Contents

The Commission at a glance..........................................................................................................3

Welcome to our Annual Report for 2009-10.................................................................................4

Letter of transmittal.......................................................................................................................5

Guide to the report........................................................................................................................6

Part 1 Overview............................................................................................................................. 8

Public Service Commissioner’s review...........................................................................................9

Commission overview..................................................................................................................18

Part 2 Performance review..........................................................................................................24

Sub-program 1.1: APS policy, review and evaluation..................................................................27

Sub-program 1.2: Development programs and employment services........................................45

Part 3 Management and accountability.......................................................................................72

Part 4 Annual report of the Merit Protection Commissioner......................................................88

Part 5 Financial statements.......................................................................................................116

Appendix A: Agency resource and outcome resource statements............................................163

Appendix B: Report on performance under the Commonwealth Disability Strategy................166

Appendix C: Occupational health and safety.............................................................................167

Appendix D: Freedom of information........................................................................................170

Appendix E: Advertising and market research...........................................................................175

Appendix F: Ecologically sustainable development and environmental performance..............176

Appendix G: Staffing profile and equal employment opportunity.............................................178

Appendix H: List of requirements..............................................................................................183

Abbreviations and acronyms.....................................................................................................187

The Commission at a glanceOur roleThe Australian Public Service Commission promotes good practice in strengthening the capability of the Australian Public Service (APS) workforce to meet the evolving needs of citizens and the government, supports leadership and learning and development in the APS, and fosters ethical behaviour and workplaces that value diversity.

We also have an important evaluation role in working with agencies to ensure that the APS is performing effectively and consistently with the APS Values.

Our mission To support a high-performing Australian Public Service.

Highlights from 2009–10During 2009–10, the Commission:

contributed to the work of the Advisory Group that developed the report Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration (the Blueprint)

began the significant task of implementing many of the recommendations from the blueprint—which included work to reposition the Commission and build its capacity to support a more systematic approach to the development of the APS workforce

established a whole-of-government ICT career structure and a whole-of-government strategic ICT workforce plan

tabled the 2008–09 State of the Service Report in November 2009. The report provides an insight into APS workforce trends and capabilities, and areas of focus for the APS in addressing future challenges

conducted a second census of Indigenous APS employees to canvass and record their views on a range of issues, including the pathways to employment, work–life balance, job satisfaction, people management, and learning and development opportunities. The Commission is working with agencies to develop robust strategies in response to the key findings

gained responsibility for Australian Government policies for agreement-making, classification structures, APS pay and employment conditions, work level standards and workplace relations advice from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. The transfer took place on 1 July 2010

undertook an in-depth, external survey of participants at our key leadership programs and commissioned research into program models to build future capability in strategic policy leadership.

Welcome to our Annual Report for 2009-10The Australian Public Service Commission is a central agency within the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio. The Commission supports two statutory office holders: the Public Service Commissioner—who is also agency head—and the Merit Protection Commissioner.

This report has been prepared in accordance with section 63(2) of the Public Service Act 1999 and reflects the Requirements for annual reports for departments, executive agencies and FMA Act bodies endorsed by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in June 2010.

© Commonwealth of Australia 2010

ISSN 1032 0350

ISBN 978-0-9806404-8-9

This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and inquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney-General’s Department, 3–5 National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600, or posted at: www.ag.gov.au/caa.

Acknowledgments

Lead coordinator: Edward M Hay

Group coordinators: Gail Baker, Paul Casimir, Sarah Hardy, Margaret Lovell, Qiumeng Mao

Design and typesetting: Jayne Abel, Paul Joice

Letter of transmittalAUSTRALIAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONERSTEPHEN SEDGWICKOctober 2010

The Honourable Julia Gillard MPPrime MinisterParliament HouseCanberra ACT 2600

Dear Prime Minister

In accordance with sections 44 and 63 of the Public Service Act 1999, I am pleased to present my annual report for the year ended 30 June 2010. This report includes the annual report of the Merit Protection Commissioner, as required by section 51 of the Public Service Act 1999.

This report has been prepared in accordance with section 63(2) of the Public Service Act 1999, which requires that you table the report in parliament. It reflects the Requirements for annual reports for departments, executive agencies and FMA Act bodies endorsed by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in June 2010.

The report includes the Commission’s audited financial statements as required by section 57 of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997.

In addition, and as required by the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines, I certify that I am satisfied that the Commission has in place appropriate fraud control mechanisms that meet the Commission’s needs and that comply with the guidelines applying in 2009–10.

Yours sincerely

Stephen SedgwickAustralian Public Service Commissioner

Guide to the reportThe Australian Public Service Commissioner’s annual report 2009–10 is provided in accordance with the provisions of sections 44 and 63 of the Public Service Act 1999 (the PS Act). The report has been developed with the aim of transparent reporting under the Commission’s outcome and sub-program structure.

Part 1: Overview

The report’s overview includes the Public Service Commissioner’s review and an overview of the Commission’s role and responsibilities, outcome and sub-program structure, organisational structure and financial performance. The Commissioner’s review summarises some of the principal developments affecting the work of the Commission, including highlights of some of the significant achievements during 2009–10.

Part 2: Performance review

The performance review provides a detailed discussion of the Commission’s performance under its two sub-programs. The performance information in Part 2 covers the Commission as a whole. To ensure comprehensive reporting against the sub-program structure, the performance review includes the work of the Merit Protection Commissioner.

Part 3: Management and accountability

The management and accountability component of the report provides an overview of the Commission’s approach to corporate governance and the management of resources within the Commission.

Part 4: Annual report of the Merit Protection Commissioner

In accordance with the provisions of section 51 of the PS Act, Part 4 contains the Merit Protection Commissioner’s report on her statutory role and responsibilities.

Part 5: Financial statements

Part 5 contains the Commission’s audited financial statements for 2009–10.

Appendices

The appendices provide detailed information on staffing and other matters relevant to the Commission’s activities, including a statement as required under section 8(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 at Appendix D.

Contact us

The Commission welcomes your comments on this report. To make a comment, or to request more information, please contact:

Steve TomlinClient Engagement Australian Public Service Commission16 Furzer StPhillip ACT 2606

Tel: (02) 6202 3526Fax: (02) 6264 5153

Email: steve.tomlin@apsc.gov.au

Internet: www.apsc.gov.au

Internet address for report: www.apsc.gov.au/annualreport

Part 1 OverviewThis part of the report includes the Public Service Commissioner’s review and an overview of the Commission’s role and responsibilities, outcome and sub-program structure, organisation structure and financial performance.

Public Service Commissioner’s reviewThis is my first annual report since I became Public Service Commissioner in December 2009. I am pleased to present this report in what has been a challenging year and one of transition for the Commission.

I would like to acknowledge the significant contributions of my predecessor, Ms Lynelle Briggs, and the Deputy Public Service Commissioner, Ms Carmel McGregor, who acted as Public Service Commissioner prior to my commencement. Ms McGregor provided strong leadership in the Commission during a time of uncertainty and made an invaluable contribution to the work of the Advisory Group that developed the recommendations of the report Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration (the Blueprint).

The Commission commenced the year with a new corporate plan identifying strategies to continue to support a high-performing Australian Public Service (APS). We had a number of challenges in bedding down a new structure, investigating different ways of managing our regional presence, managing a challenging budget which includes a requirement to fund certain activities through revenue from our fee-for-service activities and implementing a more centralised approach to managing the review work of the Merit Protection Commissioner.

The then Prime Minister established an Advisory Group in September 2009 to review Australian Government administration and develop a blueprint for reform. The Commission made a submission to the review and argued in favour of a significant refresh of a number of aspects of the APS human capital framework, which in some instances would involve an enhanced role for the Commission.

