Performance Indicators for 2005–06

Effectiveness

The Authority's key effectiveness indicators are:

Quantity

Number of submissions made to the Authority's Governing Body.

Quality

Rating by the Authority's Governing Body as to the content, accuracy and presentation of these submissions.

Timeliness

  1. Number (percentage) of submissions provided by the required deadline.
  2. Rating by the Authority's Governing Body as to its perception of the timeliness of the submissions.

These ratings are assigned and collated monthly. This enhances the accuracy and therefore the value of the indicators, and provides important feedback on the quality and timeliness of submissions received each month.

2005–06 Performance

Submissions

The Authority's Governing Body met 61 times during the year to review and discuss submissions. In addition to the meetings, a number of submissions were reviewed by email. The number of submissions exceeded the target as there was a larger than anticipated workload.

With the finalisation of the assessment of three outstanding gas access arrangements for AlintaGas Networks Pty Ltd, Goldfields Gas Pipeline and Dampier to Bunbury Natural Gas Pipeline, the overall number of submissions fell slightly in comparison with 2004-05. However, the number of submissions exceeded the target due to electricity access and licensing matters that were brought before the Authority.

Number of Submissions

Quality

The members of Authority's Governing Body rated the submissions they reviewed each month for quality and timeliness. Ratings were assigned on a range of one to five, where one was "well below expectations", three was "expected level of performance" and five was "well above expectations". Ratings are averaged for the three members.

Quality was rated at the expected level of performance, with the average rating for the year being 4.0. This was a slight reduction on 2004-05.

Quality

Timeliness (Deadlines Achieved)

Of the 227 submissions reviewed during the year, 49 related to functions that had time limits. This was a significant increase on the previous year, during which only six submissions related to functions with time limits.

The time limits involved were either firm deadlines or timelines within which the Authority, taking all reasonable steps, was to complete its assessments.

Of the 49 submissions with deadlines, 28 were completed on or before expiry of the prescribed time limit. This equated to 57.1 per cent of submissions meeting the criteria. While this was well below the 85 per cent target, the circumstances where time limits were exceeded mainly related to functions where the legislation provided some flexibility in exceeding the time limit.

An assessment of the time limits that were not met indicated that these related to either electricity licence approvals or the reporting of operational audits and asset management reviews. The delays in approving licence applications were mainly due to the need for subsequent follow-up, as a significant number of applications lodged were incomplete.

Deadlines Achieved

Timeliness (Governing Body Perception)

In addition to measuring the number of submissions meeting their deadline, members of the Authority's governing body were also surveyed following each meeting of the Authority to indicate their perception of the Secretariat's timeliness in preparing submissions.

While there was a slight improvement in this measure over 2004-05, members' perception of the Secretariat's timeliness in preparing submissions remained below target.

Timeliness