National Disability Agreement: c-Proportion of the population accessing disability services, 2010 QS
Identifying and definitional attributes
|Metadata item type:||Quality Statement|
|Registration status:||Community Services (retired), Superseded 15/12/2011|
|Indicators linked to this Quality statement:|
National Disability Agreement: c-Proportion of the potential population accessing disability services, 2010 Community Services (retired), Superseded 15/12/2011
|Quality statement summary:||People with disability enjoy choice, wellbeing and the opportunity to live as independently as possible.|
|Institutional environment:||The AIHW is an Australian Government statutory authority accountable to Parliament and operates under the provisions of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Act 1987. The AIHW provides expert analysis of data on health, housing and community services. More information about the AIHW is available on the AIHW website.|
For general issues relating to the CSTDA NMDS, refer to the CSTDA NMDS Data Quality Statement.
For information on the institutional environment of the ABS, including the legislative obligations of the ABS, please see ABS Institutional Environment.
|Timeliness:||CSTDA NMDS 2007-08|
ABS SDAC 2003; Census 2006; Estimated Resident Population at 30 June 2007.
|Accessibility:||The AIHW provides a variety of products that draw upon the CSTDA NMDS. Published products available on the AIHW website are:|
• Disability support services (annual report)
• Interactive disability data cubes
• Ad hoc data are available on request (charges apply to recover costs)
• METeOR – online metadata repository
• National Community Services Data Dictionary.
The ABS website provides information and data on the ERP, Census Need for Assistance and SDAC profound/ severe core-activity limitation. Detailed data extractions are available through the National Information Referral Service (cost-recovery applies).
|Interpretability:||Information to assist in interpretation of the performance indicator is contained in the NDA performance indicator glossary, which accompanies these Data Quality Statements.|
Supporting information on the quality and use of the CSTDA NMDS are published annually in ‘Disability support services’ available in hard copy or on the AIHW website (<www.aihw.gov.au>).
|Relevance:||Data from several different sources, each referencing different time periods, are used to produce performance indicator (c). Data used are from the CSTDA NMDS 2007–08, SDAC 2003, ERP June 2007, and Census 2006. This may reduce the overall accuracy of the estimates. In particular,|
• Data from the CSTDA NMDS 2007–08, ERP June 2007 and Census 2006 cover all geographical areas of Australia, whereas the SDAC 2003 does not cover very remote areas nor Indigenous communities.
• The use of SDAC 2003 age-sex specific rates of severe/profound core activity limitation to calculate 2007 estimates of potential population assumes these rates to be consistent over time. The assumption of constant age-sex specific rates of severe/profound core activity limitation over time is not contradicted by historical SDAC data up to 2003. Data are not available to test whether rates have been stable since 2003 but no research has shown a change to the relative stability of age-sex specific disability prevalence.
• The use of national level SDAC 2003 age-sex specific rates of severe/profound core activity limitation assumes these rates to be consistent across states/territories. This assumption is untested.
• Information from Census 2006 about people with need for assistance with core activities is based on the self enumerated completion of four questions, whereas people are defined as having a severe/profound core activity limitation in SDAC 2003 on the basis of a comprehensive interviewer administered module of questions, and thus the two populations are different although they are conceptually related.
• The use of Census 2006 data about country of birth and Remoteness Area distributions for people with need for assistance with core activities assumes these distributions to be consistent over time. This assumption is untested.
CSTDA NMDS data are generated by processes that deliver services to people. It is assumed that these processes involve the determination of eligibility and the assessment of disability support needs following broadly consistent principles across jurisdictions. However, this assumption is untested.
The scope of services funded under the CSTDA varied across jurisdictions. Users of specialist psychiatric disability services in Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia are included in the NDA performance indicators. There were 10,671 people aged 0–64 years in Victoria who used only specialist psychiatric disability services in 2007–08, 675 in Queensland and 112 in Western Australia. Other states and territories did not fund specialist psychiatric services under the CSTDA.
Potential sources of error in the CSTDA NMDS are data items for which the response is not stated or not collected. If the characteristics of the people for whom the information is not available are different for those people for whom information is reported, there is potential for bias to be introduced into the data. Not stated/not collected rates vary substantially across jurisdictions and data items. The data item need for assistance has a particularly high not stated/not collected rate of 20.5% overall, ranging from 5.3% for Tasmania to 37.3% for Victoria.
Potential sources of error in Census data include failure to return a Census form or failure to answer applicable questions. Data distributions calculated from Census 2006 data excluded people for whom data item information was not available. Should the characteristics of interest of the people excluded differ from those people included, there is potential for bias to be introduced into the data distributions. Quality statements about Census 2006 data items can be found on the ABS website.
See also ABS data quality statements, forthcoming.
|Coherence:||For general issues relating to the CSTDA NMDS, refer to the CSTDA NMDS Data Quality Statement. |
There are issues with the consistency of the numerator and denominator for this performance indicator, as the numerator and denominator are drawn from differently defined populations and different data sources. These issues reduce the consistency of the performance indicators and lead to quality issues such as cells greater than 100%.
While the numerator is taken from the CSTDA NMDS, the denominator is an estimate derived from SDAC, ERP and Census data. In the denominator, ‘estimated potential population for specialist disability services’ is defined as the estimated population with severe or profound core activity limitation. However, this does not match well with the numerator, which consists of people who used specialist disability services. People who used these services do not necessarily have a severe or profound core activity limitation (mobility, communication, or self-care). They may instead have a mild/moderate core activity limitation or limitations in other activities—for example, with working or education. This mismatch is more evident in certain types of services, such as open employment services, which are not necessarily tailored towards people with a severe or profound core activity limitation. The definition of potential population for specialist disability services is currently under review.
For the calculation of potential population for the denominator, the method used to calculate the country of birth and remoteness disaggregations is the same as that adopted by the Disability Services Working Group for calculation of special needs group indicators in the Report on Government Services 2010.
|Implementation start date:||20/07/2010|
Source and reference attributes