The Blueprint was released in March 2010 and the then Prime Minister announced, in May 2010, that the government had accepted all the recommendations from the report. The report outlines a comprehensive reform agenda to ensure that the APS can meet today’s challenges and better respond to the emerging needs of the Australian community. It was pleasing to note that the report drew substantially from the Commission’s submission in developing the recommendations accepted by government.

The Commission strongly supports the analysis underpinning the Blueprint, which provides for an enhanced emphasis on the development of the capabilities of the APS workforce. The Commission accepts the challenge to reposition itself to better support APS agencies in their pursuit of this endeavour.

In the latter part of the year, the Commission began the significant task of implementing many of the recommendations from the Blueprint—recommendations that impact across the whole APS and which require a significant revision to the Commission’s business model, organisational structure and workforce capability.

Towards the end of the year the Commission was transitioning towards a new organisational structure and business model, supported by activities to secure a broader range of capabilities in human capital. This also included the machinery of government transfer to the Commission

of the function for Australian Government policies for agreement-making, classification structures, APS pay and employment conditions, work level standards and workplace relations advice from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

This review is in two parts: the business-as-usual imperative and our achievements in 2009–10, and the initiatives underway to place the Commission in the best possible position to respond positively and quickly to the government’s APS reform agenda.

2009–10 in review

The Commission works to support a high-performing Australian Public Service.

A high-performing APS must be able to meet the changing needs of government and society in order to be relevant and fit for purpose.

Responding to an external environment characterised by rapid change has become the day-to-day business of the APS, and a key challenge for the public service is to be ready for the future. Through research and scenario planning the APS needs to be prepared for and well positioned to influence change.

Against this background, the Commission identified five strategic priorities for 2009–10 in our corporate plan.

Supporting the APS to be ready for the future

The Commission supports the APS to be future-ready using research and evaluation to assist in the transformation of the APS. The Commission identified key priorities for public sector reform and innovation to help agencies adapt and deliver on the priorities set for them by government.

In 2009–10, the Commission provided a submission to the Advisory Group established to undertake the review into the reform of Australian Government administration. The submission proposed a new and increased emphasis on human capital, workforce planning and capability management in the APS and substantial changes to the responsibilities of the Commission in these areas.

The Commission established a whole-of-government ICT career structure and a whole-of-government strategic ICT workforce plan. The ICT workforce plan provides a high-level overview of the issues affecting the ICT workforce and strategies to address the future human capital needs of ICT employment in the APS. Using this framework, agencies will be better able to plan for, develop and manage a qualified, satisfied and flexible ICT workforce, while providing an attractive career path for ICT professionals within the APS.

Embedding the government’s ethics and integrity agenda

The Commission supports high standards of accountability, transparency, ethics and integrity for the APS through the Ethics Advisory Service; active promotion of the APS Values and Code

of Conduct; policy advice on and promotion of systems and approaches to deliver the government’s objectives; and an increased emphasis on ethical decision-making.

In 2009–10, the Commission issued guidance to agencies on the disclosure of official information and on protocols for online media participation, and provided access to web-based information and publications and advice to APS employees on ethical and integrity concerns. We worked with agencies to implement the ethics contact officer network and provided support for the network, including through the establishment of a GovDex online discussion forum.

The Commission added to the available resources for ethics contact officers by publishing a new guide on ethical decision-making by the Merit Protection Commissioner and developing two new vodcasts.

Strengthening our engagement with clients and ensuring delivery around their needs

The Commission has built alliances with key clients and connected to stakeholders to deliver seamless, joined-up services. The Commission takes a proactive approach to networking and understanding client needs so our services can be highly effective. In coming months the Commission plans to introduce a revised client engagement model that is intended to better position us to deliver support that is well informed by an understanding of the needs of individual agencies.

In 2009–10, the Commission undertook an in-depth external survey of participants at our key leadership programs and commissioned research into program models to build future capability in strategic policy leadership. The report indicated that the Commission’s leadership programs were meeting the needs of participants.

In response to feedback from agencies, extensive research into the development of strategic policy leadership was conducted in 2009. This research will be used to develop initiatives to build agency capability in strategic policy development.

Driving agency performance and capability

The Commission uses learning and development services, consultancy services and review work to help agencies to improve their performance, as well as evaluating APS performance through the State of the Service Report.

The 2008–09 State of the Service Report was tabled in November 2009. The report provides an insight into APS workforce trends and capabilities, and areas of focus for the APS in addressing future challenges, including strategic workforce planning; improved leadership and employee engagement within a values-driven framework; and increased cross-agency collaboration. I am particularly pleased that the report was used extensively by the Advisory Group in developing its themes and recommendations in the Blueprint.

Leading by example

The Commission has developed leading-edge programs and products and strives to model best practice. We have challenged ourselves to implement our own best practice recommendations and, to this end, have embarked on a systematic review of internal human resource policies and procedures. This work will proceed over coming months.

In 2009–10, the Commission completed negotiations to establish a new employee enterprise agreement, which commenced on 2 October 2009 and expires on 30 June 2011. It delivered modest salary increases to staff. We also introduced revised work level standards for APS and Executive Level classifications.

The Commission implemented an e-recruitment system that enables potential employees to apply for advertised positions through a streamlined process via the web and we completed the redevelopment of our intranet to take advantage of improved knowledge management capabilities.

The Blueprint

The APS is constantly challenged to become more responsive, agile and flexible to meet the rising expectations of government and citizens in a complex and uncertain world. Taxpayers expect no less. A public service that aspires to be the best expects no less of itself.

The Advisory Group on APS reform, of which I was a member, identified a number of challenges that are increasing the degree of difficulty of modern public service.

We face rising expectations of citizens and governments, rapid technological change (including in respect of administrative technologies), a world of considerable complexity, a tight labour market and constrained budget resources.

To tackle these challenges, the public service needs to get ahead of the game—a goal captured in the Blueprint. It offers a way to respond to the changing external environment by driving change and improvement in the public service in four key areas:

service delivery and effectiveness strategic advice and strengthened leadership workforce capability efficiency of operations through consistently high standards.

The 28 recommendations in the Blueprint will help achieve this by adapting and improving the public service’s tools, structures and culture, and the Commission will play a key role in promoting this change.

A strengthened Commission

The Blueprint sets out a strengthened role for the Commission as a central agency—to provide expertise, guidance, performance monitoring and some centralised services to all the agencies in the public service and to support secretaries in our joint responsibility as stewards of the APS.

Today’s challenges require greater monitoring, transparency and accountability across the APS and stronger support for better human capital planning and development—an enhanced role for the Commission.

The Commission has been encouraged to assume a significant APS-wide leadership and change-management role and needs to reposition itself in order to deliver on these broad goals. In respect of APS employees and agencies, these goals include updated approaches to learning and career development; more systematic talent management; effective performance management; a stronger set of common values; stronger leadership; reviewed classification arrangements and work level standards and a strengthened bargaining framework that support a more united APS; greater mobility; streamlined recruitment processes; improved workforce planning; and an improved accountability framework.

Subject to available resources, the Commission will continue to build on its expertise, knowledge and capability in workforce planning and people management; human capital benchmarking; labour market analysis; agency capability reviews; centralised assessment and procurement of learning and development; and classification structures, pay, employment conditions, work level standards and workplace relations.

