survey methodology and sampling - frankston.vic.gov.au · areas. this coordinated approach allows...
TRANSCRIPT
2
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Background and objectives
Survey methodology and sampling
Further information
Key findings and recommendations
Summary of findings
Detailed findings
• Key core measure – Overall performance
• Key core measure – Customer service
• Key core measure – Council direction indicators
• Positives and areas for improvement
• Individual service areas
• Detailed demographics
Tailored questions
Appendix A: Detailed survey tabulations
Appendix B: Further project information
3
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Welcome to the report of results and recommendations for the 2014 State-wide Local
Government Community Satisfaction Survey for Frankston 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 and participating councils have a range of choices as to the content of the
questionnaire and the sample size to be surveyed, depending on their individual
strategic, financial and other considerations.
The main objectives of the survey are to assess the performance of Frankston 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.
4
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
This survey was conducted by Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) as a
representative random probability survey of residents aged 18+ years in Frankston City
Council.
Survey sample matched to the Frankston City Council 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 in the Council, particularly younger people.
A total of n=400 completed interviews were achieved in Frankston City Council. Survey
fieldwork was conducted in the period of 31 January – 11 March 2014.
The 2013 results against which 2014 results are compared involved a total of n=400
completed interviews in Frankston City Council conducted in the period of 1 February –
24 March, 2013.
The 2012 results against which results are compared involved a total of n=401
completed interviews in Frankston City Council conducted in the period of 4 May – 30
June 2012.
5
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
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 Frankston City Council area.
Any variation of +/-1% between individual results and NET scores in this report or the
detailed survey tabulations is due to rounding. In reporting, ‘--‘ denotes not mentioned
and ‘0%’ denotes mentioned by less than 1% of respondents. “NET” scores refer to two
or more response categories being combined into one category for simplicity of reporting.
6
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
54
57
58
60
67
66
50-64
35-49
Outer Melbourne Metro
Frankston
18-34
State-wide
Note: For details on the calculations used to determine statistically significant differences, please refer to Appendix B.
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 red indicate a significantly lower result than in 2013, for example, below the result
among 18-34 year olds in the council is significantly lower than the result achieved among this group in 2013.
Results shown in blue indicate a significantly higher result than in 2013, for example, below the result among
35-49 year olds is significantly higher than the result achieved among this group in 2013.
7
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Further Information
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 2014 State-wide Local
Government Community Satisfaction Survey, please contact JWS Research on (03) 8685
8555.
9
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Frankston City Council’s overall performance is a significant 3 points lower
in 2014 than in 2013, however it remains on par with the Outer Metropolitan
average and significantly above the State-wide average.
A significant 5 point decline in Council’s rated performance among North East
Ward residents is driving this more negative sentiment.
Additionally, when asked how much room for improvement there is in Council’s
performance, 46% of residents believe there is a lot of room for improvement.
Ratings of overall council direction are steady when compared to 2013,
and continue to rate well above the State-wide and Outer Metropolitan
averages.
Contact with council and customer service ratings are also on par with
2013. Customer service ratings are not significantly different from the State-
wide and Outer Metropolitan averages.
10
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Rated performance on the key measures of consultation and advocacy is
also little changed from 2013, as well as being on par with the State-wide
and Outer Metropolitan averages.
On both of these measures, 50-64 year olds rate Frankston City Council’s
performance lower than average; on advocacy 50-64 year olds have significantly
decreased their rating by 8 points compared to 2013.
On consultation, North East Ward residents are rating Council’s performance
significantly lower than in 2013 (down 7 points).
On an unprompted basis, the areas for improvement most commonly
identified were Council’s community consultation and its communication
with residents.
The need for better information and communication also comes through in
performance ratings of individual service areas: informing the community is
the only service area to have suffered a significant decrease in rated
performance.
11
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
In terms of other individual service areas, Frankston City Council
performs better than the State-wide and Outer Metropolitan groups on:
The condition of local streets and footpaths
Arts centres and libraries
The condition of sealed local roads
Council also performs better than the Outer Metropolitan group in the often
difficult area of traffic management, but by contrast it is outperformed by
other Outer Metropolitan councils when it comes to parking facilities.
Council lags behind the State-wide average on the enforcement of local
laws and waste management.
In terms of demographic cohorts to watch, 50-64 year olds continue to
drive negative sentiment on most issues.
12
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
An approach we recommend is to further mine the survey data to better
understand the profile of these over and under-performing demographic
groups. This can be achieved via additional consultation and data
interrogation, or self-mining the SPSS data provided or via the dashboard
portal available to the council.
A complimentary personal briefing by senior JWS Research
representatives is also available to assist in providing both explanation and
interpretation of the results. Please contact JWS Research on 03 8685
8555.
Please note that the category descriptions for the coded open ended
responses are summaries only. We recommend further analysis of the
detailed cross tabulations and the actual verbatim responses, with a view to
the responses of the key gender and age groups, especially any target
groups identified.
