providing evidence to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Information Commissioner as required undertaking presentations to new and existing employees of intelligence agencies to ensure an awareness and understanding of their responsibilities and accountability liaising with other accountability or integrity agencies in Australia and overseas. Key performance indicators The effectiveness of the OIGIS is measured and assessed against four key performance indicators. These indicators take into account the unique role and functions of the office as a specialised review body: the breadth and of inspection work undertaken the timeliness of completion of inquiries or complaint resolution the of acceptance by intelligence agencies, complainants and ministers of findings and recommendations of inquiries conducted the extent to which there has been change within the intelligence agencies as a result of activities of OIGIS. How we measure and report against indicators We use a of quantitative and qualitative information to measure performance. The metrics include: number of inquiries conducted number of complaints received and handled number of public interest disclosure matters handled number of inquiry recommendations accepted and implemented number of outreach activities target percentage (90%) of complaints acknowledged within five business days, and 85% of visa-related complaints resolved within two weeks. While this information is useful in identifying trends in activity numbers over the reporting periods, it does not give a complete picture of the OIGIS’s performance in fulfilling its purposes. For example, OIGIS inquiries and inspection programmes are measured on a qualitative rather than quantitative basis. Rigorous and effective oversight of intelligence agencies’ activities, and the ability to provide assurances about those activities, depends on much more than simple numbers of activities. Some issues (for example, those which raise serious questions about legality or propriety, entail the consideration of complex legal issues, and touch on different agencies) will necessarily and appropriately require focused resourcing and a longer time period for completion. Others (such as complaints about a single confined issue relating to one agency) may be able to be investigated and responded to very quickly and well within target timeframes. Accordingly, our metrics reporting will be supplemented by qualitative information directed at assessing the breadth and depth of our inspection and inquiry work, the level of acceptance of that work, and the extent to which our work results in changes to intelligence agencies’ activities. This information will be drawn from a range of sources (including our records of the nature of particular inquiries and complaints, the reactions of intelligence agencies, complainants and ministers to our
providing evidence to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Information Commissioner as required undertaking presentations to new and existing employees of intelligence agencies to ensure an awareness and understanding of their responsibilities and accountability liaising with other accountability or integrity agencies in Australia and overseas. Key performance indicators The effectiveness of the OIGIS is measured and assessed against four key performance indicators. These indicators take into account the unique role and functions of the office as a specialised review body: the breadth and of inspection work undertaken the timeliness of completion of inquiries or complaint resolution the of acceptance by intelligence agencies, complainants and ministers of findings and recommendations of inquiries conducted the extent to which there has been change within the intelligence agencies as a result of activities of OIGIS. How we measure and report against indicators We use a of quantitative and qualitative information to measure performance. The metrics include: number of inquiries conducted number of complaints received and handled number of public interest disclosure matters handled number of inquiry recommendations accepted and implemented number of outreach activities target percentage (90%) of complaints acknowledged within five business days, and 85% of visa-related complaints resolved within two weeks. While this information is useful in identifying trends in activity numbers over the reporting periods, it does not give a complete picture of the OIGIS’s performance in fulfilling its purposes. For example, OIGIS inquiries and inspection programmes are measured on a qualitative rather than quantitative basis. Rigorous and effective oversight of intelligence agencies’ activities, and the ability to provide assurances about those activities, depends on much more than simple numbers of activities. Some issues (for example, those which raise serious questions about legality or propriety, entail the consideration of complex legal issues, and touch on different agencies) will necessarily and appropriately require focused resourcing and a longer time period for completion. Others (such as complaints about a single confined issue relating to one agency) may be able to be investigated and responded to very quickly and well within target timeframes. Accordingly, our metrics reporting will be supplemented by qualitative information directed at assessing the breadth and depth of our inspection and inquiry work, the level of acceptance of that work, and the extent to which our work results in changes to intelligence agencies’ activities. This information will be drawn from a range of sources (including our records of the nature of particular inquiries and complaints, the reactions of intelligence agencies, complainants and ministers to our
Corporate%20plan%202015-2019%20-%20FINAL%20-%2011%20August%202015.docx