Implementation progress

The 2010–11 Budget provided funding to the Commission to support APS reform for three years commencing in 2010–11. A range of preliminary work has begun to implement a number of the Blueprint reforms. This includes:

the issue of a discussion paper and establishment of an online consultative forum for APS employees on improving the APS Values

work to scope out the methodology for organisational capability reviews gathering of information from agencies and other jurisdictions on their approaches to

survey citizens’ satisfaction with the services they receive and the establishment of a reference group

establishment of an Advisory Board for a new Strategic Centre for Leadership, Learning and Development which will act as a thought leader/regulator for certain core APS learning and development activities and support talent management across the APS

a project to review the size and growth of the SES and the implementation of temporary caps on the number of SES employees in agencies

scoping of work on revised employment bargaining arrangements, having regard to the large number of agency agreements due to expire in mid-2011.

The Commission has put in place a project management framework to provide some rigour around its work on key reform recommendations and will have responsibility for monitoring and reporting progress across all reforms, including the provision of regular progress reports to the Secretaries Board.

Outlook for 2010–11

The Commission has undertaken a significant amount of work in addressing the challenging agenda reflected in the Blueprint and setting up the organisation to respond. The challenge to meet the rapidly evolving external environment in which the APS operates creates an exciting future for the Commission with a wider set of responsibilities to promote and support improved human capital and organisational capability across the entire APS.

The Commission, while retaining its current outcome, has developed a new vision:

To lead and shape a unified, high-performing APS.

Further, our priorities for 2010–11 are as follows:

One APS—Build a unified, citizen-centric APS by leading APS organisational and human capital strategies

APS agencies—Drive APS agencies’ adoption of best human capital practices and assure agencies’ organisational capability

APS leaders—Develop outstanding leaders and shape a cohesive leadership network APS values—Instill and enliven APS ethics and values to inspire excellence APSC capability—Invest in and grow the Commission’s capability to deliver its expanded

role.

The Commission is implementing a revised organisational structure, which it will formally transition to from 1 July 2010, that better links to meeting the challenges confronting the APS, which are well articulated in the Blueprint, and delivering on its ongoing business. The structure reflects a new business model and a significantly enhanced focus on stakeholder and client engagement. The structure aligns our work into the new portfolios of human capital, the Strategic Centre for Leadership, Learning and Development, agency capability, workplace relations, ethics and merit protection, and corporate. As part of the restructure, the Commission settled on a business model for our offices outside of Canberra. A number of functions previously performed in Canberra will be relocated to our Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne offices. A small representational role will be retained in Perth and Adelaide.

The Commission will continue to work on aligning and enhancing our governance and corporate support mechanisms to the new structure and is working actively, subject to resources, to build the capability of our workforce to deliver on our strategic priorities. Work has commenced on implementing a workforce transition plan to assist in scaling up our activities and the development of a new workforce plan that focuses on building our capability and people performance.

I would like to thank all members of the Commission for their contribution to the work of the Commission both in maintaining the high quality of service delivery during a year of significant uncertainty and change and in helping to lay the necessary groundwork so that the Commission is well placed to respond positively and quickly to the changing environment in which the APS operates.

Stephen Sedgwick

Public Service Commissioner

Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration

In May 2010, the Prime Minister announced that the government had accepted all the recommendations of the report Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration (the Blueprint), which was published in March 2010.

The Blueprint seeks to improve the systems, structures and processes that influence outcomes for citizens. It recognises the importance of building the capability of the APS workforce to achieve this goal, and the significance of cultural norms in making change sustainable. There is an emphasis on leadership to drive change from the top and a focus on accountability to ensure progress is made.

It offers a new ethos of putting people first. It encourages greater feedback from the public, better links with stakeholders, and clearer accountability for the outcomes of citizens rather than individual programs. It also places people first within the APS, through strong investment in learning and development, clear employment frameworks, improved performance management and broad career opportunities.

The Blueprint aims to embed a culture of continuous improvement. By developing better data, more responsive systems and regular reviews, the APS can become a more flexible, innovative organisation that is alert to the needs and preferences of the community. It will also be better placed for future evaluation of performance.

Effective change will require a shift in the attitudes and behaviour of managers within agencies. The Blueprint concluded that the best way to achieve this shift was to strengthen the role of the Commission as a central agency to provide expertise, guidance, performance monitoring and some centralised services to all agencies.

The outcome will be a strong, efficient and forward-looking Commission that:

unites and leads the APS provides effective support to agencies seeking to improve people performance actively fosters talent and leadership is cognisant of, and equipped to face, future challenges drives APS-wide change values and invests in the APS workforce responds to APS-wide issues, including diversity, service responsiveness and access to

government information.

The Blueprint recommended nine reforms grouped under four core components to deliver a high-performing APS. Figure 1 outlines the report’s recommendations and highlights the areas of focus for the Commission.

While full implementation of the reform agenda will take a number of years to roll out and embed, both the community and the APS can expect to see changes in the coming year.

Figure 1: The Blueprint: recommendations for APS reform and the Commission’s responsibilities (green background)

A high-performing public service

Meets the needs of citizens

Provides strong leadership and strategic direction

Contains a highly capable workforce

Operates efficiently and at a consistently high standard

1 Delivering better services to clients

3 Enhancing policy capability 6 Clarifying and aligning employment conditions

8 Ensuring agency agility, capability and effectiveness

1.1 Simplify Australian Government services for citizens

3.1 Strengthen strategic policy 6.1 Ensure employment bargaining arrangements support one APS

8.1 Conduct agency capability reviews

1.2 Develop better ways to deliver services through the community and private sectors

3.2 Build partnerships with academia, research institutions and the community and private sectors

6.2 Assess the size of and role of the SES

8.2 Introduce shared outcomes across portfolios

1.3 Deliver services in closer partnership with State, Territory and local governments

3.3 Improve policy implementation

7 Strengthening the workforce

8.3 Reduce internal red tape to promote agility

1.4 Reduce unnecessary business regulatory burden

4 Reinvigorating strategic leadership

7.1 Coordinate workforce planning

9 Improving agency efficiency

2 Creating more open government

4.1 Revise and embed the APS Values (with PM&C)

7.2 Streamline recruitment and improve induction

9.1 Review the measures of agency efficiency

2.1 Enable citizens to collaborate with government in policy and service design

4.2 Articulate the roles and responsibilities of Secretaries(with PM&C)

7.3 Expand and strengthen learning and development

9.2 Strengthen the governance framework

2.2 Conduct a citizen survey

4.3 Revise employment arrangements for Secretaries

7.4 Strengthen the performance framework

9.3 Small agencies to improve the efficiency of their corporate functions

4.4 Strengthen leadership across the APS (with PM&C)

7.5 Encourage employees to expand their career experience

4.5 Improve talent management across the APS

5 Introducing a new APSC to drive change and provide strategic planning

5.1 New APSC with responsibilities to lead the APS

Commission overviewThe Australian Public Service Commission is a central agency within the Prime Minister and Cabinet portfolio. The Commission supports two statutory office holders: the Public Service Commissioner—who is also agency head—and the Merit Protection Commissioner. Their functions are set out in sections 41(1) and 50(1), respectively, of the Public Service Act 1999 (the PS Act).

Minister

For the reporting period, the Commission’s Minister was Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig, Cabinet Secretary, Special Minister of State, Manager of Government Business in the Senate.

Role and responsibilities

Our mission is to support a high-performing Australian Public Service. The statutory responsibilities that support our mission are detailed in the PS Act and include:

evaluating the extent to which agencies incorporate and uphold the APS Values evaluating the adequacy of systems and procedures in agencies for ensuring compliance

with the APS Code of Conduct promoting the APS Values and Code of Conduct developing, promoting, reviewing and evaluating APS employment policies and practices facilitating continuous improvement in people management throughout the APS coordinating and supporting APS-wide training and career development providing advice and assistance on public service matters to agencies on request providing independent external review of actions by the Merit Protection

Commissioner.