13
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
• Arts centres and libraries
• Customer serviceHighest results in
2014
• Parking facilities
• LobbyingLowest results in
2014
• 65+ year olds
• 18-34 year olds
Most favourably disposed towards
Council
• 50-64 year oldsLeast favourably disposed towards
Council
15
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Performance Measures Frankston
2012
Frankston
2013
Frankston
2014
Outer
Melbourne
Metro
2014
State-wide
2014
OVERALL
PERFORMANCE62 66 63 63 61
COMMUNITY
CONSULTATION(Community consultation and
engagement)
58 60 58 57 57
ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the
community)
53 57 56 56 56
CUSTOMER SERVICE72 70 71 73 72
OVERALL COUNCIL
DIRECTION61 63 61 57 53
16
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Performance Measures Frankston
2014
vs.
Frankston
2013
vs. Outer
Melbourne
Metro
2014
vs. State-
wide
2014
Highest
score
amongst
Lowest
score
amongst
OVERALL PERFORMANCE 633 points
lowerEqual
2 points
higher
18-34
year olds
50-64
year olds
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION(Community consultation and
engagement)
582 points
lower
1 points
higher
1 points
higher
18-34
year olds
50-64
year olds
ADVOCACY(Lobbying on behalf of the community)
561 points
lowerEqual Equal
65+ year
olds
50-64
year olds
CUSTOMER SERVICE 711 points
higher
2 points
lower
1 points
lowerWomen Men
OVERALL COUNCIL
DIRECTION61
2 points
lower
4 points
higher
8 points
higher
18-34
year olds
35-49
year olds
17
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
30 57 8 5Overall Council Direction
% Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say
8
6
4
31
48
33
27
38
35
32
35
17
7
10
8
8
2
4
4
4
1
15
23
1
Overall Performance
Community Consultation
Advocacy
Customer Service
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
18
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
• Arts centres and librariesHighest result in
2014
• Parking facilities
• LobbyingLowest results in
2014
• 65+ year olds
• 18-34 year olds
Most favourably disposed towards
Council
• 50-64 year oldsLeast favourably
disposed towards Council
19
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Sig
nif
ica
ntl
y h
igh
er
tha
n t
he
s
tate
-wid
e a
ve
rag
eS
ign
ifica
ntly
low
er th
an
the
sta
te-w
ide
ave
rag
e
-Local streets & footpaths
-Art centres & libraries
-Sealed roads
-Enforcement of local laws
-Waste management
20
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Sig
nif
ica
ntl
y h
igh
er
tha
n t
he
gro
up
ave
rag
eS
ign
ifica
ntly
low
er th
an
the
gro
up
ave
rag
e
-Local streets & footpaths
-Traffic management
-Art centres & libraries
-Sealed roads
-Parking facilities
21
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
82
70
70
70
68
67
65
65
62
62
60
58
57
56
55
Art centres & libraries
Family support services
Recreational facilities
Waste management
Elderly support services
Sealed roads
Local streets & footpaths
Environmental sustainability
Informing the community
Enforcement of local laws
Traffic management
Consultation & engagement
Community decisions
Lobbying
Parking facilities
81
69
72
66
68
n/a
62
66
66
65
62
60
n/a
57
51
n/a
n/a
70
64
n/a
n/a
61
65
n/a
62
55
58
n/a
53
49
2014 2013 2012
Base: All respondents.
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
22
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Top Five Highest Performing Service Areas(Highest to Lowest, i.e. #1 – Highest Performing)
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Family
support
services
3. Recreational
facilities
4. Waste
management
5. Elderly
support
services
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Waste
management
3. Recreational
facilities
4. Appearance
of public
areas
5. Community &
cultural
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Waste
management
3. Emergency &
disaster mngt
4. Recreational
facilities
5. Family
support
services
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Appearance
of public
areas
4. Waste
management
5. Recreational
facilities
1. Appearance
of public
areas
2. Art centres &
libraries
3. Elderly
support
services
4. Waste
management
5. Community &
cultural
1. Art centres &
libraries
2. Emergency &
disaster mngt
3. Appearance
of public
areas
4. Waste
management
5. Elderly
support
services
Frankston City
CouncilInner Metro Outer Metro
Regional
Centres
Small Rural
Shires
Large Rural
Shires
23
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Bottom Five Lowest Performing Service Areas(Lowest to Highest, i.e. #1 – Lowest Performing)
1. Parking
facilities
2. Lobbying
3. Community
decisions
4. Consultation
&
engagement
5. Traffic
management
1. Planning
permits
2. Population
growth
3. Tourism
development
4. Town planning
policy
5. Parking
facilities
1. Unsealed
roads
2. Planning
permits
3. Town planning
policy
4. Lobbying
5. Traffic
management
1. Unsealed
roads
2. Parking
facilities
3. Sealed roads
4. Planning
permits
5. Town planning
policy
1. Unsealed
roads
2. Sealed roads
3. Slashing &
weed control
4. Planning
permits
5. Town planning
policy
1. Sealed roads
2. Unsealed
roads
3. Slashing &
weed control
4. Population
growth
5. Local streets
& footpaths
Frankston City
CouncilInner Metro Outer Metro
Regional
Centres
Small Rural
Shires
Large Rural
Shires
24
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
BE
ST
TH
ING
SA
RE
AS
FO
R IM
PR
OV
EM
EN
T
Frankston residents are positive about their natural environment, Council’s
public spaces and their city councillors, however they are seeking more
consultation and improved communication from Council.
