Community Transport Research Report
Municipal Association of Victoria
April 2009
© Copyright Municipal Association of Victoria, 2009.
The Municipal Association of Victoria is the owner of the copyright in the
publication Community Transport Research Report April 2009.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or
by any means without the prior permission in writing from the Municipal
Association of Victoria.
All requests to reproduce, store or transmit material contained in the publication
should be addressed to Deb Smith on dsmith@mav.asn.au
.
.
The MAV can provide this publication in an alternative format upon request,
including large print, Braille and audio.
1
6
Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3
What is community transport? ......................................................................................... 3
The MAV transport context and policy position................................................................ 4
Rationale for the community transport survey.................................................................. 5
Key findings from the community transport survey .......................................................... 6
The Local Government Community Transport Survey 2008 ............................................ 8
Introduction and Methodology .......................................................................... 8
Council involvement in community transport..................................................... 9
Type and number of vehicles provided by councils......................................... 10
Local government investment in community transport vehicles ...................... 11
Staff involved in community transport ............................................................. 11
Volunteer involvement in community transport ............................................... 12
Community group use of council provided buses............................................ 13
Individuals using council provided community transport services ................... 13
Target groups using council provided community transport services .............. 14
The purpose of community transport trips....................................................... 14
Use of community transport by older residents ............................................... 15
Use of community transport by people with disabilities ................................... 16
Council provided support to other organizations to provide community transport
....................................................................................................................... 16
HACC program provision of transport ............................................................. 17
Adequacy of community transport services .................................................... 19
Estimate of costs of community transport to local government ....................... 19
2
6
Introduction
Local government has a history of providing and supporting community
transport services, developed to meet transport needs of local citizens with
limited private and public transport alternatives. Community transport
services provided by councils across the state range from the hire of
community buses to community groups to coordinated voluntary transport
services that take individuals to hospital and medical appointments.
According to a recent survey undertaken by the Municipal Association of
Victoria (MAV), local government funding of community transport services
in 2007/2008 was at least $21 million. This significant figure indicates the
large demand for local transport services throughout Victorian
communities.
Councils are committed to ensuring that community transport gains the
recognition and support needed to maintain and further develop responsive
community transport options for their communities, particularly to address
the significant issues of social disadvantage and social isolation.
As the following research data reveals, the local government sector is a
significant funder and provider of community transport services in the state.
The not-for-profit community sector and health service providers also
provide critical community transport services, however, their contribution is
not addressed in this paper.
What is community transport?
The MAV acknowledges the Victorian Council of Social Services (VCOSS)
definition of community transport which states:
“Community transport is not-for-profit transport and mobility support
which is developed to meet the needs of transport disadvantaged
people in the local community….. these services support vulnerable
and transport disadvantaged members of the community, in particular
older people and people with disabilities, to access services and
participate in community life. Community transport passengers
typically;
Do not or cannot drive;
Cannot access public transport;
Require assistance with mobility or communication or other
forms of personal support;
Need a coordinated service and consistency of drivers;
Experience financial difficulties; and/or
Lack family or social network support
3
6
Community transport providers offer a range of services including:
Supported door-to-door transport;
Coordination and liaison with service providers;
Transport information, „travel training‟ and emergency relief;
and
Community vehicle sharing and cost recovery hire to
community organizations.” 1
Community transport services are provided in many communities to
supplement limited or non-existent public transport services. These
services often meet the needs of people unable to access or use other
forms of transport. Community transport is generally provided by councils
and community agencies and operates with both paid and/or volunteer
staff.
Community transport can take a variety of forms including the hire to
community groups of self-drive buses, provision of bus services to
community programs, fixed route bus services, individualised transport
services to Home and Community Care (HACC) clients and others and any
combination of these.
The MAV transport context and policy position
The MAV Transport Position Paper (TPP), developed in consultation with
MAV members in 2008, outlines the need for the community transport
sector to be incorporated into State government transport policy and
planning and for State funding commitments to be established, in order to
sustain locally appropriate community transport (including taxis) across
Victoria.
