National Social Housing Survey 
State and territory results
2010

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare is a major national agency
which provides reliable, regular and relevant information and statistics
on Australia’s health and welfare. The Institute’s mission is
 authoritative information and statistics to promote better health and wellbeing.
© Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2012
This product, excluding the AIHW logo, Commonwealth Coat of Arms and any material owned by a third party or protected by a trademark, has been released under a Creative Commons BY 3.0 (CC‑BY 3.0) licence. Excluded material owned by third parties may include, for example, design and layout, images obtained under licence from third parties and signatures. We have made all reasonable efforts to identify and label material owned by third parties.
You may distribute, remix and build upon this work. However, you must attribute the AIHW as the copyright holder of the work in compliance with our attribution policy available at <www.aihw.gov.au/copyright/>. The full terms and conditions of this licence are available at <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/>.
Enquiries relating to copyright should be addressed to the Head of the Communications, Media and Marketing Unit, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, GPO Box 570, Canberra ACT 2601.
This publication is part of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare’s Housing Assistance series.  A complete list of the Institute’s publications is available from the Institute’s website <www.aihw.gov.au>.
ISBN 978-1-74249-326-8
Suggested citation
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2012. National Social Housing Survey: State and territory results 2010. Cat. no. HOU 264. Canberra: AIHW.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
Board Chair
Dr Andrew Refshauge
Director
David Kalisch
Any enquiries about or comments on this publication should be directed to:
Communications, Media and Marketing Unit
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
GPO Box 570
Canberra ACT 2601
Tel: (02) 6244 1032
Email: info@aihw.gov.au
Published by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare
Please note that there is the potential for minor revisions of data in this report.
Please check the online version at <www.aihw.gov.au> for any amendments.
Contents
Acknowledgments
Abbreviations
Symbols
Summary
1	Introduction
Background
The social housing sector
National Affordable Housing Agreement
2	The national picture
Who are social housing tenants?
Housing histories
Use of support services
Social housing satisfaction
3	New South Wales
Social housing services in New South Wales
Who are social housing tenants in New South Wales?
Housing histories in New South Wales
Use of support services in New South Wales
Social housing satisfaction in New South Wales
4	Victoria
Social housing services in Victoria
Who are social housing tenants in Victoria?
Housing histories in Victoria
Use of support services in Victoria
Social housing satisfaction in Victoria
5	Queensland
Social housing services in Queensland
Who are social housing tenants in Queensland?
Characteristics of households
Housing histories in Queensland
Use of support services in Queensland
Social housing satisfaction in Queensland

6	Western Australia
Social housing services in Western Australia
Who are social housing tenants in Western Australia?
Housing histories in Western Australia
Use of support services in Western Australia
Social housing satisfaction in Western Australia
7	South Australia
Social housing services in South Australia
Who are social housing tenants in South Australia?
Housing histories in South Australia
Use of support services in South Australia
Social housing satisfaction in South Australia
8	Tasmania
Social housing services in Tasmania
Who are social housing tenants in Tasmania?
Housing histories in Tasmania
Use of support services in Tasmania
Social housing satisfaction in Tasmania
9	Northern Territory
Social housing services in Northern Territory
Who are social housing tenants?
Housing histories in Northern Territory
Use of support services
Social housing satisfaction in Northern Territory
Appendix A: Survey and reporting methodology
References
List of tables
List of figures
Acknowledgments
This report is the product of the collective effort of staff, both past and present, of the Housing Unit in the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Their efforts are gratefully acknowledged.
The information in this publication is produced from data collected from the 2010 National Social Housing Survey. Members of the Housing and Homelessness Information Management Group are also acknowledged for their contributions.
Abbreviations
AHURI	Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute	
AIHW	Australian Institute of Health and Welfare	
CH	Community housing	
COAG	Council of Australian Governments	
ICH	Indigenous Community Housing	
NAHA	National Affordable Housing Agreement	
PH	Public housing	
SOMIH	State owned and managed Indigenous Housing	
NRAS	National Rental Affordability Scheme	
NSHS	National Social Housing Survey	
SAHT	South Australian Housing Trust	
Australian jurisdictions
ACT	Australian Capital Territory	
Aust	Australia	
NSW	New South Wales	
NT	Northern Territory	
Qld	Queensland	
SA	South Australia	
Tas	Tasmania	
Vic	Victoria	
WA	Western Australia	
Symbols
—	nil or rounded to zero	
. .	not applicable	
n.a.	not available	
n.p.	not publishable because of small numbers, confidentiality or other concerns about the quality of the data
	
Summary
Characteristics of social housing tenants
About half of all households surveyed were in the labour force. Labour force participation was highest among public housing respondents in Tasmania (60%) and lowest among New South Wales and South Australian public housing respondents (46%).
Fewer than 1 in 10 respondents for both public and community housing recorded that at least one member of their household was of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin (7% and 5% respectively). The Northern Territory recorded a considerably larger proportion of households where at least one member of their household was of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin (23%). 
Apart from Tasmania, a higher proportion of community housing than public housing respondents reported experiencing homelessness at some point. Queensland community housing respondents recorded the highest proportion of people experiencing homelessness with nearly 4 in 10 (37%) reporting they had been homeless in the past. 
Almost one-fifth of social housing households contained at least one person who needed help with self-care, communication or body movement activities (19% for public housing and 18% for community housing). The largest group of tenants experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication in social housing were those who had a disability. This was highest among Western Australians in community housing and lowest among Victorians (11% compared with 6%).
Use of support services
Across all reported jurisdictions, health or allied health services were needed most frequently by both public and community housing households (67% and 70% respectively), followed by mental health and personal support services. Victorian public and community housing respondents generally recorded a higher service need than any other jurisdiction.
Social housing satisfaction
Overall, community housing respondents were slightly more satisfied with the services offered by their housing provider than public housing respondents (79% compared with 73%). Community housing respondents in Tasmania reported the highest level of satisfaction, while among public housing tenants the highest level of satisfaction was in Queensland (90% and 84% respectively). 
Overall dissatisfaction (either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied) with the services offered by their housing provider ranged from 5% among Tasmanian community housing respondents to 21% among those in New South Wales public housing. 
The majority of public housing (59%) and community housing (73%) respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the physical condition of their home. Among community housing tenants, respondents in Tasmania (83%) and Queensland (79%) were most satisfied, while among public housing tenants, those in Queensland (69%) and South Australia (68%) were the most satisfied.
1	Introduction
Background
Housing assistance encompasses a range of programs targeted to provide assistance to low-income households in securing and sustaining housing. Social housing is a significant component of housing assistance and includes all rental housing owned and managed by government, or not-for-profit community organisations, which can be let to eligible households (AIHW 2009). It includes public housing (PH) (also called public rental housing), state-owned and managed Indigenous housing (SOMIH), community housing (CH), Indigenous community housing (ICH) and crisis accommodation. 
There have been considerable changes in the area of national housing policy since the previous National Social Housing Survey (NSHS) in 2007. The 2010 NSHS is the first since the National Affordable Housing Agreement (NAHA) came into effect on 1 January 2009.It is the most recent in a series of surveys designed to provide information on social housing tenants and their experiences. The survey sampled tenants of public and community housing from August to September 2010. Definitions of ‘public housing’ and ‘community housing’ for the NSHS are in Box 1.1 below.
The survey’s primary purpose is to collect data on the profile of social housing tenants in states and territories and their satisfaction with services provided and the amenity/location of their housing. Australian Capital Territory (ACT) results are not included in this report as the ACT conducted its own tenant survey. Other data of interest has also been collected for national reporting and to meet specific jurisdictional information requirements. 
National results of the 2010 NSHS were published in the recent AIHW report National Social Housing Survey: a summary of national results (AIHW 2011). This report provides results for the states and territories (excluding ACT) from the survey. It also contains some additional national level analysis. 
Box 1.1: Descriptions of the social housing services covered by the NSHS
Public housing
Public housing encompasses the publicly owned or leased dwellings administered by state and territory governments. It also provides appropriate, affordable and accessible housing for low-income households who are in housing need.
Community housing
Mainstream community housing is provided for low- to moderate-income or special needs households, managed by community-based organisations. Community housing models vary across jurisdictions and housing stock is owned by a variety of groups, including government (AIHW 2011).
This survey only covered public and community housing. While Indigenous housing was not covered, it is intended that the NSHS will provide coverage in the future. SOMIH households were last included in the NSHS in 2007. ICH households have not been included in the survey to date.
The NSHS complements other data sources about social housing in Australia, especially administrative data collected by social housing providers and reported at the national level by the AIHW. These administrative data provide valuable information about the outputs of social housing programs, including the number of houses provided and the extent to which people in special needs groups are able to access social housing. The survey adds to the picture of social housing by surveying tenants about their experiences of living in public and community housing.
The social housing sector
About 5% of the Australian population lives in social housing, that is, government-provided dwellings (public housing) or dwellings managed by not-for-profit organisations (community housing) (ABS 2007).
The social housing sector has grown slightly over recent years, from 406,500 dwellings in 2003–04 to 414,600 in 2009–10. Accompanying this small expansion has been a gradual but steady shift of focus from the public to the community-managed sector. In the last 7 years, the number of public rental housing dwellings has decreased by almost 12,000 while the mainstream community housing sector has expanded by almost 20,000. As a result, more than 11% of social housing dwellings at 30 June 2010 are managed by community housing, up from 7% in 2003.
The community housing sector is forecast to continue to grow, with governments committing to a large-scale not-for-profit sector comprising up to 35% of all social housing by 2014 (FaHCSIA 2010). The sector is also expanding under the National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) (Box 1.2). 
Box 1.2: National Rental Affordability Scheme 
The NRAS is a long-term commitment by the Australian Government to invest in affordable rental housing. The scheme seeks to address the shortage of affordable rental housing by offering financial incentives to the business sector and community organisations to build and rent dwellings for low- and moderate-income households at 20% below market rates for 10 years. It aims to:
•	increase the supply of new affordable rental housing
•	reduce rental costs for low- and moderate-income households
•	encourage large-scale investment and innovative delivery of affordable housing.
The Australian Government has committed $1 billion to the NRAS over 4 years to stimulate construction of up to 50,000 high quality homes and apartments, providing affordable private rental properties for Australians.
Social housing targets disadvantaged groups. Eligibility criteria generally specify that prospective tenants be on low-incomes, although some community housing providers also cater for middle-income earners. New tenants in both public and community housing are likely to be those in the category defined as ‘highest need’—that is, those who are homeless, whose life or safety was at risk in their accommodation, whose condition was aggravated by their housing or who had very high rental costs. In 2009–10, 75% of allocations in public housing went to people meeting these criteria. In mainstream community housing, 63% of allocations were to those in greatest need.
Social housing is also targeted towards key special needs groups including Indigenous Australians, those with disability, the young and the elderly. In 2009–10, 65% of new households assisted in public rental housing were in one of these groups, with a similarly high proportion in mainstream community housing (57%).
Tenants’ experiences of social housing inform the extent to which housing policy objectives are being met. To this end, the NSHS adds to the important work done by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) and other research bodies. For example, security of tenure to tenants has been found to enhance household health and education outcomes (AHURI 2005), social connectedness (Beer & Faulkner 2009) and employment outcomes (AHURI 2009). The 2010 NSHS results are consistent with these findings and indicate that social housing assists tenants in substantial ways. 
National Affordable Housing Agreement
The 2010 National Social Housing Survey was informed by the NAHA's policy directions. The principle objective of the agreement is that ‘all Australians have access to affordable, safe and sustainable housing that contributes to social and economic participation’ (COAG 2009). 
The NAHA combined funding for housing and homelessness services and made governments accountable for six outcomes:
•	people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness achieve sustainable housing and social inclusion
•	people are able to rent housing that meets their needs
•	people can purchase affordable housing
•	people have access to housing through an efficient and responsive housing market
•	Indigenous people have the same housing opportunities (in relation to homelessness services and access to housing through an efficient and responsive rental and purchasable housing market) as other Australians
•	improved housing amenity and reduced overcrowding for Indigenous people, particularly in remote areas and discrete communities.
Progress against these is informed by a number of national performance indicator frameworks covering social housing and other forms of housing assistance. The NSHS provides data for some of these indicators, including amenity and location.
Progress against the second outcome outlined above, the extent to which people are able to rent housing that meets their needs, was initially assessed by the COAG Reform Council through rental affordability indicators (CRC 2010). However, the council acknowledged that tenants’ needs were broader than affordability. The council raised the need for more information about tenant needs, such as whether housing is appropriate for people with special needs, housing amenity, location and tenant satisfaction. The 2010 NSHS provides valuable information about these issues for social housing tenants. The NSHS also collected some information about the social and economic participation of tenants in line with the broad policy objectives of the NAHA. 
Is the NSHS sample representative of all social housing tenants?
An analysis was undertaken comparing the demographic characteristics of NSHS respondents from the 2010 survey with the equivalent demographic information in the national administrative data collections for public housing and community housing. The purpose is to provide some indication as to whether social housing tenants surveyed as part of the NSHS are representative of the broader social housing population. 
The analysis found there were some differences in the demographic profile of NSHS respondents when compared with information from the national administrative data collections. Respondents were more likely to be female and were generally older. In the national administrative data collections, the gender profile for both public and community housing tenants was more equal (about half each). Further, less than one-fifth of tenants were aged over 65, and about 1 in 10 aged between 55 and 64 years.
It should be noted that the analysis of the administrative data was based on all members of the social housing household and was not restricted to the main tenant or leaseholder. That being said, analysis of the NSHS found that about 95% of survey respondents indicated that they had either signed or co-signed the lease. 
2	The national picture
This chapter presents the survey results collected from public housing (PH) and community housing (CH) tenants for all states and territories excluding ACT.
Who are social housing tenants?
Demographic characteristics are routinely collected in surveys to provide the opportunity when analysing the data to better understand the population surveyed—for example, questions about age, sex, education and employment help researchers understand whether those surveyed are similar to other populations. Demographic data are also used to analyse issues such as socioeconomic disadvantage.
Questions relating to demographic characteristics were included in the 2010 NSHS. The information sought was from two perspectives—some questions, such as age and sex, were asked only about the respondent and were presented first, under ‘Characteristics of survey respondents’. Other questions, such as those regarding labour force participation, asked the respondent to provide information about all relevant members of the household. The results for these questions are outlined under ‘Characteristics of households’.
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
Two-thirds of all respondents were female (66% for PH and 64% for CH) and the age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups. Almost two-thirds of public housing respondents (63%) and half of community housing respondents (51%) were aged 55 and older. 
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
More than two-thirds of public housing and community housing survey respondents (67% for both) were born in Australia. The next most frequently reported country of birth was England, for both public and community housing (17% and 14% respectively), followed by New Zealand (5% for PH and 7% for CH) and United Kingdom (not further specified) (5% for both).
The majority of respondents spoke mainly English at home (86% for PH and 85% for CH). For those respondents who mainly spoke a language other than English at home, Arabic and Spanish were the next two most frequently reported languages (between 9% and 13% for both PH and CH).
Fewer than 1 in 10 respondents for both public and community housing (7% and 5% respectively) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin’. On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 2.5% of the Australian population. They are proportionally over-represented in both public and community housing.

