66

62

67

71

62

67

67

66

66

66

n/a

64

65

67

70

74

67

69

68

68

67

64

n/a

66

65

61

2017 Law Enforcement Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?




15

16

14

12

14

16

12

13

13

17

14

15

14

18

15

11

12

36

43

42

41

43

38

39

38

34

34

41

35

37

38

29

37

38

27

26

25

25

23

23

26

26

31

29

17

28

25

23

32

27

25

7

5

6

6

5

5

8

8

6

8

8

6

9

5

7

9

9

4

1

1

1

3

2

3

3

3

4

4

5

3

7

3

2

1

12

9

11

16

12

15

13

13

14

9

16

11

13

9

13

14

15

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Law Enforcement Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?



81

81

79

78

78

77

77

77

76

76

75

73

Women

65+

Monash West

50-64

State-wide

Monash

Metro

Monash East

18-34

Monash South-West

35-49

Men

82

81

78

81

78

77

78

78

73

76

77

73

79

77

77

80

79

76

78

75

74

77

74

73

82

80

79

79

79

77

n/a

76

74

76

76

72

80

82

77

82

79

78

n/a

77

75

78

74

75

84

81

79

82

80

78

n/a

77

75

79

76

73

2017 Elderly Support Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?




31

30

31

33

33

31

35

33

33

33

26

24

38

28

29

32

38

49

51

44

44

47

51

44

45

53

44

53

49

50

54

43

51

47

16

16

20

18

16

17

17

18

9

20

18

20

12

15

23

14

12

2

1

3

2

3

1

2

3

3

2

3

3

3

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

2

2

3

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Elderly Support Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘elderly support services’ be as a responsibility for Council?



71

71

69

69

68

68

68

68

68

67

67

64

65+

18-34

Monash East

Men

Monash

Women

Monash West

State-wide

Monash South-West

Metro

35-49

50-64

74

71

70

71

71

71

68

68

80

69

69

66

74

66

69

68

68

69

66

69

70

69

66

67

69

60

60

60

62

65

65

70

62

n/a

62

55

75

68

67

66

68

70

64

69

69

n/a

68

60

74

76

71

73

71

70

70

69

75

n/a

67

65

2017 Elderly Support Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?




14

15

13

11

11

19

14

11

15

15

11

13

14

10

10

14

24

29

39

36

31

33

30

31

27

28

29

29

29

29

35

24

24

28

23

17

21

23

23

19

19

19

23

25

20

25

21

20

29

27

19

3

3

4

6

2

3

4

3

4

2

2

2

4

1

1

5

4

1

1

1

5

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

3

3

30

24

24

25

30

29

30

39

29

28

36

30

31

33

36

28

21

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Elderly Support Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘elderly support services’ over the last 12 months?



74

73

73

73

73

73

72

72

71

71

71

71

35-49

Women

Monash South-West

Metro

65+

Monash East

State-wide

Monash

18-34

Men

Monash West

50-64

74

73

71

73

73

68

73

71

65

69

75

76

76

71

73

72

70

70

72

71

66

71

72

76

74

72

70

n/a

72

71

72

71

67

69

71

70

72

74

72

n/a

71

70

72

71

68

69

72

75

73

74

72

n/a

71

71

72

73

72

72

77

75

2017 Recreational Facilities Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?




24

20

20

21

16

19

24

24

25

24

23

22

26

23

27

21

25

45

48

47

45

57

53

46

47

41

46

50

46

44

43

48

44

46

26

28

31

30

24

25

26

26

27

27

22

27

24

29

20

32

23

4

4

2

4

3

1

4

3

7

3

4

4

5

5

6

3

3

1

1

2

1

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Recreational Facilities Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘recreational facilities’ be as a responsibility for Council?