-Beach/ Foreshore
-Public areas
-Councillors
-Community consultation
-Communication
27
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
67
65
64
63
63
63
63
63
63
63
61
60
18-34
North West Ward
Women
Frankston
Outer Melbourne Metro
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
35-49
65+
State-wide
50-64
Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Frankston City
Council, not just on one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good,
good, average, poor or very poor?
Base: All respondents Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
66
65
66
66
62
68
64
65
63
68
60
65
64
60
64
62
61
61
65
60
60
63
60
59
2014 2013 2012
28
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
8
11
8
11
10
10
9
5
9
6
5
11
8
7
48
48
44
40
43
44
46
54
49
48
56
41
45
48
35
34
37
35
35
41
33
30
31
38
34
35
31
39
7
5
6
9
8
3
10
7
9
5
2
11
11
2
2
2
3
4
3
2
1
3
3
1
5
4
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
%
Very Good Good Average Poor Very Poor Can't say
Q3. ON BALANCE, for the last twelve months, how do you feel about the performance of Frankston City
Council, not just on one or two issues, BUT OVERALL across all responsibility areas? Has it been very good,
good, average, poor or very poor?
Base: All respondents Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
30
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
• 59%, up 2 points on 2013 Overall contact with
Frankston City Council
• Aged 50-64 yearsMost contact with
Frankston City Council
• Aged 18-34 years Least contact with
Frankston City Council
• Index score of 71, up 1 point on 2013 Customer Service
rating
• WomenMost satisfied with Customer Service
• MenLeast satisfied with Customer Service
31
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
59
41
TOTAL HAVE HAD CONTACT
TOTAL HAVE HAD NO CONTACT
%
2014
Q5. Over the last 12 months, have you or any member of your household had any contact with Frankston City
Council? This may have been in person, in writing, by telephone conversation, by text message, by email or
via their website or social media such as Facebook or Twitter?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 54 Councils asked group: 7
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
57
43
52
48
2013 2012
32
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
77
75
74
74
73
72
72
72
71
68
67
65
Women
65+
North East Ward
South Ward
Outer Melbourne Metro
State-wide
18-34
50-64
Frankston
35-49
North West Ward
Men
Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Frankston City Council for customer service?
Please keep in mind we do NOT mean ACTUAL OUTCOME but rather the actual service that was received.
Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months.
Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
71
78
73
67
72
71
66
70
70
68
71
69
76
73
77
69
72
71
71
65
72
74
69
66
2014 2013 2012
33
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
31
33
34
32
34
22
33
39
19
42
34
23
35
35
38
38
33
38
39
40
42
32
46
31
31
42
37
42
17
15
20
16
16
22
15
15
18
17
24
19
11
14
8
7
7
7
6
8
8
8
10
6
10
8
7
6
4
7
5
5
5
5
2
4
7
2
5
7
3
1
1
1
2
3
1
1
3
3
2
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q5c. Thinking of the most recent contact, how would you rate Frankston City Council for customer service?
Please keep in mind we do NOT mean ACTUAL OUTCOME but rather the actual service that was received.
Base: All respondents who have had contact with Council in the last 12 months.
Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
35
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
• 57% stayed about the same, equal points on 2013
• 30% improved, down 2 points on 2013
• 8% deteriorated, up 1 point on 2013
Council Direction over last 12 months
• Aged 18-34 yearsMost satisfied with Council
Direction
• Aged 35-49 yearsLeast satisfied with Council
Direction
• 46% a lot of room for improvement (down 7% on 2013), 47% a little room for improvement
Room for improvement
• 34% prefer rate rise to improve services
• 44% prefer service cuts to prevent further rate risesRates/Services trade-off
36
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
64
63
61
65
63
65
66
61
59
56
63
53
60
56
63
65
61
61
58
66
58
55
59
52
69
64
62
62
61
60
60
59
58
57
55
53
18-34
North West Ward
Women
65+
Frankston
North East Ward
Men
South Ward
50-64
Outer Melbourne Metro
35-49
State-wide
Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Frankston City Council’s overall
performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
2014 2013 2012
37
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
30
32
28
20
22
34
29
27
30
29
38
26
27
26
57
57
58
63
62
57
51
62
56
59
55
55
57
64
8
7
8
13
10
6
10
9
10
6
2
16
11
4
5
4
6
5
6
3
10
2
4
5
5
3
4
6
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
%Improved Stayed the same Deteriorated Can't say
Q6. Over the last 12 months, what is your view of the direction of Frankston City Council’s overall
performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
38
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
46
53
48
41
46
44
47
47
45
47
36
51
55
43
47
41
44
50
47
52
41
46
49
45
53
44
39
49
5
4
4
5
5
3
5
6
4
5
9
5
4
1
1
3
1
3
3
3
1
6
2
2
3
2
5
1
4
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% A lot A little Not much Not at all Can't say
Q7. Thinking about the next 12 months, how much room for improvement do you think there is in Frankston
City Council’s overall performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 9 Councils asked group: 1
39
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
9
12
10
11
10
8
5
12
10
7
9
8
6
12
25
28
22
25
23
24
26
24
25
24
24
22
29
25
23
20
26
24
26
26
23
20
17
29
29
24
19
17
21
23
24
23
23
24
21
17
23
18
20
22
20
20
23
16
18
17
18
18
24
27
25
21
18
24
26
25
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
%Definitely prefer rate rise Probably prefer rate rise Probably prefer service cuts Definitely prefer service cuts Can't say
Q10. If you had to choose, would you prefer to see council rate rises to improve local services OR would you