Highest education level 
More than one-third of both public housing and community housing survey respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent (40% and 38% respectively) and one-fifth (21% for PH and 19% for CH) had completed Year 12 or its equivalent. About 1 in 20 (5%) respondents from both public housing and community housing reported no formal education (Figure 2.1).
For both public housing and community housing, about 1 in 20 respondents indicated that they had achieved a bachelor’s degree or higher (4% for PH and 7% for CH). Community housing respondents were more likely than those from public housing to hold post-secondary school qualifications (26% compared with 16%).
Figure 2.1: Highest level of education completed, Australia, August–September 2010.
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis highest level of education completed.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of households surveyed (55% for PH and 54% for CH) comprised a single person living alone and more than 1 in 10 (14% for PH and 12% for CH) were couple only households (Table 2.1). Fewer than one-third of both public housing and community housing households contained one or more dependent children (26% and 27% respectively). 
Table 2.1: Social housing households, by household type, Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	55.2	54.3	
Single person, living with one or more children	17.9	20.1	
Couple, living without children	13.6	12.3	
Couple, living with one or more children	8.1	6.5	
Extended family, living without children	1.3	1.0	
Extended family, living with one or more children	2.0	1.5	
Group of unrelated adults	1.3	4.0	
Others	0.7	0.3	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
About half of all people aged 18 or older in both public and community housing were in the labour force (48% and 52% respectively) in one of the following categories: 
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks.
Almost one-sixth of people in households surveyed in both public and community housing were unemployed and looking for work (15% and 16% respectively) (Table 2.2).
Table 2.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, 
Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	15.8	14.9	
Employed part-time	17.3	21.0	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	15.2	15.8	
Not in the labour force	51.7	48.3	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	34.4	33.0	
Health or disability limits ability to work	43.6	42.7	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	15.3	15.2	
Studying full-time	4.3	5.8	
Other reason	2.4	3.3	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
About half of all people aged 18 or older in the households surveyed, in both public and community housing, were not employed and not looking for work (52% for PH and 48% for CH). The most frequently reported reason was ill health or disability, followed by retirement, and parenting or caring responsibilities. 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
Almost one-fifth of social housing households contained at least one person who needed help with self-care, communication or body movement activities (19% for PH and 18% for CH). The respondent was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible to report the same person having difficulty due to multiple reasons—for example, because of both a disability and a long-term health condition. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 2.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Australia, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
The largest group of tenants experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication in social housing were those who had a disability (40% for PH and 46% for CH) followed by those with a ‘long-term health condition’ (37% for PH and 32% for CH) (Figure 2.2).
For both public housing and community housing, ‘old age’ was a reason for almost one-fifth of the tenants (19% and 17% respectively).	
Housing histories 
Survey respondents were asked to provide information relating to their housing history, including the length of time in social housing, as well as whether they had previously experienced homelessness.
Prior tenure
Public housing tenants were more likely to have previously resided in another social housing property than community housing tenants (35% compared with 26% respectively). 
Before moving into their current home, more than one-third (37%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 35% were in another social housing property (31% in PH and 4% in CH), and 15% were living with friends or relatives (Table 2.3).
More than one-third of respondents from community housing (39%) moved into their current home from private rental accommodation, one-quarter (26%) had moved from another social housing property (8% from PH and 18% from CH) and 17% were living with friends or relatives. 
Table 2.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Australia, August–September 2010 
(per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	36.6	39.3	
Friend’s or relative’s home	15.1	16.6	
In public housing	31.5	7.5	
In community housing	3.6	18.2	
In a caravan park	3.3	2.5	
In a boarding house	1.0	3.0	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	5.5	7.3	
Somewhere else	3.6	5.5	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and do not necessarily
relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in this table.
Time in social housing
In general, the duration of tenancy in social housing was shorter for respondents in community housing than in public housing. Almost three-quarters of survey respondents had lived in community housing for 10 years or less, the largest proportion (26%) for between 6 and 10 years in total. In contrast, respondents were more likely to have lived in public housing for more than 10 years—with one-third for more than 20 years. However, it should be noted that these patterns may be partly explained by the fact that public housing has been available in Australia longer than community housing.
Plans to leave social housing
About 1 in 20 (6%) survey respondents reported that they were planning to leave public housing in the next 5 years compared with about 1 in 10 (11%) for community housing. 
Prior homelessness
One-fifth of public housing (21%) and one-third (31%) of community housing respondents indicated they had been homeless at some time in the past. More than one-quarter of public housing (28%) and more than one-third (40%) of community housing respondents indicated that they had been homeless during the past 5 years.
Use of support services
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of health and community services in the last 12 months, referred to here as ‘support services’. The list of services included health services, family support services and personal support services (see Table 2.4). 
Services needed
Health or allied health services were reported as needed most frequently by both public housing and community housing households (67% and 70% respectively) (Figure 2.3). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (10% for PH and 12% for CH). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both public and community housing households; however, community housing proportions are consistently higher.
Figure 2.3: Support services needed, Australia, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question was provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 2.4). The services most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (33% for PH and 46% for CH) and ‘information, advice and referral services’ (26% for PH and 28% for CH).
Table 2.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	11.8	88.2	12.2	87.8	
Mental health support services	9.3	90.7	12.9	87.1	
Life skills or community living support services	19.9	80.1	23.3	76.7	
Personal support services	14.4	85.6	18.2	81.8	
Information, advice and referral services	25.8	74.2	27.9	72.1	
Day-to-day living support services	15.4	84.6	21.7	78.3	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	33.1	66.9	46.0	54.0	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	10.1	89.9	9.8	90.2	
Training and employment support services	5.7	94.3	9.0	91.0	
Financial and material assistance	13.6	86.4	18.0	82.0	
Other support services	12.8	87.2	14.2	85.8	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
Respondents were asked about their reasons for not accessing those services which they had otherwise indicated as being needed.
The most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’. This response could be given in addition to other responses, such as cost of services. These reasons may have been of greater significance to the response; for example, respondents did not want to access services because of their cost. 

Table 2.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	18.4	16.9	8.3	19.6	12.4	20.1	4.3	
Mental health support services	15.4	17.8	7.5	12.3	7.7	36.2	3.2	
Life skills or community living support services	13.4	20.6	8.5	9.0	9.1	34.5	4.9	
Personal support services	15.7	23.7	6.6	8.1	7.8	30.9	5.3	
Information, advice and referral services	10.9	24.9	10.4	8.5	8.0	32.7	4.6	
Day-to-day living support services	10.0	21.5	8.4	7.0	7.0	35.8	10.3	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	10.9	23.4	6.0	5.9	5.0	44.9	3.9	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	10.9	22.6	8.0	7.0	7.9	36.7	6.9	
Training and employment support services	13.2	19.3	5.5	7.9	7.9	40.0	6.3	
Financial and material assistance	10.2	36.0	6.2	6.0	7.0	31.0	3.7	
Other support services	12.6	19.1	7.1	10.1	6.5	38.9	5.6	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	19.1	19.0	8.7	21.6	11.9	13.6	5.8	
Mental health support services	17.2	19.5	7.5	6.1	6.7	32.3	10.7	
Life skills or community living support services	13.6	27.9	8.2	12.1	7.3	22.8	8.1	
Personal support services	15.5	28.0	8.6	7.7	7.3	25.5	7.3	
Information, advice and referral services	15.9	26.9	8.0	6.6	8.6	26.3	7.7	
Day-to-day living support services	17.0	21.1	7.1	7.2	7.0	30.0	10.6	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	12.9	18.5	8.1	5.0	6.3	42.6	6.6	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	17.6	22.7	5.2	7.1	6.3	33.0	8.2	
Training and employment support services	14.8	19.1	3.9	6.6	5.8	39.1	10.6	
Financial and material assistance	10.4	34.6	6.9	5.5	7.0	27.3	8.4	
Other support services	16.2	20.7	10.0	9.3	11.8	27.5	4.5	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.

Social housing satisfaction 
Several aspects of tenants’ satisfaction were reported in the 2010 NSHS. Respondents were asked about their overall satisfaction with living in social housing and whether they were satisfied with the condition of their home. They were also asked about whether a range of amenities and locational aspects were important to them and whether their needs were met in relation to those aspects. Lastly, information was gathered about satisfaction with services provided by the relevant housing organisation.
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents, for both public and community housing, indicated that overall they and their household were satisfied or very satisfied to be living in social housing (88% for PH and 90% for CH) (Figure 2.4).
Figure 2.4: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, Australia, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
Overall the majority of both public and community housing respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the physical condition of their home. However, a smaller proportion of public housing than community housing respondents were satisfied (59% and 73% respectively) (Figure 2.5). Although the proportion of respondents who were very dissatisfied with the physical condition of their home was small, public housing respondents were more than twice as likely as community housing respondents to be very dissatisfied (11% and 5% respectively). 
Figure 2.5: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Australia,
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate
 to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households in both public and community housing indicated that all of the amenities listed (Table 2.6) were important (between 72% and 98%) to their household. Between 76% and 91% of those households which rated the particular amenities as important indicated that their needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The amenities reported as most important for both public and community housing respondents related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood. Almost all respondents indicated that these issues were important (98% for safety/security of home and 97% for safety/security of neighbourhood) and more than three-quarters felt their safety and security needs were met (between 76% and 84%). 

Table 2.6: Tenants’ satisfaction with amenities, Australia, August–September
2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	84.0	84.4	85.8	86.4	
Modifications for special needs	74.6	76.4	71.8	76.9	
Ease of access and entry	88.4	89.0	88.4	90.8	
Car parking	84.3	81.6	85.8	84.1	
Yard space and fencing	85.1	78.5	83.7	83.2	
Privacy of home	95.2	82.6	96.5	85.1	
Safety/security of home	97.7	78.7	98.4	83.6	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	96.8	75.9	97.3	83.6	
Notes
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Location
The aspect of location reported as most important for both public and community housing respondents was being close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (94% and 92% respectively) (Table 2.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was being close to ‘child care facilities’ (44% for PH and 45% for CH)—this reflects the age profile of the majority of respondents.
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the large majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met the needs of their household (between 85% and 92%).
Table 2.7: Tenant’s satisfaction with location of dwelling, Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	89.9	90.7	90.1	92.3	
Public transport	85.7	90.5	84.7	90.4	
Parks and recreational facilities	63.3	89.7	66.0	91.4	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	94.0	90.0	92.4	90.3	
Child care facilities	43.8	88.3	44.7	87.3	
Education/training facilities	64.1	88.4	65.8	87.4	
Employment/place of work	64.4	87.3	68.6	85.3	
Community and support services	77.5	86.5	76.4	88.4	
Family and friends	89.2	87.8	89.9	86.6	
Notes
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
The survey asked respondents to indicate how satisfied they were with the services provided by (or through) the respective government housing department or community housing organisation. Overall, most respondents were satisfied (73% in PH, 79% in CH). About 1 in 7 (15%) public housing respondents and 1 in 10 (10%) community housing respondents were dissatisfied with services (Figure 2.6).
Figure 2.6: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Australia, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
Overall, the levels of satisfaction with maintenance services were similar for both public and community housing. Three-quarters of respondents in public housing (78%) indicated that they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services (Table 2.8) and 11% were dissatisfied. The level of satisfaction for day-to-day maintenance services was lower with 71% satisfied and 16% dissatisfied.
Three-quarters (79%) of community housing respondents indicated they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services and about 1 in 10 (9%) were dissatisfied. The level of satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance was lower, with three-quarters (72%) indicating they were satisfied and 14% indicating they were dissatisfied.
Table 2.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	31.9	37.0	24.5	30.3	
Satisfied	45.8	41.9	46.5	41.7	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	11.1	11.8	12.4	13.6	
Dissatisfied	7.1	5.9	9.4	9.1	
Very dissatisfied	4.0	3.3	6.2	5.2	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
3	New South Wales
Social housing services in New South Wales
Housing NSW manages the largest portfolio of public housing in Australia with close to 120,000 dwellings. Through this portfolio of public housing properties, Housing NSW provides clients with a recognised housing need with subsidised affordable rental housing where the dwelling is owned or leased and managed by Housing NSW.
In New South Wales (NSW), community housing is administered by Housing NSW. Community housing is subsidised rental housing for low to moderate income households managed by community housing providers. These are non-profit, religious, local government or community-based organisations that deliver housing solutions on behalf of government and in accordance with their own social responsibilities to the disadvantaged. The four main types of community housing providers are Housing Associations, Religious/faith based providers, Co-operative Housing Providers and Support Providers. The community housing sector’s role in the provision of social housing continues to grow with more than 20,000 leasehold and capital properties now being managed.
Housing NSW works with a range of government agencies and non-government organisations to provide support services to social housing tenants. Key initiatives providing support services to tenants include:
•	NSW Homelessness Action Plan, which is the NSW Government’s key policy for reducing homelessness in NSW. 
•	working closely with NSW Health and other agencies to provide housing and support to clients with mental illness. 
•	the 2010 launch of the Housing NSW Youth Action Plan 2010–14, which outlines how we will address the housing needs of young people aged 12–24.
•	new initiatives developed by the NSW Aboriginal Housing Office to help the Indigenous community housing sector to better meet the needs of its tenants and communities through the Build and Grow Aboriginal Community Housing Strategy, including the introduction of a new state-wide standard for Aboriginal housing and tenancy management.
•	providing social housing assistance programs to people with a disability and participate in whole-of-government initiatives that help all tenants live full lives in the community. 
•	New Directions in Social Housing for Older People, in its fourth year of the 5 year plan, to address the needs of older social tenants, who make up almost one-third of heads of households in social housing.
Community housing providers may establish links with organisations that provide support services to assist tenants to sustain their tenancies.
NSW is delivering its share of new social housing under the Nation Building Economic Stimulus Plan. NSW will deliver, in two stages, more than 6,300 new social housing homes by 2012. This will provide more housing assistance to people most in need, particularly those people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness and Indigenous people. 
Implementation of the 5 year strategy, Planning for the Future: New Directions for Community Housing in NSW, aims to ensure the community housing sector grows as a flexible component of the NSW social housing system and is able to offer more housing, tailored to tenants’ needs. The target is to grow the sector from 13,000 to 30,000 homes over 10 years. 
Who are social housing tenants in New South Wales?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
Two-thirds of survey respondents from NSW were female (64% for PH and 68% for CH) and the age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups. Two-thirds of public housing respondents (64%) and more than half of community housing respondents (54%) were aged 55 and older. 
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
Two-thirds of respondents from both public and community housing (64% and 62% respectively) indicated that they were born in Australia. The most frequently reported country of birth for those respondents not born in Australia was England (12% for PH and 10% for CH). The next most frequently reported countries of birth for public housing respondents were Lebanon (8%) followed by Vietnam (6%). For community housing, these were China (8%) and Lebanon (8%). 
More than three-quarters of respondents indicated that they spoke mainly English at home (81% for PH and 78% for CH). For those who mainly spoke a language other than English at home, Arabic was most frequently reported (19% for PH and 16% for CH) followed by Spanish (12% for PH and 13% for CH). 
Less than 1 in 10 respondents (6% for both PH and CH) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 2% of the NSW population (2006 Census QuickStats: New South Wales). Indigenous Australians are proportionally overrepresented in both public and community housing in NSW.
Highest education level 
More than one-third of respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent (43% and 40% respectively). One-sixth of public housing and community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or its equivalent (18% and 17% respectively). About 1 in 20 respondents indicated that they had achieved a bachelor degree or higher (4% for PH and 6% for CH). A higher proportion of community housing respondents indicated that they held post-school qualifications than public housing respondents (26% compared with 17%).
Figure 3.1: Highest level of education completed, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis highest level of education completed.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.

Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of households surveyed (54% for PH and 52% for CH) comprised a single person living alone, and more than 1 in 10 (14% for PH and 13% for CH) were couple only households (Table 3.1). Less than one-third of households contained one or more dependent children (26% and 29% respectively). 
Table 3.1: Social housing households, by household type, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	54.2	52.0	
Single person, living with one or more children	17.8	22.6	
Couple, living without children	14.2	13.4	
Couple, living with one or more children	8.1	6.3	
Extended family, living without children	1.6	1.4	
Extended family, living with one or more children	2.5	2.0	
Group of unrelated adults	1.3	2.2	
Other	0.3	0.1	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
Almost half of all people aged 18 or older in the households surveyed were in the labour force (46%for PH and 49% for CH) in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
About 16% of people in households surveyed were unemployed and looking for work (Table 3.2).
Table 3.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households,
New South Wales, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	16.9	13.6	
Employed part-time	13.7	19.5	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	15.6	16.3	
Not in the labour force	53.8	50.6	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	34.7	30.0	
Health or disability limits ability to work	42.1	43.8	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	16.6	16.5	
Studying full-time	3.7	7.3	
Other reason	2.9	2.4	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
About half of all people aged 18 or older in the households surveyed were not employed and not looking for work (54% for PH and 51% for CH). The most frequently reported reason was ill health or disability, followed by retirement and parenting or caring responsibilities. 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
Almost one-fifth of social housing households contained at least one person who needed help with self-care, communication or body movement activities (18% for both PH and CH). The respondent was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons—for example, because of both a disability and a long-term health condition. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 3.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
For public housing, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with a ‘long-term health condition’ and those who had a disability (38% each) (Figure 3.2).
For community housing, almost half (46%) of those tenants experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication had a disability while one-third (32%) had a ‘long-term health condition’. 
Almost one-fifth of tenants reported ‘old age’ as a reason for needing assistance (19% and 17% respectively).	
Housing histories in New South Wales
Survey respondents were asked to provide information relating to their housing history, including the length of time in social housing, as well as whether they had previously experienced homelessness.
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, more than one-third (36%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 38% were in another social housing property (35% in PH and 3% in CH) and 15% were living with friends or relatives (Table 3.3).

Table 3.3: Prior tenure of respondents, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	36.2	35.3	
Friend’s or relative’s home	14.8	14.5	
In public housing	35.1	10.4	
In community housing	2.6	24.8	
In a caravan park	1.3	2.3	
In a boarding house	1.6	1.2	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	4.7	7.4	
Somewhere else	3.6	4.1	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.
More than one-third of respondents from community housing (35%) moved into their current home from private rental accommodation; the same proportion (35%) had moved from another social housing property (10% from PH and 25% from CH), and 15% were living with friends or relatives. 
Time in social housing
In general, the duration of tenure in social housing was longer for public housing respondents than for community housing respondents. Almost two-fifths (38%) of public housing respondents indicated they had lived in public housing for 20 years or more (Figure 3.3), whereas only 7% of community housing respondents had lived in community housing for the same period. Of community housing respondents, those who had lived in community housing for 6 to 10 years represented the largest proportion (30%). However, in considering these findings, it is important to note that the length of tenancy may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 3.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.

Plans to leave social housing
Less than 1 in 10 respondents reported that they were planning to leave social housing in the next 5 years (6% and 8% respectively). 
Prior homelessness
In NSW, one-fifth of public housing (21%) and one-third (31%) of community housing respondents indicated that they had been homeless at some time in the past. Of these, one-quarter of public housing (24%) and one-third (31%) of community housing respondents had been homeless during the past 5 years.
Use of support services in New South Wales
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of health and community services in the last 12 months, referred to here as ‘support services’. The list of services is extensive (see Table 3.4), including health, family support and personal support services. 
Services needed
‘Health or allied health services’ were the service type reported as being needed most frequently by households in both public and community housing (64% and 67% respectively) (Figure 3.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (9% and 10% respectively). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both public and community housing households. 
Figure 3.4: Support services needed, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 3.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (28% for PH and 42% for CH) and ‘information, advice and referral services’ (27% for PH and 26% for CH).
The services most frequently reported as accessed without assistance from public housing service providers were ‘training and employment support services’ (94%) followed by ‘mental health support services’ (91%). For community housing, ‘training and employment support services’, ‘services that provide support for children, family or carer’ and ‘other support services’ were most frequently reported (91% each). 

Table 3.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	10.7	89.3	9.6	90.4	
Mental health support services	8.6	91.4	11.4	88.6	
Life skills or community living support services	16.7	83.3	19.1	80.9	
Personal support services	10.2	89.8	15.8	84.2	
Information, advice and referral services	27.2	72.8	26.3	73.7	
Day-to-day living support services	12.2	87.8	14.4	85.6	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	27.9	72.1	41.6	58.4	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	9.9	90.1	9.3	90.7	
Training and employment support services	6.3	93.7	8.7	91.3	
Financial and material assistance	9.6	90.4	13.9	86.1	
Other support services	14.8	85.2	8.9	91.1	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
Among NSW tenants the most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’. As outlined earlier, this response could be given in addition to other responses which may have been more significant to the decision to not access them; for example, respondents did not want to go because it cost too much. 

Table 3.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, New South Wales, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	17.0	20.0	8.7	18.1	12.7	18.5	5.0	
Mental health support services	13.9	15.0	8.2	11.5	9.6	37.2	4.6	
Life skills or community living support services	13.5	17.7	9.3	10.8	9.1	33.8	5.8	
Personal support services	12.6	24.4	9.4	8.6	9.7	30.0	5.3	
Information, advice and referral services	10.7	22.9	8.1	10.3	7.8	37.6	2.6	
Day-to-day living support services	10.4	18.3	5.6	7.0	11.0	36.3	11.4	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	12.8	18.4	5.7	7.4	4.8	46.4	4.5	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	14.2	17.8	6.1	7.7	5.4	43.6	5.2	
Training and employment support services	9.0	18.3	5.6	6.5	7.2	48.8	4.6	
Financial and material assistance	8.5	29.6	7.1	5.1	6.5	38.8	4.4	
Other support services	11.1	19.0	5.5	11.1	7.7	40.6	5.0	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	19.8	21.6	8.1	19.1	11.3	13.0	7.1	
Mental health support services	21.2	21.4	9.6	3.0	5.6	24.4	14.8	
Life skills or community living support services	12.2	35.6	6.4	9.0	2.8	24.6	9.4	
Personal support services	17.2	33.3	9.2	3.7	5.0	25.0	6.6	
Information, advice and referral services	15.4	30.6	8.0	1.6	8.0	28.1	8.3	
Day-to-day living support services	15.2	24.4	8.2	5.0	4.9	31.9	10.4	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	9.3	17.4	8.6	2.8	5.7	53.4	2.8	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	17.7	33.4	2.8	5.0	2.8	34.3	4.0	
Training and employment support services	12.2	22.3	3.1	0.0	0.0	52.6	9.8	
Financial and material assistance	8.5	35.7	5.6	3.0	6.9	30.8	9.5	
Other support services	19.2	24.1	6.8	6.7	11.0	30.1	2.1	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in New South Wales 
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents indicated that overall they and their household were satisfied to be living in social housing (87% for PH and 89% for CH) (Figure 3.5).
Figure 3.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
Public housing respondents were not as satisfied with the physical condition of their home as community housing respondents (52% and 70% respectively). Public housing respondents were more likely to be ‘very dissatisfied’ with the physical condition of their home than those in community housing (14% and 6% respectively). 
Figure 3.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households (between 72% and 99%) indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 3.6) were important to their household. Between 71% and 88% of those households indicated that their household’s needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The amenities reported as most important for both public housing and community housing respondents related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood. Essentially all respondents (ranging between 97% and 99%) indicated that these issues were important and more than 70% of these respondents also felt their safety and security needs were met (between 72% for PH and 83% for CH). 

Table 3.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	84.9	85.5	88.6	88.4	
Modifications for special needs	71.6	71.2	72.1	72.6	
Ease of access and entry	88.2	87.7	89.0	88.4	
Car parking	80.5	82.1	85.5	83.6	
Yard space and fencing	83.2	74.4	84.2	81.2	
Privacy of home	95.2	82.4	96.4	84.3	
Safety/security of home	98.0	74.7	98.6	83.2	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	96.9	72.2	98.0	82.1	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
The most frequently reported aspect of location, for both public housing and community housing respondents, in terms of importance was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (94% and 92% respectively) (Table 3.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was to be close to ‘child care facilities’ (40% for PH and 42% for CH).
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the majority of households indicated that their location met the needs of their household (between 84% and 92%).
Table 3.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	90.8	89.3	89.7	91.8	
Public transport	88.3	90.4	85.4	90.7	
Parks and recreational facilities	63.5	89.8	63.7	90.8	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	94.3	88.9	92.2	89.6	
Child care facilities	40.0	88.3	42.0	88.3	
Education/training facilities	61.7	89.7	66.1	87.2	
Employment/place of work	61.7	85.8	66.2	84.3	
Community and support services	77.5	84.7	73.6	86.1	
Family and friends	91.1	86.3	90.3	85.4	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
The survey asked respondents to indicate how satisfied, or dissatisfied, they were with the services provided by (or through) the respective department (public housing) or their housing organisation (community housing). 
Close to two-thirds of public housing respondents (64%) were satisfied overall with the services provided (Figure 3.7). About one-fifth (21%) were dissatisfied with services.
Three-quarters of community housing respondents (77%) were satisfied with the services provided while more than 1 in 10 (12%) were dissatisfied with services. 
Figure 3.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.	
Satisfaction with maintenance services
Overall, the levels of satisfaction with maintenance services were similar for both public and community housing. Close to three-quarters of those in public housing (71%) indicated that they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services (Table 3.8) while 15% were dissatisfied. The level of satisfaction for day-to-day maintenance services was lower with 62% satisfied and 22% dissatisfied.
More than three-quarters (77%) of community housing respondents indicated they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services while about 1 in 10 (11%) were dissatisfied. The level of satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance was lower with about two-thirds (69%) indicating they were satisfied and about 1 in 5 (17%) indicating they were dissatisfied.
Table 3.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, New South Wales, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	23.5	33.1	17.2	26.3	
Satisfied	47.9	44.0	44.9	42.3	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	13.4	12.4	15.4	14.6	
Dissatisfied	9.2	6.6	13.3	10.1	
Very dissatisfied	6.0	3.9	9.2	6.7	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
4	Victoria
Social housing services in Victoria
The Department of Human Services supports Victorians most in need to find and maintain safe, secure and affordable housing. 
Public housing is available to eligible low-income households that may pay a subsidised rent according to household income. Indigenous applicants are eligible for placement in public housing in either Rental General Housing or the Aboriginal Housing Programs.
The Rental General Housing Program is the major form of long-term rental assistance offered to low-income households in need of public rental assistance. It includes separate houses, medium density dwellings and flats. 
At 30 June 2010, The Division of Housing and Community Building managed a total of 65,437 direct tenure public rental units. This number consists of 63,264 Rental General Stock units (including short term leases, and bushfire accommodation) and 1,750 Movable Units. 
Direct tenure public rental housing consists of the Division’s major public rental housing programs, the Rental General Housing Program, and the Movable Units Program. It provides long term rental housing assistance and is available to low-income households that meet eligibility limits as specified in the individual programs. 
Today, government-owned public housing works alongside community housing, which is run by not-for profit community housing organisations, and together deliver Australia’s largest public and social housing partnership program. Funds provided by the Division of Housing and Community Building to organisations ensure thousands of new dwellings are built each year. These dwellings provide affordable rental housing to low-income households across Victoria. A range of community managed housing options provide affordable accommodation for a wide range of client groups. These programs are managed by registered housing agencies, community-based organisations and local government authorities. 
At 30 June 2010, there were 14,224 Community managed housing properties in Victoria. The Division of Housing and Community Building has worked with partners to provide ongoing services and support for people at risk of homelessness living in public and social housing. These services include: living skills/personal development; family relationships; and assistance for domestic/family violence.

Who are social housing tenants in Victoria?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
About two-thirds of survey respondents from Victoria were female (66% for PH and 60% for CH) and the age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups. Almost two-thirds of public housing respondents (62%) and almost half of community housing respondents (47%) were aged 55 and older. 
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
Two-thirds of public housing respondents (63%) and three-quarters (74%) of community housing respondents indicated that they were born in Australia. The most frequently reported country of birth for those respondents not born in Australia was England (10% for PH and 13% for CH). The next most frequently reported countries were Italy (9%) followed by Scotland and Germany (both 5%) for public housing respondents, and New Zealand and the United Kingdom (not further specified) (both 7%), followed by Poland (6%) for community housing respondents. 
More than 80% of public housing respondents and 90% of community housing respondents spoke English at home. For public housing respondents who mainly spoke another language at home, Arabic was the most frequently reported language (12%) followed by Italian (9%). For community housing, Polish (15%) and Spanish (8%) were most frequently reported. 
Less than 1 in 20 respondents for both public and community housing (4% and 3% respectively) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 0.5% of the Victorian population (2006 Census QuickStats: Victoria). Indigenous Australians are proportionally overrepresented in both public housing and community housing in Victoria.
Highest education level
More than one-third of social housing respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 only or its equivalent (37% for PH and 41% for CH) (Figure 4.1). One-fifth (21%) of public housing respondents and one-sixth (17%) of community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or equivalent. A higher proportion of community housing respondents indicated that they held post-school qualifications than public housing respondents (26% compared with 18%).
Figure 4.1: Level of education, Victoria, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of households surveyed (55% for PH and 51% for CH) comprised a single person living alone and 1 in 10 (9% for PH and 9% for CH) were couple only households (Table 4.1). Less than one-third of both public and community housing households contained one or more children (32% for PH and 31% for CH). 
Table 4.1: Social housing households, by household type, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
	Public housing 	Community housing 	
Single person, living alone 	55.4	50.7	
Single person, living with one or more children	19.9	22.0	
Couple, living without children	9.0	9.0	
Couple, living with one or more children	9.6	7.7	
Extended family, living without children	1.9	0.8	
Extended family, living with one or more children 	2.1	1.0	
Group of unrelated adults	1.1	8.4	
Other	1.0	0.4	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment 
In those households surveyed, about half of all people aged 18 or older in public housing (48%) and more than half in community housing (59%), were in the labour force in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
Within both public housing and community housing households, 16% of people were unemployed and looking for work (Table 4.2). People aged 55 and over were overrepresented in the 2010 NSHS; this may have skewed the responses to this question. 

Table 4.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
	Public housing 	Community housing 	
Employment Status 	
Employed full time 	10.7	19.3	
Employed part time	21.0	23.1	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	16.0	16.2	
Not in the labour force	52.3	41.4	
Reason for not participating in labour force 	
Retired or too old to work	29.3	33.5	
Health or disability limits ability to work	46.3	42.0	
Parenting/caring responsibilities 	16.7	14.7	
Studying full-time	5.4	4.5	
Other reason	2.3	5.3	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
About half of those living in public housing households were not employed and not looking for work (52%) compared with more than one-third for community housing (41%). The most frequently reported reason for both public housing and community housing was ill health or disability, followed by retirement and parenting or caring responsibilities. 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-fifth of public housing households (21%) and one-sixth of those from community housing (16%) contained at least one person who required assistance with self-care activities, body movement or communication activities. The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for those difficulties. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons —for example because of both a disability and a long term health condition. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 4.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Victoria, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
For public housing, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with a ‘long-term health condition’ and those with a disability (39% each) (Figure 4.2). For community housing, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with disability (40%) followed by a long-term health condition (34%). 
For both public housing and community housing, less than one-fifth of the households stated old age as a reason for requiring assistance with activities of daily living (17% for PH and 19% for CH).	
Housing histories in Victoria
Survey respondents were asked to provide information relating to their housing history, including the length of time in social housing, as well as whether they had previously experienced homelessness.
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, one-third (33%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 34% were in another long-term social housing property (29% in PH and 5% in CH), and 17% were living with friends or relatives (Table 4.3). 
Table 4.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	32.8	42.2	
Friend’s or relative’s home	17.4	16.6	
In public housing	29.3	5.8	
In community housing	5.0	14.0	
In a caravan park	3.3	1.6	
In a boarding house	0.2	5.4	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	10.5	7.4	
Somewhere else	1.5	7.0	
Note 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.
More than one-third (42%) of respondents from community housing moved into their current home from private rental accommodation, one-fifth (20%) had moved from another long-term social housing property (6% from PH and 14% from CH) and one-sixth (17%) were living with family or relatives.
Time in social housing
In general, the duration of tenure in social housing was longer for public housing respondents than for community housing respondents. More than one-third (39%) of public housing respondents indicated they had lived in public housing for more than 15 years (Figure 4.3), whereas one-sixth of community housing respondents (17%) had lived in community housing for the same period of time. Of community housing respondents, more than one-quarter (27%) had lived in community housing for 2 years or less.
However, it should be noted that these patterns may be explained, in part, by the fact that public housing has been available in Australia for a longer period of time than community housing. In considering these findings it is important to note that the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 4.3: Number of years living in social housing, Victoria, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
In Victoria, 7% of public housing and 13% of community housing respondents reported they were planning to leave social housing in the next 5 years.
Prior homelessness
One-fifth (22%) of public housing respondents and less than one-third (30%) of community housing respondents reported that they had been homeless at some time in the past. Of these, close to one-third (31%) of those in public housing and almost a half (45%) of those in community housing indicated that they had been homeless during the past 5 years.
Use of support services in Victoria 
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of services, including health, family support and personal support services, in the last 12 months, referred to here as ‘support services’(see Table 4.4). 
Services needed
‘Health or allied health services’ were the service type reported as being needed most frequently by households in both public and community housing (71% and 74% respectively) (Figure 4.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (12% for PH and 15% for CH). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both public and community housing households.
Figure 4.4: Support services needed, Victoria, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 4.4). Those services which were most frequently accessed were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (57% for PH and 61% for CH) and ‘life skills or community living support services’ (31% for PH and 32% for CH).
Of services accessed without assistance from housing service providers, ‘training and employment support services’ were most frequently reported for both public and community housing respondents (94% and 91% respectively). The next most frequently reported services for public housing were ‘health or allied health services’ and ‘mental health support services’ (both 86%). For community housing, ‘services that provide support for children, family or carers‘ and ‘health or allied health services’ were the next most frequently reported services (89% and 86% respectively). 

