A report of findings from a survey of residents
prepared for / Moreland City Council
by / Danielle Jenner, Erin Roberts, Christine Maddern
Market Solutions Pty. Ltd.
Suite 8, 707 Mount Alexander Road, Moonee Ponds, Victoria, 3039
03 9372 8400
www.marketsolutions.com.au
date / November 2015
ref / 2816
Contents
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Methodology 1
1.2 Data Analysis 3
1.3 Interpreting a Significant Difference 3
2 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 4
3 HEALTH AND WELLBEING 12
4 EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION 20
5 TRANSPORT 27
6 COMMUNICATION 33
7 HOUSEHOLD FINANCES 43
8 CARING AND VOLUNTEERING 48
9 GAMBLING BEHAVIOUR 52
10 COMMUNITY SERVICES 54
11 LOCAL RETAIL TRADE 57
12 PRIORITY AREAS - LOCAL FACILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE & SERVICES 61
13 CHANGES FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 67
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1: THE 2015 QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX 2: CROSS-TABULATIONS – INDIVIDUAL DATA (weighted)
APPENDIX 3: CROSS-TABULATIONS – HOUSEHOLD DATA (weighted)
APPENDIX 4: CROSS-TABULATIONS – BY SUBURB (weighted and significance tested)
Figures
Figure 1: Geographic Coverage (Unweighted and Weighted Data) 2
Figure 2: Gender and Age 6
Figure 3: Country of Birth and Language Spoken at Home 6
Figure 4: Duration of Residence in Australia 7
Figure 5: Other Countries of Birth - Top 10 7
Figure 6: Other Languages Spoken at Home - Top 10 7
Figure 7: Literacy 8
Figure 8: ATSI Status, Ethnicity and Faith 8
Figure 9: Disability Status 9
Figure 10: Assistance Required for Disability 9
Figure 11: Household Structure 10
Figure 12: Weekly gross income 11
Figure 13: Generations of Family 11
Figure 14: Private Health Insurance 14
Figure 15: Health Care Card 14
Figure 16: General Health Level 14
Figure 17: Physical Exercise 15
Figure 18: Barriers to improving health and well-being 15
Figure 19: Frequency of Eating Fast Foods and Takeaway Meals 16
Figure 20: Frequency of Eating Fruit and Vegetables 16
Figure 21: Barriers to Nutrition 17
Figure 22: Participation in Community Groups 18
Figure 23: Participation in Recreation, Exercise and/or Sporting Activities 19
Figure 24: Employment Status 21
Figure 25: Home Based Businesses 21
Figure 26: Occupation 22
Figure 27: Industry of Employment 23
Figure 28: Employment Location 24
Figure 29: Highest Qualification 24
Figure 30: Field of Study of Highest Qualification 25
Figure 31: Study Status 25
Figure 32: Educational Institution Currently Attended 26
Figure 33: Location of Educational Institution 26
Figure 34: Mode of Transport to Work 28
Figure 35: Travel Time to Work 28
Figure 36: Mode of Transport to Study 29
Figure 37: Travel Time to Study 29
Figure 38: Bicycle Ownership 29
Figure 39: Bicycle Usage Not Related to Work/Study 30
Figure 40: Public Transport Usage Not Related to Work/Study 30
Figure 41: Distance from Public Transport 31
Figure 42: Aspects that Discourage Public Transport Use 31
Figure 43: Motor Vehicle Ownership 32
Figure 44: Internet Access Method 35
Figure 45: Lack of Internet Access 35
Figure 46: Internet Connection Type 36
Figure 47: Internet Usage 36
Figure 48: Social Media Usage 37
Figure 49: Frequency of Social Media Use 37
Figure 50: Media Forms Most Regularly Used 38
Figure 51: Frequency of Usage – Moreland Council Website 38
Figure 52: Usage of Non-English Media 39
Figure 53: Types of Non-English Media Used 39
Figure 54: Frequency of Readership – Moreland Leader Newspaper 40
Figure 55: Frequency of Readership – City News page 40
Figure 56: Accessing Council Sites 41
Figure 57: Preferred Communication Methods 41
Figure 58: Council Communication Preference 42
Figure 59: Current Home Ownership Status 45
Figure 60: Renting - Feelings of Security 45
Figure 61: Renting – Factors Leading to Insecurity 45
Figure 62: Home Loan Repayment/Rent Payment 46
