2025 NOOSA COUNCIL COMMUNITY SATISFACTION SURVEY RESULTS

Executive summary

The Noosa Council 2025 Community Satisfaction Survey was administered by Place Score between 28 April and 23 May 2025, with participation from 398 randomly selected residents and ratepayers aged 15 years or older. These participants represented the diverse composition of the shire in terms of age, gender, ratepayer status and location. The 2025 Satisfaction Survey offers a detailed assessment of resident perspectives on the performance and strategic priorities of Noosa Council. The findings function as a vital metric for evaluating how well Council is addressing the needs and expectations of local residents and ratepayers and helps Council identify areas of strength and opportunities for improvement. This data not only reflects public sentiment regarding infrastructure, facilities, and services but also informs governance practices, customer service standards, and strategic planning processes. It captured comprehensive community feedback across a broad spectrum of council services and functions, providing key insights to guide informed decision-making and future planning. In 2025, Council transitioned from the previous Satisfaction Survey landline methodology and appointed Place Score to implement a contemporary survey model featuring improved data collection methodologies. This modernised approach enabled more accurate and inclusive representation of the community’s views across various demographics and enhanced ability to analyse and use the results. The shift underscores Council’s commitment to evolving its engagement strategies in line with technological progress and changing community expectations. Council achieved a 79% overall performance rating, indicating that a substantial majority of respondents were at least moderately satisfied with Council services over the previous two years. These results are consistent with satisfaction ratings observed in other councils across Regional Queensland and Australia, suggesting Noosa Council is broadly meeting community expectations. Performance scores of individual service areas ranged from 58% to 99% with 27 (54%) of the 50 service areas scoring a very high level of satisfaction at 80% or above. Library Services and Waste Management received the highest satisfaction scores of 99% and 95%, respectively, while the Community Places service dimension recorded the highest overall satisfaction at 88%. In contrast, Parking Management and Local Laws enforcement were identified as the lowest performing areas at 58%. A significant learning from this survey was the value of offering a 'Don't Know' response option, which revealed low resident familiarity with some services, such as services for older people, community grants and local business support. Nevertheless, individuals who had engaged with these services rated them highly, pointing to strong performance among users but highlighting a need for greater promotion. In relation to prioritisation for action, there were no service areas that deemed as urgent priorities however there are seven service areas in the mid-range priority area deemed 'Manage'. Although data is not directly comparable to previous surveys due to revised methodologies, indicative analysis suggests a notable 14% decline in overall satisfaction between 2021 and 2025. This downward trend is similar to other local government community satisfaction survey findings. The outcomes of the 2025 survey are used in conjunction with Council's other community engagement initiatives to help understand community perspective, enhance service delivery and inform strategic planning. By leveraging these insights, Council is positioned to allocate resources more effectively, respond to community priorities, and foster increased trust with residents. Ultimately, the survey findings reinforce Noosa Council’s dedication to incorporating community feedback and ensuring that future actions align closely with the aspirations and needs of its residents and ratepayers.

Recommendation

That Council note the report by the Director Community Services to the Ordinary Meeting dated 20 November 2025 presenting the results of the 2025 Noosa Council Community Satisfaction Survey as detailed in Attachment 1 to the Report: "Noosa Council 2025 Community Satisfaction Survey Performance and Priorities Executive Summary Report".

Report

Background

Local governments conduct community satisfaction surveys to better understand residents’ needs, expectations and experiences. These surveys provide valuable insights into the delivery of Council services, highlight areas for improvement, and inform future planning and resource allocation. By capturing public opinion on issues like infrastructure and facilities, services, strategic planning, governance and customer service, councils can make more informed and transparent decisions. Ultimately, satisfaction surveys strengthen community engagement and trust by ensuring Council’s actions reflect the priorities of residents and ratepayers. Noosa Council has a longstanding practice of conducting community satisfaction surveys to understand resident perceptions of Council services and priorities. In 1997, LGAQ commissioned a survey to help local governments monitor and track their performance. From 1997 to 2017, Noosa Council participated in LGAQ’s biennial Community Satisfaction Surveys for Queensland councils, providing statistically valid data on community satisfaction and the importance of Council functions. Each survey aimed to deliver reliable insights by sampling a broad cross-section of the community and ensuring representation across age, gender, home ownership and work status. Over time, these surveys enabled Council to track trends, identify high-performing and priority areas, and benchmark results against other Queensland councils. LGAQ discontinued the service following a final survey conducted by Market Facts in 2017 as the methodology became outdated and local governments started shifting to other providers. Noosa Council engaged Market Facts directly to conduct satisfaction surveys in 2019 and 2021 however the survey encountered several challenges, primarily due to its outdated methodology. Most responses were gathered through landline phone calls, requiring a total of 5,233 calls to secure a sample size of 400 participants. While Council also offered an online survey option, the results from this channel had to be largely excluded from the final analysis as they were not randomised. In addition, benchmarking capability declined, with fewer councils opting to be involved in the Market Facts survey process.