77

73

73

73

73

73

72

72

71

71

70

70

65+

35-49

Metro

Monash East

Monash West

Women

Monash

Men

Monash South-West

50-64

18-34

State-wide

75

69

73

73

74

74

74

73

76

77

75

69

75

73

74

75

78

73

74

75

70

75

75

70

75

72

n/a

73

73

74

73

72

72

68

74

71

76

74

n/a

72

71

73

74

74

75

72

74

70

78

73

n/a

74

75

74

74

74

74

71

74

70

2017 Recreational Facilities Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?




24

25

23

22

26

24

22

25

24

26

21

25

23

20

27

19

32

42

45

51

47

46

46

43

45

43

40

45

42

43

45

39

47

38

25

23

18

25

20

23

22

20

28

25

22

26

24

26

27

27

20

4

2

3

2

3

3

7

5

1

4

6

4

4

6

3

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

4

3

4

4

3

4

4

4

3

5

4

2

6

2

4

3

8

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Recreational Facilities Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘recreational facilities’ over the last 12 months?



76

75

74

74

74

74

73

73

72

72

71

69

Women

Metro

State-wide

35-49

50-64

Monash East

65+

Monash

Monash West

Monash South-West

18-34

Men

74

74

74

75

76

69

73

71

76

70

65

69

75

73

73

77

73

73

72

72

72

68

67

69

74

n/a

73

76

75

71

74

72

71

76

67

70

75

n/a

74

73

77

74

73

73

70

72

69

70

74

n/a

73

74

75

73

74

73

77

71

70

71

2017 Public Areas Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?




22

18

20

21

22

22

26

27

19

25

21

18

26

19

22

26

22

49

53

48

50

49

48

47

48

53

46

48

46

52

44

54

45

55

26

26

29

27

25

28

24

23

25

27

26

31

22

35

22

26

17

2

3

3

3

2

1

2

2

2

1

2

3

1

3

4

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Public Areas Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘the appearance of public areas’ be as a responsibility for Council?



75

73

72

72

72

72

71

71

71

70

69

67

Monash West

65+

35-49

Men

Metro

50-64

State-wide

Monash

Monash East

Women

18-34

Monash South-West

74

73

71

75

72

73

71

74

73

72

76

74

75

72

72

74

73

72

72

73

74

72

76

70

74

72

68

70

n/a

69

72

71

69

72

73

69

65

70

71

71

n/a

66

71

70

71

70

73

71

68

75

69

68

n/a

68

71

71

70

74

70

72

2017 Public Areas Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?




23

22

23

24

21

19

25

24

25

25

14

25

20

23

21

22

24

46

54

52

43

47

53

46

48

50

42

47

45

47

43

51

46

45

25

19

20

26

24

18

20

20

22

25

32

23

27

23

24

28

28

4

3

4

4

6

7

6

6

3

4

4

4

3

5

4

2

2

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

4

2

1

2

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Public Areas Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘the appearance of public areas’ over the last 12 months?



69

68

67

65

65

65

64

64

63

62

61

60

65+

Women

Metro

35-49

Monash West

Monash South-West

State-wide

Monash

Monash East

50-64

18-34

Men

67

69

68

66

66

66

66

65

65

69

61

61

69

69

69

69

73

66

65

68

66

72

65

67

68

70

n/a

67

65

69

66

66

66

68

64

63

68

71

n/a

73

64

68

66

68

70

71

63

65

70

73

n/a

71

69

73

66

69

67

69

67

65

2017 Art Centres & Libraries Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?




13

13

15

16

17

18

15

18

13

10

19

9

17

7

17

14

18

41

45

47

42

47

46

39

41

45

42

35

37

45

40

44

36

46

35

34

32

34

29

31

34

32

33

37

35

39

31

45

24

36

30

9

8

5

7

5

5

9

7

8

8

10

12

6

7

14

12

3

2

1

1

1

2

1

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Art Centres & Libraries Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘art centres and libraries’ be as a responsibility for Council?



