The North Rock Council delivers a broad range of events to its residents to support the wellbeing and prosperity of its community. The council understands the value and impact of arts and culture, and the important role of cultural development in helping to achieve social, economic, environmental, and wellbeing objectives for the community. The council boasts a large and diverse events program that incorporates community, arts, and culture.
The North Rock Council events program:
Street Party
Concert Series
Artists in Residency Workshops
Art Gallery
Night Markets
The following report identifies community responses, and benchmarks for council events to identify outcomes, benefits, and learnings.
The Shire of North Rock engaged Culture Counts to conduct an evaluation of events and programs, as well as to assess the economic impact. The evaluation was conducted by surveying members of the general public. Surveys were delivered through intercept interviews organised by Culture Counts and distributed by The Shire of North Rock. In partnership with Culture Counts, this survey was designed and developed to evaluate the strategic goals and outcomes of the North Rock Council.
15,638 responses were collected from public attendees via intercept interviews and online surveys.
Each survey contained a range of ‘dimension’ questions, asking stakeholders about their experience of the event. These dimensions have been developed and tested in collaboration with industry, practitioners, and academics to measure the impact and value of arts and cultural events and activities.
Appropriate dimensions were chosen based on their alignment with the council's strategic objectives.
| Domain | Dimension | Dimension statement |
|---|---|---|
| Cultural | Insight | It helped me gain new insight or knowledge |
| Content | It reflected a broad and inclusive range of voices | |
| Celebration | It celebrated my own cultural heritage | |
| Social | Access | It gave me the opportunity to access cultural activities |
| Safe | It made me feel safe and welcome | |
| Civic | Belonging | It helped me feel part of the community |
| Economic | Diversity | It engaged people from different backgrounds |
| Environmental | Place | It made me feel proud of my local area |
| Quality | Rigour | It was well thought through and put together |
| Local Impact | It's important that it's happening here |
Dimensions are assessed on a Likert scale, in which respondents move a slider to a point that indicates whether they agree or disagree with the dimension statement. An example of a dimension question in the Culture Counts survey tool is presented below.
The current council strategic community plan is focused on four key areas of service. Based on this council strategy, Culture Counts worked with the Shire to align appropriate outcome metrics to the different strategic areas. The following visualisation lists those key areas and their overall goal.
An accompanying table highlights which dimensions are aligned to which strategic area, for the purpose of monitoring and evaluation. It aligns each dimension with the associate outcome domain and the reference number in the strategic plan.
| Reference | Strategy Area | Dimension | Domain |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Good Governance | Local Impact | Quality |
| 1.1 | Rigour | Quality | |
| 1.2 | Access | Social | |
| 2.1 | Celebrate Difference | Diversity | Economic |
| 2.2 | Insight | Cultural | |
| 3.1 | Connect the Community | Safe | Social |
| 3.2 | Content | Cultural | |
| 3.3 | Place | Place | |
| 3.1 | Belonging | Social | |
| 4.1 | Community Growth | Diversity | Economic |
| 4.2 | Access | Social |
Survey respondents were asked to provide their age, gender, and identity. This data identifies the demographic sample of people who responded to the survey and took part in the event. It enables data to be matched to the wider population and responses to be filtered to understand differences in demographics.
The following charts show the proportion of survey responses captured for each of the age, gender, and identity demographic questions.
The largest age group of respondents overall were in the over 60 age bracket (43%). This was followed by those aged 50-59 (16%) and 20-29 (16%). Those aged 30-39 made up 12% of the total sample, those aged 40-49 made up 11%, and people aged under 20 made up 3%. 59% of respondents were female, 39% identified male and 2% identified in a different way.
50% of respondents who attended the Concert Series were aged 60 and over the highest attending age group across all events held. The Night Markets attracted the highest percentage of attendees in the 20-29 bracket. Females made up the majority of respondents that attended the Artist in Residence Workshops (75%) and Night Markets (56%). The Street Party (49%) and Concert Series (43%) recieved the most respondents who identified in another way.
56% of the overall sample identified as LGBTQI+ and 46% of survey respondents identified as a carer for a person with a disability. Respondents who were born overseas made up 40% of the sample and 32% of respondents identified as a person with a disability. 30% of respondents mainly spoke a language other than English and 27% identified as Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander. 35% identified with non of the options.