Table 4.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing service provider’s help	Without housing service provider’s help	With housing service provider’s help	Without housing service provider’s help 	
Health or allied health services	14.3	85.7	14.1	85.9	
Mental health support services	14.4	85.6	16.8	83.2	
Life skills or community living support services	31.4	68.6	31.6	68.4	
Personal support services	22.4	77.6	23.7	76.3	
Information, advice and referral services	25.0	75.0	31.8	68.2	
Day-to-day living support services	19.9	80.1	37.5	62.5	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	57.0	43.0	60.6	39.4	
Services that provide support for children, family or carers	10.2	89.8	10.9	89.1	
Training and employment support services	6.3	93.7	8.6	91.4	
Financial and material assistance	25.6	74.4	13.9	86.1	
Other support services	18.7	81.3	16.7	83.3	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services 
The most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 4.5). This response could be given in addition to other responses of more importance. 

Table 4.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	20.0	14.3	9.2	21.9	10.9	18.4	5.3	
Mental health support services	20.2	30.8	2.6	14.5	3.7	28.0	0.2	
Life skills or community living support services	12.7	21.9	10.1	7.8	8.2	37.3	2.0	
Personal support services	24.3	26.3	10.8	5.4	5.0	27.3	0.9	
Information, advice and referral services	5.5	29.0	13.6	7.8	7.6	30.2	6.3	
Day-to-day living support services	7.3	32.9	14.5	9.8	3.2	24.1	8.2	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	4.2	55.8	3.2	2.8	1.0	31.5	1.5	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	6.3	38.8	6.8	5.7	4.1	34.3	4.0	
Training and employment support services	23.0	29.1	2.8	9.6	4.3	31.2	0.0	
Financial and material assistance	12.5	53.6	3.6	4.9	5.2	19.4	0.8	
Other support services	13.8	24.8	10.4	13.4	3.3	33.1	1.2	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	22.8	17.7	7.6	25.3	12.7	8.8	5.1	
Mental health support services	17.6	19.6	3.9	9.8	3.9	37.4	7.8	
Life skills or community living support services	17.2	20.3	9.4	18.8	10.9	17.2	6.2	
Personal support services	15.9	20.6	6.3	11.1	11.2	27.0	7.9	
Information, advice and referral services	22.0	18.0	4.0	14.0	10.0	22.0	10.0	
Day-to-day living support services	23.4	19.1	4.3	10.6	10.7	23.4	8.5	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	20.0	20.0	8.6	5.7	8.6	25.7	11.4	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	19.0	14.3	7.1	9.5	9.5	28.7	11.9	
Training and employment support services	19.4	11.1	2.8	13.9	8.3	33.4	11.1	
Financial and material assistance	15.9	31.8	6.8	9.2	4.5	25.0	6.8	
Other support services	16.7	11.9	11.9	11.9	14.3	26.2	7.1	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in Victoria
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (85% for PH and 90% for CH) (Figure 4.5). 
Figure 4.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Victoria, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
Public housing respondents were not as likely to be satisfied with the physical condition of their home as community housing respondents (57% and 74% respectively) (Figure 4.6). Public housing respondents were more than three times as likely to be ‘Very dissatisfied’ with the physical condition of their home as those in community housing (15% and 4% respectively).
Figure 4.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Victoria, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity 
Most households indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 4.6) were important (between 70% and 98%) to their household. Between 73% and 92% of those households indicated that their household’s needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The amenity aspects reported as most important related to the safety and security of the home and neighbourhood. 
Essentially all respondents (ranging between 97% and 98%) indicated that these issues were important and more than three quarters of these respondents also felt their safety and security needs were met (between 76% and 87%).

Table 4.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	81.0	78.5	83.2	83.7	
Modifications for special needs	77.9	79.0	70.3	77.9	
Ease of access and entry	91.7	85.5	88.2	92.4	
Car parking	85.0	76.2	85.8	85.1	
Yard space and fencing	88.0	73.2	84.4	85.7	
Privacy of home	94.3	78.8	97.4	87.2	
Safety/security of home	97.3	78.9	98.5	84.2	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	97.0	76.1	97.2	87.3	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location 
The location aspect considered most important was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (96% and 94% respectively) (Table 4.7). The aspects of location reported as least important were being close to ‘child care facilities’ (52% for PH and 49% for CH).
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met their needs (between 84% and 94%). 
Table 4.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Victoria, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	90.6	91.5	90.6	94.5	
Public transport	86.5	90.8	85.0	90.6	
Parks and recreational facilities	68.7	87.8	69.4	93.6	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	95.7	92.1	93.5	91.6	
Child care facilities	52.3	86.0	49.1	83.6	
Education/training facilities	74.6	87.0	66.2	88.0	
Employment/place of work	69.6	87.2	72.3	88.2	
Community and support services	82.9	88.0	80.4	91.7	
Family and friends	89.1	87.1	89.9	87.9	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
Three-quarters of public housing respondents (75%) were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider (Figure 4.7) and 15% were dissatisfied.
Four-fifths of community housing respondents (79%) were satisfied overall with the services provided and about 1 in 10 (11%) were dissatisfied.
Figure 4.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Victoria, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
More than three-quarters of both public and community housing respondents were either very satisfied or satisfied with the emergency maintenance services provided (76% and 79% respectively). The level of satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services was similar, with three-quarters of respondents being very satisfied or satisfied (74% for both PH and CH) (Table 4.8).
Table 4.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	31.1	39.2	22.6	30.9	
Satisfied	45.0	39.9	51.2	42.5	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	14.4	12.3	14.7	14.0	
Dissatisfied	7.0	5.1	6.7	8.4	
Very dissatisfied	2.5	3.5	4.8	4.2	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
5	Queensland
Social housing services in Queensland
The delivery of social housing in Queensland is the responsibility of the Queensland Department of Communities which administers the Queensland Housing Act 2003 and is responsible for the delivery of services under the Act.
Queensland has an integrated waitlist as part of its social housing system and people are allocated social rental housing on the basis of need. Tenancies are managed by the department, referred to as government-managed social rental housing or by the not-for-profit sector, referred to as non-government managed social rental housing.
For national reporting purposes, Queensland’s social housing system is broken down into: public housing, state-owned and managed Indigenous housing and community housing. As at 30 June 2011 there were 51,976 dwellings under Queensland’s public housing program and 3,614 new households were assisted under this program during 2010–11. Under Queensland’s SOMIH program, the number of dwellings was 3,388 at 30 June 2011, and 330 new SOMIH households were assisted during 2010–11. Community housing manages tenancies for 10,203 dwellings, and 3,065 new households were assisted during 2010-11.
During 2010-11, the department continued to provide integrated social housing and support services to families and individuals, especially those who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. Under the Nation Building Jobs Plan—Social Housing Initiative, Queensland expended $490.4 million and completed 2,406 dwellings during 2010–11. The final 1,280 dwellings are due for completion by June 2012. Queensland is committed to the implementation of the NAHA and supporting National Partnership Agreements. Under the National Partnership Agreement on Social Housing, Queensland is expending $80.1 million to complete construction on 306 dwellings with 286 completed at 30 June 2011. Under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, Queensland has constructed 62 new dwellings and 425 upgrades in 2010–11.
Who are social housing tenants in Queensland?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
More than two-thirds of survey respondents from public housing were female (69%). In community housing, females made up 58% of respondents. More than half of all respondents were aged 55 and older (58% for PH and 56% for CH).
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
Three-quarters of respondents from both public and community housing (74% and 73% respectively) indicated that they were born in Australia. The most frequently reported countries of birth for those respondents not born in Australia were, for both public and community housing, England (21% and 18% respectively) and New Zealand (15% and 16% respectively).
The majority of respondents spoke English at home (92% for both). Of languages other than English spoken at home, Vietnamese was reported most frequently (11%) followed by Spanish (10%). For community housing these were Spanish (16%) followed by Arabic (8%).
About 1 in 10 respondents for both public and community housing (12% and 9% respectively) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 3% of the Queensland population (2006 Census QuickStats: Queensland). Indigenous Australians are proportionally overrepresented in both public and community housing in Queensland.
Highest education level 
More than one-third of both public and community housing survey respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent (41% and 37% respectively) (Figure 5.1). About one-fifth of public and community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or its equivalent (18% and 19% respectively). Community housing respondents were more likely than those from public housing to hold post-secondary school qualifications (21% compared with 17%).
Figure 5.1: Level of education, Queensland, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
Half of the households surveyed in public housing (50%) and more than two-thirds (69%) in community housing were comprised of a single person living alone. More than 1 in 10 (13% for PH and 11% for CH) were couple only households (Table 5.1). Fewer than one-third of both public and community housing households contained one or more dependent children (31% and 16% respectively).
Table 5.1: Social housing households, by household type, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	49.8	68.7	
Single person, living with one or more children	21.3	10.9	
Couple, living without children	12.7	10.9	
Couple, living with one or more children	9.6	5.1	
Extended family, living without children	0.8	0.4	
Extended family, living with one or more children	2.6	1.0	
Group of unrelated adults	2.8	2.2	
Others (please specify)	0.4	0.8	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
In those households surveyed, more than half of all people aged 18 or older in public housing (52%) and about half in community housing (48%), were in the labour force in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
In households surveyed, 16% of people in public housing and 17% in community housing were unemployed and looking for work (Table 5.2). 
Table 5.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Queensland, August–September 2010
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	16.8	12.4	
Employed part-time	19.6	18.9	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	15.7	16.9	
Not in the labour force	47.9	51.8	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	31.0	40.9	
Health or disability limits ability to work	46.0	41.1	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	16.8	10.1	
Studying full-time	4.8	3.3	
Other reason	1.4	4.5	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
About half of those living in social housing households were not employed and not looking for work (48% for PH and 52% for CH). The most frequently reported reason was ill health or disability, followed by retirement and parenting or caring responsibilities. 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-fifth of social housing households contained at least one person who needed help with self-care, communication or body movement activities (20% for PH and 17% for CH). The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 5.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Queensland, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
For public housing, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with disability or a ‘long-term health condition’ (46% and 34% respectively) (Figure 5.2). For community housing, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with disability (43%) followed by a long-term health condition (32%).
Fewer than one-fifth of the respondents stated old age as a reason for a household member requiring assistance with activities of daily living (17% for PH and 18% for CH).	
Housing histories in Queensland
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, close to half (48%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 23% were in another social housing property (18% in PH and 5% in CH), and 16% were living with friends or relatives (Table 5.3).
Table 5.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	47.6	36.5	
Friend’s or relative’s home	15.7	18.9	
In public housing	18.4	3.7	
In community housing	4.9	12.2	
In a caravan park	5.3	5.1	
In a boarding house	0.6	6.4	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	3.4	9.6	
Somewhere else	4.1	7.7	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.
More than one-third (37%) of respondents from community housing moved in to their current home from private rental accommodation, about one-fifth (19%) were living with friends or relatives and about one-sixth (16%) had moved from another social housing property (4% from PH and 12% from CH).
Time in social housing
In general, the duration of tenure in social housing was longer for public housing respondents than for those from community housing. More than one-third (34%) of public housing respondents indicated they had lived in public housing for more than 15 years (Figure 5.3), whereas fewer than a tenth of community housing respondents (6%) had lived in community housing for the same period of time. Those who had lived in community housing for 3 to 5 years represented the largest proportion (28%) of community housing respondents.
However, the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 5.3: Number of years living in social housing, Queensland, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
In Queensland 4% of public and 16% of community housing tenants reported they were planning to leave social housing in the next 5 years.
Prior homelessness
In Queensland, one-quarter (24%) of public housing respondents and more than one-third (37%) of community housing respondents reported that they had been homeless in the past. One-third (34%) of public housing respondents and almost two-thirds (63%) of community housing respondents indicated that they had been homeless during the past 5 years.
Use of support services in Queensland
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of ‘support services’ in the last 12 months (see Table 5.4). 
Services needed
‘Health or allied health services’ were the service type reported as being needed most frequently by households in both public and community housing (66% and 70% respectively) (Figure 5.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (11% for PH and 13% for CH). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both housing groups.
Figure 5.4: Support services needed, Queensland, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 5.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (23% for PH and 40% for CH) and ‘information, advice and referral services’ (29% for PH and 30% for CH).
For services accessed without assistance, ‘training and employment support services’ were most frequently reported for both housing groups (98% and 92% respectively). The next most frequently reported services were ‘services that provide support for children, family or carer’ and ‘mental health support services’ (both 93%) for public housing, and ‘mental health support services’ (90%) for community housing.
Table 5.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	11.4	88.6	14.3	85.7	
Mental health support services	6.7	93.3	10.2	89.8	
Life skills or community living support services	13.2	86.8	19.1	80.9	
Personal support services	10.4	89.6	14.6	85.4	
Information, advice and referral services	29.1	70.9	30.0	70.0	
Day-to-day living support services	14.4	85.6	22.1	77.9	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	23.0	77.0	39.8	60.2	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	6.7	93.3	12.2	87.8	
Training and employment support services	2.4	97.6	7.6	92.4	
Financial and material assistance	9.9	90.1	16.9	83.1	
Other support services	6.9	93.1	16.6	83.4	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services 
In Queensland, the most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 5.5). This response could, however, be given in addition to other responses. 

