bega valley shire council community · pdf filedavid garcia iris research bega valley shire...

Presented by David Garcia

IRIS Research

Bega Valley Shire Council

Community Survey 2012

page 2

¾ Research Objectives

¾Methodology

¾ Survey Results

¾ Special Rate Variation Results

¾ Summary

¾Questions

Presentation Outline

page 3

¾ Measure the importance of and satisfaction with, services and facilities

provided by Council;

¾ Compare levels of satisfaction for Council services and facilities with the

benchmark results of 2006 and 2009;

¾ Assist Council in identifying service use priorities for the community;

¾ Identify key drivers of resident dissatisfaction;

¾ Gain an understanding of the perception held by residents towards how

safe they feel in their area;

¾ Identify priority action areas for Bega Valley Shire over the next 5 to 10

years.

Research Objectives

page 4

¾ Telephone survey (IRIS CATI facility)

¾ Random sample

* White Pages & ‘Plus-5’ method

* up to 35% of numbers are unlisted

¾ To qualify, respondents had to be: * permanent residents of the Bega Valley Shire Council area

* lived in the area for at least 6 months

* 18 years or older

¾ Sampling procedures mirrored the Census characteristics of the overall

adult population

¾ Final sample was weighted by Age, Sex & Area.

¾ 750 complete interviews collected

¾ Max. sampling error on proportion for total sample is ± 3.8%

Survey Methodology

page 5

Survey Methodology (cont.)

page 6

Survey Results

page 7

Measuring resident perceptions

¾ Respondents asked to rate 39 council services & facilities using the

following scales:

* Importance scale

* (1 = “not important” to 5 = “very important”)

* Satisfaction scale

* ( 1 = “very dissatisfied” to 5 = “very satisfied” )

¾ The 39 services and facilities were grouped into 1 of 5 key service areas:

* A Liveable Place

* An Enterprising Place

* A Sustainable Place

* An Accessible Place

* A Leading Organisation

page 8

“A Liveable Place” To support a place where everyone regardless of age or circumstance can enjoy a safe, involved and affordable community life.

Ave. Imp = 4.24 Ave. Sat = 3.15

3.23

2.87

3.82

2.67

3.353.373.623.733.843.87

4.104.184.26

3.233.03

2.94 3.02

3.42

3.233.29

1

2

3

4

5

Operation ofLibrary

services

Counciloperated

services andfacilities forthe elderly

Counciloperated

services andfacilities forpeople with

disability

Appearanceand

adequacy ofcommunitycentres andcommunity

halls

Social andcultural

planning

Protection ofAboriginal

heritage andsites

Protection ofEuropeanheritage

values andbuildings

Counciloperated

Youthservices and

facilities

Operation ofthe RegionalArt Gallery

CounciloperatedChildren'sServices

Mea

n S

core

out

of 5

Imp Sat

10

page 9

“An Enterprising Place” To support a creative and innovative business community invigorating growth in employment and economic activity, in partnership with government.

Ave. Imp = 4.24 Ave. Sat = 3.15

4.37 4.35 4.324.30 4.08

2.88

3.173.12

2.852.97

1

2

3

4

5

Promoting economicdevelopment andbusiness growth

Appearance andpresentation of the town

centres

Planning for towncommercial centres

Promotion of Tourism andrecognition of brand

Development andoperation of Merimbula

Airport

Mea

n S

core

out

of 5

Imp Sat

page 10

“A Sustainable Place” To ensure the unique environment is protected to maintain biodiversity and water quality and managed for our community, to provide growth and economic opportunity.

