Target 9A
By 2031, increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing to 88%
Target 9B
By 2031, all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households:
- within discrete Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander communities receive essential services that meet or exceed the relevant jurisdictional standard;
- in or near to a town receive essential services that meet or exceed the same standard as applies generally within the town (including if the household might be classified for other purposes as a part of a discrete settlement such as a “town camp” or “town based reserve”).
Nationally in 2021, 81.4% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing (figure CtG9.1).
This is an increase from 78.9% in 2016 (the baseline year).
Nationally, based on progress from the baseline, target 9A shows improvement but is not on track to be met. However, this assessment should be used with caution as it is based on a limited number of data points. Please refer to the How to interpret the data page for more information.
Target 9B is not able to be reported against as there is no data source currently available which includes all required data elements.
The state and territory assessments below reflect progress from the baseline (improvement, worsening or no change). There are no state and territory targets. The Australia assessment reflects progress from the baseline towards the national target.
| Appropriate housing | NSW | Vic | Qld | WA | SA | Tas | ACT | NT | Aust |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment of progress 2016 to 2021 |
improvement no change worsening no assessment available. improving and target on track to be met (Aust only). improving but target not on track to be met (Aust only).
Note: These assessments of progress should be used with caution as they are based on a limited number of data points.
Housing and homes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people represent more than just shelter – they are intimately tied to relationships with Country, kinship, identity and culture (Anderst et al. 2024; Lowitja Institute 2022). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people lived sustainably and communally on this continent for thousands of years. Many communities were highly mobile and were guided across land and sea by their local knowledges of the environment, seasons and stars (Buergelt et al. 2017; Phillips 2022; Prout Quicke and Green 2018; Sutton and Walshe 2021). They lived in a variety of temporary and permanent dwellings according to changing seasons and conditions (Buergelt et al. 2017).
Ongoing colonisation has shifted conceptions of ‘suitable’ housing from being tied to the land and seasonal cycles to being primarily associated with a fixed, permanent dwelling (Sanders 2000). The dispossession of land, and control of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s movements, left them little autonomy over where and how they lived. Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were forced onto missions and reserves that were often overcrowded, poorly constructed and lacked essential services (AHRC 1997). More than 50 years since laws restricting freedom of movement were repealed across Australia, access to appropriate housing remains an enduring issue. Meaningful change requires an understanding of the systemic barriers to housing access and investment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led responses as well as culturally safe services (Tually et al. 2022; AHURI 2025).
Housing is essential to physical and mental health, two primary mechanisms that impact this are poor housing conditions and overcrowding (AIHW 2019; Bailie et al. 2010; PC 2022). Poor housing conditions, such as inadequate infrastructure, can increase the risk of health issues by facilitating the transmission of infections, limiting temperature control, and reducing food safety (Bailie et al. 2010, NATSIHA 2018). In an ever-changing environment, appropriate housing that supports the health and wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people must be resilient to the effects of extreme temperatures and climate events (Lowitja Institute 2022).
Access to quality housing can significantly improve health outcomes. Government strategies that respond to the housing needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people tend to centre on addressing overcrowding (PC 2022). Overcrowding can impact health, education and social and emotional wellbeing. Reducing overcrowding can also prevent infection transmission within households, such as infections that lead to Rheumatic Heart Disease (Lansbury et al. 2024). Overcrowding also increases interpersonal contacts within the household, which may precipitate privacy violations, disturbances, and household conflict (Bailie et al. 2010). Influenced by a desire for greater connection to family, kin and culture, and the limited supply of affordable housing, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander household sizes tend to be larger compared to other households (Brackertz and Wilkinson 2017; SCRGSP 2020). Measures of overcrowding in Australia must reflect the diverse cultures and preferences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
In the 2021 Australian Census, more than one in five people experiencing homelessness were Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander (AIHW 2021). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander definitions of ‘home’ and ‘homelessness’ are culturally distinct (Tually et al. 2022). For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to thrive in reliable, appropriate, and affordable housing, supports must be informed by the community, their culture and their needs (Moskos et al. 2022).
The most appropriate form of housing for an individual will depend on their specific priorities and needs. Forms of housing include homeownership, tenancy arrangements, social housing and crisis accommodation. Housing services provide a range of supports to assist people to identify, secure and maintain appropriate housing. Outcomes can be improved when there is collaboration between a broad range of adequately funded, client-centred, trauma-informed, and culturally responsive service providers that involve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff and community-controlled organisations (Allen and Clarke Consulting 2022; Moskos et al. 2022; Spicer et al. 2015). When Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are actively involved in the planning, design and delivery of housing programs and services, the whole community benefits (Anderst et al. 2024; Buergelt et al. 2017; Lowitja Institute 2022; Moskos et al. 2022).