prefer to see cuts in council services to keep council rates at the same level as they are now?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 22 Councils asked group: 5
41
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
18
9
9
8
8
7
7
6
6
6
Beach/foreshore
Public areas
Councillors
Parks and gardens
Customer service
Community facilities
Waste management
Family support services
Community activities/Public events
Nothing
Q16. Please tell me what is the ONE BEST thing about Frankston City Council? It could be about any of the
issues or services we have covered in this survey or it could be about something else altogether?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 28 Councils asked group: 5
%
42
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
9
9
8
8
7
6
4
4
4
4
12
Community consultation
Communication
Waste management
Public safety
Parking availability
General maintenance of public areas
Financial management
Sealed road maintenance
Traffic management
Footpaths/Walking tracks
Nothing
Q17. What does Frankston City Council MOST need to do to improve its performance?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 35 Councils asked group: 5
%
44
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
61
60
60
59
58
58
58
57
57
57
56
51
18-34
South Ward
65+
Men
Frankston
North West Ward
35-49
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
Women
North East Ward
50-64
63
57
59
61
60
59
58
57
57
58
63
56
56
61
63
55
58
55
56
57
58
60
57
57
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ over the last
12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
45
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
6
9
7
8
7
8
7
3
5
7
7
6
3
7
33
36
31
32
32
33
24
42
38
29
27
41
30
35
32
29
35
32
32
29
39
30
24
39
38
32
26
30
10
11
13
13
11
12
8
9
12
7
7
6
17
10
4
4
2
5
4
5
6
3
4
5
8
8
3
15
10
12
9
13
13
17
14
16
13
20
6
16
17
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Community Consultation and Engagement’ over the last
12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
46
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
60
59
58
57
57
56
56
56
56
55
54
49
65+
35-49
Men
North West Ward
18-34
Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North East Ward
South Ward
Women
50-64
56
54
59
57
61
57
55
56
61
53
54
57
57
51
51
54
54
53
55
56
49
58
55
51
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ over the last 12
months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
47
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
4
4
5
6
4
5
2
4
4
4
4
5
2
5
27
27
21
27
27
30
25
24
32
21
24
35
19
27
35
34
36
32
33
34
32
39
32
38
47
29
34
26
8
9
15
11
10
10
8
7
9
7
5
6
14
8
4
3
3
4
4
3
3
5
3
4
2
5
6
2
23
23
19
19
23
18
30
22
20
26
18
20
25
32
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Lobbying on Behalf of the Community’ over the last 12
months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 67 Councils asked group: 11
48
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
67
63
63
63
62
62
62
62
62
61
61
60
65+
North East Ward
South Ward
Women
Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
35-49
Men
18-34
50-64
68
70
65
66
66
61
62
63
67
66
64
66
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
60
63
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Informing the Community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 39 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
49
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
11
20
13
12
12
14
9
13
10
7
13
12
16
40
41
40
39
43
33
42
36
43
40
38
38
43
33
23
30
31
26
36
37
36
30
42
30
29
25
9
10
11
11
11
11
5
9
9
7
11
11
7
3
4
4
3
5
1
3
4
3
2
3
6
3
4
3
3
3
2
6
5
3
5
2
5
5
7
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Informing the Community’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 39 Councils asked group: 6
50
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
67
67
66
66
65
65
64
63
63
60
59
58
North West Ward
35-49
Men
18-34
Frankston
65+
North East Ward
South Ward
Women
50-64
Outer Melbourne Metro
State-wide
59
63
63
65
62
60
70
56
61
55
58
58
60
55
62
68
61
62
60
65
61
59
59
57
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’
over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 46 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
51
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
16
22
11
13
16
19
18
13
17
16
22
17
10
14
41
32
43
34
35
45
32
45
47
35
35
45
44
42
27
25
30
28
26
24
33
26
21
33
29
27
23
31
13
14
12
15
15
10
15
14
12
14
13
11
18
9
2
7
4
7
7
2
3
2
1
2
3
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘The condition of local streets and footpaths in your area’
over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 46 Councils asked group: 6
52
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
63
62
62
61
61
60
60
60
59
59
58
56
65+
South Ward
18-34
North East Ward
Women
Frankston
State-wide
50-64
North West Ward
Men
35-49
Outer Melbourne Metro
63
62
64
63
63
62
60
59
61
60
61
57
57
58
57
53
57
55
58
53
55
53
52
55
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Traffic Management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 30 Councils asked group: 5
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
53
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
9
10
6
10
9
7
9
9
6
10
11
8
6
8
43
44
34
40
38
43
42
43
43
42
42
41
46
42
32
30
37
30
28
30
36
30
33
30
31
32
31
34
11
10
14
12
15
13
9
10
11
11
11
14
10
6
4
3
6
5
8
5
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
1
4
2
2
2
1
7
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Traffic Management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 30 Councils asked group: 5
54
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
62
59
57
56
56
55
55
54
54
54
53
46
18-34
Outer Melbourne Metro
State-wide
North East Ward
Men
Frankston
South Ward
North West Ward
Women
35-49
50-64
65+
50
58
57
53
55
51
51
49
47
49
54
53
52
58
56
46
51
49
52
49
47
46
46
52
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Parking Facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 33 Councils asked group: 5