Table 5.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	16.8	18.4	6.2	23.7	12.2	18.9	3.8	
Mental health support services	14.1	17.8	8.2	11.2	8.8	32.8	7.1	
Life skills or community living support services	13.1	24.2	6.8	9.0	11.0	29.4	6.5	
Personal support services	16.3	22.1	5.9	8.7	8.0	28.7	10.3	
Information, advice and referral services	15.7	22.6	11.1	7.9	8.8	30.9	3.0	
Day-to-day living support services	15.3	20.8	721	6.4	8.5	34.4	7.4	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	11.5	15.3	8.3	8.3	7.3	44.5	4.8	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	13.2	21.5	6.1	7.6	8.9	31.4	11.3	
Training and employment support services	7.5	9.4	6.5	7.5	12.8	40.0	16.3	
Financial and material assistance	10.6	30.7	5.4	7.5	10.6	28.6	6.6	
Other support services	12.6	19.3	4.8	10.9	6.1	36.5	9.8	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	17.7	14.7	13.7	23.4	14.7	12.9	2.9	
Mental health support services	12.7	14.9	9.7	9.7	12.7	34.3	6.0	
Life skills or community living support services	10.4	25.9	11.1	7.4	11.1	29.6	4.4	
Personal support services	10.3	26.5	10.9	12.9	7.5	26.5	5.4	
Information, advice and referral services	10.0	28.6	14.3	10.0	10.0	22.9	4.2	
Day-to-day living support services	16.1	18.5	12.2	9.7	8.9	29.8	4.8	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	10.3	14.4	7.2	9.3	6.2	48.5	4.1	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	16.2	19.2	8.1	6.1	9.1	38.3	3.0	
Training and employment support services	14.1	20.0	8.2	8.2	8.3	31.8	9.4	
Financial and material assistance	9.1	32.6	10.6	6.8	9.1	26.5	5.3	
Other support services	11.5	26.0	11.5	13.0	10.6	22.9	4.6	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in Queensland
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents, for both public and community housing, indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (94% for PH and 88% for CH) (Figure 5.5). 
Figure 5.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Queensland, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household
Satisfaction with condition of the home
Public housing respondents were less likely to be satisfied with the physical condition of their home than community housing respondents (69% and 79% respectively) (Figure 5.6). More public housing respondents were dissatisfied with the physical condition of their home than those in community housing (18% and 11% respectively).
Figure 5.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Queensland, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity 
Most households in both public and community housing indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed were important (between 73% and 98%) to their household (Table 5.6). Between 75% and 92% of those households who rated particular amenities as important indicated that their household’s needs were being met.
The amenity aspects that were reported as most important related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood.
Almost all respondents (ranging between 96% and 98%) indicated that these issues were important and more than three-quarters felt their safety and security needs were met (between 81% and 87%).

Table 5.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	85.3	80.6	80.6	82.0	
Modifications for special needs	76.4	80.7	73.1	83.2	
Ease of access and entry	88.3	91.1	87.6	92.4	
Car parking	86.9	81.1	83.7	75.3	
Yard space and fencing	84.2	83.4	77.9	81.7	
Privacy of home	96.0	83.8	94.9	82.0	
Safety/security of home	97.8	87.1	97.7	84.8	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	96.4	83.1	95.6	81.2	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
The aspect of location reported as most important was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (94% for PH and 92% for CH) (Table 5.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was to be close to ‘child care facilities’ (49% for PH and 44% for CH).
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met their needs (between 83% and 93%).
Table 5.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Queensland, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	89.6	92.7	90.0	90.3	
Public transport	84.1	91.2	83.7	88.2	
Parks and recreational facilities	63.9	91.7	65.6	90.8	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	93.6	90.9	92.4	90.2	
Child care facilities	49.3	91.7	43.9	87.7	
Education/training facilities	68.1	90.7	64.9	87.6	
Employment/place of work	69.3	89.4	69.3	82.7	
Community and support services	77.7	88.2	80.3	87.6	
Family and friends	87.1	89.6	87.9	86.2	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
The majority of public housing respondents (84%) and community housing respondents (81%) were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider (Figure 5.7).
Figure 5.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Queensland, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
About 9 out of 10 public housing respondents (88%) and four-fifths of community housing respondents (82%) were either very satisfied or satisfied with the emergency maintenance services provided. The level of satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services was slightly lower with 82% of public housing respondents and 78% of community housing respondents being very satisfied or satisfied with the services provided (Table 5.8).
Table 5.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Queensland, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Emergency maintenance services	Day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	44.0	39.2	36.4	35.3	
Satisfied	43.8	42.9	45.4	42.3	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	6.4	10.4	9.5	9.9	
Dissatisfied	4.2	4.9	5.8	9.0	
Very dissatisfied	1.7	2.6	2.9	3.5	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
6	Western Australia
Social housing services in Western Australia
The rental housing programs provide housing assistance to those most in need by targeting households with special housing requirements and/or low-income. Applicants must meet strict income and asset eligibility criteria. The public rental housing program is by far the largest of these programs and includes about 39,000 dwellings throughout the state. Special programs are also available to assist people with special needs. This includes priority assistance for people in extreme need of housing and targeted housing programs for people with disabilities, Indigenous Australians, youth and other low-income groups.
As an alternative to mainstream public rental housing, the department of housing administers several community housing programs, which provide housing assistance to income eligible people through community groups and local government.
Community housing includes rental accommodation managed by non-profit community organisations, housing associations and local governments. It provides tenants with an alternative to renting in public or private rental markets. Community housing offers tenants security of tenure, links to local community supports and an opportunity to participate in the design, location and management of their accommodation.
Who are social housing tenants in Western Australia?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
About two-thirds of survey respondents from Western Australia were female (68% for PH and 60% for CH) and the age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups. Two-thirds of public housing respondents (68%) and about half of community housing respondents (46%) were aged 55 and older.
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
For both housing sectors, 6 out of 10 indicated that they were born in Australia (61% for PH and 62% for CH). The most frequently reported country of birth for those respondents not born in Australia was England, (27% for PH and 23% for CH), followed by United Kingdom (not further specified) (12%), India (5%) and Poland (4%) for public housing, and the United Kingdom (not further specified) (9%), New Zealand, and Scotland ( 8% each) for community housing. 
English was the most frequently spoken language at home (92% for both groups). For public housing, the most reported languages other than English spoken at home were Polish (12%), followed by Malay (10%). For community housing these were Arabic (15%) followed by Italian, Thai and Somali (all 7%). 

Fewer than one-tenth of respondents for both public (9%) and community housing (6%) reported that at least one member of their household were of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 3% of the Western Australian population (2006 Census QuickStats: Western Australia). Indigenous Australians are proportionally overrepresented in both public housing and community housing in Western Australia.
Highest education level 
More than one-third of public and community housing survey respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent (41% for PH and 43% for CH) (Figure 6.1). One-quarter of public and community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or its equivalent (23% and 24% respectively). A higher proportion of community housing respondents indicated that they held post-school qualifications than public housing respondents (22% compared with 15%).
Figure 6.1: Education level of respondents, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of households surveyed (56% for PH and 54% for CH) comprised a single person living alone and more than 1 in 10 (16% for PH and 14% for CH) were couple only households (Table 6.1). Almost one-quarter of both public housing and community housing households contained one or more dependent children (23% and 24% respectively). 
Table 6.1: Social housing households, by household type, Western Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	56.2	53.9	
Single person, living with one or more children	17.2	17.6	
Couple, living without children	15.7	13.9	
Couple, living with one or more children	6.2	6.7	
Extended family, living without children	0.9	0.4	
Extended family, living with one or more children	1.0	1.7	
Group of unrelated adults	0.8	5.0	
Other	2.0	0.8	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.

Employment
In those households surveyed, half of all people aged 18 or older were in the labour force (52% for PH and 50% for CH) in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
One-sixth of people in households surveyed in both public and community housing households were unemployed and looking for work (16% and 17% respectively).
Table 6.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Western Australia, August–September 2010
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	16.5	11.1	
Employed part-time	20.4	21.5	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	15.6	17.2	
Not in the labour force	47.5	50.2	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	39.2	28.8	
Health or disability limits ability to work	40.5	45.2	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	14.0	16.3	
Studying full-time	3.7	6.1	
Other reason	2.6	3.6	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Half of public and community housing tenants were not employed and not looking for work (48% for PH and 50% for CH). The most frequently reported reason was ill health or disability, followed by retirement and parenting or caring responsibilities. 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-fifth of public and community housing households contained at least one person who required assistance with self-care activities, communication or body movement activities (18% for PH and 21% for CH). The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 6.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
For both public and community housing households, difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were experienced most by those with a disability (42% for PH and 54% for CH) followed by a long-term health condition (34% for both) and old age (23% for PH and 10% for CH).	
Housing histories in Western Australia
Survey respondents were asked to provide information relating to their housing history, including the length of time in social housing, as well as whether they had previously experienced homelessness. 
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, more than one-third (38%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 39% were in another social housing property (37% in PH and 2% in CH), and 11% were living with friends or relatives (Table 6.3).
Table 6.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Western Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	38.3	45.6	
Friend’s or relative’s home	10.9	19.5	
In public housing	37.0	7.8	
In community housing	2.3	11.4	
In a caravan park	2.5	3.2	
In a boarding house	1.3	1.4	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	3.6	6.8	
Somewhere else	4.1	4.3	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for five years or less are included in the data in this table.
About half (46%) of respondents from community housing moved into their current home from private rental accommodation, one-fifth (20%) were living with friends or relatives and roughly one-fifth (19%) had moved from another social housing property (8% from PH and 11% from CH).
Time in social housing
In general, the length of tenancy in social housing was longer for public housing than community housing. Two-fifths (43%) had lived in public housing for more than 15 years (Figure 6.3), whereas 5% of community housing respondents had lived in community housing for the same period. Of community housing respondents, 1-2 years represented the largest proportion (30%).
However, the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 6.3: Number of years living in social housing, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
In Western Australia, 6% of public housing and 9% of community housing respondents in Western Australia reported they were planning to leave in the next 5 years. 
Prior homelessness
In Western Australia, about one-fifth (18%) of public housing respondents and fewer than one-third (30%) of community housing respondents reported that they had been homeless in the past. One-fifth (21%) of public housing respondents and half (52%) of community housing respondents had been homeless during the past 5 years.
Use of support services in Western Australia
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of ‘support services’ in the last 12 months (see Table 6.4). 
Services needed
‘Health or allied health services’ were reported as being needed most frequently (69% for both sectors) (Figure 6.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (16% for CH and 9% for PH). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both housing groups. 
Figure 6.4: Support services needed, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 6.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (44% for PH and 34% for CH) and ‘information, advice and referral services’ (29% for PH and 33% for CH).
The services accessed most frequently without assistance from housing service providers were ‘financial and material assistance services’ for public housing respondents (95%), followed by ‘training and employment support services’ (93%) and ‘mental health support services’ (91%). For community housing these were ‘services that provide support for children, family or carers‘(92%) followed by ‘training and employment support services’ (86%) and ‘health or allied health services’ (85%).

Table 6.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	11.6	88.4	15.0	85.0	
Mental health support services	9.4	90.6	17.6	82.4	
Life skills or community living support services	27.3	72.7	23.9	76.1	
Personal support services	16.4	83.6	17.1	82.9	
Information, advice and referral services	29.3	70.7	32.7	67.3	
Day-to-day living support services	19.0	81.0	17.7	82.3	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	44.2	55.8	34.0	66.0	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	23.8	76.2	7.6	92.4	
Training and employment support services	7.1	92.9	14.4	85.6	
Financial and material assistance	4.8	95.2	20.2	79.8	
Other support services	11.9	88.1	24.4	75.6	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
In Western Australia, the most frequently recorded reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 6.5). This response could, however, be given in addition to other responses. 

Table 6.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Western Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	19.8	15.2	8.7	18.8	13.3	21.7	2.5	
Mental health support services	14.6	8.3	10.4	9.1	6.7	49.1	1.8	
Life skills or community living support services	14.4	16.3	5.0	10.6	8.9	42.0	2.8	
Personal support services	13.0	19.4	6.8	12.7	7.7	39.3	1.1	
Information, advice and referral services	17.3	22.9	9.8	8.0	6.2	32.8	3.0	
Day-to-day living support services	8.2	21.6	5.6	8.4	2.0	43.8	10.4	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	16.9	8.6	3.1	3.1	4.5	56.9	6.9	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	14.2	19.6	10.2	9.1	8.6	30.7	7.6	
Training and employment support services	10.5	20.3	8.6	9.5	3.7	42.3	5.1	
Financial and material assistance	7.3	25.7	5.6	11.0	2.7	43.5	4.2	
Other support services	8.6	21.6	2.9	1.7	11.6	51.9	1.7	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	22.1	21.2	7.7	16.3	11.5	17.4	3.8	
Mental health support services	7.8	25.5	5.9	3.9	3.9	43.2	9.8	
Life skills or community living support services	10.9	30.9	9.1	10.9	7.3	18.2	12.7	
Personal support services	15.1	24.5	3.8	13.2	3.8	30.2	9.4	
Information, advice and referral services	14.9	27.7	4.3	10.6	6.4	29.8	6.3	
Day-to-day living support services	13.5	21.2	7.6	5.8	5.8	32.6	13.5	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	20.0	23.3	6.7	6.7	3.3	33.3	6.7	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	18.6	20.9	7.0	4.6	7.0	27.9	14.0	
Training and employment support services	20.0	14.2	8.6	8.6	8.6	34.3	5.7	
Financial and material assistance	14.5	32.3	8.1	8.1	11.3	16.1	9.6	
Other support services	15.0	32.5	7.5	10.0	5.0	30.0	0.0	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in Western Australia
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents for both public and community housing indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (91% for PH and 90% for CH) (Figure 6.5).
Figure 6.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
A smaller proportion of public housing respondents were satisfied with the physical condition of their home than community housing respondents (61% and 72% respectively) (Figure 6.6). One-quarter of public housing respondents (25%) and close to one-sixth (16%) of community housing respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied. 
Figure 6.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 6.6) were important (between 70% and 98%) to their household. Between 78% and 93% of those households indicated that their needs were met.
The amenity aspects reported as most important related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood.
Almost all respondents (ranging between 97% and 98%) indicated that these issues were important and more than three-quarters felt their needs were met (between 79% and 81%). 