SURVEY APPROACH

In response to challenges faced during the 2021 survey, Noosa Council has partnered with Place Score, a trusted partner known for the successful Liveability survey, to pilot a new approach for the

Community Satisfaction Survey. Place Score designed the survey using best-practice principles, informed by a review of 22 national survey models. This approach provided a more contemporary collection method, allowed Council to analyse results by location and demographics and provided the unique ability to compare service performance with Liveability survey outcomes. This offered a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of community needs and priorities. The result is a robust, repeatable process that is more equitable, future-focused, and supports evidence-based decision-making. An important aspect of the Place Score survey is the ability for respondents to select 'Don't Know' for service areas that they don't know about or use well enough to be able to confidently rate their performance. The 'Don't Know' percentages are excluded from performance evaluations thus providing a more accurate performance rating result. Noosa Council’s 2025 Community Satisfaction Survey was conducted by Place Score between 28 April and 23 May 2025. The objective of the survey was to measure the community's satisfaction with the performance of Council services, and to identify priorities and focus areas for future planning and improvements. A total of 398 randomly selected Noosa residents and ratepayers participated, all of whom were aged 15 years or older and represented a diverse cross-section of the shire, including variations in age, gender, ratepayer status, location, and work status.

DESIGN

The survey was structured into four main sections: 1. Demographic and screening: Ensured that only eligible participants contributed to the data and allowed for detailed analysis by demography and locality. 2. Service Performance and Importance: Respondents were asked to rate each of the service areas with the possible answers being Very good, Good, Average, Poor, Very poor and Don't know. Performance ratings comprised Performance percentage (P%): The proportion of 'Very good', 'Good', and 'Average' responses out of all valid answers, rounded to the nearest whole number; and Performance average (PA): The mean score of all valid responses, rounded to one decimal place. 'Don't Know' percentages are counted separately and excluded from performance calculations. Respondents identified their top three service areas which are currently most important to them in each of five service dimensions, resulting in a Service importance (IM) score—the percentage choosing each area, rounded to a whole number. 3. Communication Preferences: Participants shared their past and preferred methods of communication with Council. 4. Overall Satisfaction and Priorities: Overall satisfaction: Based on a single mandatory question, 'Thinking about all the services that your council provides, how would you rate your overall satisfaction with the performance of your council over the last 2 years?'. The overall satisfaction percentage is the number of 'Very good', 'Good' and 'Average' answers divided by the total number of answers, rounded to the nearest whole number. Respondents were also invited to share, in their own words, what they believed Council should focus on over the next two years by entering them into a free text field, allowing for more detailed context and personal perspectives. The survey captures community satisfaction with the performance of 50 Council Service Areas which is an expansion of previous surveys which assessed performance across 41 areas. The 50 services were grouped within 5 Service Dimensions: • Community programs and services: Council services which contribute to enhancing social and community well-being; • Community places: Council's provision of community and shared places, and how well they are managed and maintained; • Transportation, waste and water: Council's delivery and management of roads, paths, water and waste services; • Management and communications: Council's governance, organisational and communications practices; • Planning for the future: Council's planning for a sustainable and successful future; • A full list of the 50 service areas and descriptions can be found in Attachment 1.

METHODOLOGY

This survey marked a significant departure from traditional landline-based methods by implementing a digital-first strategy. A community engagement panel was created, with over 30,000 invitations distributed to members of Council’s different databases. Randomised email invitations were then sent to potential panel participants, complemented by targeted social media outreach to achieve the required sample size and a balanced demographic representation. For several cohorts that were underrepresented, an incentive scheme was introduced with the initial responders offered a $20 voucher. Respondents completed the survey through an online survey tool. The new methodology facilitated a broader and more representative sample, encompassing younger, more mobile, and culturally diverse residents which have been traditionally difficult to attract to undertake surveys. Additionally, the approach reduced costs, expedited administration, improved accessibility, and yielded more reliable data. To ensure confidence in the findings, the 2025 survey was designed to achieve statistical validity with respect to both sample size and demographic composition. Based on an estimated population of 56,298 in 2021 (Australian Bureau of Statistics Census Data) and an ABS projected Estimated Resident Population of 59,274 in 2024, a minimum sample size of 382 participants was necessary to obtain results with a +/-5% margin of error at a 95% confidence level. This means that if the survey was conducted 100 times, the results would fall within 5% of the original outcome in 95 instances. For example, a result of 65% would typically be replicated within a range of 60% to 70%. Achieving a reduced margin of error to +/-4% would have required a minimum sample size of 594, however, the additional cost and time needed to reach this threshold were not considered justified for such a marginal increase in confidence. A random sample of 398 Noosa residents and ratepayers aged over 15 was achieved across a four- week survey sample period, matching the shire’s 2021 census profile for age, gender, locality, and work status. Council staff and Councillors were excluded to maintain integrity. Rather than adjusting or weighting data post-survey like some survey methodologies, Place Score used continuous sampling to achieve the right respondent balance from the outset. This provides greater survey result confidence.