78

77

77

76

76

75

75

75

75

74

73

73

Women

Monash East

35-49

65+

Monash

Monash South-West

18-34

Metro

50-64

Monash West

State-wide

Men

77

76

71

80

76

75

75

74

76

75

72

75

76

75

75

79

75

74

72

75

74

76

73

74

79

77

78

81

76

76

73

n/a

75

76

75

74

77

75

80

79

77

78

74

n/a

75

76

73

76

80

78

77

82

78

80

78

n/a

73

76

73

75

2017 Art Centres & Libraries Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?




24

25

20

25

26

32

23

25

24

26

20

23

25

22

27

22

25

47

48

55

49

49

47

43

44

45

46

51

43

51

50

44

45

47

17

18

17

18

18

14

18

17

19

17

14

20

14

13

21

19

16

2

1

2

1

1

3

4

3

2

2

3

3

1

4

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

10

7

6

7

6

5

10

10

9

10

13

11

10

11

8

12

10

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Art Centres & Libraries Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘art centres and libraries’ over the last 12 months?



66

63

63

61

61

61

61

61

60

60

59

58

18-34

Women

Monash West

Metro

Monash

State-wide

Monash South-West

Monash East

35-49

Men

50-64

65+

60

60

61

62

59

62

60

57

53

57

61

61

61

63

63

62

60

62

60

58

60

58

62

58

60

63

60

n/a

59

62

67

56

59

56

57

60

59

63

63

n/a

60

62

60

60

62

57

62

58

62

65

63

n/a

61

62

58

64

59

56

61

60

2017 Community Activities Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?




13

7

7

8

7

6

12

13

15

11

13

13

12

22

9

6

8

33

35

38

35

39

41

35

35

33

35

32

28

38

26

38

35

39

40

45

41

43

43

41

39

39

40

39

40

41

38

40

39

44

35

10

12

12

10

9

8

11

11

7

14

7

11

8

7

13

10

11

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

3

4

3

1

1

1

1

6

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

5

3

1

4

3

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Community Activities Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘community and cultural activities’ be as a responsibility for Council?



73

71

71

70

70

69

69

69

69

68

66

64

Monash South-West

35-49

Monash East

Women

Metro

18-34

Monash

State-wide

50-64

Men

65+

Monash West

80

72

68

74

71

70

71

69

70

69

73

70

72

72

69

71

71

71

71

69

69

72

71

75

69

73

69

71

n/a

65

69

70

65

67

72

68

68

68

63

67

n/a

66

66

69

64

65

68

69

72

66

64

72

n/a

69

69

68

65

67

75

72

2017 Community Activities Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?




15

20

19

17

14

16

17

18

11

15

21

15

15

12

22

15

12

41

47

43

42

38

43

42

43

37

48

35

37

45

48

39

37

36

26

23

27

27

31

25

25

23

33

23

23

30

23

29

26

25

24

3

3

2

4

5

3

5

5

5

2

1

3

2

1

4

4

4

1

2

2

1

2

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

13

5

8

8

11

11

10

11

12

11

20

14

13

10

8

17

21

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Community Activities Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘community and cultural activities’ over the last 12 months?



83

83

82

82

82

81

81

81

80

80

79

79

35-49

Monash South-West

Women

50-64

65+

Metro

Monash

Monash West

Men

Monash East

State-wide

18-34

80

78

79

83

80

82

78

77

78

79

80

73

78

80

80

84

78

81

79

78

77

78

79

77

80

79

82

84

82

n/a

80

79

77

80

79

76

82

81

82

87

83

n/a

81

79

81

84

79

76

78

80

83

83

80

n/a

81

83

79

82

78

83

2017 Waste Management Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?




38

32

33

30

40

38

36

40

33

36

47

36

40

36

42

39

34

49

51

50

58

47

50

46

46

56

49

40

50

48

45

48

49

57

11

13

15

12

11

11

16

13

10

13

11

11

12

14

10

12

8

3

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Waste Management Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘waste management’ be as a responsibility for Council?



82

78

77

77

77

76

76

75

75

75

73

71

65+

Men

Monash West

Monash East

Monash

18-34

Monash South-West

50-64

Women

Metro

35-49

State-wide

83

79

78

81

80

80

78

78

80

76

77

70

81

79

81

77

77

77

73

76

75

77

74

72

82

77

80

76

78

77

78

75

79

n/a

76

73

82

78

71

78

77

77

78

73

76

n/a

76

71

85

78

80

77

79

79

80

76

80

n/a

75

72

2017 Waste Management Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?




33

33

28

32

32

38

25

29

36

32

31

35

31

33

28

29

43

43

55

54

50

48

45

44

48

41

43

47

43

44

41

45

46

42

17

9

15

14

13

11

18

16

16

18

15

16

17

15

18

22

11

4

2

2

2

4

3

6

5

4

4

6

3

6

6

6

3

1

1

1

1

2

3

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

3

2

2

2

4

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Waste Management Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘waste management’ over the last 12 months?