The Art Gallery had the most respondents that identified themselves as being born overseas (59%). Over half of Concert Series respondents identified as a person with disability (59%) and LGBTQI+ (54%). Half (50%) of Artist in Residence Workshop respondents identified as being born overseas, spoke a language other than English, and being a carer for a person with a disability. Carers of those with a disability and those from the LGBQIA+ community both made up 67% of Night Markets respondents. 64% of Street Party respondents identified as LGBTQI+.
Survey respondents were asked to provide their current living location and postcode. This data identifies the demographic sample of people who responded to the survey and took part in the event. It enables data to be matched to the wider population and responses to be filtered to understand differences in demographics.
The following charts show the proportion of survey responses captured for respondents' identified living location and top suburb results.
Respondents travelled from all over to attend North Rock Council events 24% of the total sample live in the council area, 23% reside interstate. Overseas and regional residing respondents made 19% each with 15% residing in the metropolitan area. The most cited suburb was Bourkegin (17%). This was followed by Pieyeppa (15%) and Mount Rimbus (15%).
The Street Party attracted the most respondents from the local council (35%) and metropolitan area (33%). Interstate respondents made up the largest respondent group for Night Markets (39%) and Artist in Residence (38%). 31% of respondents who attended the Concert series reside overseas.
Respondents were asked to indicate whether this was their first time attending a North Rock Council event. Responses can be seen distributed on the chart below.
Over half the entire sample of respondents (61%) indicated that they had attended a North Rock Council event in previous years, with the remaining 39% being first-time attendees. 78% of respondents who attended the Street Party had attended this event before. New attendees made up over half (56%) of Artist in Residence Workshops.
Survey respondents moved a slider to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the included dimension statements in relation to the event. The first tab chart contains the response data for 'public' responses, showing the average result for each dimension.
The second tab shows the interquartile range of responses for each dimension. These ranges represent the middle 50% of responses, which are areas on the slider where most responses typically fell. Accompanying this range is the median result for each dimension (i.e. the most common response). Smaller ranges indicate similarity in agreement between respondents, whereas larger ranges indicate a wider spread of responses.
The Culture Counts platform provides various methods to capture survey responses at a minimal marginal cost. Achieving larger samples enables organisations to be more confident about the average results and that opinions of the survey respondents are representative of all attendees. The accompanying margin of error chart shows the expected differences for the associated dimension results calculated at a 95% confidence level.
Of all 10 measurable dimensions, 'Local Impact' (85/100), 'Safe' (83/100) and 'Rigour' (82/100) received the highest average levels of agreement overall. This indicates that respondents were most likely to agree that it was important the event was happening here, it made them feel safe and welcome, and it was well thought through and put together. 'Celebration' (63/100) was the dimension that received the lowest average agreement, indicating that of all comparable dimensions, respondents were least likely to agree that the event they attended celebrate their own cultural heritage. 'Place'' had the largest interquartile range, indicating that responses to this statement was the most varied out of all comparable dimensions.
At a 95% confidence level, the margin of error for dimensions ranged from 1.9% to 5%. This means that we can be 95% confident that if we surveyed the entire visitor population, the average outcome for 'Safe' would fall within 2.3% of the average generated by the sample.
Dimension statements can be categorised into their representative outcome domain. Outcome domains represent categorisations of dimensions based on their general area of focus. For example:
Cultural Outcomes represent dimensions that reflect shared cultural values; things we care about and the ways we share them.
Social Outcomes represent dimensions that support the building of social capital, creates and promotes participation in community life and fosters the realisation of self at the individual level.
Environmental Outcomes represent dimensions that recognise the links between people, where they live and how these connections contribute to overall wellbeing.
Economic Outcomes represent dimensions that seek to promote dynamic and resilient local economies that are required to sustain vibrant communities.
Artistic & Quality Outcomes represent dimensions that connect the quality of what is produced to the realisation of intentions and the strength of their impact.
Civic Outcomes represent dimensions that recognise links between community groups, social institutions and decision-making structures that supports broader engagement in community-led activities.
The highest ranking outcome domain measured was 'Arts Quality', followed by 'Social' and 'Economic', indicating that the event excelled in these areas. Despite still being a positive result, the lowest ranking outcome domain measured was 'Cultural', meaning that respondents were least likely to agree with dimension statements from this outcome domain.
