← Community Funding Map

St Agnes - Ridgehaven, SA

5097Major Cities of AustraliaSEIFA Decile 7/10LGA: Tea Tree GullyView on Power MapDownload Place Brief (PDF)
Entities
76
Total Funding
$737K
Community-Controlled
0
CC Funding Share
0%

Top Funded Entities

$542K
G: $103K C: $439K
$89K
C: $89K
VETS4PETS
Company
$32K
C: $32K
$25K
C: $25K
$23K
C: $23K

Justice Funding ($5K)

Lions Club Of Golden Grove Inc
Purchase a new BBQ Trailer and buy goods to update and improve equipment · community services
$5K

NDIS Supply & Service Pressure

State Providers
958
Thin Districts
8
Very Thin
1
Local Disability Delivery
0
21 disability-focused enterprises in SA

NDIS money is not the same thing as healthy service coverage. This view shows whether St Agnes - Ridgehaven, SA sits inside a state market with thin provider supply, captured payment flows, and too few local disability-focused or community-controlled alternatives. This matters here because St Agnes - Ridgehaven, SA already shows $5K in justice-related funding moving through local entities.

Thinnest Districts In SA
Far North (SA)49 providers
Far North (SA)50 providers
Eyre and Western62 providers
Eyre and Western67 providers
Captured Markets
Barossa, Light and Lower North97%
Far North (SA)97%
Fleurieu and Kangaroo Island92%
Limestone Coast91%

Schools (4)

ACARA school profiles in postcode 5097. ICSEA measures educational advantage (national avg 1000).

Ardtornish Primary School
GovernmentPrimary3% Indigenous
ICSEA 1044
462 students
Redwood Park Primary School
GovernmentPrimary3% Indigenous
ICSEA 1032
368 students
St Agnes School P - 6
GovernmentPrimary7% Indigenous
ICSEA 1039
251 students
Ridgehaven Primary School
GovernmentPrimary9% Indigenous
ICSEA 983
222 students

NDIS Participants

Tea Tree Gully (C) LGA
3,493
active participants
2025-Q4

All Entities (76)

Disadvantage Index

7/10
SEIFA IRSD Decile

This area has relatively low socio-economic disadvantage.

Entity Types

Company
52
Charity
17
Govt
4
Foundation
2
person
1

Gap Alert

This postcode has 76 funded entities but no identified community-controlled organisations receiving funding. This may indicate a gap in community self-determination.