77

76

76

75

74

73

73

73

72

72

71

67

65+

50-64

35-49

Women

Monash South-West

Monash West

Monash

Metro

State-wide

Monash East

Men

18-34

75

80

78

74

72

76

72

72

73

70

71

63

73

79

76

70

71

74

72

72

72

71

74

65

72

78

76

74

74

71

72

n/a

72

71

70

65

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

73

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

72

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Town Planning Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘council’s general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?




27

26

25

21

26

26

31

24

25

25

29

18

34

30

30

40

37

41

43

41

41

37

40

46

37

43

34

41

41

49

24

25

26

26

24

23

22

25

26

29

21

38

19

20

13

4

3

4

3

4

5

4

5

1

4

3

4

6

3

2

1

2

1

1

1

3

1

1

2

4

6

3

6

4

4

3

5

2

4

3

5

5

4

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Town Planning Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘council’s general town planning policy’ be as a responsibility for Council?



62

62

58

58

58

57

57

56

54

53

53

50

Monash South-West

18-34

Men

50-64

65+

Monash

Monash East

Women

Monash West

State-wide

Metro

35-49

60

64

61

53

61

59

58

58

61

52

54

54

51

59

56

49

58

56

56

55

60

54

55

53

61

63

57

52

61

59

57

61

60

55

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

55

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

54

n/a

n/a

2017 Town Planning Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘council’s general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?




8

11

6

8

5

5

7

7

10

10

6

7

7

8

11

31

30

31

30

26

25

27

30

37

34

27

38

23

31

26

26

34

34

33

30

28

26

29

23

26

27

21

27

30

32

12

11

11

7

14

14

12

12

10

12

11

8

20

11

10

6

4

6

4

7

6

8

5

4

6

5

4

8

5

6

18

12

13

18

19

20

20

17

16

13

23

23

15

15

16

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Town Planning Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘council’s general town planning policy’ over the last 12 months?



79

79

77

74

74

73

73

73

72

72

71

71

18-34

Monash South-West

Women

Monash

Monash East

Metro

35-49

50-64

State-wide

Monash West

Men

65+

74

74

75

72

71

74

69

72

73

73

69

72

76

77

77

72

70

74

72

73

73

71

68

68

76

76

78

72

69

n/a

72

68

73

74

67

71

70

72

75

71

70

n/a

71

74

72

70

66

69

73

70

75

71

71

n/a

70

72

71

73

66

68

2017 Environmental Sustainability Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?




29

22

28

31

25

25

29

30

31

25

34

26

32

39

27

24

21

44

49

43

36

42

44

40

41

34

49

46

41

46

39

41

47

51

22

22

21

25

27

21

24

22

28

18

18

24

19

18

28

24

17

4

5

4

5

5

8

5

5

5

5

1

6

2

3

5

2

7

1

1

3

2

1

2

2

1

2

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Environmental Sustainability Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘environmental sustainability’ be as a responsibility for Council?



66

66

66

64

64

64

64

64

64

63

63

63

Men

35-49

Monash East

Metro

Monash

Monash South-West

65+

50-64

State-wide

18-34

Monash West

Women

67

63

66

64

65

66

69

63

63

64

64

64

64

62

64

65

63

64

64

62

64

64

62

63

65

64

63

n/a

65

65

66

62

64

66

67

65

66

62

67

n/a

65

66

69

65

64

65

58

64

64

63

66

n/a

67

66

71

64

64

67

70

69

2017 Environmental Sustainability Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?




9

11

10

12

11

14

10

10

7

10

9

10

8

9

9

6

10

39

42

38

39

41

38

37

37

40

36

42

38

40

39

43

41

33

29

31

33

30

28

28

29

28

31

29

25

27

30

25

31

30

31

6

6

6

4

7

5

7

6

10

5

3

6

6

8

3

6

7

1

1

2

3

2

2

2

2

1

5

3

2

1

1

1

16

9

11

11

12

12

14

16

11

20

16

19

13

17

13

15

18

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Environmental Sustainability Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘environmental sustainability’ over the last 12 months?