Ave. Imp = 4.24 Ave. Sat = 3.15

4.10

3.17

4.144.31

4.404.444.534.554.634.654.66

3.04

3.57 3.60

3.07

3.58

2.97

3.31

2.92

3.69

1

2

3

4

5

General wasteand recycling

collection

Planning andimplementing

bushfireprotection

Operation ofquality water

services

Clean lines ofcreeks andwaterways

Sewage andseptic services

Weed Controland protectionof natural bush

land

Environmentalmonitoring and

protection

The wayresidential andrural lands are

developed

The way treesare managed

Control of dogsand cats

Mea

n S

core

ou

t of 5

Imp Sat

page 11

4.06

4.68 4.63 4.614.43 4.41 4.32 4.26 4.19 4.16

3.142.89

3.073.62 3.703.39

2.792.722.76

3.66

1

2

3

4

5

Cleaning andmaintenance of

public toilets

Maintainingsealed roads

Appearanceand adequacyof public toilets

Maintainingunsealed roads

Appearanceand adequacy

of Parks,Playgrounds

and Reserves

Adequacy andmaintenance ofcar parking in

the towncentres

Appearanceand adequacy

of sportingfields

Adequacy andmaintenance of

boat rampsand foreshore

areas

Operation ofswimmingpools or

aquatic centres

Adequacy andmaintenance of

kerb andguttering

Mea

n S

core

out

of 5

Imp Sat

“An Accessible Place” To plan and provide a comprehensive mix of public and private sector services and facilities for residents and visitors to access.

Ave. Imp = 4.24 Ave. Sat = 3.15

page 12

4.544.564.574.68

2.88 2.96 2.772.91

1

2

3

4

5

Planning with the community for thefuture of the Shire

Consulting and engaging with thecommunity

Informing the community of Councildecisions, activities and services

Council responsiveness to communityrequests

Mea

n S

core

ou

t of 5

Imp Sat

“A Leading Organisation” To shape an organisation that supports the agreed aspirations of the community and the capacity of the organisation.

Ave. Imp = 4.24 Ave. Sat = 3.15

page 13

Importance Scores - Summary

Ave. Imp 2012 = 4.24

Ave. Imp 2009 = 4.35

page 14

Satisfaction Scores - Summary

Ave. Sat 2012 = 3.15

Ave. Sat 2009 = 3.24

page 15

¾ Three methods were used to help

prioritise individual services & facilities

ð Quadrant analysis

ð Gap analysis

Prioritising services & facilities

page 16

Incr

easin

g im

porta

nce

2. OPPORTUNITIES FOR

IMPROVEMENT

Higher importance / lower

satisfaction

1. SERVICE STRENGTHS

Higher importance / higher

satisfaction

4. OVERKILL?

Lower importance / higher

satisfaction

3. LOWER PRIORITIES

Lower importance / lower

satisfaction

Quadrant analysis

page 17

Quadrant analysis

4.24

page 18

Quadrant analysis… in summary

q Council operated Children's Services q Council operated services and facilities for the elderly q Operation of the Regional Art Gallery q Protection of Aboriginal heritage and sites q Protection of European heritage values and buildings q Development and operation of Merimbula Airport q Control of dogs and cats q Adequacy and maintenance of boat ramps and foreshore areas q Operation of swimming pools or aquatic centres

q Council operated Youth services and facilities q Council operated services and facilities for people with disability q Appearance and adequacy of community centres and community halls q Social and cultural planning q The way trees are managed on both private and public land. q Adequacy and maintenance of kerb and guttering

4. Over delivering? (High Sat / Low Imp)

3. Candidates for longer-term action? (Low sat / Low Imp)

ü Operation of Library services ü Operation of quality water services ü Sewage and septic services ü General waste and recycling collection ü Planning and implementing bushfire protection ü Environmental monitoring and protection ü Appearance and adequacy of Parks, Playgrounds and Reserves ü Appearance and adequacy of sporting fields

û Appearance and presentation of the town centres û Promoting economic development and business growth û Promotion of Tourism and recognition of brand û Planning for town commercial centres û Clean lines of creeks and waterways û Weed Control and protection of natural bush land û The way residential and rural lands are being developed û Maintaining sealed roads û Maintaining unsealed roads û Adequacy and maintenance of car parking in the town centres û Appearance and adequacy of public toilets û Cleaning and maintenance of public toilets û Consulting and engaging with the community û Planning with the community for the future of the Shire û Informing the community of Council decisions, activities and services û Council responsiveness to community requests