Figure 63: Financial Stress from Home Loan Repayment/Rent Payment 46
Figure 64: Food Security – Total 46
Figure 65: Food Security by Suburb 47
Figure 66: Food Security – Ran Out of Food 47
Figure 67: Caring Responsibilities - Total 49
Figure 68: Caring Responsibilities by Suburb 49
Figure 69: Caring Responsibilities – Hours per Week 50
Figure 70: Volunteering - Total 50
Figure 71: Volunteering by Suburb 50
Figure 72: Volunteering – Hours per Month 51
Figure 73: Gaming Penetration and Venue – Part 1 53
Figure 74: Gaming Penetration and Venue – Part 2 53
Figure 75: Youth Services 55
Figure 76: Arts & Culture 55
Figure 77: Recreational and Leisure 56
Figure 78: Recreational and Leisure – Reasons for None Usage 56
Figure 79: Shopping Localities – Local Centres 58
Figure 80: Shopping Localities – Sub-Regional and Regional Centres 59
Figure 81: Online Shopping 60
Figure 82: Areas for Improvement or Development – Facilities and Infrastructure 63
Figure 83: Areas for Improvement or Development – Facilities and Infrastructure – TOP 10 by Suburb 64
Figure 84: Areas for Improvement or Development – Council Services 65
Figure 85: Areas for Improvement or Development – Council Services - TOP 10 by Suburb 66
Figure 86: Changes for the Environment 68
Figure 87: Activities Carried Out In Consideration of the Environment 69
Figure 88: Sources of Information – Recycling/ Waste 70
Figure 89: Sources of Information – Energy 70
Figure 90: Sources of Information – Water 71
Figure 91: Frequency of Putting Bins Out 71
Figure 92: Bin Capacity Utilised at Collection 71
Figure 93: Disposal of Household Items 72
1 INTRODUCTION
Market Solutions was commissioned by Moreland City Council in 2015 to undertake a survey of households located in the Moreland City Council area. The aim of the survey was to collect demographic and socio-economic information on people living in the area that would provide Moreland City Council with an up-to-date snapshot of the local population. The survey is intended to act as the Council’s source of data on the community for inter-censal years and assist in its service planning.
This report has been prepared to provide a summary of the key findings from the survey for the total residential population of the Moreland City Council including a discussion of any variations between suburbs. Where appropriate, comparisons have been made with results from the 2013 and 2011 Household Surveys also undertaken by Market Solutions, as well as figures from the 2011 Australian Bureau of Statistics Census of Population and Housing.
1.1 Methodology
The survey was undertaken via one of two methods: a hard copy questionnaire or an online questionnaire which are included at Appendix 1. Participants were recruited using a telephone approach to obtain participant agreement from individual households. Once agreement was received, the participant was asked for their preferred method of completion. Those who chose the hard copy method were sent a questionnaire by mail with a reply paid envelope for return, whilst those who chose online were emailed a link to the online survey. Reminder calls were made to those who had not returned/ completed the questionnaire within the agreed timeframe.
The sample for telephone placement was divided into suburbs with quotas to ensure that questionnaire distribution was conducted evenly across the Municipality. An over-representation of smaller suburbs was undertaken to enable results to be summarised more reliably at this level.
A total of 1,133 completed household surveys were returned (705 via mail and 428 online). The completed questionnaires included information on 2,618 individuals residing in these households. Figure 1 shows the number of completed questionnaires received for the 2011, 2013 and 2015 Household Surveys.
Figure 1: Geographic Coverage (Unweighted and Weighted Data)
Q.57 What suburb is this household in?