82

82

80

80

80

78

78

77

77

76

75

75

65+

Women

18-34

State-wide

Monash East

Monash

Monash West

Monash South-West

Metro

50-64

Men

35-49

73

78

80

80

76

76

76

73

76

73

73

73

70

79

75

80

72

72

73

71

77

74

64

68

76

79

75

80

72

74

78

74

n/a

70

69

73

77

80

80

80

78

76

69

77

n/a

75

72

70

78

82

79

80

78

78

79

77

n/a

80

74

76

2017 Disaster Management Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘emergency and disaster management’ be as a responsibility for Council?




42

32

28

35

40

38

45

40

43

42

42

41

44

49

39

32

45

35

42

40

34

31

39

34

35

31

40

33

31

39

30

32

41

42

15

19

23

20

20

17

14

17

17

13

16

15

14

15

16

23

6

4

4

7

6

6

4

4

6

7

2

5

8

1

3

11

2

2

2

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

3

3

1

3

1

3

1

2

2

2

2

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

2

1

3

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Disaster Management Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘emergency and disaster management’ be as a responsibility for Council?



73

71

70

70

69

69

68

68

67

67

65

64

65+

18-34

State-wide

Monash South-West

Men

Monash West

Monash

Metro

Women

Monash East

50-64

35-49

71

73

69

74

71

67

70

68

69

71

65

68

69

73

70

69

69

69

69

69

69

70

64

66

70

72

71

66

67

66

68

n/a

68

69

62

59

66

74

70

69

68

69

68

n/a

67

66

63

62

74

74

70

72

69

73

71

n/a

72

66

63

66

2017 Disaster Management Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘emergency and disaster management’ over the last 12 months?




10

13

11

11

11

14

17

11

11

8

11

14

6

12

4

9

13

32

35

38

29

33

35

37

31

34

31

31

28

35

36

31

29

29

20

18

20

18

19

17

19

19

20

24

13

23

17

15

24

27

16

3

2

3

5

4

3

4

3

2

2

5

3

3

3

4

5

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

35

29

28

36

32

30

21

34

31

35

40

31

39

34

36

29

41

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

2012 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Disaster Management Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘emergency and disaster management’ over the last 12 months?



80

77

77

76

76

75

75

74

74

74

73

73

Monash South-West

Women

65+

State-wide

18-34

Metro

Monash

35-49

Monash West

Monash East

50-64

Men

76

75

76

76

69

75

74

75

78

71

78

72

75

74

72

75

71

74

73

74

75

70

78

71

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

75

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

2017 Population Growth Importance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?




32

32

31

36

36

32

30

36

28

36

30

39

27

35

41

37

38

38

37

39

41

45

42

40

46

27

47

42

19

25

22

19

19

22

21

12

21

17

18

24

20

13

5

5

6

4

5

4

7

3

7

3

4

9

4

4

1

1

2

1

1

2

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

1

2

1

1

4

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Population Growth Importance

Q1. Firstly, how important should ‘planning for population growth in the area’ be as a responsibility for Council?



57

54

54

54

53

53

53

53

53

52

51

51

50-64

Monash South-West

65+

Men

Monash

Monash West

18-34

Women

Monash East

State-wide

35-49

Metro

54

58

58

59

58

57

64

57

59

51

53

51

50

48

53

55

53

55

53

51

54

54

54

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

54

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

52

n/a

n/a

2017 Population Growth Performance2016 2015 2014 2013 2012

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?




7

7

3

7

6

7

8

6

8

6

8

5

8

8

23

33

27

24

22

22

20

28

24

22

23

24

22

22

30

29

32

29

30

33

33

23

33

28

29

27

38

30

14

11

13

16

17

12

16

13

13

15

10

24

11

11

6

4

5

7

7

7

5

7

8

5

10

4

3

7

19

15

21

16

18

19

18

22

14

24

20

17

18

22

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+


2017 Population Growth Performance

Q2. How has Council performed on ‘planning for population growth in the area’ over the last 12 months?