Table 6.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Western Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs	
Size of dwelling	83.0	85.0	87.6	86.0	
Modifications for special needs	77.9	80.3	69.9	77.8	
Ease of access and entry	85.4	93.0	85.7	91.3	
Car parking	86.1	83.8	89.2	87.0	
Yard space and fencing	84.9	84.6	85.3	88.1	
Privacy of home	95.6	87.6	95.8	83.4	
Safety/security of home	97.8	79.4	98.0	80.9	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	97.0	79.0	97.6	81.3	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
The most important reported aspect of location was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (93% for both sectors) (Table 6.7). The aspect of location reported as least important were being close to ‘child care facilities’ (39% for PH and 46% for CH). 
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met their needs (between 82% and 94%).
Table 6.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	89.6	90.1	91.6	90.4	
Public transport	83.1	89.1	84.1	85.8	
Parks and recreational facilities	60.9	93.9	74.9	91.9	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	92.9	90.3	92.7	86.3	
Child care facilities	38.9	87.9	45.7	88.6	
Education/training facilities	56.0	83.6	65.7	82.0	
Employment/place of work	64.6	85.8	68.7	86.0	
Community and support services	73.3	87.3	77.1	89.3	
Family and friends	89.4	91.4	90.0	86.9	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
Three-quarters of public housing respondents (74%) were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider (Figure 6.7), compared with slightly more than three-quarters of community housing respondents (79%).
Figure 6.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
More than three-quarters of respondents were either very satisfied or satisfied with the emergency maintenance services provided (both 78%). The level of satisfaction for day-to-day maintenance services was lower with slightly more than two-thirds of respondents being very satisfied or satisfied (both 69%) (Table 6.8). 
Table 6.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Western Australia, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	35.6	34.6	27.7	29.7	
Satisfied	42.9	43.7	41.2	38.9	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	10.1	12.4	13.6	16.2	
Dissatisfied	7.0	6.4	11.0	10.3	
Very dissatisfied	4.4	2.9	6.5	5.0	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
7	South Australia
Social housing services in South Australia
The South Australian Housing Trust (SAHT) is established under the South Australian Housing Trust Act 1995 and is managed by the SAHT Board of Management. It is under the portfolio of the Minister for Housing and utilises the staff of the Department for Families and Communities for the provision of services. The delivery of housing services on behalf of SAHT is undertaken by Housing SA under a performance agreement.
Housing SA’s aim is to work with South Australians to create a range of housing options, from access to emergency and crisis accommodation, to private rental assistance, the provision and management of a range of housing options, through to home ownership information.
Housing SA partnerships with other agencies are aimed at maximising affordable housing outcomes for South Australians. This process is seen as the most efficient and effective way regulated organisations that provide housing services on behalf of government can operate.
The functions of Housing SA include:
•	assisting people to secure and maintain affordable and appropriate housing by:
–	acting as a landlord of public housing in the state
–	managing various forms of public housing
–	providing private rental assistance
–	providing advice and referral on housing options and housing-related issues
–	supporting initiatives to increase the supply of affordable housing
•	providing houses to meet housing needs, or to support or promote programs and other initiatives within the private or not-for-profit sectors
•	facilitating support for South Australians to increase their ability to achieve successful housing outcomes
•	administering and delivering Indigenous housing products and services
•	ensuring the long-term financial viability of social housing in the state
•	providing and maintaining a stock of social housing for South Australians in housing need.
In addition, under the South Australian Co-operative and Community Housing Act 1991, the Minister delegates the administration of community housing to the SAHT. The Act, provides a legislative framework for the establishment, development, regulation and administration of community housing.
Community housing organisations are registered and incorporated bodies, and are governed by the requirements of the Act. Community housing organisations are not-for-profit community groups that manage all housing management functions, such as tenant selection, rent collection, property maintenance and all other issues associated with housing management. They may be established as either housing co-operatives or community housing associations.
Who are social housing tenants in South Australia?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
About two-thirds of survey respondents from South Australia were female (63% for PH and 64% for CH), while 7 out of 10 of public housing (69%) and half of community housing respondents (54%) were aged 55 and older. 
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
Two-thirds of respondents indicated that they were born in Australia (69% for PH and 66% for CH). The most frequently reported country of birth other than Australia was England (37% for PH and 30% for CH), followed by United Kingdom (not further specified) and Scotland (both 11%) for public housing, and the United Kingdom (not further specified) (14%), Poland, Scotland and New Zealand (all 5%) for community housing.
The majority of respondents spoke English at home (94% and 90% respectively). For public housing, Vietnamese was the next most frequently reported language (15%), followed by Greek (12%), with Spanish (17%) and Polish (15%) the next most frequently reported for community housing. 
Fewer than 1 in 20 respondents for both public and community housing (3% and 2% respectively) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 2% of the South Australian population (2006 Census QuickStats: South Australia) Indigenous Australians are proportionally represented in public housing and community housing in South Australia.
Highest education level 
More than one-third (35%) of public housing respondents and one-third (33%) of community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent. One-quarter (27%) of public housing respondents and one-fifth (23%) of community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or its equivalent and fewer than one-tenth had completed bachelor’s degrees (2% for PH and 7% for CH). Community housing respondents were more likely than those from public housing to hold post-secondary school qualifications (30% compared with 12%).
Figure 7.1: Level of education, South Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of the households responding, for both public and community housing, consisted of a single person living alone (64% for PH and 54% for CH), and fewer than 1 in 5 were couple only households (18% for PH and 15% for CH) (Table 7.1). For public housing, 1 in 10 households consisted of a single person living with children (11%) with one-fifth of community housing households consisting of a single person living with children (19%). About 1 in 20 households were couples living with children (5% for PH and 6% for CH).
Table 7.1: Social housing households, by household type, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	63.7	54.2	
Single person, living with one or more children	11.0	18.8	
Couple, living without children	18.4	15.4	
Couple, living with one or more children	4.8	6.3	
Extended family, living without children	0.4	0.7	
Extended family, living with one or more children	0.7	1.1	
Group of unrelated adults	0.4	3.1	
Others (please specify)	0.6	0.4	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
In those households surveyed, about half of all people aged 18 or older were in the labour force (46% and 50% respectively) in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
One-tenth of people were unemployed and looking for work (11% for PH and 12% for CH).
Table 7.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	16.5	14.0	
Employed part-time	17.8	23.6	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	11.4	12.1	
Not in the labour force	54.3	50.3	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	43.3	37.9	
Health or disability limits ability to work	43.4	40.4	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	6.9	15.4	
Studying full-time	4.2	4.2	
Other reason	2.2	2.1	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Half of public and community housing households were not employed and not looking for work (54% for PH and 50% for CH). The most frequently reported reason was ill health or disability, followed by retirement and parenting or caring responsibilities. 

Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-fifth of public housing households (20%) and one-sixth of community housing households (15%) contained at least one person who required assistance with self-care activities, communication or body movement activities. The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 7.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, South Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
The largest group of tenants experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication in public housing were those with a disability and those with a long term ‘health condition’ ( 36% and 34% respectively); ’old age’ was a reason for one-quarter of the tenants (25%).
Half (53%) of community housing tenants experiencing difficulties were those with disability and one-quarter (27%) because of a long term ’health condition’. ‘Old age’ was a reason for 14% of the tenants.	
Housing histories in South Australia
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, two-fifths (43%) of all respondents were in another social housing property (40% in PH and 3% in CH), 29% lived in private rental accommodation and 13% were living with friends or relatives (Table 7.3).
Table 7.3: Prior tenure of respondents, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	29.3	48.7	
Friend’s or relative’s home	12.8	19.2	
In public housing	40.1	5.6	
In community housing	3.4	14.5	
In a caravan park	6.7	0.9	
In a boarding house	0.0	1.7	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	2.7	4.3	
Somewhere else	5.0	5.1	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.
Half of respondents from community housing (49%) moved in to their current home from private rental accommodation, one-fifth had moved from another social housing property (14% from PH and 6% from CH) and 19% were living with friends or relatives. 
Time in social housing
In general, the length of tenancy in social housing was longer for public housing respondents than for community housing respondents. Half of public housing respondents (49%) indicated they had lived in public housing for 20 years or more (Figure 7.3), whereas less than one-tenth of community housing respondents (7%) had lived in community housing for the same period. The largest proportion of community housing respondents had lived in community housing for 6-10 years (28%). 
However, the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 7.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, South Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
About 1 in 20 public housing (4%) respondents and one-tenth (11%) of community housing respondents in South Australia reported they were planning to leave in the next 5 years. 
Prior homelessness
In South Australia, one-fifth of public housing (18%) and one-quarter (28%) of community housing respondents indicated that they had been homeless in the past. One-quarter (24%) of public housing respondents and one-third (32%) of community housing respondents indicated that they had been homeless during the past 5 years. 
Use of support services in South Australia
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of ‘support services’ in the last 12 months (see Table 7.4). 
Services needed
Health or allied health services’ was reported as being needed most frequently (71% for both sectors) (Figure 7.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (10% for both sectors). Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by public and community housing households. 
Figure 7.4: Support services needed, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 7.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (40%) for community housing and ‘life skills or community living support services’ (19%) for public housing. 
For services accessed without assistance from housing service providers, ‘mental health support services’ were most frequently reported (95% for PH and 94%for CH). The next most frequently reported services for public housing were ‘training and employment support services’ (93%) and ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (92%). For community housing, these were ‘services that provide support for children, family or carers‘, and ‘training and employment support services’ (both 91%).
Table 7.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	11.9	88.1	15.0	85.0	
Mental health support services	5.4	94.6	6.1	93.9	
Life skills or community living support services	19.1	80.9	21.6	78.4	
Personal support services	16.6	83.4	17.8	82.2	
Information, advice and referral services	14.2	85.8	18.4	81.6	
Day-to-day living support services	17.1	82.9	18.4	81.6	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	8.4	91.6	40.0	60.0	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	8.7	91.3	8.9	91.1	
Training and employment support services	7.4	92.6	9.0	91.0	
Financial and material assistance	9.7	90.3	15.3	84.7	
Other support services	10.5	89.5	22.9	77.1	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
In South Australia, the most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 7.5). This response could, however, be given in addition to other responses. 

Table 7.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	22.3	12.2	6.8	10.8	15.2	30.0	2.7	
Mental health support services	15.9	10.4	8.2	15.6	8.6	41.3	0.0	
Life skills or community living support services	14.7	26.8	5.7	4.5	7.4	33.4	7.5	
Personal support services	9.7	23.6	5.3	8.1	6.7	37.7	8.9	
Information, advice and referral services	10.9	28.5	7.8	5.9	9.3	30.3	7.3	
Day-to-day living support services	5.5	13.3	7.8	0.0	3.6	54.2	15.6	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	9.3	10.5	6.7	3.9	6.7	62.9	0.0	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	4.2	17.3	12.2	4.2	15.7	40.0	6.4	
Training and employment support services	19.4	23.4	2.5	6.8	9.6	31.9	6.4	
Financial and material assistance	9.1	29.3	9.5	5.3	10.2	33.8	2.8	
Other support services	15.3	11.9	10.1	4.6	5.3	41.4	11.4	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	10.7	17.3	6.7	25.3	9.3	24.0	6.7	
Mental health support services	11.8	14.7	5.9	5.9	11.8	41.2	8.7	
Life skills or community living support services	14.3	23.8	4.8	9.5	4.8	28.6	14.2	
Personal support services	16.1	35.5	12.9	3.2	6.5	16.1	9.7	
Information, advice and referral services	9.5	33.3	14.3	0.0	4.8	33.3	4.8	
Day-to-day living support services	5.9	17.6	0.0	0.0	0.0	41.2	35.3	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	0.0	25.0	8.3	0.0	0.0	58.3	8.4	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	14.3	14.3	0.0	14.3	0.0	35.7	21.4	
Training and employment support services	5.9	41.2	0.0	0.0	11.8	23.5	17.6	
Financial and material assistance	3.8	42.3	7.7	3.8	7.7	23.2	11.5	
Other support services	15.4	19.2	15.4	3.8	15.4	23.1	7.7	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in South Australia
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (90% for PH and 92% for CH) (Figure 7.5).
Figure 7.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, South Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
A smaller proportion of public housing respondents were satisfied with the physical condition of their home than community housing respondents (68% and 75% respectively) (Figure 7.6). More public housing respondents were dissatisfied with the physical condition of their home than those in community housing (20% and 14% respectively). 
Figure 7.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households in both public and community housing indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 7.6) were important (between 72% and 98%). Further, more than 7 in 10 households who rated particular amenities as important felt that their needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The amenity aspects reported as most important related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood. 
Almost all respondents (ranging between 97% and 98%) indicated that these issues were important and more than 80% also felt their needs were met (ranging between 83% and 98%).

Table 7.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	84.2	85.7	85.7	87.2	
Modifications for special needs	74.0	71.9	71.9	81.6	
Ease of access and entry	88.3	88.4	88.4	94.1	
Car parking	88.4	87.3	87.3	90.2	
Yard space and fencing	85.9	86.3	86.3	84.9	
Privacy of home	95.8	97.7	97.7	87.1	
Safety/security of home	97.6	98.2	98.2	82.8	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	96.6	96.6	96.6	86.1	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
The reportedly most important aspect of location was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (94% and 91% respectively) (Table 7.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was to be close to ‘child care facilities’ (33% for PH and 50% for CH). 
 The majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met the needs of their household (ranging between 84% and 93%).
Table 7.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	90.0	91.4	91.1	93.1	
Public transport	83.7	90.1	83.5	93.0	
Parks and recreational facilities	58.6	88.2	66.3	89.7	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	93.8	89.9	91.2	91.8	
Child care facilities	32.9	87.9	50.0	88.4	
Education/training facilities	53.0	88.2	65.3	87.9	
Employment/place of work	56.3	91.8	70.3	84.3	
Community and support services	73.0	86.7	74.7	90.1	
Family and friends	88.2	87.6	90.2	88.0	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
Roughly 8 out of 10 respondents were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider (82% and 84% respectively) (Figure 7.7) and fewer than 1 in 10 were dissatisfied (9% for PH and 6% for CH).
Figure 7.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, South Australia, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
Close to 9 out of 10 public housing respondents (86%) indicated that they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services (Table 7.8) and 8% were dissatisfied. Satisfaction for day-to-day maintenance services was lower with 81% satisfied and 9% dissatisfied.
More than three-quarters (82%) of community housing respondents indicated they were satisfied with emergency maintenance services and 1 in 10 (7%) were dissatisfied. Satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance was lower with 77% indicating they were satisfied and 10% being dissatisfied.
Table 7.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	39.3	46.4	30.0	38.7	
Satisfied	46.6	35.4	50.6	38.4	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	5.9	10.8	10.2	12.6	
Dissatisfied	5.2	6.0	5.2	6.9	
Very dissatisfied	3.0	1.4	4.0	3.4	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
8	Tasmania
Social housing services in Tasmania
Housing Tasmania directly or indirectly oversee the social housing portfolio, which contains more than 13,000 homes. These homes provide safe, secure and affordable housing for people on low-incomes. To measure levels of customer satisfaction and the extent to which homes continue to meet their household’s needs, Housing Tasmania participates in the NSHS every two years. The 2010 survey questionnaire was sent to 2,650 public housing tenants, and slightly more than 550 households living in community housing. 
To be eligible for public housing, applicants must satisfy eligibility criteria, and be able to demonstrate their need under the Housing Assessment System. Need is assessed against the housing-related factors of adequacy, appropriateness and affordability, with a range of points awarded depending on the applicant’s particular circumstances. When assessment processes are complete, applicants are placed into a category of need and available homes are allocated accordingly. Once a home is allocated, the amount of rent is calculated based on household income. By allocating homes on a priority basis, Housing Tasmania ensures that those with the highest levels of need are offered homes first.
People applying to live in community housing may be required to satisfy eligibility criteria depending on the managing organisation, but the criteria are not as comprehensive as for public housing. Similarly, the majority of organisations allocate homes on a ‘wait turn’ basis; therefore the assessment and allocation process is not as complex as for public housing. Generally, community housing tenants do not pay an income-based rent, and rents are generally set at levels that attract the maximum Commonwealth Rent Assistance payment.
While both sectors offer an affordable housing solution, the reasons for choosing one over the other vary, as do the outcomes the tenant may hope to achieve. Whereas public housing tenancies are managed cooperatively between tenant and tenancy officer, many tenants in community housing have a role in the organisation. Further, there is great diversity within community housing models, with some offering tenancy support, meals, laundry and the like, and others offering only a home and/or a role in the organisation.
Who are social housing tenants in Tasmania?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and gender
About two-thirds of survey respondents from Tasmania were female (68% for PH and 71% for CH) and the age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups. About 6 out of 10 were aged 55 and older (58% for PH and 62% for CH).
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
The majority of respondents indicated that they were born in Australia (91% for PH and 90% for CH). The next most frequently reported country of birth was England (34% for PH and 23% for CH), followed by Scotland and United Kingdom (not further specified) (both 11%) for public housing, and El Salvador (14%) followed by New Zealand, Scotland, Germany and the Netherlands (all 9%) for community housing. 
English was the most frequent language spoken at home (99% for PH and 96% for CH). For public housing, Greek was the next most frequently reported language (20%) followed by Croatian (12%). For community housing this was Spanish (38%). 
For public housing, 1 in 10 respondents and 1 in 20 community housing respondents (10% and 6% respectively) reported that at least one member of their household was of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 3.5% of the Tasmanian population (2006 Census QuickStats: Tasmania). Indigenous Australians are proportionally overrepresented in both public and community housing in Tasmania.
Highest education level 
Half of public housing respondents (50%) and more than one-third of community housing respondents (38%) indicated they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent. One-quarter (24%) of public housing respondents and one-fifth (21%) of community housing respondents indicated they had completed Year 12 or its equivalent and fewer than 1 in 20 had completed bachelor’s degrees (1% for PH and 2% for CH). Community housing respondents were more likely to hold post-secondary school qualifications than public housing respondents (16% for CH and 11% for PH). 
Figure 8.1: Level of education, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half of households surveyed (58% for PH and 54% for CH) comprised a single person living alone. About 1 in 10 (14% for PH and 10% for CH) were couple only households (Table 8.1). Fewer than one-quarter of households contained one or more dependent children (25% for PH and 19% for CH). 
Table 8.1: Social housing households, by household type, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Single person, living alone	57.7	54.2	
Single person, living with one or more children	16.1	10.6	
Couple, living without children	13.6	10.1	
Couple, living with one or more children	9.0	8.4	
Extended family, living without children	0.6	0.0	
Extended family, living with one or more children	1.4	1.7	
Group of unrelated adults	0.0	14.1	
Others (please specify)	1.1	0.9	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
In those households surveyed, more than half of all people aged 18 or older were in the labour force (51% and 60% respectively) in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
Public housing had twice the proportion of household members unemployed and looking for work compared with community housing (16% compared with 8%) (Table 8.2).
Table 8.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Tasmania, August–September 2010
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	19.1	24.5	
Employed part-time	15.9	27.7	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	16.2	7.8	
Not in the labour force	48.8	40.0	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	28.6	41.3	
Health or disability limits ability to work	44.5	39.1	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	18.9	14.0	
Studying full-time	4.9	5.6	
Other reason	3.0	0.0	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
About half of those living in public housing households were not employed and not looking for work (49%) compared with more than one-third for community housing (40%). The most frequently reported reason for public housing was ill health or disability (44%), followed by retirement (29%) and parenting or caring responsibilities (19%). For community housing this was retired or ‘too old’ to work (41%), followed by health issues or a disability (39%) and parenting or caring responsibilities (14%). 
Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-fifth of public and community housing households contained at least one person who required assistance with self-care activities, body movement or communication activities (18% and 20% respectively). The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 8.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
The largest group of tenants experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication were those with disability (42% for PH and 47% for CH) followed by those with a long term health condition (40% for PH and 35% for CH) and old age (15% for PH and 18% for CH).
Housing histories in Tasmania 
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, one-third (30%) of public housing respondents lived in private rental accommodation, 30% were in another social housing property (27% in PH and 3% in CH), and 21% were living with friends or relatives (Table 8.3).
Table 8.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	 Community housing 	
Private rental	30.4	54.5	
Friend’s or relative’s home	20.6	22.2	
In public housing	26.6	5.1	
In community housing	3.1	3.0	
In a caravan park	2.7	3.0	
In a boarding house	3.2	0.0	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	7.3	2.0	
Somewhere else	6.1	10.1	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.
More than half of respondents from community housing moved into their current home from private rental accommodation (54%), one-fifth (22%) were living with friends or relatives, and 8% had moved from another social housing property (5% from PH and 3% from CH).
Time in social housing
In general, the length of tenancy in social housing was longer for public housing respondents than for those in community housing. Half (50%) of public housing respondents indicated they had lived in public housing for more than 15 years (Figure 8.3), whereas one-tenth of community housing respondents (13%) had lived in community housing for the same period of time. The largest proportion of community housing respondents had lived in community housing for 6-10 years (29%). 
However, the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 8.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
Fewer than one-tenth of respondents in Tasmania reported they were planning to leave social housing in the next 5 years (5% for PH and 6% for CH). 
Prior homelessness
In Tasmania, one-quarter (24%) of public housing respondents and one-sixth (16%) of community housing respondents reported that they had been homeless in the past. One-third of respondents indicated that they had been homeless during the past 5 years (36% for PH and 30% for CH). 
Use of support services in Tasmania
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of ‘support services’ in the last 12 months (see Table 8.4). 
Services needed
Health or allied health services’ was reported as being needed most frequently by households in both public and community housing (63% and 68% respectively) (Figure 8.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently for public housing households was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (9%) and ‘children, family or carers support services’ (9%) for community housing. Generally, there was little difference in the types of services needed by both public and community housing households.
Figure 8.4: Support services needed, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Social housing respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 8.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with the assistance of community housing providers were ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (71%), and ‘information, advice and referral services’ (26%) for public housing. 
‘Training and employment support services’ were most frequently reported as accessed without assistance from housing service providers for both public housing and community housing respondents (99% and 86% respectively). The next most frequently reported services for public housing were ‘other support services’ (99%) and ‘day to day living support services’ (97%). For community housing, these were ‘services that provide support for children, family or carers’ (85%) and ‘other support services’ (76%).