1. Keep up the good work! (High Sat / High Imp)

2. Candidates for immediate attention (Low Sat / High Imp)

page 19

Quadrant analysis comparison

page 20

Importance score

Gap analysis

Satisfaction score GAP SCORE

* Please note that to be included a respondent must provide both an importance and satisfaction score for the relevant service or facility for it to count as a gap score. That is, if they give a ‘Can’t say’ response for satisfaction with roads for example, a gap score will not be calculated for this respondent.

page 21

Gap analysis

Priority Level 1 (i.e. above average gap score)

Ave. gap 2009 =

1.18

Ave. gap 2012 =

1.20

page 22

Gap analysis

Priority Level 2 (i.e. average gap score)

Ave. gap 2009 =

1.18

Ave. gap 2012 =

1.20

page 23

Gap analysis

Priority Level 3 (i.e. below average gap score)

Ave. gap 2009 =

1.18

Ave. gap 2012 =

1.20

page 24

Pulling the analysis together Areas where Council is performing well

page 25

Pulling the analysis together Greatest impact on overall satisfaction will come from focusing on the following areas…

Focus on service items with 2 ticks

page 26

Areas for improvement against other Council’s performance

Performance relative to similar

Councils

page 27



Councils

page 28



Councils

page 29



Councils

page 30



Councils

page 31



Councils

page 32



Councils

page 33



Councils

page 34

Overall Satisfaction

page 35

Overall Satisfaction by Demo

Overall satisfaction remains steady. At

the lower end of the ‘medium’

satisfaction range

30 to 64 years less satisfied

No statistically significant differences

by area

Question: How would you rate your overall satisfaction with Bega Valley Shire Council as an organisation?

page 36

Reasons why residents are dissatisfied

* Proportions are out of dissatisfied residents ONLY (22.7%, n=174) and not of the entire sample.

2.3

3.1

1.2

1.3

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.7

5.1

6.4

8.2

8.5

13.8

17.8

19.0

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

N/A

Other

Too focused on Bega

Lack of facilities available

Councillors have own agenda

Wasting money in the wrong areas

Eden is left out

Rural areas left out

Lack of maintenance of infrastructure

Corruption within Council / favouring large businesses

Hard to deal with

No planning or foresight in the Shire

Rates are too high for the service received

Council is incompetent / not performing

Not responsive to community / lack of consultation

% (n=174)

page 37

Agreement Statements

Residents were asked to rate their level of agreement with regards to Council's resourcing of the 5 key service areas. This was done on a 5 point scale, where 1 is 'Strongly disagree' and 5 is 'Strongly agree'.

page 38

Agreement with Council’s resourcing

page 39

How should Council fund greater investment?

1.0

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.8

0.9

0.9

1.5

1.6

2.0

2.3

2.6

3.4

3.7

4.5

5.5

11.0

56.6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Other

Population growth

Continue as is / don't know

Borrow money

Encouraging employment

Educate / train staff

Seek advice / better planning

Communication / Consultation with the community

Develop / sell land

Through environmentally efficient methods

Promoting tourism

Private enterprise / local business

Community events / fundraisers

Seek grants

Increase rates

Cut council admin costs / red tape

Better use of current funds

Federal / State government

No response given

% (n=750)

page 40

Special Rate Variation Results

page 41

¾ IRIS recruited 1000 local residents;

¾ Council forwarded an information pack to these residents;

¾ They were given one week to deliberate over the information they

received;

¾ Residents were then contacted and asked a series of questions. A total

of 407 interviews were completed, which is the sample size

recommended by IPART;

¾ Error rates on a sample of 407 are ± 4.9%.