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
55
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
8
7
6
10
11
7
10
8
7
10
14
5
8
3
35
28
28
35
37
36
35
34
40
31
36
38
37
27
28
35
30
32
30
26
30
29
26
30
29
32
24
27
20
18
21
15
13
23
19
17
20
19
18
19
19
23
6
10
11
6
6
6
6
7
5
7
6
10
11
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
4
3
3
2
2
9
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Parking Facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 33 Councils asked group: 5
56
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
66
64
63
63
63
63
62
62
62
60
60
59
State-wide
Women
Outer Melbourne Metro
North East Ward
18-34
65+
Frankston
North West Ward
35-49
South Ward
Men
50-64
65
66
65
73
71
63
65
64
64
60
65
62
65
63
63
65
64
62
62
59
60
62
61
63
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 40 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
57
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
8
19
8
14
13
6
10
7
4
11
7
6
8
10
42
34
42
41
38
42
38
45
43
40
47
40
41
36
27
27
26
25
24
30
29
22
28
26
24
32
25
28
9
7
11
7
10
6
10
12
11
8
11
8
10
8
3
5
2
3
4
3
1
5
3
3
2
2
7
2
11
9
10
11
11
14
12
9
10
13
9
12
9
17
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Enforcement of local laws’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 40 Councils asked group: 6
58
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
74
74
72
72
70
70
70
70
68
68
65
65
Women
35-49
North West Ward
65+
Frankston
North East Ward
South Ward
18-34
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
Men
50-64
68
66
68
74
69
72
66
68
67
67
70
68
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
67
67
n/a
n/a
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Family Support Services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 44 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
59
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
13
11
12
12
13
13
13
5
20
13
19
7
12
31
34
33
31
34
30
29
27
35
27
43
28
23
16
18
20
21
11
18
19
19
14
22
13
15
12
3
3
4
3
4
3
2
3
3
2
5
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
1
36
33
29
31
38
35
36
46
28
37
21
43
51
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Family Support Services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 44 Councils asked group: 6
60
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
74
70
69
69
68
68
67
66
66
66
66
65
65+
State-wide
North West Ward
Women
Frankston
South Ward
Outer Melbourne Metro
Men
18-34
35-49
50-64
North East Ward
77
69
69
66
68
66
66
69
66
58
68
68
n/a
69
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
67
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Elderly Support Services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 44 Councils asked group: 5
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
61
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
10
12
16
12
10
8
10
5
14
5
9
9
18
31
26
34
29
31
26
34
32
29
29
27
30
39
16
18
17
19
14
21
15
14
18
20
16
16
12
2
4
4
4
1
3
3
3
2
4
3
3
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
5
3
1
39
39
27
35
42
39
35
44
34
42
43
39
27
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Elderly Support Services’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 44 Councils asked group: 5
62
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
75
72
72
71
71
71
70
70
68
68
67
66
65+
North West Ward
Women
State-wide
South Ward
35-49
Frankston
50-64
Outer Melbourne Metro
Men
North East Ward
18-34
76
73
69
70
69
71
72
71
69
75
73
70
76
69
72
70
74
64
70
70
69
68
68
71
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Recreational Facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 50 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
63
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
21
25
20
23
20
24
15
21
13
28
18
19
23
24
47
45
45
44
43
47
45
48
55
40
40
56
44
49
22
21
24
21
23
16
28
22
22
21
33
18
18
14
6
3
5
6
7
8
5
4
6
5
7
3
9
3
2
3
2
2
2
1
3
3
2
3
2
3
2
2
3
3
4
3
3
3
4
2
2
4
2
4
8
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Recreational Facilities’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 50 Councils asked group: 6
64
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
86
85
83
83
82
81
81
80
80
79
77
75
North West Ward
65+
Women
35-49
Frankston
Men
18-34
North East Ward
South Ward
50-64
Outer Melbourne Metro
State-wide
82
88
82
83
81
80
75
83
78
80
76
73
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
73
73
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 33 Councils asked group: 4
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
65
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
37
40
27
29
42
34
34
31
42
31
41
31
48
45
40
44
45
45
47
43
49
40
47
46
43
39
9
11
17
14
3
10
15
10
9
9
8
14
6
1
1
3
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
7
8
8
10
8
8
9
8
13
3
12
6
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Art Centres and Libraries’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 33 Councils asked group: 4
66
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
77
73
72
72
71
71
70
70
69
68
67
66
65+
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
South Ward
North West Ward
Men
Frankston
18-34
Women
50-64
35-49
North East Ward
72
71
72
67
65
66
66
64
65
61
64
64
68
72
71
66
65
63
64
67
65
63
58
61
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Waste Management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 48 Councils asked group: 6
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
67
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
28
26
15
26
26
27
27
30
25
31
22
32
23
40
41
35
49
47
46
45
36
40
50
32
42
35
47
39
19
19
19
16
18
17
19
20
15
22
31
13
15
14
7
12
10
5
6
7
10
6
6
9
5
9
11
4
5
7
7
3
3
4
8
3
4
5
11
5
4
1
1
2
1
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Waste Management’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 48 Councils asked group: 6
68
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
69
67
66
65
65
65
64
64
64
64
63
62
North East Ward
18-34
65+
Frankston
Women
35-49