Table 8.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	With housing provider’s help	Without housing provider’s help	
Health or allied health services	5.8	94.2	29.2	70.8	
Mental health support services	4.6	95.4	56.7	43.3	
Life skills or community living support services	4.2	95.8	63.9	36.1	
Personal support services	6.8	93.2	45.2	54.8	
Information, advice and referral services	26.1	73.9	59.4	40.6	
Day-to-day living support services	3.2	96.8	52.8	47.2	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	14.8	85.2	70.8	29.2	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	4.4	95.6	15.4	84.6	
Training and employment support services	0.8	99.2	14.3	85.7	
Financial and material assistance	4.8	95.2	33.3	66.7	
Other support services	1.2	98.8	24.4	75.6	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
In Tasmania, the most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 8.5). This response could, however, be given in addition to other responses. 

Table 8.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	14.8	18.5	12.1	22.0	9.2	18.7	4.7	
Mental health support services	10.7	16.7	11.6	10.4	9.0	37.5	4.1	
Life skills or community living support services	10.4	16.4	14.6	9.2	9.0	36.3	4.1	
Personal support services	11.7	16.3	11.2	9.5	11.5	32.8	7.0	
Information, advice and referral services	10.6	17.5	14.3	14.6	8.9	26.4	7.7	
Day-to-day living support services	13.7	12.3	12.0	9.3	10.3	33.9	8.5	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	13.1	12.0	12.2	9.7	7.7	38.9	6.4	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	8.5	9.1	13.1	10.9	8.7	36.7	13.0	
Training and employment support services	10.6	12.0	13.4	9.2	9.7	38.3	6.8	
Financial and material assistance	10.3	19.4	11.9	6.9	10.0	31.8	9.7	
Other support services	14.3	11.5	8.7	13.8	9.7	37.8	4.2	
Community housing	
Health or allied health services	11.4	8.6	14.3	20.0	11.4	28.6	5.7	
Mental health support services	10.0	15.0	5.0	5.0	5.0	50.0	10.0	
Life skills or community living support services	10.0	10.0	10.0	0.0	30.0	40.0	0.0	
Personal support services	0.0	0.0	11.1	0.0	22.2	44.4	22.3	
Information, advice and referral services	0.0	11.1	0.0	22.2	11.1	55.6	0.0	
Day-to-day living support services	11.1	0.0	0.0	11.1	0.0	77.8	0.0	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	0.0	11.1	0.0	0.0	11.1	66.7	11.1	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	16.7	83.3	0.0	
Training and employment support services	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	87.5	12.5	
Financial and material assistance	0.0	33.3	0.0	0.0	0.0	66.7	0.0	
Other support services	5.0	5.0	10.0	10.0	5.0	60.0	5.0	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in Tasmania
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (87% for PH and 96% for CH) (Figure 8.5).
Figure 8.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
A smaller proportion of public housing respondents were satisfied with the physical condition of their home than community housing respondents (57% and 83% respectively) (Figure 8.6). Three times the proportion of public housing respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied with the physical condition of their home compared with those in community housing (30% and 10% respectively).
Figure 8.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households in both public housing and community housing indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 8.6) were important (between 71% and 99%) to their household. Between 72% and 94% of those households which rated the particular amenities as important indicated that their household’s needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The reportedly most important amenities related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood.
Almost all respondents (ranging between 96% and 99%) indicated that these issues were important and more than three-quarters also felt their needs were met (between 74% and 92%). 

Table 8.6: Tenants satisfaction with amenities, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Size of dwelling	78.3	80.3	79.4	94.5	
Modifications for special needs	71.2	71.7	77.6	90.2	
Ease of access and entry	85.2	88.7	89.0	93.5	
Car parking	83.9	84.9	84.3	91.1	
Yard space and fencing	86.4	80.3	81.0	82.7	
Privacy of home	92.7	78.4	93.6	92.8	
Safety/security of home	97.1	74.4	98.7	92.3	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	96.4	73.6	97.3	87.6	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
The aspect of located reported as most important was being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (91% for PH and 92% for CH) (Table 8.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was being close to ‘child care facilities’ (43% for both sectors). 
The majority of households from both public and community housing indicated that the location met the needs of their household (between 83% and 100%).
Table 8.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	Community housing	
	Was important	Met needs	Was important	Met needs 	
Shops and banking	85.0	89.3	85.8	95.7	
Public transport	78.0	90.9	80.4	92.1	
Parks and recreational facilities	55.7	85.1	55.3	94.3	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	91.0	85.4	92.0	94.8	
Child care facilities	43.1	88.0	42.9	100.0	
Education/training facilities	62.4	82.9	63.4	96.6	
Employment/place of work	62.1	83.4	70.4	95.5	
Community and support services	75.0	84.1	81.2	94.7	
Family and friends	86.9	89.3	89.8	93.0	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
Two-thirds of public housing respondents (68%) were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider (Figure 8.7) and 16% were dissatisfied.
For community housing respondents, 9 out of 10 (90%) were satisfied overall with the services provided by their housing provider and 1 in 20 (5%) were dissatisfied.
Figure 8.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Tasmania, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing, for public and community housing, on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
The majority of public housing respondents were satisfied with emergency maintenance (74%) while 13% were dissatisfied. Satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance was a little lower with 65% satisfied and 20% dissatisfied (Table 8.8).
The level of satisfaction with the emergency maintenance and day-to-day maintenance services was similar for community housing respondents (86% and 85% respectively), with 6% dissatisfied with emergency maintenance and 9% dissatisfied with day-to-day maintenance.
Table 8.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
	Public housing	Community housing	Public housing	Community housing 	
Very satisfied	27.8	47.9	22.5	40.6	
Satisfied	46.0	38.5	42.5	43.9	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	13.1	7.8	15.3	6.6	
Dissatisfied	8.7	3.7	11.3	5.6	
Very dissatisfied	4.4	2.1	8.4	3.3	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
9	Northern Territory
Social housing services in Northern Territory 
The Northern Territory Department of Housing, Local Government and Regional Services, provides and administers a range of both remote and urban housing programs across the Territory. The objective of these programs is to ensure Territorians have access to safe, affordable and appropriate housing. Unlike other jurisdictions, the Territory does not have an established community housing sector and demand for public housing is therefore high. More than 10,000 Territory families are housed in public housing, about 1 in 7 households. 
To support clients to be successful in their tenancies, the Department is investing to expand the Tenancy Sustainability Program delivered through the non-government sector to public housing tenants and applicants on the waitlist. In 2010-11 more than 399 households were supported through case management support and life skills training, with this increasing to more than 570 households in 2011-12. The program is currently being delivered in Darwin, Katherine, Alice Springs and Borroloola and will soon be rolled out into Tennant Creek.
Community organisations such as the Salvation Army, Mission Australia, Anglicare, St Vincent De Paul and YWCA are being funded under the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness to deliver programs and services to support people who are homeless or at risk of homelessness to access stable accommodation and employment. The non-government sector contributes to government policy through the Housing and Homelessness Advisory Group, established to provide advice to the Minister for Children and Families and the Minister for Public and Affordable Housing.
The Territory Government is working to grow the community housing sector through a head-leasing scheme (dwellings owned by private individuals or private corporations that are leased to community housing organisations) and divestment of management responsibility to the non-government sector for new managed and supported accommodation services. Two transitional housing villages managed by non-government service providers in Alice Springs and Darwin, together with the A Place to Call Home program will support many families to develop the skills necessary to maintain a public housing tenancy. An integrated wait list will support integration between the public and community housing sectors. 
The government is also establishing an affordable housing rental company to develop an affordable rental sector that can bridge the gap between public and private rental housing.
Only urban public housing tenants participated in the 2010 Survey. Urban public housing tenancies are spread across 5 regions, with more than 70% of dwellings located in the Darwin region. Seniors and Indigenous tenants make up a substantial number of tenants. Demand for public housing is high, and housing allocations are prioritised on a needs basis. Work has begun on nearly 550 new dwellings in regional centres, including four new seniors’ villages in Darwin and Alice Springs. Through investment of more than $1.7 billion under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing to improve the standard of existing dwellings and increase the Territory’s remote housing stock, unmet demand for urban public housing may lessen over time.
Who are social housing tenants?
Characteristics of survey respondents
Age and sex
The majority of survey respondents were female (60%). The age profile of respondents was concentrated in the older age groups with two-thirds (70%) aged 55 and older. 
Country of birth, language spoken and Indigenous status
Two-thirds of the respondents indicated that they were born in Australia (67%). The next most frequently reported country of birth was New Zealand and the Philippines (both 14%), followed by England and East Timor (both 7%).
English was by far the most commonly spoken language at home (85%). Tagalog was the next most frequently reported language (12%), followed by Vietnamese (7%). 
One-quarter of respondents for public housing (23%) reported that at least one member of their household were of ‘Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin.’ On Census night 2006, Indigenous Australians represented about 28% of the Northern Territory population (2006 Census QuickStats: Northern Territory). In comparison to the other states and territories, Indigenous Australians are proportionally underrepresented in public housing in the Northern Territory. 
Highest education level 
More than one-third of public housing survey respondents indicated that they had completed Year 10 or its equivalent (40%) (Figure 9.1), while 18% had completed Year 12 or equivalent, and 21% had completed post-school qualifications. 
Figure 9.1: Level of education, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of education.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members 
of the household.
Characteristics of households
Household types
More than half (55%) of the households responding consisted of a single person living alone and 1 in 10 were couple only households (13%) (Table 9.1). More than one-quarter of households contained one or more dependent children (27%).

Table 9.1: Social housing households, by household type, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent) 
 	Public housing	
Single person, living alone	54.7	
Single person, living with one or more children	18.5	
Couple, living without children	12.9	
Couple, living with one or more children	8.9	
Extended family, living without children	1.8	
Extended family, living with one or more children	1.8	
Group of unrelated adults	0.8	
Others (please specify)	0.6	
Note: Responses to this question relate to all individuals who are part of the household.
Employment
More than half of all people in public housing households, aged 18 or older, were in the labour force (54%) in one of the following categories:
•	Employed full-time (35 hours or more in one or more jobs)
•	Employed part-time (less than 35 hours per week in all jobs)
•	Unemployed and looking for work in the last four weeks.
A tenth of households (11%) were unemployed and looking for work.
Table 9.2: Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	
Employment status	
Employed full-time	27.0	
Employed part-time	15.3	
Unemployed and looking for work in the last 4 weeks	11.2	
Not in the labour force	46.5	
Reason for not participating in the labour force	
Retired or too old to work	49.5	
Health or disability limits ability to work	33.6	
Parenting/caring responsibilities	12.0	
Studying full-time	3.1	
Other reason	1.8	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Close to half of public housing tenants were not employed and not looking for work (47%). The most frequently reported reason was retired or too old to work (50%), followed by ill health or disability (34%) and parenting or caring responsibilities (12%).

Need for assistance with activities of daily living
One-sixth of public housing households contained at least one person who required assistance with self-care activities, communication or body movement activities (16%). The respondent for these households was asked to provide details about the number of people in the household who were experiencing such difficulties and the reasons for them. It was possible for respondents to report the same person was having difficulty due to multiple reasons. The results below are presented by reason for difficulty. Individuals may be reported in more than one category.
Figure 9.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis reason for needing assistance.
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Disability was the most reported reason for experiencing difficulties with self-care, body movement or communication (43%) followed by a long-term health condition (34%) and old age (22%).
Housing histories in Northern Territory
Prior tenure
Before moving into their current home, 37% of respondents were in another social housing property (36% in PH and 1% in CH), 32% lived in private rental accommodation and 17% were living with friends or relatives.
Table 9.3: Prior tenure of respondents, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	
Private rental	31.6	
Friend’s or relative’s home	17.1	
In public housing	35.7	
In community housing	1.3	
In a caravan park	3.0	
In a boarding house	1.1	
In a refuge, crisis accommodation or other supported accommodation	7.2	
Somewhere else	3.0	
Notes 
1.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
2.	Only respondents who have lived in their current home for 5 years or less are included in the data in this table.

