Tools, techniques and considerations for developing performance measures

Evaluation tools and techniques can be used to help develop and review performance measures and related information. The Commonwealth Evaluation Policy and Toolkit (RMG-130) provides guidance, templates, tools and additional resources designed to support better practice evaluation and the measurement of performance. 

Things to consider

PGPA Rule RequirementConsider
s16EA(a) relate directly to one or more of the entity’s purposes or key activities
  • Is the relationship clear for each performance measure?
  • Do any relationships need to be explained in the corporate plan?
s16EA(b) use sources of information and methodologies that are reliable and verifiable
  • Have supporting data sources and methodologies been identified, documented and agreed by management?
  • Has an assessment been made to confirm that data sources and methodologies are both reliable and able to be verified?
  • Has responsibility been assigned for the maintenance of data sources and the development of methodologies?
s16EA(c) provide an unbiased basis for the measurement and assessment of the entity’s performance
  • Whether methodologies may result in the results being biased or perceived to be biased.
  • The adequacy of controls to prevent and detect the manipulation of data sources.
s16EA(d) where reasonably practicable, comprise a mix of qualitative and quantitative performance measures
  • Whether the nature of the entity’s key activities lend themselves to both qualitative and quantitative measurement.
  • The relative usefulness and cost of developing and reporting against both qualitative and quantitative measures.
  • Whether the rationale for the mix of measures is properly documented. 
s16EA(e) include measures of the entity’s outputs, efficiency and effectiveness  if those things are appropriate measures of the entity’s performance
  • Whether the nature of the entity’s key activities lend themselves to measuring outputs, efficiency and effectiveness.
  • Whether the mix of measures enables a complete assessment of the entity’s performance.
  • Whether the entity’s approach to measuring its performance is properly documented. For example, documenting where a decision is made that output, efficiency or effectiveness measures are not appropriate in the context of their purposes or key activities.
s16EA(f) provide a basis for an assessment of the entity’s performance over time
  • Whether the way performance is measured is consistent over time;
  • Whether the type of performance measures used reflect the different stages or maturity of implementation of programs or activities;
  • Whether the rationale for any changes to performance measures is documented, and outlined in the corporate plan and annual performance statements.

Subsection 16E(2) table Item 5(b) specified targets for each of those performance measures for which it is reasonably practicable to set a target


  • Is there a rational basis for each target?
  • Does the corporate plan include details of these rationales where it will assist the reader to better understand the target(s)?
  • Is the entity satisfied that all targets are attainable and do not promote adverse results or perverse incentives?
  • Where it is not reasonably practicable to set a target, is the reason for this documented and outlined in the corporate plan?


Did you find this content useful?