The TPP, which was endorsed by the MAV State Council in October 2008,
has included under the heading of “equity and access” a priority for “a
transport system that is inclusive of older people, people with disabilities
and Victorians who live in areas that are poorly serviced by public
transport….. all Victorians should have affordable transport options,
irrespective of age, disability or place of residence, and welcomes ongoing
discussion with the State to improve transport options for all 79
municipalities”.
Community transport is a significant social and financial challenge for local
councils and communities in Victoria. For many years the community
transport sector has provided an invaluable service to some of Victoria‟s
most transport disadvantaged citizens. Community transport services have
arisen in response to local unmet transport needs. Rural and remote
1
VCOSS Community Transport Snapshot Project, July 2008
4
6
communities located outside the boundaries of the regional rail network
and distant from V/Line coach services rely on their community transport
network to access essential services such as health, education and
recreational facilities.
The provision of community transport is under pressure from petrol price
rises and a lack of secure funding for the purchase, maintenance and
accreditation of vehicles, as well as appropriate insurance and liability
cover for vehicles. With approximately 1.3 million Victorians located in
regional, rural and remote areas, demand for community transport,
particularly as the state‟s population expands and ages, will continue to
rise.
Rationale for the community transport survey
While local government has a long history of involvement in providing
community transport services, no database of consistent or reliable
information on these services exists. To overcome this shortfall of
information the MAV requested all Victorian councils (79 in total) in
October 2008 complete an on-line survey on community transport. The
data from the survey can to be used to inform the MAV community
transport policy position. The survey was designed to collect information
on:
The extent of council involvement in community transport services;
the type of community transport services councils provide;
the number and time commitment of staff involved
the number of volunteers involved;
type and number of community transport vehicles provided by
council;
target groups of transport services;
estimated number of user groups and individual users of community
transport services;
the purpose of trips within council‟s community transport services;
the number of Home and Community Care (HACC) clients and the
number of HACC funded hours used for transporting clients; and
the adequacy of services in meeting community transport needs.
The data from this survey assists the MAV in understanding how and to
what extent local government in Victoria is currently involved in community
transport services.
This report:
Sets local government community transport in its wider context;
Presents an overview of data on local government involvement in
community transport;
Provides insight to the value of local government investment in
community transport;
5
6
Develops a clearer picture of the types of services provided by
councils, the recipients of the services, information on client‟s
transport needs, data gaps; and
Quantifies the importance of local community transport services to
their communities.
Key findings from the community transport survey
Sixty-six of 79 councils responded to the community transport survey, or
84% of Victorian councils. The survey results identified a consistent local
government view that community transport services do not adequately
meet the amount of community transport services needed in local
communities (75% of councils) or the type of services needed (77% of
councils).
An overview of the survey results are outlined below.
Investment in Community Transport
In 2007/2008 councils in Victoria spent an estimate of $21million on local
community transport initiatives.
Community transport needs
Community transport services are not considered by councils adequate
to meet the „amount of services needed‟ by the community (75%) and „do
not adequately meet the type of services needed‟ by their communities
(77%).
Community transport services are substituting where no public transport
service exists.
45% of rural councils provide trips for older people because there is no
other transport available.
Local Government support to other agencies
35% of councils surveyed contribute resources to other organisations to
provide community transport services – this support is in the form of
vehicles (42%), funds (42%) and staff time (5%).
The capital contribution from councils to other agencies to provide
community transport was at least $1.49 million in 2007/8.
12 councils provide resources to other organisations to operate door-todoor transport; five councils fund others to provide fixed route services and
an additional 10 councils provide funds to support other types of
community transport services.
Council supported operations focus on the provision of transport
services for the aged and people with disabilities.
Most other community transport services are provided by not-for-profit
agencies.
6
6
Three councils financially support private bus or taxi companies to
provide some community transport services.
Community Transport Users
Community transport services are used by a wide cross section of the
community.
At least 88,000 people are using community transport services provided
by local government across Victoria (although the data available on
numbers of service users varies).