KEY RESULTS

Performance and Importance Scores Council received an overall performance rating of 79% which means that 79% of respondents selected very good, good or average to describe their level of satisfaction with Council's performance over the past two years. Satisfaction with the overall performance of Council ranged from 74% to 91% across the varying demographic cohorts such as age, gender and work status. Publicly available data comparison provided by Place Score indicates that Noosa Council (79%) continues to record a satisfaction rating similar to other councils across Regional Queensland (80%), Queensland (79%) and Australia (84%). As additional local governments take part in the Place Score survey program, Noosa Council will be able to benchmark our results against Councils using the same methodology for direct comparison. Survey results indicate a continued decline in overall satisfaction with Council performance from

to 2025. The 2025 result reflects a 14% drop from the 2021 figure of 93%, after adjusting for methodology changes. Although LGAQ no longer provides statewide benchmarking, other local government surveys also show generally lower satisfaction levels compared to historical data. Respondents were most satisfied with the Community Places service dimension (88%) and least satisfied with the Management and Communications service dimension (71%). Performance scores of individual service areas ranged from 58% to 99% with 27 (54%) of the 50 service areas scoring a very high level of satisfaction at 80% or above: 7 of the 50 service areas achieved a performance rating above 90% while another 20 services areas achieved a performance rating between 80 and 89%. For the fourth consecutive survey, Library Services received the highest satisfaction rating, with 99% of respondents rating them as average, good, or very good in 2025. Waste Management continues to perform very strongly returning the second highest performance score at 95% in 2025 - it has been the second highest performing service area for three out of the last four surveys. The 10 service areas that respondents felt most satisfied with Council's performance were: Note: n_r= is the number of respondents who rated their satisfaction with the service and excludes the respondents who selected 'Don't Know'. P% is the percentage of n_r= respondents who selected 'Very good', 'Good', and 'Average' and excludes the respondents who selected 'Don't Know". Parking Management continues to be one of the lowest-performing service areas scoring 58% in 2025, as consistently reflected in responses to the last three surveys. In this, the first time it has been included as its own service area, Local Law Enforcement also received the equal lowest rating at 58%. Economic Development and Road Maintenance have remained relatively stable, ranking among the bottom scoring categories, as was the case in the 2021 survey. Notably, satisfaction ratings for Financial Management and Council Decision-making have declined significantly, moving these areas from mid-level performance in previous surveys to the lowest 10 in 2025. The 10 service areas that respondents feel least satisfied with Council's performance are: Including a 'Don't Know' option proves crucial when analysing the results. Many services had high percentages of respondents who were either unfamiliar with the service or lacked enough experience to rate it. For example, youth services, cemetery provision and maintenance, first nations' engagement and partnerships, family and children’s services, programs for older residents, community grants, and local business support all saw over 40% of respondents select 'Don't Know.' Interestingly, with the exception of Youth Services, these areas also received high satisfaction ratings at above 80% from those who did use them. This suggests there is significant potential for the Council to better promote existing services, as satisfaction among users is very high. The complete list of performance results is included as Attachment 2. To help understand the current priorities of residents and ratepayers, respondents were asked to select their three most important service areas out of ten in each of five service dimensions. The service areas are ranked based on how many people selected each as being important to them. All