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.

Gender Age

49%51%

Men

Women

9%

25%

24%

20%

21%18-24

25-34

35-49

50-64

65+

S3. [Record gender] / S4. To which of the following age groups do you belong?



2017 Years Lived in Area

19

10

10

12

9

16

11

9

11

13

64

80

80

77

77

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

2015 Monash

2014 Monash

2013 Monash

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

S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?



2017 Years Lived in Area

19

10

14

16

9

16

41

17

22

42

15

3

3

16

11

17

15

16

17

15

18

14

20

26

10

6

19

27

24

22

26

16

16

21

18

13

32

26

9

17

21

18

20

22

17

8

20

13

19

14

21

12

28

32

28

27

27

34

20

24

32

6

13

39

70

2017 Monash

2016 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

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

S5. How long have you lived in this area?/How long have you owned a property in this area?



2017 Own or Rent

77

83

80

83

84

58

77

78

63

72

91

93

20

15

18

15

15

37

20

20

35

23

8

6

2017 Monash

State-wide

Metro

Monash West

Monash East

Monash South-West

Men

Women

18-34

35-49

50-64

65+

% Own Rent

Q9. Thinking of the property you live in, do you or other members of your household own this property, or is it a rental

property?



2017 Countries of Birth- Top Mentions Only -

%

54

9

5

5

5

1

1

1

1

1

AUSTRALIA

CHINA

INDIA

OTHER ASIAN

UNITED KINGDOM

GERMANY

GREECE

OTHER EUROPEAN

OTHER AMERICAS

NEW ZEALAND

Q12. Could you please tell me which country you were born in?



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 Monash City Council according to the most recently available

Australian Bureau of Statistics population estimates, whereas the results were previously not

weighted.

The service responsibility area performance measures have changed significantly and the rating

scale used to assess performance has also changed.

As such, the results of the 2012 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey should

be considered as a benchmark. Please note that comparisons should not be made with the State-wide

Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey results from 2011 and prior due to the

methodological and sampling changes. Comparisons in the period 2012-2017 have been made

throughout this report as appropriate.


Demographic Actual survey

sample sizeWeighted base

Maximum margin of error at

95% confidence interval

Monash City Council 400 400 +/-4.9

Men 184 197 +/-7.2

Women 216 203 +/-6.7

Monash West 139 131 +/-8.3

Monash East 176 171 +/-7.4

Monash South-West 85 98 +/-10.7

18-34 years 77 137 +/-11.2

35-49 years 86 95 +/-10.6

50-64 years 115 82 +/-9.2

65+ years 122 86 +/-8.9

The sample size for the 2017 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey for

Monash 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 151,000 people aged

18 years or over for Monash City Council, according to ABS estimates.


All participating councils are listed in the state-wide report published on the DELWP website. In 2017,

68 of the 79 Councils throughout Victoria participated in this survey. For consistency of analysis and

reporting across all projects, Local Government Victoria has aligned its presentation of data to use

standard council groupings. Accordingly, the council reports for the community satisfaction survey

provide analysis using these standard council groupings. Please note that councils participating across

2012-2017 vary slightly.

Council Groups

Monash City Council is classified as a Metropolitan council according to the following classification list:

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

Councils participating in the Metropolitan group are: Banyule, Bayside, Boroondara, Brimbank, Glen

Eira, Greater Dandenong, Frankston, Kingston, Knox, Manningham, Maroondah, Melbourne, Monash,

Moonee Valley, Moreland, Port Phillip, Stonnington and Whitehorse.

Wherever appropriate, results for Monash City Council for this 2017 State-wide Local Government

Community Satisfaction Survey have been compared against other participating councils in the

Metropolitan group and on a state-wide basis. Please note that council groupings changed for 2015,

and as such comparisons to council group results before that time can not be made within the reported

charts.