Older people and people with disabilities are key users of council
provided community transport services in most areas.
Local services and programs are an important destination for community
transport trips, along with trips to shopping centres and medical, hospital
and rehabilitation appointments.
Of councils providing community transport services, 86% of rural and
42% metropolitan councils provide trips to medical, rehab or hospital
appointments.
Of the rural councils that provide community transport services, 80%
transport older people to health related appointments.
Self-drive bus hire for community groups is an important element of
community transport, within metropolitan and interface councils
Community buses are used by at least 1594 community groups across
the state.
Staffing
74% of councils responding to the survey employ staff to work on
community transport initiatives.
There are at least 71 full-time council staff working in community
transport across the state.
Metropolitan councils are more likely to have paid staff than rural
councils.
A conservative estimate of the staffing costs to Victorian councils to
administer community transport programs is over $5.8 million.
Volunteers
Volunteers play a key role in council-run community transport service
provision across the state, particularly in rural municipalities.
48% of councils use volunteer drivers to resource some component of
their community transport services.
The bulk of volunteers are involved in rural community transport
services indicating the importance of the volunteer sector in rural areas.
Home and Community Care program (HACC)
HACC funding provides a significant transport service for individuals to
access medical appointments and to shop.
7
6
76% of all councils responding to the survey use HACC funding to
provide one-on-one assisted transport to take clients shopping and to
medical appointments.
Of the councils able to provide data, over 58,000 hours of HACC funded
services were used by councils to provide assisted transport services to
HACC clients in 2007/8.
Vehicles
Victorian councils have made a significant investment in vehicles to
provide community transport services, with an estimated minimum
investment of $14 million by Victorian councils.
55% of councils provide 9-14 seat buses, 39% provide buses with 15+
seats and 38% provide cars for community transport services.
The Local Government Community Transport Survey 2008
Introduction and Methodology
In October 2008 the MAV contacted all Human Services Directors within
local councils across Victoria, requesting them to complete an on-line
survey about council involvement in community transport services. The
following information has been collated from the responses provided.
The survey received an 84% response rate with 66 councils responding to
the survey. Responses were received from across metropolitan, interface,
regional city and rural councils. The lowest response rate was from rural
councils.
Table 1
Survey responses by type of council
Total number
of councils
Number of
councils in this
group
completing
survey
Metropolitan
Interface
Council
Regional
City
Rural
Shire
24
9
9
38
79
20
9
9
28
66
83%
100%
100%
74%
Total
84%
Data was collected from across all Department of Human Services (DHS)
regions, as indicated in the tables below. A spread of responses has been
collated from across the state, from across DHS regions and metropolitan
and rural areas.
8
6
Table 2
Responses from department of human services regions
Metropolitan
Regions
Eastern Metro
(7)
Percentage of total
returns
Percentage of
returns from the
region
10.6% (7)
Rural Regions
Hume
(12)
Percentage of total
returns
Percentage of
returns from the
region
Southern Metro
(10)
13.6% (9)
100%
North West Metro
(14)
19.7% (13)
90%
93%
Gippsland
(6)
Barwon
South West
(9)
Loddon
Mallee
(10)
Grampians
(11)
12.1% (7)
9.1% (6)
10.6% (6)
10.6%
(7)
13.6% (8)
58%
100%
67%
64%
73%
Council involvement in community transport
Councils across Victoria have a significant involvement in community
transport. Table 3 shows the involvement of councils across a range of
different types of community transport provision. Most councils responding
to the survey (95%) provide a community transport service of some type.
Four councils (6%) provide no community transport beyond using HACC
funded care hours for this purpose. Three councils (5%) do not provide any
community transport services at all, these councils are all small rural
councils.
The survey data shows:
79% of councils provide community bus transport to council
programs. A much lower proportion of rural councils provide this
service.
Self-drive bus hire for community groups is an important element of
community transport and metropolitan and interface councils are
more likely to provide this service.
48% of councils use volunteer drivers to staff their community
transport services.