service areas were selected by some respondents as being most important to them at the moment with results ranging from 2% of respondents selecting Cemeteries and 61% of respondents selecting Providing Value for Money From Rates. The 10 areas respondents said were most important to them at the moment were: Providing value for money from rates (Fair/equitable rates/fees across residential, rural, 61% commercial etc., balancing income from rates with user-pays fees/charges) Provision and maintenance of parks and public spaces (Open space, off-leash dog areas, 59% shelters, BBQs, outdoor showers, etc.) Road maintenance and condition (Repairing potholes/damaged road, resurfacing, grading, 59% street sweeping etc. Excludes highways/state main roads, etc.) Council making decisions in the best interest of the community (Making balanced, 58% evidence-based and transparent decisions for the broad community) Community wellbeing (Community events, Living Well program, support for vulnerable 53% people, Christmas Convoy, etc.) Protection and management of the natural environment (Bushland reserves, ecosystem support, coastal and foreshore dune management, river/waterway quality, conservation, 52% parks and gardens) Health services and/or programs (Licensing and inspection of restaurants/cafes/shops, 50% noise complaints, waterways sampling, mosquito/midge treatment, etc.) Beach and/or waterway services (Lifeguard services, beach access, showers, sand 47% replenishment, Noosa North Shore Ferry, etc.) Safe public spaces (Lighting, CCTV, etc.) 46% Planning for future community needs (Plans/strategies for leadership & direction re: 46% housing, community, sport & recreation, transport, place plans, smart biosphere, etc.) The complete list of performance results is included at Attachment 3. Service strengths and priorities While the performance scores and importance ratings are highly valuable to understand satisfaction with Council services and areas to celebrate or seek improvement, Place Score also compares service performance against level of importance to guide prioritising efforts. This helps Council understand which areas need nurturing or maintaining, which areas are a priority for improvement and which areas need to be addressed urgently. Service strengths are determined by identifying the Service Areas that the community is generally satisfied with, and that they have also selected as currently most important. Council should continue to nurture these. Council's service strengths are: Service priorities are determined by identifying the Service Areas that the community is less satisfied with, and that they have also selected as currently most important. Fortunately there are no service areas that are urgent priorities however there are seven service areas in the mid-range priority area deemed 'Manage'. Council should consider what is underlying the lower satisfaction levels with the following service areas and how these could be improved: Historical Survey Comparison A thorough review was undertaken to develop and enhance the 2025 survey, ensuring it aligns with Council’s current objectives. Service areas were evaluated and expanded to accurately represent the range of services now provided by Council, while performance reporting for 2025 uses a more precise methodology. Where possible, historical survey metrics have been mapped to existing service areas to support meaningful comparison with previous performance data; however, direct comparisons were not always feasible. Accordingly, any comparative analyses presented in this report are based on converting both prior survey results and available public data to the updated methodology. The outcomes of the 2025 survey will establish a benchmark using this revised approach, and future reports will offer performance comparisons grounded in the current methodology, facilitating more accurate evaluation across subsequent survey years. Communication and Customer Experience 85% of respondents said they had had contact with Council in the last 2 years: 27% by telephone, 26% by email, 18% in person, 16% using Snap Send Solve and 7% using a Council online form. Customer experience performance was varied with contact choice and staff service skills rated very highly. Being kept informed on the progress of requests rated the lowest at 72% which is similar to issues identified through Council's Customer Experience program. When asked how respondents would prefer Council to provide information to them about planning, engagement opportunities, projects, initiatives or events, the strong emphasis was on direct communication via an emailed newsletter or direct email. Community ideas Respondents were also offered the chance to share their ideas for where Council should focus regarding service delivery over the next two years. 345 survey respondents provided ideas and a summary by theme is provided below: The community feedback highlights strong sentiment around prioritising residents' needs over tourism. Key areas of focus include improving road and footpath maintenance, managing traffic and parking, enhancing public transport, and increasing affordable housing. Many respondents called for better environmental protection, more transparency, and genuine community engagement. There is widespread concern about overdevelopment, short-term accommodation impacts, and the loss of Noosa’s unique character. Overall, the community seeks a shift towards sustainable infrastructure, equitable service delivery, and a council that listens and acts on local concerns.

DETAILED DATA ANALYSIS

One of the significant advantages of the Place Score product is the availability of an online Service Monitor portal which provides a rich source of data and enables staff to undertake detailed data analysis both in breakdown and comparison. Performance results can be analysed by varying demographic cohorts such as age, gender, ratepayer status, council contact as well as geographic location. This provides more nuanced data which can assist Council in improving and planning for services and infrastructure. For example, in rating Council's performance in addressing climate change respondents generally rated performance 78% whereas respondents under 25 rated performance 58% and in rating Council's performance in providing public toilets respondents generally rated performance at 74% whereas respondents under 25 rated performance at just 41%. Analysis can also be undertaken at a geographic level to help understand issues and priorities for individual communities. In the overall service priorities assessment there were no areas in the urgent priorities section however, in the Noosaville example below the service areas of car parking and local laws enforcement have scored very low levels of performance satisfaction and were rated as very high priorities for Council for the coming two years putting them into the zone of urgent priority. Noosaville Service Strengths and Priorities

CONCLUSION

The report provides an overview of the findings from the 2025 Noosa Council Community Satisfaction Survey, with additional information available in the attached documents. Council will integrate these insights with outcomes from other community engagement activities to gain a comprehensive understanding of community views and priorities. This approach will help refine strategic objectives, enhance communication efforts, and ensure that decision-making incorporates local interests. A subsequent survey is planned for late 2026 to support budget planning and monitor ongoing progress.

Report details

Index: ECM: Subject/27.64 Organisational Performance