National Indigenous Reform Agreement: P25-3 month employment outcomes (post-program monitoring), 2010 QS

Identifying and definitional attributes

Metadata item type:Quality Statement
METeOR identifier:396322
Registration status:Community Services (retired), Superseded 04/04/2011

Relational attributes

Indicators linked to this Quality statement:

National Indigenous Reform Agreement: P25-3-month employment outcomes (post-program monitoring), 2010 Community Services (retired), Superseded 04/04/2011

Data quality

Institutional environment:

Program participation data are recorded within the department’s administrative data warehouse. Most of the program participation data are either auto-generated following a referral from Centrelink or entered via the IT interface by employment services providers.

Three-month employment outcomes are estimated predominantly based on the results of the department’s Post-Program Monitoring (PPM) survey. The survey is sent to job seekers around three months after they have completed a period of employment assistance. The determination of a job seeker’s labour market status is generally self-assessed by the job seeker at the time that they complete the survey.

The PPM survey has been conducted by the department on an ongoing basis since 1987. For this Performance Indicator, the results from the survey are augmented with administrative data (such as 13 week employment outcome claims, exit reasons from income support and reported earnings from Centrelink).


There is a small lag (2-3 months) between the reference period (to which the data pertain) and the date at which the data become available. This is to allow for sufficient time for all survey forms to be returned and to allow the administrative data to become stable before employment outcome levels are estimated.

The PPM survey is undertaken year round, with a new sample of job seekers to be surveyed selected every two weeks.

Accessibility:Results from the PPM survey are published quarterly through the Labour Market Assistance Outcomes (LMAO) report. The results published through the LMAO report, however, cannot be used to replicate the results presented in the CRC report. This is because the results in the LMAO report are at the program or service level, whereas the CRC report results are at the aggregated employment service level.
Interpretability:Any supplementary material needed to interpret the results will be provided in the footnotes to the table.

The data provided in relation to Performance Indicator 25 meets the needs of users in terms of the indicator measured (three month post-assistance employment outcomes), and the population represented (count of job seekers who exited a period of assistance in a 12 month period).

The Performance Indicator measure is sourced from the PPM survey which is the most relevant data source.

For the baseline report, the reference period relates to job seekers who had exited a period (or phase) of employment assistance between 1 October 2007 and 30 September 2008 within their employment status measured around three months later. Results are presented at the State level and disaggregated by Indigenous, non-Indigenous and all jobseekers.


The employment outcomes for this measure are estimated based on the results of the PPM survey. The PPM survey had been estimated to be accurate to ± 1.0 percentage point at the national level for the non-Indigenous and all job seekers estimates. Given the lower number of Indigenous job seekers, and the lower response rate achieved, the results for Indigenous job seekers from the PPM survey had been estimated to be accurate to ± 5.0 percentage points at the national level. The PPM survey generally achieves a response rate of around 25 per cent for Indigenous job seekers at the national level (compared to around 50 per cent for non-Indigenous job seekers), although the response rate in WA and the NT are somewhat lower.

Coverage error: For some job seekers who exited a period of Job Network Job Search Support or Intensive Support contacts (under the Active Participation Model) their post-assistance employment status was not assessed through the PPM survey. This is because post-assistance outcomes data for these phases of assistance were not always collected. In such instances, alternative measures of employment outcomes were used. This includes job seeker’s advice to Centrelink of earnings from employment (around three months after they left assistance) and exit reasons from income support (for those who were on income support about the time that they exited employment assistance, and who had left income support in the observation period).

For just under 20 per cent of the in-scope job seekers, it was not possible to estimate their post-assistance employment status. These job seekers have been excluded. Excluding these job seekers may slightly over-state the achieved employment rate.

Sample error: The relative standard errors for WA, SA, the NT and the ACT are greater than 25 per cent for Indigenous job seekers. Consistent with the approach used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in publications, such as Labour Force Characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians (Cat. no. 6287.0) results for these jurisdictions have been reported, with the relevant figures identified as having a relative standard error greater than 25 per cent.

Non-response error: There is no identified non-response bias issues associated with this measure.

Response error: There is no identified response error associated with this measure.

Other sources of errors: There are no other identified sources of error in the data.

Revisions to data: It is possible that the base period used for this Performance Indicator may be extended with a view to reducing the number of jurisdictions with a reported relative standard error of greater than 25 per cent.

Coherence:There are no issues relating to coherence of the data used for this measure. The use of consistent wording of questions across each of the PPM surveys on what constitutes an employment outcome ensures internal consistency of the measure.