52% of councils use paid staff to operate and administer community
transport services. Metropolitan councils are more likely to have
paid staff than rural councils.
Over one-third of councils provide funds to other agencies to
provide community transport services. Metropolitan and rural
councils are more likely to provide funds to support these services.
HACC funding provides a significant transport service for individuals
to access medical appointments and to shop. Interface councils are
less likely to provide this service.
9
6
Table 3
Type of community transport services provided by councils
Type of involvement
% of all Metropolitan Rural Interface Regional
Councils
Councils Councils Councils City
responding
(20)
(28)
(9)
(9)
(66)
Council has buses for
transporting clients to
council programs.
79% (52)
100% (20) 61% (17) 100% (9) 67% (6)
Council uses HACC funded
home care hours for carers
to transport individual
clients to shopping,
medical appointments etc.
76% (50)
85% (17)
71% (20) 44% (4) 100% (9)
Council hires or loans self
drive buses to community
groups or other services
68% (45)
75% (15)
61% (17) 100% (9) 44% (4)
Council directly provides a
community transport
service with council
vehicles and paid staff to
organise and/or drive.
52% (34)
85% (17)
32% (9) 66% (6) 22% (2)
Council organises a
community transport
service - using volunteer
drivers.
48% (32)
40% (8)
32% (9) 56% (5) 56% (5)
Council contributes
financially or in- kind to
another organisation to
provide community
transport.
35% (23)
40% (8)
32% (9)
22% (2)
33% (3)
Type and number of vehicles provided by councils
Councils use a range of vehicles to operate community transport services
throughout Victoria.
The data shows:
Victorian councils have made a significant investment in vehicles for
community transport services.
Buses are the most common type of vehicle used by councils.
Nine-14 seat buses account for 37% of all community transport
vehicles.
55% of councils provide 9-14 seat buses, 39% provide buses with
15+ seats and 38% of councils provide cars for community transport
services.
10
6
Table 4
Number of councils providing community transport vehicles
Cars/station wagons
Vans/buses up to 8
passenger seats
Buses with 9 to 14
passenger seats
Buses with 15 or
more passenger
seats
6
7+
% of all
% of all
vehicles
councils
3
11
8
5
4
5
3
3
2
0
0
0
0
2
1
59
40
11
11
8
4
2
1
0
89
37%
55%
11
10
2
2
1
0
0
50
21%
39%
Vehicles
5
Total
2
Vehicles
4
Number
Vehicles
1
Vehicle
Vehicles
Vehicles
Vehicles
Vehicles
Total
238
25%
17%
38%
28%
100
100
Local government investment in community transport vehicles
The following table outlines estimates of the investment made by local
government in Victoria in community transport vehicles. The estimates are
based on a calculation of the current retail cost of new vehicles (without
any modifications), and represents a minimum estimate of investment
(depreciation, vehicle modifications, repairs and maintenance or financing
cost are not included). The estimate of council investment in community
transport vehicles is a minimum $14,110,000, a significant financial
commitment for local councils.
Table 5
Estimated council investment
in community transport vehicles
Vehicles
Vehicle
Cars/station wagons
Vans/buses up to 8 passenger seats
59
40
Estimated
$m
investment
$1.77m
$2.00m
Buses with 9 to 14 passenger seats
89
$5.34m
Buses with 15 or more passenger seats
50
$5.00m
Numbers
$14.11m
Staff involved in community transport
Forty-nine of the 66 councils (74%) that responded to the survey employ
staff to work on community transport initiatives. This represents a
significant annual financial commitment from local government to deliver
these services.
The data shows:
There are at least 71 full-time council staff working in community
transport across the state.
At least 113 staff work part time in community transport.
11
6
Five councils have more than five people on their teams employed
full time in community transport.