Base: All households / Questionnaires(unweighted data)
No. / % / No. / % / No. / %
SUBURB / 2011 / 2013 / 2015
Glenroy / 95 / 8.0 / 68 / 6.2 / 88 / 7.8
Fawkner / 94 / 7.9 / 92 / 8.3 / 83 / 7.3
Oak Park / 111 / 9.3 / 103 / 9.3 / 106 / 9.4
Hadfield / 117 / 9.8 / 107 / 9.7 / 103 / 9.1
Gowanbrae/ Tullamarine / 70 / 5.9 / 55 / 5.0 / 68 / 6.0
Pascoe Vale / 96 / 8.1 / 85 / 7.7 / 91 / 8.0
Pascoe Vale South / 113 / 9.5 / 104 / 9.4 / 100 / 8.8
Coburg / 90 / 7.6 / 100 / 9.1 / 93 / 8.2
Coburg North / 101 / 8.5 / 87 / 7.9 / 112 / 9.9
Brunswick / 101 / 8.5 / 85 / 7.7 / 87 / 7.7
Brunswick East/ Fitzroy North / 99 / 8.3 / 119 / 10.8 / 104 / 9.2
Brunswick West / 101 / 8.5 / 97 / 8.8 / 98 / 8.6
Total / 1,188 / 100 / 1,102 / 100.0 / 1,133 / 100.0
Base: All households / Households
(weighted data)
No. / % / No. / % / No. / %
SUBURB / 2011 / 2013 / 2015
Glenroy / 7,250 / 12.6 / 7,954 / 12.6 / 7,954 / 12.6
Fawkner / 4,431 / 7.7 / 4,763 / 7.6 / 4,763 / 7.6
Oak Park / 2,172 / 3.8 / 2,405 / 3.8 / 2,405 / 3.8
Hadfield / 2,262 / 3.9 / 2,355 / 3.7 / 2,355 / 3.7
Gowanbrae/ Tullamarine / 746 / 1.3 / 1,042 / 1.7 / 1,042 / 1.7
Pascoe Vale / 5,811 / 10.1 / 6,452 / 10.2 / 6,452 / 10.2
Pascoe Vale South / 3,685 / 6.4 / 3,828 / 6.1 / 3,828 / 6.1
Coburg / 9,346 / 16.2 / 10,250 / 16.3 / 10,250 / 16.3
Coburg North / 2,569 / 4.5 / 2,475 / 3.9 / 2,475 / 3.9
Brunswick / 9,274 / 16.1 / 10,311 / 16.4 / 10,311 / 16.4
Brunswick East/ Fitzroy North / 3,942 / 6.9 / 4,682 / 7.4 / 4,682 / 7.4
Brunswick West / 6,037 / 10.5 / 6,546 / 10.4 / 6,546 / 10.4
Total / 57,525 / 100 / 63,063 / 100 / 63,063 / 100
1.2 Data Analysis
The data is analysed at the level of the individual and the household depending on the nature of the question. Cross tabulations by suburb are provided in Appendix 2 for questions regarding individual characteristics and Appendix 3 for questions relating to the household as a whole.
The data has been weighted by suburb representing the number of households or individuals residing in the City of Moreland as appropriate.
1.3 Interpreting a Significant Difference
A significance test shows how likely it is that any difference seen between two values reflects a real difference in the population and not just a chance difference in the sample.
When it is indicated that a value is statistically significantly different at the .05 level of significance, it means there is only a 5% chance that the observed discrepancy is a spurious occurrence rather than a genuine difference. In other words, to say that a difference is statistically significant or statistically detectable is to say that the observed result cannot reasonably be attributed to random variation alone. Also, a difference has been established fairly conclusively but no judgement has been made as to the practical importance of the declared difference.
In some instances in this report, a significance test is used to compare the results of 2015 survey with those from the 2013 survey. A statistically significant change is indicated by a ñ (or blue text) for an increase and a ò (or red text) for a decrease.
2 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
This section covers:
§ Gender (Q.1)
§ Age (Q.2)
§ Sexual identity (Q.10)
§ Country of birth (Q.4)
§ Language spoken at home (Q.6)
§ Duration of residence in Australia (Q.5)
§ Literacy (Q.7)
§ Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander status (Q.8)
§ Faith (Q.9)
§ Disability status (Q.20, Q.21)
§ Length of time at address (Q.11)
§ Household structure & type (Q.70, Q.72, Q.73)
§ Personal income (Q.56)
§ Number of generations of family in household (Q.71)
Key Results (see Figures 2 to 13):
§ The 2015 survey captured a similar age profile when compared with the 2013 survey although there was a significant increase in the proportion of people surveyed in the 61-75 years age group (24% compared with 18% in 2013).
§ 97% of people surveyed identified as heterosexual.
§ Overseas born residents were represented by 26% of people surveyed, and of those born overseas, the key countries of birth were Italy, United Kingdom and Greece.
§ 25% of people surveyed speak a language other than English at home, most likely to be Italian or Greek.
§ 84% self-identified as speaking, reading and understanding English very well. A total of 6% self-identified their English skills at the lower levels of “not well” or “not at all”.
§ 0.7% of individuals identified themselves as an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander.
§ 28% of individuals surveyed have a permanent or long term disability. Of those individuals with a disability, 30% require assistance.
§ 38% of households were families with children, 26% were sole person households, and 29% couples without children.
§ 57% have one generation living in the household and 36% have two generations (representing a significant decrease from 41% in 2013).
§ No significant changes in personal income with the majority stating nil income (21%) or earning less than $600 per week (42%).
Suburb Variations (see appendices)
§ An older age profile is particularly apparent in the suburb of Hadfield where 54% of all individuals profiled by the Household Survey were aged over 60 years. Other suburbs with an above average proportion of residents aged over 60 years include Glenroy (49%), Oak Park (44%) and Fawkner (40%).