Outcome and sub-program structure

The Commission’s outcome is increased awareness and adoption of best practice public administration by the public service through leadership, promotion, advice and professional development, drawing on research and evaluation activities.

In 2009–10, the Commission worked to achieve its outcome through two sub-programs:

1.1: APS policy, review and evaluation 1.2: Development programs and employment services.

The Public Service Commissioner provides staff to assist the Merit Protection Commissioner to perform her prescribed functions.

Corporate structure

A three-person Executive, consisting of the Australian Public Service Commissioner, the Australian Deputy Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, led the Commission in 2009–10.

The Executive

Mr Stephen SedgwickAustralian Public Service Commissioner

Mr Stephen Sedgwick became Australian Public Service Commissioner in December 2009 after a period as Professor and Director of the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research at the University of Melbourne. He has had a long and distinguished career in the public sector, having served as the Secretary of the Commonwealth Departments of Finance, Employment and Education between 1992 and 2002. He is a former Commissioner and Chairperson of the Industry Commission and a former senior officer of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Mr Sedgwick graduated with honours in economics from the University of Sydney and holds a master’s degree from the University of London. He was a member of the board of the Asian Development Bank between 2002 and 2007. He is currently a member of the Research and Policy Council of the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia.

Ms Carmel McGregorDeputy Australian Public Service Commissioner

Ms Carmel McGregor joined the Commission as Deputy Australian Public Service Commissioner in November 2008.

Ms McGregor’s previous position was Deputy Secretary Client and Corporate Services in the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. She led a global client service reform and a major organisational and cultural change program. Her earlier roles in the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs and at Centrelink involved considerable experience in policy, service delivery and human capital programs.

Previously she was General Manager Employment, Disability and Education at Centrelink, where she managed delivery of employment and education programs and led the implementation of the Welfare to Work reforms.

She is Vice Chair (October 2009) and Australian representative of the OECD Public Governance Committee.

She holds an arts degree with majors in psychology and sociology from the University of Queensland and is a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management. She has memberships in the Institute of Public Administration Australia, the Australian Institute of Training and Development and the Australian Human Resources Institute.

Ms Annwyn GodwinMerit Protection Commissioner

Ms Annwyn Godwin was appointed as Merit Protection Commissioner in January 2008. Ms Godwin joined the APS in 1990 and has extensive experience in corporate and staffingrelated fields, including with the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service. During her early career, she also worked in a wide variety of private sector agencies.

Ms Godwin has a Bachelor of Arts (Hons) from Melbourne University with majors in Australian politics and history and a Master’s of Business Administration from the Australian Graduate School of Management at the University of New South Wales.

Organisational structure

Six groups, each led by a Group Manager, supported the functions of the Commission in 2009–10 and reported to the Executive. The Deputy Public Service Commissioner had responsibility for the day-to-day oversight of the National Business Centre, National Leadership and Programmes Centre, Research and Evaluation and Workforce Policy Groups. The Merit Protection Commissioner had responsibility, in addition to her statutory responsibilities, for the Ethics and Corporate Groups. Figure 2 shows the Commission’s organisational structure at 30 June 2010.

Figure 2: Organisational structure as at 30 June 2010

Group functions

The Ethics Group advances and advises on ethics and integrity in the APS, encouraging open, transparent and effective agency decision-making and supporting the review and inquiry functions of both the Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner.

The Corporate Group supports the operations of the groups, builds organisational capability and provides assurance on governance.

The Workforce Policy Group leads and shapes the APS workforce and develops and advises on APS employment policy to support the APS of the future. The group actively works with agencies to assist them to manage their workforce and adapt to a changing environment.

The National Business Centre provides nationally and centrally coordinated consultancy services across all areas of strategic human resource management; manages whole-of-government recruitment campaigns implementing specific government initiatives; and provides

recruitment and employment services more generally. The National Business Centre includes the Career Transition and Support Centre, and area offices that provide a local focus for Commission services.

The National Leadership and Programmes Centre provides national leadership, learning and development services to the public sector. The group strategically engages and develops relationships with stakeholders, fosters capability and nurtures talent.

The Research and Evaluation Group advises on the long-term future directions for the APS and its leadership through targeted research, evaluation and policy activities that support APS transformation.

Reports and publications

The Commission issues a range of APS leadership, learning and development information in a variety of formats. Commission publications and circulars, as well as selected speeches given by the Public Service Commissioner, are available on the Commission’s website at www.apsc.gov.au.

Locations

The Commission’s head office is in Canberra. It has area offices in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth. Full addresses and contacts details are available on the Commission’s website.

Funding and financial performance

The Commission’s activities are funded through a combination of appropriation and revenue generated through the sale of leadership services, learning and development training courses, and employment-related services. Much of the Commission’s revenue is earned in a competitive market where agencies may choose the source of the services they need.

In 2009–10 the Commission received $20.731 million in appropriation funding, with revenue of $19.922 million coming from the sale of goods and rendering of services. The 2009–10 Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements reduced the Commission’s appropriation by $0.250 million, reflecting whole-of-government departmental efficiencies.

During 2009–10, the Commission managed its budget with care and diligence in difficult economic conditions so that it finished the financial year with a surplus. As a result of the funding to implement the recommendations of the Blueprint, the Commission’s 2010–11 budget position has been substantially improved.

Part 2 Performance reviewIn this part, the Commission reports on its performance against its outcome and its two sub-programs, including achievements during the year, key performance results, and activities undertaken during the year.

Outcome and sub-program structure The Commission’s outcome is:

increased awareness and adoption of best practice public administration by the public service through leadership, promotion, advice and professional development, drawing on research and evaluation.

The Commission delivered this outcome through two sub-programs:

1.1: APS policy, review and evaluation

1.2: Development programs and employment services.

Financial performanceTable 1 summarises the Commission’s financial performance in 2009–10.

Table 1: Summary of financial performance, 2009–10

Budget estimate($ million)

Actual result($ million)

Sub-program 1.1: APS policy, review and evaluation

Advice and support to Minister, Executive and agency heads 2,327 2,521

Merit Protection and other services 2,273 2,036

Statistical/information services 1,516 1,603

Research and evaluation 1,306 1,276

Total for sub-program 1.1 7,422 7,436

Sub-program 1.2: Development programs and employment services

Employment services 6,071 5,549

International assistance and organisations 2,968 3,121

Leadership services 7,177 6,232

Program delivery 7,143 7,322

National/international programs 2,833 4,337

Indigenous employment 3,959 3,994

Promote better practice 2,293 1,902

Total for sub-program 1.2 32,444 32,457

Total for outcome 39,866 39,893

Note: The 2009–10 Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements reduced the Commission’s

Table 1: Summary of financial performance, 2009–10

Budget estimate($ million)

Actual result($ million)

budget by $0.250 million.

Table 2 shows the income, by source, that the Commission received in 2009–10.

Table 2: Income received by source, 2009–10

Source Estimate ($ million)Actual ($ million)

Development programs 12.2 13.8

Employment services 3.3 3.1

International assistance 2.1 2.4

Better practice and evaluation0.9 0.5

Other services 0.1 0.2

Total 18.6 20.0

Sub-program 1.1: APS policy, review and evaluationSummary

Components

The sub-program consists of:

advice and support to Minister, Executive and agency heads Merit Protection and other services statistical/information services research and evaluation.