Table 6
Number of councils with staff working full time
and part time in community transport
Full time Part time
(75%
of time)
Number
of Staff
1
2
Part time
(50% or
less
of time)
8
4
8
0
17
8
3
4
0
10
4
1
1
2
5
2
0
1
6
1
0
0
7
1
1
0
8
1
0
0
9
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
11
0
0
2
total
71
15
98
A conservative estimate of the costs to Victorian councils to administer
community transport programs is over $5.8 million. This is based on an
assumption of a $50,000 annual wage (including on costs) for staff working
full time and part time. No estimates have been made on other operating
costs such as fuel.
Volunteer involvement in community transport
Volunteers play a crucial role in council run community transport services
across the state, particularly in rural municipalities.
The data shows:
At least 695 volunteers are involved in council-run community
transport services across the 66 councils responding to the survey
(The dollar contribution of volunteers to community transport
remains uncosted).
35 councils have volunteers involved in their community transport
services.
31 councils have no volunteers involved in community transport.
The bulk of volunteers are involved in rural community transport
services, which highlights the importance of the volunteer sector in
rural areas.
12
6
Table 7
Number of volunteers assisting with community
transport services across 35 councils using volunteers
Number of volunteers
assisting with
community transport
Metropolitan
Councils
Rural
Councils
Interface
Councils
Regional
City
Total
135
487
19
54
695
Community group use of council provided buses
Most councils (81%) provide self-drive vehicles to local community groups
as a component of their community transport services. This is an important
strategy in supporting community participation and social engagement.
The data shows:
Community buses are used by at least 1594 community groups
across the state.
The use of community buses is particularly high in interface councils
where 515 community groups were identified as users of these
vehicles.
Table 8
Estimated number of community groups
using community buses across Victoria
Across all
councils
Metropolitan
Councils
Rural
Councils
Interface
Councils
Regional
City
1594
750
268
515
61
Individuals using council provided community transport services
Data on the number of individuals using community transport should be
considered with caution as some councils were only able to provide
estimates and approximations of numbers of users because they do not
routinely collect this type of data. Furthermore, the figures are likely to be
lower than the actual number of people using community transport as
some councils were unable to supply figures on individual use.
The data shows:
At least 88,000 people are using community transport services
provided by local government across Victoria.
High numbers of users live in „interface‟ council areas and in
metropolitan council areas.
The data for rural councils appears much lower but may reflect a
lack of consistent data collection across services, rather than a
lower level of use or need
13
6
Table 9
Estimated number of residents using council
provided community bus services
Metropolitan
Councils
Rural
Councils
Interface
Councils
Regional
City
Total
63,700
2,670
21,140
688
88,198
Target groups using council provided community transport services
The data in Table 10 indicates that community transport services are used
by a wide cross section of the community, although older people and
people with disabilities are the key users of council provided community
transport services in most areas.
Table 10
Target groups of local government provided
community transport services (% of councils)
aged residents
disabled residents (under 65 yrs)
youth
children
any resident with transport need
other groups
% of Councils
88%
71%
41%
29%
20%
24%
Other groups listed by councils as users of community transport services
include people accessing libraries, indigenous people and groups, isolated
older residents, sporting teams and people from culturally and linguistically
diverse (CALD) backgrounds.
The purpose of community transport trips
The following data (Table 11) presents information on the purpose of
community transport trips. The data shows the different types of
community transport services provided by councils to each specific target
group. Accessing local services and programs are an important purpose of
community transport trips, along with trips to shopping centres and
medical, hospital and rehabilitation appointments. Community transport
services also serve an important role where no public transport services
are available.
14
6
Table 11
Purpose of community transport trips for specified target groups
(% of councils)
target group
AGED RESIDENTS
DISABLED RESIDENTS
(UNDER 65 YRS)
YOUTH
trips to
and
from
council
services
trips to
other
local
programs
or
services
trips to
connect
with
public
transport
trips to
shopping
centres
trips to
medical,
rehab or
hospital
appointments
trips at
times
when no
public
transport
available
other
purposes
68%
48%
59%
50%
12%
8%
74%
47%
55%
42%
21%
18%
26%
18%
24%
26%
2%
3%
3%
9%
21%
11%
8%
0%
0%
2%
5%
15%
ANY RESIDENT WITH
TRANSPORT NEED
8%
8%
3%
0%
8%
6%
8%
2%
8%
2%
11%
OTHER GROUPS
12%
8%
CHILDREN
8%
Community transport is used for a range of purposes including: cultural
activities, faith based groups, to attend sporting and recreational activities,
for transport to social events, for after school care and sometimes for
transport to funerals.