Housing impacts many of the socio-economic factors that shape outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people over the course of their lives. Secure housing and safe living conditions can impact health, education, employment, childhood development, digital inclusion, family safety and interactions with the child protection system (Allen and Clarke Consulting 2022; Andersen et al. 2016; NACCHO 2021). Housing security is important for children and young people to engage in education. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people may need to prioritise work over education and training due to housing affordability (AHURI 2025). A lack of appropriate or quality housing can also contribute to contact with the criminal justice system, including entry into youth detention (ALRC 2017; AMA 2015; Weatherburn 2014). Structural and systemic factors can also shape Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s capacity to secure affordable, appropriate housing aligned with their needs (Andersen et al. 2018). Systemic racism in lending and rental markets and exclusion from generating intergenerational wealth can limit access to housing (Yoorrook Justice Commission 2026).
Culture, Country and housing are inextricably connected. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people need self-determined supports that reflect cultural preferences, extended kinship structures and community priorities. Many communities have maintained cultural connections to their land and fought tirelessly for legal rights through movements like the Gurindji Walk Off and the Mabo decision, which led to recognition of Native Title (Charola and Meakins 2016; Keon-Cohen 2000). Land Councils and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander-led housing services continue to be powerful advocates, vital service providers and essential partners in increasing access to appropriate and affordable housing. A culturally informed and holistic approach is necessary to overcome the entrenched housing inequity faced by too many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
AHRC (Australian Human Rights Commission) 1997, Bringing them Home Report.
AHURI (Moskos, Milligan, Benedict, Habibis, Isherwood and Van De Nouwelant) 2025, ‘Indigenous housing support in Australia: the lay of the land’, AHURI Final Report, FR 434, https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/434 (accessed 13 February 2026).
AIHW (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare) 2019, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: a focus report on housing and homelessness, HOU 301.
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics) 2021, Census of Population and Housing: estimating homelessness, ABS Website, https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/housing/estimating-homelessness-census/latest-release.
Allen & Clarke Consulting 2022, Indigenous mental health, housing and homelessness, AIHW, Canberra.
ALRC (Australian Law Reform Commission) 2017, Pathways to Justice—Inquiry into the Incarceration Rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, Final Report No 133.
AMA (Australian Medical Association) 2015, 2015 AMA Report Card on Indigenous Health - Closing the Gap on Indigenous Imprisonment Rates, AMA.
Andersen, MJ Williamson, AB Fernando, P Redman, S and Vincent, F 2016, ‘“There's a housing crisis going on in Sydney for Aboriginal people”: focus group accounts of housing and perceived associations with health’, BMC Public Health, vol. 16, pp. 429.
Andersen, MJ Williamson, AB Fernando, P Wright, D and Redman, S2018, ‘Housing conditions of urban households with Aboriginal children in NSW Australia: tenure type matters’, BMC Public Health, vol. 18, pp. 70.
Anderst, J Hunter, K Coombes, J Trindall, A Porykali, B Kairuz Santos, C and Mackean, T 2024, ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ meanings of home: a systematic scoping review’, Housing Studies, vol. 40, no. 9, pp. 1895–7921.
Bailie, R Stevens, M McDonald, E Brewster, D and Guthridge, S 2010, ‘Exploring cross-sectional associations between common childhood illness, housing and social conditions in remote Australian Aboriginal communities’, BMC Public Health, vol. 10, pp. 147.
Brackertz, N and Wilkinson, A 2017, Research synthesis of social and economic outcomes of good housing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People, Remote Housing Review: A review of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing and the Remote Housing Strategy (2008-2018), Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Canberra.
Brown, A Haregu, T Gee, G Mensah, F Waters, L Brown, SJ Nicholson, JM Hegarty, K Smith, D D’Amico, S Ritte, R Paradies, Y and Armstrong, G 2023, ‘Social and emotional wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Aboriginal controlled social housing’, BMC Public Health, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 1935.
Buergelt, PT Maypilama, EL McPhee, J Dhurrkay, G Nirrpuranydji, S Mänydjurrpuy, S Wunungmurra, M Skinner, T Lowell, A and Moss, S 2017, ‘Housing and Overcrowding in Remote Indigenous Communities: Impacts and Solutions from a Holistic Perspective’, Energy Procedia, vol. 121, pp. 270–277.
Charola, E and Meakins, F 2016, Yijarni: true stories from Gurindji country, AIATSIS (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies), Canberra.