Objectives

The Commission’s objectives under this sub-program in 2009–10 were to:

provide policy advice on, and promote systems and approaches to improve, public service ethics and integrity

implement an Ethics Advisory Service that will, among other things, assist the Commissioner and agency heads to promote the APS Values and Code of Conduct and support all APS employees in ethical decision-making

strengthen its support for the review and inquiry functions of the Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner

undertake its regulatory review and reporting role under the Public Service Act 1999 (PS Act), including handling whistleblowing reports

collect, maintain, analyse and use data on APS employment to assist in its advice to the government and the APS

provide an annual State of the Service Report and undertake other research and evaluation activity to provide an evidence base on the current strengths and weaknesses of the APS and to generate informed debate on contemporary issues and future public sector reform directions.

Priorities

To achieve these objectives, the Commission’s corporate plan identified the following priorities for 2009–10:

undertake research and evaluation to support debate on contemporary government challenges, public sector reform, and improvements to public service leadership

develop a whole-of-government APS workforce strategy which will support the APS into the future as well as during an economic downturn

establish a whole-of-government APS career pathway and a whole-of-government strategic ICT workforce plan by March 2010, and provide support for the ICT workforce through leadership events, awards and monitoring use of contractors

support the government’s wider accountability and integrity agenda for the public sector, including effective implementation of the Ethics Advisory Service and enhancing the focus on the review and inquiry functions of the Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner

progress a review of the PS Act and subordinate legislation ready for implementation by mid-2010

prepare the State of the Service Report and the Statistical Bulletin for delivery in November 2009, and ensure the Commission’s APS data collections are relevant.

Achievements

During 2009–10, the Commission:

provided a submission to the Advisory Group established to undertake the review into the reform of Australian Government administration. The submission proposed a new and increased emphasis on human capital, workforce planning and capability management in the APS and substantial change to the responsibilities of the Commission in these areas

established a whole-of-government ICT career structure and a whole-of-government strategic ICT workforce plan. The ICT workforce plan provides a high-level overview of the issues affecting the ICT workforce and strategies to address the future human capital needs of ICT employment in the APS

tabled the 2008–09 State of the Service Report in November 2009. The report provided an insight into APS workforce trends and capabilities, and areas of focus for the APS in addressing future challenges, including strategic workforce planning, improved leadership and employee engagement within a values-driven framework, and increased cross-agency collaboration

issued guidance to agencies on the disclosure of official information and on protocols for online media participation. Both of these circulars re-emphasised the need for APS employees to fully understand the APS Values and Code of Conduct and how they apply to official or personal communications and participation in online forums

continued to enhance its reputation through the provision of access to web-based information and publications and advice to APS employees on ethics and integrity concerns

streamlined the processes for handling whistleblowing reports lodged with the Public Service Commissioner or Merit Protection Commissioner.

Key performance indicator

Table 3 summarises sub-program 1.1 performance against its key performance indicator for 2009–10 and the previous two years.

Table 3: Summary of sub-program 1.1 performance against key performance indicator, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Key performance indicator Actual Actual Target Actual

High level of use and satisfaction with the State of the Service Report and other research and evaluation reports by the SES, agencies and other clients.

90% 90% 70% 90%

Program deliverables

Table 4 summarises sub-program 1.1 performance against its program deliverables for 2009–10 and the previous two years.

Table 4: Summary of sub-program 1.1 performance against program deliverables, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Deliverables Actual Actual Target Actual

Reviews finalised on behalf of the Merit Protection Commissioner (pages 91–2) 261 217 235 264

Reviews conducted on behalf of the Merit Protection Commissioner completed within published timeframes (page 92)

57% 86% 70% 81%

Responses to whistleblowing reports made to the Commissioner or the Merit Protection Commissioner (page 25)

5 3 22 24

Whistleblowing reports responded to within 6 weeks with any further investigations conducted promptly (page 25) 80% 100% 70% 96%

State of the Service Report and associated publications (page 33) 2 2 2 2

State of the Service Report tabled in accordance with tabling requirements (page 33) 100% 100% 100% 100%

Research and evaluation reports completed (page 32) AchievedAchieved3 Not achieved*

Secretariat service provided to the Management Advisory Committee and the Public Service Commissioners’ Conference (page 37)

AchievedAchieved2 2

* Research and evaluation resources were redirected to supporting the Advisory Group’s

Table 4: Summary of sub-program 1.1 performance against program deliverables, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Deliverables Actual Actual Target Actual

review of Australian Government administration and international research projects.

Advice and support to Minister, Executive and agency heads

A central role of the Commission is to provide high-quality, timely advice and support to the Minister, the Executive and agency heads.

Ethics and integrity

APS Values and Code of Conduct

The report Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration (the Blueprint) proposed that to reinvigorate the strategic leadership of the APS the Commission should, as part of a number of initiatives, revise and embed the APS Values in the APS.

The Blueprint recommended that the APS Values, and, as necessary, the Code of Conduct, be revised in order to:

promote APS collegiality and unity encourage excellence in the public service clarify expectations of public service behaviour to foster public trust affirm the importance of including consideration of human rights issues in policy

making.

The Commission was given the lead role to implement this recommendation.

Ethics Advisory Service

Following its launch in May 2009, the Ethics Advisory Service (EAS) provided expert advice to APS employees and agencies through the year consistent with its client service charter. Seventy-eight per cent of queries were made by telephone and 22% by email, indicating a preference for the closer personal contact as a way of resolving problems with an ethical dimension. The number and nature of calls to the EAS in 2009–10 are reported in the Commissioner’s State of the Service Report.

Ethics contact officer network

The Commission established an ethics contact officer network in May 2009 with representatives from 99 APS agencies. Ethics contact officers support their agencies by

providing a contact point for discussion and dissemination of advice on ethical issues and through liaison with the EAS.

The network is supported by an online discussion forum developed on GovDex, the Australian Government’s secure, web-based collaborative space. Ethics contact officers use the forum to share ideas on ethics issues and maintain their link to the network. The themes for the year included disclosure of information, social media and embedding the APS Values.

Merit Protection Commissioner and ethical decision-making

The EAS published a booklet, The Merit Protection Commissioner and ethical decision-making, which draws together two presentations by the Merit Protection Commissioner on how the APS Values and Code of Conduct can be used to make ethical decisions in the APS. The resource is aimed at ethics contact officers and other employees with an interest in ethical decision-making.

Vodcasts

In response to agency demand, the EAS released two vodcasts during the year dramatising ethical dilemmas that APS employees may encounter during their careers. One vodcast deals with disclosure of information, conflict of interest and procedural fairness, while the other is about workplace behaviour and respect.

A total of five vodcasts are now available on the EAS’s website, and are used by agencies in their training programs. A sixth vodcast is being developed for release in 2010–11.

Online media participation protocols

APS agencies are increasingly embracing the opportunities that Web 2.0 technologies provide, particularly as an avenue for the Australian community to engage directly with government. However, participation of public servants in policy debates on these forums can raise issues about the role of the APS—for example, if they are invited to play a moderating role in a blog-based discussion of policy issues or options.

To help clarify agencies’ responsibilities, in November 2009 the Commission issued Circular 2009/6: Protocols for online media participation. The circular explains the broad parameters for agencies operating in this environment and includes guidelines for public servants. The development of the protocols was informed by agency trials, feedback from agencies, including through the ethics contact officer network, and discussion with the Government 2.0 Taskforce.

The Government 2.0 Taskforce endorsed the Commission’s new guidelines, including the declaration that Web 2.0 provides public servants with unprecedented opportunities to open up government decision-making and implementation to contributions from the community. The taskforce agreed that APS employees should be encouraged and empowered to engage online, consistent with the APS Values and Code of Conduct. Agencies have a responsibility to develop policies to ensure that their employees have a clear understanding of how they are expected to conduct themselves in such forums.