Use of community transport by older residents
Table 12 shows that in metropolitan councils, community transport
provided to older people is mainly used to assist them in shopping, in
accessing medical appointments, and to participate in community activities.
A much higher proportion (80%) of rural councils provide community
transport to older people for health related appointments.
In rural areas, transport services for older people are more likely to
substitute for an overall lack of other public transport options. Forty-eight
percent of rural councils provide community transport trips for older
residents to take them to and from council services, and 80% of these trips
are to shopping centres. Eighty percent of rural council community
transport services take older people to medical, rehab and hospital
services and 45% of rural councils provide trips because there is no public
transport.
15
6
Table 12
Councils providing community transport trips targeted
at older people
trips to
and from
council
services
trips to
other
local
programs
or
services
trips to
connect
with
public
transport
trips to
shopping
centres
trips to
medical,
re-hab or
hospital
appointm
ents
trips at
times
when no
public
transport
available
other
purposes
total
number
of
councils
68%
100%
67%
48%
77%
59%
75%
55%
64%
33%
12%
15%
11%
16%
0
74%
100%
67%
80%
33%
55%
50%
33%
80%
33%
21%
10%
11%
40%
11%
26%
40%
33%
20%
11%
66
20
9
25
9
All councils
Metropolitan
Interface
Rural
Regional City
Use of community transport by people with disabilities
The community transport trips targeted at people with disabilities show an
interesting difference between metropolitan and rural councils. More
metropolitan councils (84%) provide community transport trips „to and from
other council services‟ than rural councils (43%). More rural councils
(86%) provide trips to medical, rehab or hospital appointments than
metropolitan councils (42%).
Table 13
Councils providing community transport trips targeted
at people with disabilities
Council type
trips to
and
from
council
services
trips to
trips to
trips to
trips to
trips at
other
other
connect shopping
medical,
times
purposes
local
with
centres
rehab or
when no
programs
public
hospital
public
or
transport
appointments transport
services
available
All councils
48%
50%
8%
Metropolitan
70%
55%
10%
Interface
Rural
67%
25%
Regional City
55%
50%
55%
11%
7%
33%
47%
65%
67%
36%
0%
42%
35%
44%
50%
22%
18%
10%
11%
18%
25%
22%
32%
14%
33%
0%
11%
Council provided support to other organizations to provide
community transport
Across Victoria, 35% of councils provide resources to other organisations
to provide community transport services. The services provided by these
organisations are door-to-door (43%), fixed route (17%) and 39% for other
service types. The main client groups of these services are older people
and people with disabilities.
Beyond council-run services, support from councils to other organisations
to deliver community transport services is predominantly not-for-profit
16
6
community organisations (89%). Nine percent of councils responding to
the survey provide support to private companies (e.g. bus or taxi
companies), and 13% of councils support other types of organisations to
provide these services.
Support to other organisations is provided in the form of vehicles (42%),
funds (42%) and staff time 5%.
In 2007/8, the capital contribution from councils to other agencies to
provide community transport was at least $1.49 million.
HACC program provision of transport
Fifty councils (76% of all councils responding to the survey) use HACC
funding to provide one-on-one assisted transport to take clients shopping
and to medical appointments. Transport services are provided to at least
4500 HACC clients statewide. In rural councils, 818 HACC clients utilise
transport services that are funded through HACC. Many councils did not
have any or accurate data and could not provide details on this service.
Therefore it is likely to be a much larger number than the 818 HACC clients
identified by this survey.
According to survey data, over 58,000 hours of HACC funded services
were used by councils to provide assisted transport services to HACC
clients in 2007/8. Many councils do not collect this data so the figures
should be considered conservative.