More information about outcome domains are available at https://culturaldevelopment.net.au/outcomes/
The North Rock Council 5-Year Strategy contains objectives that align with four key themes. Dimension questions within North Rock Events surveys contributed to the assessment of objectives.
The charts below show results for the four themes assessed. Each theme has its own tab containing a chart, with each chart showing the stacked level of agreement for component Dimensions that were used to assess the achievement of that objective.
When looking at dimension agreement categorised by Theme, Good Governance (91%) had the highest level of agreement, indicating that chosen dimensions related to local impact, organisation, and improved mobility and access received the highest levels of agreement.
Community Growth also had the highest overall agreement with the dimensions focused on evaluating if the council's events were accessible and engaged a wide range of people, receiving 81% overall agreement. Connect the Community also received 81% overall agreement with metrics related to measure respondents' wellbeing, sense of community ('Safe', 'Content', 'Place', and 'Belonging').
Respondents were asked about their overall experience of attending a North Rock Council event, with a choice of five options - Excellent, Good, Neutral, Poor and Terrible.
This chart shows the percentage of respondents that rated the events overall across these five options and the results per event.
The vast majority of the sample (71%) reported having a positive experience overall, an excellent result. Of this sample, 35% reported having an excellent experience and 36% reported their experience as good. 20% of respondents reported having a neutral experience, 6% reported their experience being poor and the remaining 3% reported their experience as terrible.
The 'Night Markets' (95%) received the most postive overall experience result followed by 'Street party' (90%). Other events also had positive results.
Respondents were asked whether they would recommend North Rock Council events to a friend or colleague. Respondents could choose a number from 0 to 10 from a menu, with 0 meaning 'not likely at all' and 10 meaning 'extremely likely'.
These results can be used to calculate a Net Promoter Score (NPS). NPS is a standardised metric that seeks to measure loyalty between an organisation and its audience. Respondents with a score of 9 or 10 are considered 'Promoters'. 'Detractors' are those who respond with a score of 0 to 6. Scores of 7 and 8 are considered 'Passives'.
NPS is calculated by subtracting the percentage of respondents who are Detractors from the percentage of customers who are Promoters. This means that an overall Net Promoter Score can range between -100 to +100.
This chart shows the proportion of respondents that would or would not recommend North Rock Council events, followed by the calculated NPS below.
71% of respondents rated North Rock Council events either 9 or 10, indicating they would be classified as Promoters. 13% of respondents had passive results (7 or 8) and 16% would be considered detractors (scoring between 0-6).
A NPS that is positive (i.e. higher than zero) is felt to be good, and a NPS of 50+ is excellent. The North Rock Council event's NPS of 55 that audiences have a high level of loyalty towards council events and are much more likely to promote than detract from it when speaking with others.
Respondents were asked to provide their age and gender as part of the survey. This data enables results to be filtered to understand any differences that exist because of demography.
The following charts highlight a selection of results based on the gender that respondents identified with as well as by age cohort.
Overall, all age brackets responded positively for all dimensions measured. 'Local Impact' (89) received a positive response from those in the 50-59 age bracket. This had the highest outcome of the dimensions and age brackets. Respondents in the 20-29 bracket had the highest level of agreement for 'Safe' (87) and 'Access' (81) however, had the lowest for Rigour'(76)' and 'Diversity'. As those aged under 20 made up 3% of respondents, the sample size was not large enough to draw insights from.
Respondents of all genders similarly across the eight dimensions. Women had the highest level of agreement for 'Place' (79) and 'Access' (79). Males had the highest level of agreement for 'Insight' (76) and 'Rigour' (84). Those who identified in a different way rated 'Local Impact' (86) and 'Diversity' (77) the highest.
Arguably, the effects of North Rock Council events can be described as a collection of individual experiences, which are primarily created by the different events organised by the council. By calculating the mean results of each event where enough data exists, we can then confidently estimate the aggregate results of the event program.
As a point of comparison, the dimension averages pooled together from all responses is also shown. Similarities between the show median and the pooled mean likely suggest a robust evaluation methodology.
Dimension agreement levels have trended similarly over the 5 events. When comparing agreement results some events excelled in particular domains indicating the areas of the community the event positively impacted. The Street Party event had the highest result for 'Safe' indicating that event attendees were likely to agree that the event made them feel safe and welcome.