‘Testing APS ethics: Where’s the integrity?’

In July 2009, the then Commissioner published an article in the Australian Journal of Public Administration outlining Australia’s approach to maintaining high ethical standards in the APS. The article considers the APS’s standards of integrity by analysing the ethical framework under which the public service operates and the particular ethical issues and tensions that this involves; testing and benchmarking the ethical performance of the public service; and providing some suggestions for next steps in ethics considerations in the APS.

Disclosure of official information

In response to community debate about the disclosure of official information, particularly when dealing with non-government members of parliament, the Commission issued Circular 2009/4 in July 2009. The aim of the circular was to remind agencies of the responsibilities and rights of APS employees with regard to disclosure of official information. The then Commissioner released a media statement in August 2009 on the same issue.

Information sessions and assistance to agencies

Part of the role of the EAS is to provide advice on ethics and ethical decision-making in the APS. The EAS presented a number of information sessions to APS agencies during the year, including:

National Security Executive Development Program, Carmel McGregor, Deputy Commissioner, November 2009

The APS management framework and values-based leadership, Senior Executive Workshop, Screen Australia, Karin Fisher, Group Manager, Ethics and Karen Wilson, Group Manager, Workforce Policy, November 2009

Ethical decision making, Learning and Development Seminar Series, Australian Maritime Safety Authority, November 2009.

The Group Manager, Ethics presented at the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation Anticorruption and Transparency Workshop in Beijing in October 2009. The presentation focused on the EAS and recent ethics developments in the APS.

Improving APS Values

To support the reforms to the public service, and particularly as part of the commitment to reinvigorate strategic leadership, the Blueprint proposed that the APS Values be revised and embedded APS-wide. The objective behind the proposal is to create ‘a smaller set of core values that are meaningful, memorable and effective in driving change’.

The Commission was given lead responsibility for this recommendation.

The Blueprint proposed that the Commission:

consult broadly, including with employees and stakeholders from the government, community, private sectors and relevant unions, on revised APS Values

provide advice on necessary legislative changes to the Public Service Act 1999.

The Blueprint proposed five qualities as a starting point for the consultations:

accountable frank, impartial and non-partisan results oriented ethical merit-based employment.

Once revised APS Values are agreed, the Commission will develop strategies to promote, model and embed the new values into the work of the APS, including through:

a compulsory SES induction program to develop APS-wide values leadership other core learning and development programs a new performance framework.

In June 2010, the Commission issued a discussion paper, including on the Commission’s website and publicly, outlining possible directions for changes to the APS Values. The paper was sent to a broad range of government agencies, trade unions, peak industry groups and academic commentators.

The Commission also wanted to tap into the practical experience that APS employees have in working with the APS Values and get their perspective on how the Values could be improved, including what strategies would work best to embed them in APS agencies. It established an online consultation forum allowing APS employees to comment, and engage in discussion with their peers about what the APS Values should be, and how they can be made an even stronger part of the APS.

This material will be taken into account in developing a streamlined set of APS Values later in 2010.

Review of secrecy provisions

In 2008, the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) commenced a review of Commonwealth secrecy laws. The terms of reference asked the ALRC to inquire into and report on options for ensuring a consistent approach across government to the protection of Commonwealth information, balanced against the need to maintain an open and accountable government through providing appropriate access to information.

The Commission assisted the ALRC in its review and provided input throughout the review. The ALRC tabled the final report, Secrecy laws and open government in Australia, on 11 March 2010.

The report recommends a new and principles-based framework for striking a fair balance between the public interest in open and accountable government, and adequate protection for confidential Commonwealth information.

Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity submission and hearing

In May 2009, the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity initiated an inquiry into the operation of the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006.

The Commission made a submission to the inquiry and the Merit Protection Commissioner and the Group Manager, Ethics appeared before the committee on 14 August 2009.

Whistleblowing reports and other allegations of misconduct

In July 2009, the then Commissioner delegated her whistleblowing inquiry functions to senior staff in the Ethics Group, reserving for her personal consideration matters concerning agency heads or matters that raised serious public interest issues. This has enabled greater streamlining in the handling of whistleblowing cases. In 2009–10, the Commission responded to 96% of reports within six weeks, exceeding the target of 70%.

During 2009–10, the Commissioner received eight whistleblowing reports from APS employees and 19 complaints from non–public servants, including private citizens and former public servants. Table 5 shows actions taken by the Commissioner in response to these reports over the past three years and the source of the complaints.

Table 5: Whistleblowing reports received by the Public Service Commissioner, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Number of reports

Received 22 15 27

Finalised 20 17 23

On hand at the end of the reporting period 7 5 9

Source of report

Current APS employees 11 10 8

Former APS employees 1 1 6

Private citizens 7 2 10

Anonymous or employment status uncertain 3 2 3

In 2009–10, the complaints from public servants concerned agency recruitment processes, including allegations of patronage and cronyism; performance management decisions; and alleged misreporting of data or information by colleagues. The complaints from members of the public generally alleged that agency decision-makers had failed to comply with their legislative obligations or had not exercised their decision-making powers properly.

Twenty-three matters were finalised in 2009–10, including five matters carried over from the previous year. Table 6 shows the actions the Commissioner took in response to these cases.

Table 6: Whistleblowing matters finalised by outcome, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Action by Commissioner 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Referred to agency head for consideration 12 8 12

Investigated under whistleblowing powers 3 3 3

Code of Conduct inquiry conducted 1 2 1

No further action or referred elsewhere 4 4 7

Total 20 17 23

Eight of the finalised matters involved allegations against agency heads. In seven of these cases, the Commissioner decided that an inquiry into the allegations was not warranted. In the remaining case no breach of the Code of Conduct was found.

New whistleblowing arrangements

In 2008, the Australian Government asked the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs to inquire into and report on whistleblowing protections in the Australian Government public sector. The committee tabled its report, Whistleblower protection: A comprehensive scheme for the Commonwealth public sector, in the House of Representatives on 25 February 2009.

The government agreed fully or in part to all but four of the 25 recommendations in its response released in March 2010. The Commission contributed to the government response, which was prepared by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Clarifying the role of new agency heads

In May 2009, the Commissioner released an information paper to portfolio secretaries, Roles and responsibilities of Australian Government statutory office agency heads. Since July 2009, the paper has been provided to six new APS agency heads as part of the Commissioner’s ‘welcome letter’, which also includes a range of tailored information and publications to assist new agency heads in their role.

Merit-based selection of APS agency heads and statutory office holders

The policy and guidelines Merit and transparency: Merit-based selection of APS agency heads and APS statutory office holders was released in February 2008 and revised in February 2009.

During 2009–10, 47 positions were filled in accordance with the new policy and guidelines. The Commission provided assistance to agencies in implementing the guidelines, including finding suitable panel representatives, and supported the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner in

performing their responsibilities. The current list of positions covered by the policy (and of specific offices that are excluded) is available on the Commission’s website.

Improving the employment framework

Whole-of-government ICT strategic workforce plan 2010–2013

Flowing from the 2009 Gershon ICT Review, the Commission established a whole-of-government ICT career structure and a whole-of-government strategic ICT workforce plan. The ICT workforce plan provides a high-level overview of the issues affecting the ICT workforce and strategies to address the future human capital needs of ICT employment in the APS. Using this framework, agencies will be better able to plan for, develop and manage a qualified, satisfied and flexible ICT workforce, while providing an attractive career path for ICT professionals within the APS. See page 29 for more information.