Special Rate Variation, background

page 42

3.9

23.3

43.0

19.9

9.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 Very satisfied

% (n

=407

)

3.9

23.3

43.0

19.9

9.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 Very satisfied

% (n

=407

)Satisfaction with quality of Infrastructure On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 5 is very satisfied, how satisfied are you with the quality of infrastructure currently provided by Council in the local area?

29.7% ‘dissatisfied’ or ‘very dissatisfied’

24.2% ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’

Mean score 2.92 out 5 “Low” Satisfaction Score

page 43

0.5

6.4

17.9

37.6

31.4

6.1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Very dissatisfied 2 3 4 Very satisfied Don't know

% (n

=407

)

Range of Services Offered Again using the same scale, how satisfied are you with the range of services currently provided by Council in the local area?

37.5% ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’

Mean score 3.13 out 5 “Medium” Satisfaction Score

page 44

1.2

52.8

26.3

14.0

3.22.50

10

20

30

40

50

60

Not important at all 2 3 4 Very Important Can't say

% (n

=407

)Programs for Improved Infrastructure and Services On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not important at all and 5 is very important, how important do you believe it is for Bega Valley Shire Council to undertake programs to provide improved infrastructure and services.

79.1% ‘important’ to ‘very important’

Mean score 4.25 out 5 “High” Importance Score

page 45

Awareness of Council’s Financial Position Are you aware of Council's financial position in regards to financing future improvements and maintenance of infrastructure and services in the Bega Valley shire?

52.347.7

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Yes No

% (n

=407

)

page 46

1.0

17.7

23.1

38.8

17.2

2.20

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Very poor value 2 3 4 Very good value Don't know

% (n

=407

)

Value for Rates $ Use a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means you think the infrastructure and services provided by Council are very poor value for the rates you pay and 5 means they are good value.

40.8% say value is ‘poor’ to ‘very poor’

Mean score 2.63 out 5 “Low” Value Score

page 47

25.1

34.9

23.8

7.67.6

1.00

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Can't say Poor Fair Average Good Excellent

% (n

=407

)Knowledge of Special Rate Variation How would you rate your level of understanding of Council’s proposal for a special rate variation? (READ OUT RESPONSES)

60.0% ‘good’ to ‘excellent’ knowledge

page 48

31.9

16.7

25.8

18.7

6.9

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Not at all supportive Not very supportive Somewhat supportive Supportive Very supportive

% (n

=407

)

Support for rate variation How supportive are you of Council's proposed general rate increase of three rises over the next three years of 2 to 2.4% above the standard increase of 3% to pay for improved roads, community buildings and sporting and recreation facilities. Are you …

51.4% show some level of support

Mean score 2.52 out 5 “Low” Support Score

page 49

Summary

page 50

¾ Resident satisfaction with the overall performance of Council has remained steady. *3.13 out of 5, compared to 3.15 in 2009 *35% ‘High’ satisfaction, same result as in 2009

¾ Residents are generally satisfied with: * Environmental monitoring and protection * Planning and implementing bushfire protection * Appearance and adequacy of Parks, Playgrounds and Reserves * Sewage and septic services * General waste and recycling collection * Appearance and adequacy of sporting fields * Operation of Library services

Summary

page 51

¾ But are dissatisfied with: * Appearance and adequacy of public toilets * Maintaining sealed roads * Cleaning and maintenance of public toilets * Planning with the community for the future of the Shire * Council responsiveness to community requests * Consulting and engaging with the community * Maintaining unsealed roads * Informing the community of Council decisions, activities and services * Promoting economic development and business growth * Weed Control and protection of natural bush land * Planning for town commercial centres * Clean lines of creeks and waterways * Appearance and presentation of the town centres * The way residential and rural lands are being developed

Summary Cont.

page 52

Questions?

bega valley shire council community · pdf filedavid garcia iris research bega valley shire...

Documents