Index Scores

Many questions ask respondents to rate council performance on a five-point scale, for example, from

‘very good’ to ‘very poor’, with ‘can’t say’ also a possible response category. To facilitate ease of

reporting and comparison of results over time, starting from the 2012 survey and measured against the

state-wide result and the council group, an ‘Index Score’ has been calculated for such measures.

The Index Score is calculated and represented as a score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale), with ‘can’t

say’ responses excluded from the analysis. The ‘% RESULT’ for each scale category is multiplied by

the ‘INDEX FACTOR’. This produces an ‘INDEX VALUE’ for each category, which are then summed to

produce the ‘INDEX SCORE’, equating to ‘60’ in the following example.

SCALE

CATEGORIES% RESULT INDEX FACTOR INDEX VALUE

Very good 9% 100 9

Good 40% 75 30

Average 37% 50 19

Poor 9% 25 2

Very poor 4% 0 0

Can’t say 1% -- INDEX SCORE 60


Similarly, an Index Score has been calculated for the Core question ‘Performance direction in the last

12 months’, based on the following scale for each performance measure category, with ‘Can’t say’

responses excluded from the calculation.

SCALE CATEGORIES % RESULT INDEX FACTOR INDEX VALUE

Improved 36% 100 36

Stayed the same 40% 50 20

Deteriorated 23% 0 0

Can’t say 1% -- INDEX SCORE 56


Index scores are indicative of an overall rating on a particular service area. In this context, index scores

indicate:

a) how well council is seen to be performing in a particular service area; or

b) the level of importance placed on a particular service area.

For ease of interpretation, index score ratings can be categorised as follows:

INDEX SCORE Performance implication Importance implication

75 – 100Council is performing very well

in this service area

This service area is seen to be

extremely important

60 – 75Council is performing well in this service

area, but there is room for improvement


very important

50 – 60Council is performing satisfactorily in

this service area but needs to improve


fairly important

40 – 50Council is performing poorly



somewhat important

0 – 40Council is performing very poorly



not that important


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.


Core, Optional and Tailored Questions

Over and above necessary geographic and demographic questions required to ensure sample

representativeness, a base set of questions for the 2017 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 2017 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey were optional.

Councils also had the ability to ask tailored questions specific only to their council.


Reporting

Every council that participated in the 2017 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

https://www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au/our-programs/council-community-satisfaction-survey.

.

https://www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au/our-programs/council-community-satisfaction-survey


Core questions: Compulsory inclusion questions for all councils participating in the CSS.

CSS: 2017 Victorian Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey.

Council group: One of five classified groups, comprising: metropolitan, interface, regional centres, large rural and

small rural.

Council group average: The average result for all participating councils in the council group.

Highest / lowest: The result described is the highest or lowest result across a particular demographic sub-group e.g.

men, for the specific question being reported. Reference to the result for a demographic sub-group being the highest or

lowest does not imply that it is significantly higher or lower, unless this is specifically mentioned.

Index score: A score calculated and represented as a score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale). This score is sometimes

reported as a figure in brackets next to the category being described, e.g. men 50+ (60).

Optional questions: Questions which councils had an option to include or not.

Percentages: Also referred to as ‘detailed results’, meaning the proportion of responses, expressed as a percentage.

Sample: The number of completed interviews, e.g. for a council or within a demographic sub-group.

Significantly higher / lower: The result described is significantly higher or lower than the comparison result based on

a statistical significance test at the 95% confidence limit. If the result referenced is statistically higher or lower then this

will be specifically mentioned, however not all significantly higher or lower results are referenced in summary reporting.

Statewide average: The average result for all participating councils in the State.

Tailored questions: Individual questions tailored by and only reported to the commissioning council.

Weighting: Weighting factors are applied to the sample for each council based on available age and gender

proportions from ABS census information to ensure reported results are proportionate to the actual population of the

council, rather than the achieved survey sample.

Contact Us:

03 8685 8555

John Scales

Managing Director

Mark Zuker

Managing Director

Documents

Background and objectives - monash.vic.gov.au main objectives of the survey are to assess the performance of Monash City Council across a range of measures and to seek insight into