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
South Ward
Men
North West Ward
50-64
66
66
69
66
65
62
64
65
69
66
62
69
66
65
68
65
66
65
64
65
66
64
64
62
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Environmental Sustainability’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 32 Councils asked group: 5
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
69
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
10
13
10
11
11
8
14
10
11
9
11
9
9
12
40
40
40
39
38
37
39
43
38
42
45
38
37
38
30
27
33
29
30
36
28
26
30
30
27
33
29
30
5
7
5
6
7
4
4
8
7
4
4
3
10
5
2
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
13
11
13
12
11
13
15
10
11
14
11
14
13
13
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Environmental Sustainability’ over the last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 32 Councils asked group: 5
70
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
61
58
58
58
58
57
57
57
57
56
56
51
65+
Outer Melbourne Metro
South Ward
18-34
35-49
Frankston
State-wide
North East Ward
Men
North West Ward
Women
50-64
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
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the
last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 43 Councils asked group: 9
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
71
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
4
7
6
2
8
3
3
5
2
6
2
6
35
33
33
39
29
36
39
32
35
35
32
40
36
34
34
36
38
35
33
39
45
30
30
39
10
12
11
11
11
8
10
10
4
11
21
4
4
5
4
5
4
4
5
4
4
5
6
4
10
10
12
7
11
13
10
10
11
13
9
7
2014 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘Decisions made in the interest of the community’ over the
last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 43 Councils asked group: 9
72
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
70
69
68
67
67
67
67
66
65
64
61
55
65+
18-34
North West Ward
Frankston
North East Ward
Men
Women
South Ward
50-64
35-49
Outer Melbourne Metro
State-wide
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
2014 2013 2012
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘The condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the
last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 40 Councils asked group: 8
Note: please see page 6 for explanation about significant differences
73
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
18
12
16
18
18
18
15
21
29
11
14
16
46
33
38
53
41
44
51
41
31
51
51
58
21
27
25
14
33
18
20
22
25
19
21
16
11
17
13
11
8
15
10
13
13
16
9
6
2
10
7
3
2
2
2
2
5
2
2
1
1
1
3
2
1
2
2
1
2
2014 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very good Good Average Poor Very poor Can't say
Q2. How has Frankston City Council performed on ‘The condition of sealed local roads in your area’ over the
last 12 months?
Base: All respondents. Councils asked statewide: 40 Councils asked group: 8
75
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
49%
51%
Gender
Men
Women
9%
22%
28%
23%
19%Age
18-24
25-34
35-49
50-64
65+
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.
76
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
29
27
16
15
7
3
3
1
Married or living with partner with children 16 orunder at home
Married or living with partner with children butnone 16 or under at home
Married or living with partner, no children
Single person living alone
Single living with friends or housemates
Single living with children 16 or under
Single with children but none 16 or under livingat home
Do not wish to answer
%
S6. Which of the following BEST describes your household?
Base: All respondents Councils asked statewide: 16 Councils asked group: 6
77
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
14
15
14
16
11
20
13
14
15
20
21
4
8
14
13
14
16
15
20
8
13
16
16
20
8
10
71
72
71
68
74
59
78
72
70
62
59
89
81
1
2
1
2
2014 Frankston
2012 Frankston
State-wide
Outer Melbourne Metro
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% 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?
Base: All respondents Councils asked statewide: 23 Councils asked group: 5
79
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR3. Do you work in the Frankston municipality?
Base: All respondents.
15
22
20
18
19
10
11
19
13
22
20
4
41
30
38
39
43
41
51
31
55
54
35
5
43
47
42
43
38
47
37
48
31
24
43
91
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Work in Frankston Work elsewhere Don't work Unsure
80
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR4. And which of the following best describes what form of transport do you use MOST OFTEN to get to work or
to your regular weekly commitments?
Base: All respondents.
70
15
3
3
3
1
0
5
69
17
4
1
3
0
0
6
76
13
2
2
1
1
5
Car only
Car and train or tram or bus
Bus only
Train only
Walk
Bicycle
Car pool
Other
2013 20122014
81
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR5. What is your level of satisfaction with bus performance, frequency of services and bus routes in your local
suburb?
Base: All respondents.
65
59
56
54
54
53
53
52
51
51
65+
South Ward
Women
Frankston
18-34
Men
North West Ward
50-64
35-49
North East Ward
82
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR5. What is your level of satisfaction with bus performance, frequency of services and bus routes in your local
suburb?
Base: All respondents.
6
3
2
12
5
7
7
2
5
12
22
25
18
21
21
23
18
25
21
23
33
35
33
32
35
32
44
35
26
23
9
13
9
4
10
8
7
13
10
3
6
5
6
6
7
5
5
6
8
3
24
19
31
24
23
26
18
19
30
36
2014 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
83
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR6. And in the past 12 months have you participated in casual recreational physical activity (for example
walking the dog or general walking)?
Base: All respondents.
92
86
84
91
95
90
91
92
96
97
88
82
8
14
16
9
5
10
9
8
4
3
12
18
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Yes No
84
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR6. And in the past 12 months have you participated in or attended formal, organised physical activity (for
example played netball, basketball, football, cricket, gone to the gym etc...)?