Recruitment advertising policy and website

The Commission received funding in the 2008–09 Additional Estimates for the measure ‘recruitment advertising policy and website’. To support this measure, the Commission is conducting an evaluation of recruitment advertising to closely monitor the impact, if any, the Guidelines on Recruitment Advertising are having on the efficiency and effectiveness of agencies’ recruitment advertising.

The evaluation seeks to gain an understanding of how and where potential employees become aware of vacant positions, and to consider how efficient the various advertising sources are at providing the best candidates. Two surveys have been conducted that evaluated data from recruitment advertisements in June and July 2009 and March 2010.

A report on the first survey has been made available to agencies. A final survey will collect data from September 2010 recruitment advertisements.

Review of the SES

Mr Roger Beale AO, a distinguished former public servant, has been engaged to guide, advise on and oversee a review of the size and growth of the SES. Work is also in hand to revise the work level standards and capability expectations of the SES, assisted by a consultancy that has been awarded to Mercer LLC. Temporary caps on the number of SES have been agreed for all agencies until the SES review has been completed.

A new ICT workforce plan and career structure

On 29 April 2010, the Minister for Finance and Deregulation, the Hon Lindsay Tanner MP, and Cabinet Secretary and Special Minister of State, Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig, announced the release of a new ICT workforce plan and career structure.

In line with the Gershon Review, the new plan provides a framework for agencies’ people management processes and for the career planning of ICT professionals across the APS.

The goal of the ICT workforce plan is to develop a strategic APS-wide understanding of the relationships between demography, labour markets, skill shortages, branding, attraction and retention.

Priority actions include:

continuing to focus on workforce planning to support the identification of capacity and capability requirements for critical ICT jobs

improving the way that agencies attract and retain ICT employees, through targeted recruitment campaigns to attract key talent

building on the work underway to attract more women, Indigenous Australians and people with a disability into the ICT workforce

focusing on investing in the development of people to respond to the identified needs of agencies and the APS.

The workforce plan provides a high-level overview of the issues affecting the ICT workforce and strategies to address the future human capital needs of ICT employment in the APS.

To ensure the ICT workforce plan continues to meet the needs of agencies across the whole of government, the Commission will canvass the views of key agency and industry stakeholders as the plan and structure are implemented, evaluated and updated.

The plan and career structure are underpinned by an ICT capability framework, which is built upon an internationally recognised ICT capability model—the Skills Framework for the Information Age.

The career structure assists employees to plan their ICT careers in the APS. It is available to all APS agencies and employees in an interactive online format. The online portal—Career Navigator—contains a number of tools, including an ICT capability assessment and links to learning and development options. The structure will also assist agencies to develop consistent job profiles.

Employment Policy Adviceline

The Commission’s Employment Policy Adviceline continued to provide advice and information to APS agencies’ human resources areas and senior managers. This advice included guidance about recruitment, termination of employment and redundancy.

The Adviceline received 1,887 phone calls and emails covering 2,024 subjects in 2009–10. Some callers had inquiries that covered more than one subject area. Table 7 provides a three-year breakdown of Adviceline inquiries by main category.

Table 7: Main categories of Employment Policy Adviceline inquiries, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Inquiry categories 2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Agency head/statutory office holder selection na 19 14

Staffing matters 933 831 813

General legislative issues 135 136 134

Separations 190 218 215

Conditions/entitlements 351 398 193

Review matters 88 161 75

APS Values/Code of Conduct 265 225 102

Workplace diversity issues 29 42 31

SES matters 50 86 95

Mobility/reciprocal mobility with other jurisdictions 35 23 24

Competencies/qualifications 6 8 5

Other 402 524 323

Total 2,484 2,671 2,024

na = not applicable.

As well as providing guidance to agencies, the Commission analyses the queries to inform policy direction on employment matters.

Public servants and the workplace relations environment

The Commission continued to work with the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) on a range of issues arising out of the introduction of the Fair Work Act 2009 and its impact on the APS, including:

the implications for APS redundancy arrangements of the new Notice of Termination and Redundancy Pay element of the National Employment Standards under the Fair Work Act

reviewing the supporting guidance on the Australian Government Employment Bargaining Framework.

As part of APS bargaining arrangements, DEEWR provided the Commission with copies of draft agency enterprise agreements and collective determinations under section 24(1) of the PS Act for review against the requirements of the Bargaining Framework. In 2009–10, the Commission reviewed 127 industrial instruments (124 enterprise agreements and three section 24(1) collective determinations) to ensure that they included compulsory redeployment, reduction and retrenchment provisions and did not enhance existing redundancy provisions. One hundred and three assessments were conducted within the agreed five-day assessment period; delays in reviewing the remaining assessments were due to the complexity of the matters dealt

with in the agreements and the changes to the Bargaining Framework as a consequence of the introduction of the Fair Work Act.

Table 8 shows the number of assessments conducted by the Commission over the last three years, including the percentage that were conducted within the agreed period of five working days.

Table 8: Agreement and determination assessments, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–082008–09 2009–10

Number of instruments received 45 100 127

Number (and percentage) of reviews conducted within agreed period

40 (89%)

93 (93%)

103 (81%)

On 4 May 2010, the government agreed to the transfer of the function for Australian Government policies for agreement-making, classification structures, APS pay and employment conditions, work level standards and workplace relations advice from DEEWR to the Commission. The transfer took place on 1 July 2010.

Merit Protection and other services

The Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions are set out in section 50 of the PS Act. The Merit Protection Commissioner and the Commissioner have a memorandum of understanding for provision of staff necessary to assist the Merit Protection Commissioner in performing her statutory functions.

The Commission’s move to a new structure from 1 July 2010 involved centralisation of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions in Sydney.

A report on the performance of these functions is contained in the Merit Protection Commissioner’s annual report in Part 4.

Statistical/information services

To support a high-performing APS, the Commission collects and analyses workforce statistics. This assists the Commission in identifying significant workforce challenges for the APS, and helps agencies to develop and benchmark their workforce planning strategies. The Commission maintains the APS Employment Database (APSED), which is the central information source on trends in APS employment.

APSED is an important tool for ensuring cross-service accountability, especially for the State of the Service Report. It is also used as the sampling frame for the State of the Service employee survey and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander APS employee census.

APSED is also used for research. A particular focus in 2009–10 was APS-wide research into classification levels and the composition of the SES. This research was used as the basis for

work commenced as part of the Blueprint—for example, determining the SES cap and providing details for the SES appointments survey. A range of APS data was also provided to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development for a comparative publication.

APS Statistical Bulletin

The APS Statistical Bulletin 2008–09 provides a snapshot of APS-wide staffing as at 30 June 2009, and of staff movements during 2008–09. The bulletin also provides summary data for the past 15 years, and contains information useful to agencies in benchmarking themselves against APS-wide trends. It is distributed to all APS agency heads, state and territory public service commissioners, New Zealand’s State Services Commissioner and leading public and tertiary education libraries. It is available in hard copy and electronically on the Commission’s website.

In 2009–10, due to the large number of errors generated by agency data, an audit was initiated to look at the capture and processing procedures of the APSED team. The audit’s objectives are to identify areas where data can be processed more efficiently and recommend corrective action where necessary. The audit is expected to be completed early in the next financial year.

Enhancing APSED

Enhancements have been made to the way in which leave without pay and maternity leave data is stored on APSED. This data had been underutilised because of data quality issues and the complex way in which it was stored on APSED. The changes aim to provide better quality data as well as enable easier analysis. The enhancements are expected to be completed early in the next financial year.