Gilbert, J 2014, Nomadic peoples and human rights, Routledge research in human rights law, Routledge, New York.
Habibis, D Phillips, R and Phibbs, P 2018, ‘Housing policy in remote Indigenous communities: how politics obstructs good policy’, Housing Studies, vol. 34, pp. 1–20.
Keon-Cohen, B 2000, ‘The Mabo Litigation: A Personal and Procedural Account’, Melbourne University Law Review, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 893–911.
Lansbury, N Memmott, P Wyber, R Burgen, C Barnes, S Daw, J Cannon, J Bowen, A Burgess, R Frank, P Redmond, A 2024, Housing Initiatives to Address Strep A Infections and Reduce RHD Risks in Remote Indigenous Communities in Australia, Int J Environ Res Public Health, vol. 21, no. 9, pp.1262.
Lawrence, J Carapetis, J Griffiths, K Edwards, K Condon, J 2013, Acute rheumatic fever and rheumatic heart disease: incidence and progression in the Northern Territory of Australia, 1997 to 2010, Circulation, vol. 128, no. 5, pp. 492-501.
Longden, T, Quilty, S, Riley, B, White, LV, Klerck, M, Davis, VN and Frank Jupurrurla, N 2022, ‘Energy insecurity during temperature extremes in remote Australia’, Nature Energy, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 43–54.
Lowitja Institute 2022, Transforming power: Voices for generational change, Close the Gap Campaign Report 2022, The Close the Gap Campaign Steering Committee.
Moskos, M Isherwood, L Dockery, M Baker, E and Pham, A 2022, “What works” to sustain Indigenous tenancies in Australia, AHURI Final Report No. 374, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne.
NACCHO (National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation) 2021, Indigenous Digital Inclusion Plan Discussion Paper, Submission to the National Indigenous Australians Agency.
NATSIHA 2018, Submission on the Closing the Gap Refresh Targeting Housing and Homelessness, August, https://www.natsiha.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Submission-on-Closing-the-Gap-Refresh.pdf (accessed 28 January 2026).
PC (Productivity Commission) 2022, In need of repair: The National Housing and Homelessness Agreement, Study Report, Canberra.
Phillips, S 2022, ‘Walking While Aboriginal’, Qualitative Inquiry, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 198–199.
Prout Quicke, S and Green, C 2018, ‘“Mobile (nomadic) cultures” and the politics of mobility: Insights from Indigenous Australia’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 646–660.
Sanders, W 2000 ‘Understanding the past, looking to the future: The unfinished history of Australian Indigenous housing’, in Read, P (ed.), Settlement, Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra, pp. 237–248.
Scott, J 2009, The art of not being governed: Am anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
SCRGSP (Standing Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision) 2020, Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: Key indicators 2020, Productivity Commission, Canberra.
Spicer, B Smith, DI Conroy, E Flatau, PR and Burns, L 2015, ‘Mental illness and housing outcomes among a sample of homeless men in an Australian urban centre’, The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 49, no. 5, pp. 471–480.
Sutton, P and Walshe, K 2021, Farmers or hunter-gatherers? The Dark Emu debate, Melbourne University Press, Carlton, Victoria.
Tually, S Tedmanson, D Habibis, D McKinley, K Akbar, S Chong, A Deuter, K and Goodwin-Smith, I 2022, Urban Indigenous homelessness: much more than housing, AHURI Final Report No. 383, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Melbourne.
Weatherburn D 2014, Arresting Incarceration: pathways out of Indigenous imprisonment, Aboriginal Studies Press, Canberra.
Yoorrook Justice Commission 2026, Housing, State Library Victoria, Yoorrook Justice Commission, https://www.yoorrook.org.au/focus-areas/housing (accessed 28 January 2026).
By sex
Nationally in 2021, a higher proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander males were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing (81.8%) compared to females (81.1%) (figure CtG9.2). The proportions increased by around three percentage points for males and around two percentage points for females since the 2016 baseline year.
By age group
Nationally in 2021, the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing was highest for people aged 65 years and over (91.8%). The proportion was lower for younger age groups and was lowest for people aged 15-24 years (76.6%) (figure CtG9.3). This follows a similar pattern to the 2016 baseline year. Nationally from 2016 to 2021, there was an increase of two to three percentage points for people living in appropriately sized housing across all age groups.
By remoteness area
Nationally in 2021, the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing was highest in major cities (87.8%) (figure CtG9.4). The proportions declined as remoteness increased, down to 45.0% for people living in very remote areas. Since the 2016 baseline year, the proportions increased for people in major cities, outer regional areas and very remote areas, but did not change for people living in inner regional areas and decreased (less than one percentage point) for people living in remote areas.
By Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage (IRSD) quintile
Nationally in 2021, the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing was highest in the least disadvantaged socio-economic areas of Australia (94.5%) (figure CtG9.5). The proportion declined in more disadvantaged areas, down to 71.4% for people living in the most disadvantaged socio-economic areas of Australia. The proportions have increased in all socio-economic areas since the 2016 baseline year.
By disability status
Nationally in 2021, a higher proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with a need for assistance with core activities were living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing (85.5%) compared to people who do not have a need for assistance (81.4%) (figure CtG9.6). The proportions increased by around one percentage point for people with a need for assistance with core activities and increased by around three percentage points for people who do not have a need for assistance, since the 2016 baseline year.
By number of extra bedrooms needed
Nationally in 2021, 18.6% of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people lived in overcrowded dwellings (i.e. dwellings requiring one or more extra bedrooms), a decrease of around three percentage points since the 2016 baseline. Most Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that lived in overcrowded dwellings in 2021 lived in a dwelling that required one extra bedroom (10.5% of people), while 4.1% of people required two extra bedrooms, 1.8% required three extra bedrooms and 2.1% lived in a dwelling that required four or more extra bedrooms (figure CtG9.7).
By tenure type
Nationally in 2021, a higher proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people lived in appropriately sized dwellings if they were owned outright or owned with a mortgage (88.9% and 92.1%, respectively) than if they lived in rented dwellings or other tenure types (75.5% and 72.5%, respectively). Since 2016, there was an increase in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized housing across all tenure types (figure CtG9.8).
Target 9: Increase the proportion of people living in housing that is appropriately sized and with all households receiving essential services meeting or exceeding standards
| Outcome: | Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people secure appropriate, affordable housing that is aligned with their priorities and need. |
|---|---|
| Target: | Target 9A By 2031, increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing to 88%. Target 9B By 2031, all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households:
|
| Indicator: | Target 9A The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) housing. Target 9B The proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households receiving essential services that meet or exceed standards |
| Measure: | Target 9A The measure is defined as: Numerator – number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in appropriately sized (not overcrowded) dwellings Denominator – total number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and is presented as a percentage. Target 9B The indicator has two measures. Measure 1 is the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households within discrete Indigenous communities that meet or exceed the relevant jurisdictional standard Numerator – number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households within discrete Indigenous communities that meet or exceed the relevant jurisdictional standard Denominator – number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households within discrete Indigenous communities and is presented as a percentage Measure 2 is the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households in or near to a town that receive essential services that meet or exceed the same standard as applies generally within the town Numerator – number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households in or near to a town that receive essential services that meet or exceed the same standard as applies generally within the town Denominator – number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander households in or near to a town and is presented as a percentage |
| Target established: | National Agreement on Closing the Gap July 2020; target 9B added August 2022 |
| Latest dashboard update: | 15 June 2023 |
| Indicator type: | Target |
| Interpretation of change: | For all measures, a high or increasing proportion is desirable. |
| Data source(s): | Target 9A Name: Census of Population and Housing Frequency: Five‑yearly Documentation (links): ABS -Census Target 9B To be confirmed. There is no data source currently available which includes all required data elements to enable reporting against this target. |
| Data provider: | Target 9A Provider name: Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Provider area: Census Target 9B To be confirmed. |
| Baseline year: | Target 9A 2016 Target 9B To be confirmed. |
| Latest reporting period: | Target 9A 2021 Target 9B To be confirmed. |
| Target year: | Targets 9A and 9B 2031 |
| Disaggregations: | Target 9A State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by sex. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by remoteness area. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by Index of Relative Socio‑economic Disadvantage (IRSD) quintile. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by disability status. State and territory and Australia, by age. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by number of extra bedrooms needed. State and territory and Australia, by Indigenous status, by tenure type. Target 9B To be confirmed. |
| Computation: | Target 9A Numerator divided by Denominator multiplied by 100. Counting rules The data is for people enumerated in private dwellings who reported being ‘at home’ on Census night. Geographical variables are based on a person's Place of Enumeration (location on Census night). Numerator Appropriately sized dwellings are those where no extra bedrooms are required to adequately house the usual residents, using the criteria of the Canadian National Occupancy Standard (CNOS). The CNOS specifies that:
The CNOS requires knowledge of the age, sex and relationship status of all tenants within a household, as well as the number of bedrooms in the dwelling. Households for which complete dwelling utilisation information is not available are excluded from this measure. Includes (numerator and denominator):
Excludes (numerator and denominator):
Disaggregations: Sex refers to a person’s biological characteristics. The 2021 Census allowed all respondents to select from three response options for the sex question: male, female and non‑binary sex. Where a respondent has provided a male or female response and a non‑binary sex response, the male or female response was used to determine a binary sex variable. Otherwise, sex was derived by a statistical process using random allocation. Remoteness area is classified according to the ABS Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) using SA1 as the building block. For people with incomplete/invalid or missing address information, the ABS imputes the place of usual residence. The non‑response rate at the SA1 level was 4.4% in 2021. Remoteness area disaggregations exclude ‘Migratory – Offshore – Shipping’ and ‘No usual address’. Please see the How to interpret the data page for more information. Socio‑economic status of the locality is classified according to the ABS Socio‑Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA): Index of Relative Socio‑economic Disadvantage (IRSD), using SA1 as the building block. For people with incomplete/invalid or missing address information, the ABS will impute the place of usual residence. The data is reported by IRSD quintile, which is determined at the Australian level and excludes persons with unknown or unavailable SEIFA score. Some individual geographic areas were excluded from SEIFA for various reasons, such as low population or high non‑response to certain Census questions. Please see the How to interpret the data page for more information. Disability is classified according to core activity need for assistance. The data is only available for people with a profound or severe core activity limitation. Disability data sourced from the Census is based on four questions to identify need for assistance and may not be fully comparable with data from other sources. See ABS - ausstats for more information. (Data for people whose ‘need for assistance with core activities’ was not stated is provided for context.) Age is derived from a person’s date of birth. If date of birth is not stated, an age value is imputed by the ABS. Number of extra bedrooms needed is classified according to the CNOS. Data are reported for dwellings requiring one, two, three and four or more extra bedrooms to be considered appropriately sized to adequately house the residents. Tenure type describes whether a dwelling is owned, owned with a mortgage/being purchased (includes ‘owned with a mortgage’ and ‘being purchased under a share equity scheme’), rented, or all other tenure types (includes ‘being occupied rent free’, ‘being occupied under a life tenure scheme’, ‘other tenure type' and ‘not stated’). Extraction Census TableBuilder Pro Counting Persons, Place of Enumeration database HOSD x INGP x Main ASGS (EN) x UAICP [Disaggregations: SEXP; REMOTE (UR); IRSD; ASSNP; AGE5P; TEND]. Target 9B The definition of a discrete community from ABS 2016 Census dictionary: A discrete community is a geographic location, bounded by physical or legal boundaries, which is inhabited or intended to be inhabited predominantly (i.e. greater than 50% of usual residents) by Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander peoples, with housing or infrastructure (power, water, sewerage) that is managed on a community basis. Discrete communities have populations of (but not limited to) 50% or more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Essential services include: power, water, wastewater and solid waste management only. Relevant jurisdictional standard: Applicable standards may differ between places within a jurisdiction according to population size or other relevant criteria but not on criteria linked to the settlement’s status as a discrete Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander community. |
| Data quality considerations: | Target 9A All data values have been randomly adjusted using perturbation to avoid the release of confidential data. Proportions/rates calculated for small populations should be used with caution. There is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes an overcrowded household. The ABS uses the CNOS. The CNOS is widely used in Australia and internationally. The relevance and appropriateness of CNOS in depicting dwelling utilisation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has not been assessed. Classification of ‘Levels of overcrowding specific to Australian conditions’ is to be considered under the Data Development Plan endorsed by the Joint Council on Closing the Gap in August 2022. Target 9B To be confirmed. |
| Future reporting: | Target 9A Future reporting will seek to include the following additional disaggregations:
|
Driver
- Change in population by location
- Change in social housing dwellings by location
Contextual information
Home ownership rate
Including by location and tenure type
Homelessness rate including by type and age group
e.g. Transitional housing/sleeping rough
Structural problems including functional health hardware
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) measure of acceptable standard of housing
- Low income household experiencing rental stress/mortgage stress
- Social housing dwellings per 100 households by location
- Progress towards parity
Rate of Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) diagnoses
By severity at diagnosis
- Hospitalisation rates for environmentally based diseases
- Mortality rates for diseases associated with poor environmental health
Material for download
People secure appropriate, affordable housing that is aligned with their priorities and need data tables (XLSX 291.3 KB)
People secure appropriate, affordable housing that is aligned with their priorities and need dataset (CSV 705.4 KB)To assist with interpretation of the data provided (Excel data tables and CSV dataset) please refer to the target data specifications and the indicator data specifications. The specifications are presented for each target and supporting indicator on their relevant dashboard page.