Location of agencies

In 2020–21:

  • Nearly 3 in 5 (57% or 732) treatment agencies were located in Major cities and a quarter (25% or 323) were in Inner regional areas. Agencies in these two areas provided 89% of all treatment episodes (Figure AGENCIES REMOTENESS1; tables Agcy.3-Agcy.4).
  • Relatively few treatment agencies were located in Remote and Very remote areas (5.1% in total).
  • This pattern was similar across most states and territories, except for Northern Territory where over half (52%) of all agencies were located in Remote (32%) and in Very remote (20%) areas (Table Agcy.3).

Over the 5-year period to 2020–21:

  • Nationally, the total number of agencies has increased, rising from 659 agencies in 2016–17 to 1,279 agencies in 2020–21.
  • The majority of agencies were located in Major cities: this trend was similar for most states and territories but does not apply to the Northern Territory and Tasmania which do not have these areas.

Figure AGENCIES REMOTENESS1: Treatment agencies by remoteness area and state or territory, 2016–17 to 2020–21 (per cent)

The horizontal bar chart shows that 57% of treatment agencies in Australia were located in Major cities in 2020–21. Most agencies in New South Wales (63%), Victoria (62%), Western Australia (61%) and the Australian Capital Territory (100%) were located in Major cities. Tasmania and Northern Territory do not have any areas classified as Major cities. A filter allows the user to view different years of data.

There was slight variation across remoteness areas based on the type of main treatment provided. Nationally, in 2020–21:

  • Counselling was the most common main treatment type provided by treatment agencies across all remoteness areas except for Very remote areas.
  • The proportion of treatment episodes for counselling ranged from as high as 45% in Remote areas to 37% in Major cities (Figure AGENCIES REMOTENESS2; Table Agcy.6).

At a jurisdictional level, variation was also apparent. In 2020–21:

  • Agencies across all remoteness areas in New South Wales most commonly provided counselling, ranging from 41% of treatment episodes in Major cities to 100% in Very remote areas.
    • Withdrawal management treatment provided by agencies in Major cities accounted for 15% of their treatment episodes; whereas support and case management was more common in Inner regional and Outer regional areas (17% and 23% respectively).
  • In Victoria agencies in Major cities most commonly provided counselling and support and case management (both 26% episodes), Inner regional agencies most commonly provided assessment only (29%) and Outer regional counselling (38%) as a treatment.
  • In Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Northern Territory agencies across remote and very remote areas most commonly provided treatment episodes for counselling, support and case management, and information and education (Figure AGENCIES REMOTENESS2; Table Agcy.6).
  • Note that remoteness categories are derived by applying a correspondence based on the agency’s Statistical Area level 2 code (SA2). See technical notes for information on how this affects the reporting of the number of agencies in a particular remoteness category.

Figure AGENCIES REMOTENESS2: Treatment episodes by states and territories, treatment type and remoteness of agency 2018–19 to 2020–21(%)

The horizontal bar chart shows that counselling was the most common main treatment type in Major cities (37% of episodes), Inner regional areas (38%), Outer regional areas (43%) and Remote areas (45%) nationally in 2020–21. In Very remote areas, the most common main treatment type was information and education (42%) followed by counselling (34%). Filters allow the user to view data for different years and by state/territory.