'Access' (81) was the dimension with the highest agreement among Night Market respondents indicating that attendees were more likely to agree that the event gave them the opportunity to access cultural activities. The Artist in Residency events respondents had highest level of agreement for 'Diversity' (80) and the Concert Series' respondents agreed with the 'Local Impact' (88) dimension statement the most. The Art Gallery also had positive results across all dimensions.
Dimensions used in the evaluation were also measured in previous years. This consistent use of measurement allows organisers to benchmark their results and track progress in achieving strategic outcomes over time.
The following charts compare the results for previous years. The dimension averages chart compares the average result.
Seven out of ten comparable dimensions received higher on average results in the current year than in the previous years, this indicates a level of improvement across the range of dimensions. 'Celebration' (+13/100) and 'Insight' (+10/100) had the most improvement in dimension agreement over the year, an incredible result. 'Diversity' (-5/100), 'Access' (-2/100) , and 'Belonging' (-1/100) had lower results in the current year compared to the previous year's results, still receiving a positive result.
Participating councils of the state network made benchmarks available from 39 community events hosted by councils, that were evaluated by Culture Counts. Benchmarks give context to organisers so that they can understand the unique impact their work delivers and the outcomes that distinguish them from other offerings.
The below chart shows the average dimension results for this evaluation, compared to the interquartile range of average results from other council events. Results that sit within the range are considered to be a ‘benchmark’ result because they represent the typical outcomes achieved in other evaluations. Any result that sits above this range is considered to be exceptional.
Nine out of ten comparable dimensions fell within the North Rock Council's benchmark range for those dimensions, indicating that the outcomes related to 'Local Impact', 'Safe' and 'Insight' are in line with past events in the council.
The result for 'Celebration' fell below the North Rock Council's benchmark, while still receiving a positive result overall. This indicates potential room for improvement in this area, compared to the other dimensions.
The following charts detail influence of events on attendees decision to visit the North Rock area as well as how they heard about events or activities in the area.
60% of respondents claimed that the event was an important factor in their decision to visit the North Rock Council area. 28% said it made no impact on their decision to visit the area.
'Community Newspaper' (20%) was the most popular way to hear about council events and news amongst survey respondents followed by 'Radio' (18%). 'TV' was chosen the least which indicates that it isn't a common channel respondents use to hear about council events or news.
Respondents were asked to leave any additional feedback about their experience at North Rock Council events. This feedback has been classified into positive, neutral, or negative categories, with the percentage of feedback sentiment types presented in the following chart.
Feedback helps organisations understand where the value of visitor experiences lies and how they can be improved and strengthened in the future. A selection of comments have been highlighted underneath.
We really love the effort the council puts into community activities
The concert series is an amazing way to get the family out of the house each weekend. Keep bringing it back!
It’s such a great excuse to not cook when the night markets are on
we really love coming to the city to see the lights and hope they continue. thank you
Yeah, it’s not bad
I didn’t know it was on, just heard the music and came to check It out
Need more year-round events
The workshops are so inaccessible. Held at awful times and hart to get to, how is anyone supposed to attend?
There is rubbish everywhere after these council things, they should tell people to clean up after themselves
Too many youths around, I don't feel safe
Spending questions ask survey respondents about how much they spent in the local area on items like shopping, food and beverage etc. as part of their attendance at the event. Respondents are asked to exclude accommodation or other travel expenses as these are separated as part of the economic impact calculations.
Respondents are also asked what they would have done otherwise if it was not for their attendance at the event. This question is used to determine 'additionality', which is the percentage of spending that could be considered to be additional, or could genuinely be attributed to the event. It is statistically defined as one minus the percentage of deadweight (1 - dw%), where deadweight is the economic outcome that would have happened in the absence of an activity.
The following charts show the visitor spending and additionality results used in the economic impact analysis, as well as what spending types respondents reported.
74% of respondents reported spending less than $60 per person at the event and in the local area, with most people reporting to have spent between $10-$20 (28%) and $50-60 (16%).
After outliers were removed, the average visit spend per person was determined as $41.50. A weighting is applied to spend results within the economic impact analysis depending on where respondents come from, and therefore this average result may differ from the weighted average. When both results are very close, it is understood to be a rigorous result.
52% of respondents reported spending money on shopping and 40% spent money on food. respondents additionally spend money on parking (5%) and Accommodation (3%). 53% of respondents claimed they would not have visited the area if the event had not taken place while 47% of respondents would have done something else in the local area if they had not attended the event.