Base: All respondents.
44
34
41
52
43
36
43
45
47
55
40
27
56
66
59
48
57
64
57
55
53
45
60
73
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Yes No
85
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of the Frankston Waterfront?
Base: All respondents.
78
74
72
75
74
76
74
77
73
72
77
75
71
73
76
76
74
77
71
71
77
75
74
74
74
74
73
73
71
70
65+
South Ward
Men
35-49
50-64
North West Ward
Frankston
Women
North East Ward
18-34
2013 20122014
86
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of the Frankston Waterfront?
Base: All respondents.
20
21
20
18
16
24
20
19
20
19
18
23
51
53
51
58
53
44
51
52
46
59
54
47
19
15
20
18
18
22
21
18
20
23
19
15
2
2
2
2
4
2
1
3
7
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
6
7
7
4
8
8
6
7
5
8
15
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
87
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of open spaces such as parks and
gardens?
Base: All respondents.
69
72
67
71
68
69
71
70
65
67
70
74
73
72
74
71
70
69
68
66
71
71
69
69
69
68
67
67
67
64
50-64
South Ward
Women
65+
North West Ward
Frankston
Men
18-34
35-49
North East Ward
2013 20122014
88
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of open spaces such as parks and
gardens?
Base: All respondents.
13
15
14
12
7
20
13
14
14
10
15
15
51
51
56
60
44
47
47
54
45
57
52
49
30
27
24
21
41
28
35
25
35
29
26
27
3
2
2
3
5
2
2
4
4
3
3
4
1
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
2
3
1
3
1
1
2
4
4
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
89
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of natural reserves such as
Sweetwater Creek and Kananook Creek Reserve?
Base: All respondents.
56
56
58
57
55
54
58
59
55
60
65
63
62
62
62
56
63
61
60
67
65
62
61
60
59
59
58
58
57
57
35-49
North West Ward
Men
Frankston
Women
North East Ward
50-64
65+
18-34
South Ward
2013 20122014
90
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of natural reserves such as
Sweetwater Creek and Kananook Creek Reserve?
Base: All respondents.
7
6
7
8
2
10
5
8
5
9
6
5
37
28
38
42
38
31
42
32
38
46
31
28
29
36
26
27
29
31
31
27
33
24
30
27
10
9
6
6
8
15
9
11
13
6
10
10
4
4
3
4
3
4
3
5
5
3
4
3
14
18
20
13
21
9
10
18
5
11
19
26
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
91
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of the Central Business District or the
Frankston City Centre?
Base: All respondents.
58
55
53
59
56
57
54
52
57
59
57
51
46
51
51
48
47
50
51
60
59
58
58
56
55
55
53
53
52
51
65+
Women
South Ward
18-34
Frankston
North East Ward
35-49
50-64
Men
North West Ward
2013 20122014
92
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of the Central Business District or the
Frankston City Centre?
Base: All respondents.
5
7
5
4
5
6
2
8
5
3
5
8
27
30
25
24
28
30
25
30
27
25
24
35
49
42
43
49
48
49
50
48
49
56
49
37
11
15
17
16
10
6
14
8
13
10
12
7
4
3
7
5
5
3
5
4
2
5
6
6
4
3
3
2
4
4
4
3
4
2
4
6
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
93
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of your suburb?
Base: All respondents.
59
59
64
64
62
60
63
60
65
63
60
63
63
67
63
64
63
64
67
60
70
68
67
67
66
65
65
64
63
63
35-49
North West Ward
Men
South Ward
Frankston
Women
18-34
50-64
65+
North East Ward
2013 20122014
94
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR7. How satisfied are you with the PRESENTATION and CLEANLINESS of your suburb?
Base: All respondents.
12
8
10
16
5
14
12
12
11
14
12
11
48
44
45
50
46
47
52
44
45
56
43
45
32
37
34
25
41
32
29
35
36
25
37
32
5
8
9
5
6
5
6
5
4
5
6
8
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
3
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
95
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR8. ‘In your opinion can you tell me if you agree or disagree that this describes the Frankston municipality?
Base: All respondents.
83
82
65
57
52
Has great potential
Liveable
Attractive
Safe
Exciting
83
79
62
55
53
83
80
65
52
52
2013 20122014
96
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
45
38
12
10
4
44
54
55
46
34
5
4
14
14
25
4
2
16
23
30
1
1
6
3
2
1
1
2
4
Has great potential
Liveable
Attractive
Safe
Exciting
%
Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Can't say
FR8. ‘In your opinion can you tell me if you agree or disagree that this describes the Frankston municipality?
Base: All respondents.
97
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
10
7
5
46
46
44
14
13
14
23
22
28
6
10
8
2
2
1
2014 Safe
2013 Safe
2012 Safe
%
Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Can't say
FR8. ‘In your opinion can you tell me if you agree or disagree that this describes the Frankston municipality?
Base: All respondents.
98
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR9. Please rate your perception on the overall image of the Frankston municipality, that is how do you feel and
think about Frankston?
Base: All respondents.
69
68
67
66
66
65
64
64
62
62
35-49
South Ward
Men
65+
North West Ward
Frankston
Women
50-64
18-34
North East Ward
65
71
66
68
62
65
63
61
63
61
63
66
63
67
66
63
63
63
59
58
2013 20122014
99
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR9. Please rate your perception on the overall image of the Frankston municipality, that is how do you feel and
think about Frankston?