Time in social housing
One-third of public housing respondents had lived in public housing for 20 years or more (33%). However, the duration of tenure may not be the same for all members of the household.
Figure 9.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, Northern Territory, 
August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis number of years.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Plans to leave social housing
In the Northern Territory, 13% of respondents reported they were planning to leave social housing in the next 5 years. 
Prior homelessness
One-quarter of respondents (27%) reported that they had been homeless in the past. Of these, 29% had been homeless during the past 5 years. 
Use of support services
Respondents were asked to indicate whether any member of their household had needed or used any of a range of ‘support services’ in the last 12 months (see Table 9.4). 
Services needed
‘Health or allied health services’ was reported as being needed most frequently by public housing households (67%) (Figure 9.4). The service reported as being needed least frequently was ‘residential care and supported accommodation services’ (9%). 
Figure 9.4: Support services needed, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Horizontal bar chart showing on the y-axis support services needed and on the x-axis per cent.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Services accessed
Respondents indicated that their households usually accessed support services without the help of their housing service provider (Table 9.4). The services which were most frequently accessed with their assistance were ‘information, advice and referral services’ (29%) and ‘day to day living support services’ (21%).
For services accessed without assistance from housing service providers, ‘other support services’ were most frequently reported for respondents (94%), followed by ‘training and employment support services’ (93%) and ‘personal support services’ (89%). 

Table 9.4: Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, 
Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	With housing department’s help	Without housing department’s help	
Health or allied health services	20.2	79.8	
Mental health support services	14.1	85.9	
Life skills or community living support services	10.8	89.2	
Personal support services	10.6	89.4	
Information, advice and referral services	28.7	71.3	
Day-to-day living support services	21.1	78.9	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	18.9	81.1	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	14.6	85.4	
Training and employment support services	7.4	92.6	
Financial and material assistance	14.9	85.1	
Other support services	5.6	94.4	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.
Barriers to accessing services
For the Northern Territory, the most frequently reported reason for not accessing services across all service types was ‘did not want to access this service’ (Table 9.5). This response could, however, be given in addition to other responses. 

Table 9.5: Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Cost of service	Did not know where to go	No service in the area	Waiting list too long 	Transport restrictions	Did not want to access service	 Other 	
Public housing	
Health or allied health services	14.0	15.7	9.8	16.7	15.5	25.4	2.9	
Mental health support services	6.5	22.0	12.6	6.3	10.2	35.9	6.5	
Life skills or community living support services	25.0	13.7	15.7	0.0	10.4	26.1	9.1	
Personal support services	5.0	33.8	10.0	5.0	4.4	28.6	13.2	
Information, advice and referral services	22.0	10.6	14.1	0.0	3.9	39.1	10.3	
Day-to-day living support services	8.9	15.5	14.5	7.7	8.9	24.1	20.4	
Residential care and supported accommodation services	15.9	6.4	21.9	0.0	23.3	20.0	12.5	
Services that provide support for children, family or carer	24.7	44.8	16.7	0.0	9.7	4.1	0.0	
Training and employment support services	20.5	21.0	7.6	11.7	8.6	30.6	0.0	
Financial and material assistance	23.7	26.5	6.1	0.0	0.0	39.6	4.1	
Other support services	22.6	11.3	16.2	14.1	6.0	21.8	8.0	
Note: Responses to this question were provided by the respondent on behalf of the household.

Social housing satisfaction in Northern Territory
Overall satisfaction
The majority of respondents indicated that overall they were satisfied to be living in social housing (90%) (Figure 9.5).
Figure 9.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public housing, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Response to this question were provided by respondents on behalf of the household.
Satisfaction with condition of the home
Respondents were mostly satisfied with the physical condition of their home (56%) while 28% were dissatisfied. 
Figure 9.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with amenity
Most households indicated that all of the amenity aspects listed (Table 9.6) were important (between 72% and 96%) to their household. Between 78% and 91% of those households which rated the particular amenities as important indicated that their household’s needs in relation to those amenities were met.
The reportedly most important aspects related to the safety and security of their home and neighbourhood. 
Almost all respondents (94% for safety/security of neighbourhood and 96% for safety/security of home) indicated that these issues were important and more than two-thirds of these respondents felt their needs were met (68% and 78% respectively).

Table 9.6: Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	
	Was important	Met needs	
Size of dwelling	78.9	84.4	
Modifications for special needs	72.4	87.6	
Ease of access and entry	82.8	90.6	
Car parking	84.3	77.6	
Yard space and fencing	89.2	80.4	
Privacy of home	93.6	79.4	
Safety/security of home	96.3	78.2	
Safety/security of neighbourhood	94.4	67.6	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with location
Being located close to ‘emergency services, medical services and hospitals’ (88%) was reported as the most important aspect of location (Table 9.7). The aspect of location reported as least important was being close to ‘child care facilities’ (48%).
For all aspects of location, irrespective of their rated importance, the majority of households indicated that the location of their housing met the need of their household (between 86% and 93%).
Table 9.7: Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
 	Public housing	
	Was important	Met needs	
Shops and banking	80.3	93.4	
Public transport	78.1	92.6	
Parks and recreational facilities	53.2	86.0	
Emergency services, medical services
and hospitals	88.2	86.7	
Child care facilities	47.5	87.3	
Education/training facilities	62.1	87.8	
Employment/place of work	56.6	85.6	
Community and support services	71.6	86.6	
Family and friends	77.4	90.1	
Notes 
1.	Only households who rated each amenity as important are included in the ‘met needs’ data in this table.
2.	Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Services provided by the housing organisation
Overall satisfaction with services
Three quarters of respondents were satisfied with the services provided by their housing provider (74%) (Figure 9.7). 
Figure 9.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Vertical bar chart showing on the y-axis per cent and on the x-axis level of satisfaction.
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to other members of the household.
Satisfaction with maintenance services
More than three-quarters of respondents were either very satisfied or satisfied with the emergency maintenance services provided (76%). Satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services was similar with close to three-quarters of respondents being very satisfied or satisfied (72%) (Table 9.8).
Table 9.8: Satisfaction with maintenance services, Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
	Overall satisfaction with emergency maintenance services	Overall satisfaction with day-to-day maintenance services	
Very satisfied	34.4	24.4	
Satisfied	42.0	47.3	
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied	11.3	14.9	
Dissatisfied	5.9	9.4	
Very dissatisfied	6.4	4.0	
Note: Responses to this question relate to the individual completing the survey form and therefore do not necessarily relate to 
other members of the household.

Appendix A: Survey and reporting methodology
Survey methodology
The development of the questionnaire for the 2010 NSHS was overseen by a Steering Committee consisting of representatives from states and territories and the Community Housing Federation of Australia. The final survey tools were approved by the Housing and Homelessness Information Management Group.
Cognitive testing was undertaken before implementation of the survey tool. Questions included were similar to the 2007 questionnaire. The tenant sample was randomly selected in all states and territories, excluding the ACT which chose not to participate due to its own recent survey of tenants. The NSW sample was stratified by region and housing class. Tasmania and Victoria received a boost of indigenous tenants in the public housing sample. 
The survey was mailed to recipients following an initial approach letter. Reminder letters were sent as necessary. The survey was primarily paper-based, although an online version was available for those who preferred. Phone-based assistance and interpreting services were available. 
Most states and territories used the same version of the questionnaire. Queensland and Tasmania supplemented the core NSHS questionnaire with additional questions of interest in those states. 
Responses to the 2010 NSHS
The information collected from members of social housing households in the 2010 NSHS related to demographic characteristics, needs and satisfaction with living in social housing. A questionnaire was mailed out to a randomly selected sample of 24,307 public housing and 11,284 community housing households. 
A profile of NSHS respondents
A total of 9,681 public housing and 4,040 community housing respondents completed and returned the survey—a response rate of 40% and 36% respectively.
Almost all respondents (97% for PH and 96% for CH) indicated that they were the person (or one of the people) who signed or co-signed the lease for their dwelling.
About two-thirds of respondents (66% for PH and 64% for CH) were female.
More than one-third (39%) of public housing and almost one-third (31%) of community housing respondents were aged over 65. More than one-fifth (24%) of public housing respondents and one-fifth (20%) of CH respondents were aged between 55 and 64. Fewer than 3% of respondents were aged under 25.

Respondents versus households
Responses to survey questions are reported in the following ways:
1.	Information about the member of the social housing household who is completing the survey (the respondent), for example, age and gender, which may not relate directly to all other members of the household
2.	Information provided by the respondent that is:
–	about individuals in the social housing household—for example, the number of adults in a household currently working full-time 
–	on behalf of all members of their household—for example, whether aspects of the location of their dwelling are rated as meeting the needs of the household. Survey respondents may not have consulted with other household members in formulating these responses. The majority of NSHS questions relate to the household.
Survey weighting
This report does not present raw survey data. Estimates have been derived by applying ‘weights’ to the survey responses to overcome the imbalances arising from the design and execution of the sampling. Weighting the data ensures that results are representative of the true population. Two adjustments have been made to ensure that each region and jurisdiction is representative of the social housing sector. 
2010 Public Housing weighting strategy
The weighting for the 2010 survey was calculated as the proportion in the population divided by the proportion in the sample for each stratum, where the stratum are divided by region and by housing type for New South Wales, indigenous status for Tasmania and Victoria, and region for all other jurisdictions. The average weight for Public Housing was 1. The 2010 Public Housing technical report contains a detailed explanation of the weighting procedure.
2010 Community Housing weighting strategy
The weighting for the 2010 survey was calculated as the proportion in the population divided by the proportion in the sample for each stratum, where the stratum are divided by region and housing class for New South Wales, with each of the other states consisting of a single stratum. The average weight for Community Housing was 1. The 2010 Community Housing technical report contains a detailed explanation of the weighting procedure.
More detailed information regarding weighting for the 2010 NSHS can be found at: <www.aihw.gov.au>.
References
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2007. 2006 Census of Population and Housing Australia. Census tables, 2007 (reissue). ABS cat. no. 2068.0. Canberra: ABS.
AHURI (Australia Housing and Urban Research Institute) 2005. The health, employment, and education benefits of public housing. AHURI research and policy bulletin. Issue 54. Melbourne: AHURI.
AHURI 2009. What can be done to improve employment outcomes among people receiving housing assistance? AHURI research and policy bulletin. Issue 114. Melbourne: AHURI.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) 2009. Australia’s welfare 2009. Cat. no. AUS 117. Canberra: AIHW.
AIHW 2011. Housing assistance in Australia. Cat. no. HOU 236. Canberra: AIHW.
AIHW 2011. National Social Housing Survey: a summary of national results. AIHW bulletin no. 92. Cat. no. AUS 141. Canberra: AIHW.
Beer A & Faulkner D 2009. The housing careers of people with a disability and carers of people with a disability. Australia Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) research paper. Melbourne: AHURI.
COAG (Council of Australian Governments) 2009. National Affordable Housing Agreement. Intergovernmental Agreement on Federal Financial Relations. Canberra: COAG.
CRC (COAG Reform Council) 2010. National Affordable Housing Agreement: Baseline performance report for 2008–09. Sydney: COAG Reform Council.
FaHCSIA (Australian Government Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs) 2010. Regulation and growth of the not-for-profit housing sector. Discussion paper. Canberra: FaHCSIA.
List of tables
Table 2.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Australia,  August–September 2010
 (per cent)
Table 2.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households,  Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 2.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Australia, August–September 2010  (per cent)
Table 2.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Australia,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 2.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Australia, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
Table 2.6: 	Tenants’ satisfaction with amenities, Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 2.7: 	Tenant’s satisfaction with location of dwelling, Australia,  August–September
2010 (per cent)
Table 2.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Australia, August–September 2010 
(per cent)
Table 3.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, New South Wales,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 3.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households, New South Wales, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 3.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, New South Wales,  August–September 2010 
(per cent)
Table 3.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, New South Wales,  August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 3.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 3.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities, New South Wales, August–September 2010 
(per cent)
Table 3.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 3.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, New South Wales, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Victoria, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households, Victoria, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Victoria, August–September  2010 (per cent)
Table 4.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Victoria, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Victoria, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Victoria, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 4.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Victoria, August–September  
2010 (per cent)
Table 4.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Victoria, August–September 2010 
(per cent)
Table 5.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Queensland, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
Table 5.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households,  
Queensland, August–September 2010
Table 5.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Queensland, August–September  2010 (per cent)
Table 5.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Queensland,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 5.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Queensland, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 5.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Queensland, August–September  
2010 (per cent)
Table 5.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Queensland,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 5.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Queensland, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Western Australia,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households,  
Western Australia, August–September 2010
Table 6.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, Western Australia,  August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Western Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities, Western Australia,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Western Australia,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 6.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Western Australia, 
August–September  2010 (per cent)
Table 7.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, South Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households, 
South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, South Australia, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, South Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities, South Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, South Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 7.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, South Australia, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Tasmania, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households,
Tasmania, August–September 2010
Table 8.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households, 
Tasmania, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Tasmania, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.6: 	Tenants satisfaction with amenities, Tasmania, 
August–September  2010 (per cent)
Table 8.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling, Tasmania,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 8.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Tasmania, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
Table 9.1: 	Social housing households, by household type, Northern Territory, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 9.2: 	Labour force participation by respondents and their households,  
Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 9.3: 	Prior tenure of respondents, Northern Territory,  August–September 
2010 (per cent)
Table 9.4: 	Support services accessed by respondents and/or households,  
Northern Territory, August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 9.5: 	Reasons for not accessing services, by service type, Northern Territory,
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 9.6: 	Tenant satisfaction with amenities,  Northern Territory, August–September 
2010 (per cent)
Table 9.7: 	Tenant satisfaction with location of dwelling,  Northern Territory, 
August–September 2010 (per cent)
Table 9.8: 	Satisfaction with maintenance services, Northern Territory,  
August–September 2010 (per cent)
List of figures
Figure 2.1: Highest level of education completed, Australia, August–September 2010.
Figure 2.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Australia,  August–September 2010
Figure 2.3: Support services needed, Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 2.4: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, Australia,  August–September 2010
Figure 2.5: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 2.6: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Australia,  August–September 2010
Figure 3.1: Highest level of education completed, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Figure 3.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, New South Wales,  August–September 2010
Figure 3.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, New South Wales,  August–September 2010
Figure 3.4: Support services needed, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Figure 3.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Figure 3.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, New South Wales,  August–September 2010
Figure 3.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, New South Wales, August–September 2010
Figure 4.1: Level of education, Victoria, August–September 2010
Figure 4.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Victoria,  August–September 2010
Figure 4.3: Number of years living in social housing, Victoria, August–September 2010
Figure 4.4: Support services needed, Victoria, August–September 2010
Figure 4.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Victoria, August–September 2010
Figure 4.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Victoria, August–September 2010
Figure 4.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Victoria,  August–September 2010
Figure 5.1: Level of education, Queensland, August–September 2010
Figure 5.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Queensland,  August–September 2010
Figure 5.3: Number of years living in social housing, Queensland, August–September 2010
Figure 5.4: Support services needed, Queensland, August–September 2010
Figure 5.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Queensland,  August–September 2010
Figure 5.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Queensland, August–September 2010
Figure 5.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Queensland,  August–September 2010
Figure 6.1: Education level of respondents, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 6.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Western Australia,  August–September 2010
Figure 6.3: Number of years living in social housing, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 6.4: Support services needed, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 6.5: Overall satisfaction with living in social housing, Western Australia,  August–September 2010
Figure 6.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of home, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 6.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Western Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 7.1: Level of education, South Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 7.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, South Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 7.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, South Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 7.4: Support services needed, August–September 2010
Figure 7.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, South Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 7.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, August–September 2010
Figure 7.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, South Australia, August–September 2010
Figure 8.1: Level of education, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.4: Support services needed, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public or community housing, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Tasmania, August–September 2010
Figure 8.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Tasmania,  August–September 2010
Figure 9.1: Level of education, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Figure 9.2: Reason for needing assistance with activities of daily living, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Figure 9.3: Number of years living in public or community housing, Northern Territory,  August–September 2010
Figure 9.4: Support services needed, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Figure 9.5: Overall satisfaction with living in public housing, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Figure 9.6: Satisfaction with physical condition of the home, Northern Territory, August–September 2010
Figure 9.7: Overall satisfaction with services provided by housing providers, Northern Territory, August–September 2010