Survey respondents who identified as living Intrastate, Interstate or Overseas were asked additional questions about their spending and reasons for visiting. This data is used to determine the economic impact of the event on tourism-related spending.
Tourism additionality asks respondents how much influence the event had on their decision to visit the North Rock area. Tourists that indicated the event was their primary reason for visiting means that 100% of their trip spend is attributable to the event, whereas tourists that were unaware of the event before visiting indicate that the event was responsible for 0% of their trip spend.
A weighted exponential scale of attribution is applied to calculate an overall trip additionality figure in the economic impact calculations (i.e. 100%, 50%, 25%, 5%, 0%).
Respondents were also asked to identify their primary reason for travel. Response options for this question were sourced from Tourism Research Australia for benchmarking purposes.
Regional visitors were most likely to visit the area to attend the events, unlike overseas visitors, who were least likely. 38% of metropolitan area visitors and 36% of local council area respondents cited the event to be the main reason for visiting the North Rock Council area. 50% of interstate visitors were unaware that the event was happening.
Survey respondents were asked to estimate how much they had spent as part of their visit, the level of influence on their decision to visit, as well as indicate what they would have done if they had not visited. Combining this data with attendance figures allows an overall impact figure to be generated.
The economic impact is determined by three main factors:
Visits/Attendance: The number of people spending money (converted to the number of nights for accommodation and longer trips).
Spend: Spending in the local economy. Includes spend as part of a visit, spend on accommodation for those staying overnight and other trip-related spending for those staying multiple nights. Excludes spending on tickets or other items that would be captured through organisation expenditure (i.e. to avoid double-counting).
Additionality: The percentage of spending that would not have occurred otherwise.
To calculate the economic impact on the local area, only additional visitation is included. From those visits, only expenditure that would not have otherwise occurred is considered. In this case, the economic impact is from attendees who would have otherwise stayed at home, gone to work, or those who would have done something else outside the local area.
The tables below detail a breakdown of visitation by additionality (i.e. new visits to the area because of the event), visitor expenditure (if they came and stayed in the area because of the event and any other spending they did), and total economic output.
| ORIGIN | VISITORS | EVENT SPEND | ADDITIONALITY | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local Council Area | 2,308 | $29.98 | 55% | $38,050 |
| Metropolitan Area | 1,442 | $40.29 | 77% | $44,743 |
| Regional | 1,827 | $40.56 | 81% | $60,019 |
| Interstate | 2,211 | $43.45 | 41% | $39,396 |
| Overseas | 1,827 | $55.56 | 17% | $17,255 |
| TOTAL | 9,615 | $41.50 | 53% | $199,463 |
| ORIGIN | NIGHTS | ACCOM SPEND/NIGHT | TRIP SPEND/NIGHT | ADDITIONALITY | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Local Council Area | - | - | - | - | $0 |
| Metropolitan Area | 69 | $70.01 | - | 12% | $577 |
| Regional | 462 | $93.60 | $33.10 | 16% | $9,370 |
| Interstate | 1,429 | $110.54 | $113.15 | 23% | $73,499 |
| Overseas | 3,897 | $116.21 | $115.55 | 5% | $45,162 |
| TOTAL | 5,857 | $112.50 | $107.10 | 10% | $128,608 |
| DIRECT IMPACT | MULTIPLIED IMPACT | |
|---|---|---|
| Total Nights Generated | 606 | |
| Attendee Spending | $362,632 | $1,055,566 |
| Event | $199,463 | $590,410 |
| Accommodation | $66,465 | $182,778 |
| Trip | $62,143 | $181,458 |
| Organiser Expenditure | $130,500 | $348,435 |
| Total Impact | $458,571 | $1,303,081 |
Event expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.96, the national Food and Beverage multiplier (2.96).
Accommodation expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.75, the national Accommodation multiplier.
Trip expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.92, representing an average of national Retail and, Food and Beverage multipliers (2.88 and 2.96 respectively).
Organisation expenditure scaled by an output multiplier of 2.67, the national Heritage, Creative and Performing Arts multiplier.
This report has been prepared by Culture Counts for demonstration purposes.
We respectfully acknowledge the Traditional Owners of Country throughout Australia and recognise the continuing connection to lands, waters and communities. We pay our respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, and to Elders past and present.
We would love to partner with you on your evaluation journey. Please complete the enquiry form and we will be in touch!