In understanding the use of HACC funding for transport it should be noted
that:
Community transport is not a funded activity type in the Victorian
HACC Program, however the Program Manual acknowledges that
“the provision of transport for a consumer is an integral part of
providing most HACC activities”.(p78). The activities of both Home
Care and Personal Care can include the task of escorting
consumers to shopping and medical and related appointments.
Funding contribution to vehicles and staff may also be made
through HACC capital allocations and the volunteer co-ordination
component of the Social Support activity, but again this is not
reported on as transport.
Thus because community and consumer transport (those assisted
or escorted as part of a HACC service) are not funded and
accounted for under the single category of transport, but rather as
sub tasks or components of other activities, neither the funding
contribution or usage is measured as transport.
Community or assisted transport is not an item in the HACC
Minimum Data Set and thus there is no consistency on how councils
17
6
record the number of HACC service users receiving transport
assistance, nor the number of hours dedicated to such support.
Uniformity in access and coverage –most HACC eligible clients can
access this service, although some councils choose to provide it as
a transport service rather than a home care service, and others do
both.
Although the majority of responding councils reported that they are
using HACC funded home care hours for transporting clients to
shopping and medical appointments, using individual care
workers,15 councils (25%) report that they do not provide this
service. However this includes 5 councils who are not themselves
direct HACC service providers, and 10 councils who provide a
transport service for HACC clients using paid staff or volunteers and
council vehicles. Three of these councils count these hours as part
of the HACC funded outputs, the others don‟t. Some of the councils
providing transport services for HACC clients don‟t make this
available to take people to medical appointments. There are other
HACC funded services providing assistance with access to medical
appointments eg Red Cross, and other local transport services in
some areas, so the way in which the HACC homecare services are
used does depend in part on what else is available to clients.
The data reporting the number of HACC clients and hours used for
assisted transport is variable, with 38% of councils not being able to
provide details. The highest number of HACC clients reported is
235, and the highest number of HACC funded hours is 6328 hrs.
Overall, the numbers and hours will be considerably
underestimated. Without accurate data it is difficult to assess the
overall contribution to community transport options being provided
from the HACC Program or to compare utilisation rates between
types of LGAs.
There are both risk management processes and cost issues in
asking home care workers and volunteers to use their own vehicles
to transport clients, not adequately covered in HACC unit prices.
Processes are required to adequately assess and ensure the
driver‟s capability and the safe condition of their vehicles. Re –
imbursement of petrol costs and/or per kilometre allowances for the
distances covered are generally not covered adequately in the
average unit costs for an hour of home care. Thus although the
transport component of HACC services is broadly recognised, it is
not included adequately in funding or reporting, and thus remains
at the less visible end of community care.
Given the important role of the HACC Program in contributing to both
assisted transport and other types of community transport (such as Red
Cross and council community transport ) it would be valuable to have a
more common approach to HACC data collection. This could be achieved
by having a transport assistance sub category in the MDS requirements for
home care and within the social support activity.
18
6
Adequacy of community transport services
Community transport services are not considered by councils to be
adequate to meet the „amount of services needed‟ by the community (75%)
and „do not adequately meet the type of services needed‟ by their
communities (77%).
There are significant differences across rural and metropolitan areas
regarding the perceived adequacy of community transport services with a
greater level of need in rural areas. For example, 86% of rural councils
report that the „amount of community transport services‟ they currently
provide are not adequate, and 95% of councils report that the „type of
services‟ do not fulfill community needs. This compares to metropolitan
areas where the figures are 70% and 61% respectively.
Estimate of costs of community transport to local government
Councils are spending a conservative estimate of approximately $21million
on local community transport initiatives.
Vehicles
$14,100,000
Operating costs (uncosted)
Staff
$ 5,827,000
Volunteers (uncosted)
Contributions to other Community Transport Services $ 1,490,000
Total
$21,317,000
Importantly, the services provided by local government are funded from
council revenue streams. Some of the smaller rural councils have local
need but not the financial capacity to provide services.
19
6