Base: All respondents.
10
9
12
13
8
9
10
10
9
11
10
10
49
51
40
45
45
56
55
43
38
56
53
51
34
33
37
36
36
31
29
39
45
31
25
32
5
4
7
4
7
3
5
5
7
2
7
3
2
3
3
1
3
1
2
4
3
1
1
1
2014 Frankston
2013 Frankston
2012 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Low Very low Can't say
100
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR10. How satisfied are you with the number and variety of major festivals and events available within the
Frankston municipality?
Base: All respondents.
15
17
11
18
13
17
18
14
15
12
46
45
44
47
47
44
44
52
46
39
26
27
30
22
23
29
24
22
28
34
1
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
6
3
8
6
10
2
9
8
2
6
7
6
5
6
6
4
2
8
15
2014 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Very high High Average Very low Low Can't say
101
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
FR11. Are you satisfied with Frankston as a tourism destination?
Base: All respondents.
64
62
70
60
64
64
58
60
66
77
30
31
25
31
30
29
36
33
27
16
7
6
5
8
6
7
5
6
8
7
2014 Frankston
North West Ward
North East Ward
South Ward
Men
Women
18-34
35-49
50-64
65+
% Satisfied Not satisfied Can't say
104
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Please note that as a result of feedback from extensive consultations with councils, in 2012
there were necessary and significant changes to the methodology and content of the survey,
including:
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 Frankston 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 2012-2014
have been made throughout this report as appropriate.
105
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Demographic
Actual
survey
sample size
Weighted
base
Maximum margin of
error at 95%
confidence interval
Frankston City Council 400 400 +/-4.9
Men 163 194 +/-7.7
Women 237 206 +/-6.4
18-34 years 55 123 +/-13.3
35-49 years 63 111 +/-12.4
50-64 years 157 92 +/-7.8
65+ years 125 74 +/-8.8
The sample size for the 2014 State-wide Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey for
Frankston 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 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 102,000 people aged
18 years or over for Frankston City Council, according to ABS estimates.
106
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
The Councils in the Outer Melbourne Metro group are: Brimbank, Cardinia, Casey,
Frankston, Greater Dandenong, Knox, Manningham, Melton, Mornington Peninsula,
Whittlesea and Yarra Ranges. All participating Councils are listed in the State-wide
report published on the DTPLI website. In 2014, 67 of the 79 Councils throughout
Victoria participated in this survey.
Please note that the Councils that participated in 2012 and 2013 vary slightly to those
participating in 2014.
107
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Council Groups
Wherever appropriate, results for Frankston City Council for this 2014 Community
Satisfaction Survey have been compared against other Councils in the Outer Melbourne
Metro group and on a State-wide basis. Frankston City Council is self-classified as an
Outer Melbourne Metro council according to the following classification list:
Inner metropolitan councils
Outer metropolitan councils
Rural cities and regional centres
Large rural shires
Small rural shires
108
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
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
benchmark survey and measured against the state-wide result and the council group, an ‘Index
Score’ has been calculated for such measures.
The Index Score is calculated and represented as a score out of 100 (on a 0 to 100 scale), with
‘can’t say’ responses excluded from the analysis. The ‘% RESULT’ for each scale category is
multiplied by the ‘INDEX FACTOR’. This produces an ‘INDEX VALUE’ for each category, which
are then summed to produce the ‘INDEX SCORE’, equating to ‘60’ in the following example.
SCALE
CATEGORIES% RESULT INDEX FACTOR INDEX VALUE
Very good 9% 100 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
109
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
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
110
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Index Scores Significant Difference Calculation
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.
111
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
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 2014 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)
Contact in last 12 months (Contact)
Rating of contact (Customer service)
Overall council direction last 12 months (Council direction)
112
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Reporting of results for these Core questions can always be compared against other
councils in the council group and against all participating councils state-wide.
Alternatively, some questions in the 2014 State-wide Local Government Community
Satisfaction Survey were optional. If comparisons for Frankston City Council for some
questions cannot be made against all other councils in the Outer Melbourne Metro group
and/or all councils on a state-wide basis, this is noted for those results by a footnote of
the number of councils the comparison is made against.
Councils also had the ability to ask tailored questions specific only to their council.
113
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Reporting
Every Council that participated in the 2014 State-wide Local Government Services
Survey has received a customised report. In addition, the State Government is supplied
with a Statewide 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 Services Report is available at
www.localgovernment.vic.gov.au.
114
Community Satisfaction Survey 2014 – Frankston City Council
Core questions: Compulsory inclusion questions for all councils participating in the CSS.
CSS: 2014 Victorian Local Government Community Satisfaction Survey.
Council group: One of five self-classified groups, comprising: inner metropolitan councils, outer metropolitan councils,
rural cities and regional centres, large rural shires and small rural shires.
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.
State-wide average: The average result for all participating councils in the State.
Tailored questions: Individual questions tailored by and only reported to the commissioning council.
Weighting: Weighting factors are applied to the sample for each council based on available age and gender
proportions from ABS census information to ensure reported results are proportionate to the actual population of the
council, rather than the achieved survey sample.