Revised APSED data specifications were released in June 2008. The new specifications have seen considerable improvements in data quality from agencies. This has resulted in the generation of fewer errors as data is loaded into APSED, and fewer queries for agencies to resolve.

However, there are still some agencies that have yet to implement the revised specifications. At the end of January 2010, just under a third of agencies were still sending data based on the old specifications, which causes problems with data consistency.

Improving APSEDII

The APSED Internet Interface (APSEDII) promotes better practice in workforce planning and benchmarking by enabling users to produce data similar to that published in the APS Statistical Bulletin. APSEDII users can also produce cross-tabulation data and download the results for further manipulation. Some 108 users in 46 agencies can access more detailed information on APSEDII through a secure logon and password procedure. This level of access allows designated users to examine unit record information for employees in their agency in order to improve workforce planning and enhance data quality. In 2009–10, more than 3,500 queries were run.

Research and evaluation

The Commission’s research and evaluation activities inform its work to help the APS achieve best practice public administration and deliver more effective services to the Australian community. The Commission pursues research and evaluation activities through:

statistical assessment of APS performance comprehensive annual surveys of APS operations and employee attitudes public administration research, both Australian and international production of speeches and presentations for the Commission’s Executive.

These activities equip the Commission to assess the capacity of the APS and its employees to meet government objectives, advise on long-term future challenges for the APS and its leadership, and develop guidance and recommendations for change. The research and evaluation work also enables the Commission to learn from, and benchmark, APS performance against that of comparable overseas public sector jurisdictions.

State of the Service Report

Under section 44(2) of the PS Act, the Commissioner is required to report annually on the state of the APS. The State of the Service Report 2008–09 was tabled in parliament in November 2009. The report highlighted four new themes for the APS as a whole—building workforce capability, leading for the future, working with others to shape a stronger future, and building trust.

Survey reports

The Commission also produced two associated publications: the State of the Service Employee Survey Results 2008–09, which provided the results of the employee survey in a collated, aggregated form; and the State of the Service Report 2008–09: At a Glance pamphlet, which contained a summary of findings. All three publications are available on the Commission’s website.

Following the success of agency-specific employee survey reports in previous years, the Commission again provided these reports to heads of all agencies with at least 400 employees. These reports summarised the agencies’ own employee responses, as well as employee engagement results, and compared these with the APS-wide results. Statistically valid differences were marked appropriately. Small and medium-sized agencies were provided with a benchmark summary of all similarly sized agencies.

Data sources

In compiling the report, the Commission drew upon diverse and complementary data sources. These included the Commission’s own research and databases (particularly APSED), published and unpublished material from other agencies, Australian National Audit Office reports and, where available, comparable data from other Australian and international jurisdictions.

The Commission also conducted two surveys that contributed to the report:

The agency survey provided information on a wide range of management and capability issues in agencies with 20 or more APS employees. The Commission conducted the agency survey online and achieved a response rate of 100% from the 95 agencies in scope.

The employee survey, sent to about 9,500 randomly selected APS employees, provided data on employee attitudes to, and understanding of, a variety of issues, including work–life balance, job satisfaction, working with external stakeholders, the APS Values and Code of Conduct, diversity, individual performance management, and harassment and bullying. The 2009 survey had a high response rate, for a voluntary survey, of 66%.

State of the Service Report 2008–09: Future challenges

The 2008–09 State of the Service Report provided valuable insight into the capacity of the APS to meet the challenges facing Australia in the 21st century. This assessment provided an important evidence base for the report on APS reform (the Blueprint) released in March 2010.

The 2008–09 State of the Service Report’s findings indicated a high level of commitment by APS employees, who embraced the vision and direction of their organisation and are motivated to make a difference. It also highlighted five key challenges that needed to be addressed if the APS is to be well positioned to meet future demands. These challenges are:

improving collaboration across boundaries building leadership capability attracting and retaining appropriately skilled staff fostering employee engagement embedding the APS Values framework.

The Blueprint identified four key areas of reform designed to meet these challenges and to develop a high-performing public service that:

meets the needs of citizens provides strong leadership and strategic direction contains a highly capable workforce operates efficiently and at a consistently high standard.

Future State of the Service reports will be an important evidence source for assessing how well the APS is performing in these key areas.

Evaluation

To evaluate readers’ perceptions of the 2008–09 State of the Service Report, a short questionnaire was made available through the Commission’s website. The questionnaire asked readers for general impressions of the report, the usefulness of the chapters and any additional comments. The feedback—from 161 respondents—was generally positive. Around 90% of

respondents agreed that the report is a valuable resource and that the information is well presented and easy to understand.

Planning for next report

One of the key considerations in the development of the 2009–10 report has been to assess the capability of the APS to meet the demands of an increasingly challenging environment in order to become a world leader in public administration.

Particular focus was given in the 2010 employee survey to employee engagement, interactions with ministers and collaboration across government. The survey, which was in the field for a month, achieved a response rate of 64%. Consistent with the approach taken in 2009, agencies with at least 400 employees will be provided with a copy of their results, benchmarked against the results for the APS as a whole, in December 2010.

The agency survey also included a focus on these issues, but from an employer perspective. It examined areas such as agencies’ leave management practices, succession management strategies and other workforce planning activities. It was administered online to agencies in early June for completion by mid-July 2010.

Review of Australian Government administration

In September 2009, the then Prime Minister established an Advisory Group to review Australian Government administration and identify reforms.

The Commission contributed to the work of the Advisory Group in a number of ways:

by providing two seconded staff (one at SES level) to the secretariat taskforce to the Advisory Group; this taskforce operated within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet

supporting the Commissioner’s role as a member of the Advisory Group supporting the Deputy Commissioner’s role as a member of the Internal Reference

Group providing research and policy options papers as input to the Advisory Group’s

deliberations providing a submission to the Advisory Group which proposed a new and increased

emphasis on human capital, workforce planning and capability management in the APS and substantial change to the responsibilities of the Commission in these areas.

The Advisory Group’s March 2010 report—the Blueprint—is the product of the group’s deliberations and recommends 28 reforms to the APS (see pages 9–10 for details).

Implementation progress

The Commission is responsible as lead agency for conducting a citizen survey and agency capability reviews which will examine the full range of institutional capability to assist secretaries and agency heads to improve their organisations’ capability and performance.

Initial work involved developing project implementation arrangements, and scoping the methodology for conducting the survey and the reviews in the context of the Blueprint’s findings.

Towards a new synthesis in public administration

The Commission is partnering with the Victorian State Services Authority and the Australian and New Zealand School of Governance to represent Australia in an international research project. As part of the project, the Commission developed a case study on Australia’s new cooperative federal financial framework, focusing on outcomes for citizens. The case study was presented at an international roundtable in Canada in May 2010.

Management Advisory Committee

The Commission continued to assist the Management Advisory Committee (MAC). The committee, which was established under section 64 of the PS Act, is chaired by the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, with the Commissioner as its executive officer.

During 2009–10, a MAC project team conducted an inquiry into public sector innovation. Its final report, Empowering change: Fostering innovation in the Australian Public Service, was released on 21 May 2010. This was the ninth—and final—MAC report. Secretariat support for the inquiry was provided by the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research. The Deputy Commissioner was a member of the Project Steering Committee and State of the Service Report data was used in the project team’s analysis of workforce capability.

The MAC has been replaced by a Secretaries Board. This new leadership forum comprises portfolio secretaries and the Commissioner, and is supported by an expanded senior leaders forum—the APS 200. The Commission will take over the responsibility for secretariat support to both these forums in the coming year.

Public Service Commissioners’ Conference

The Public Service Commissioners’ Conference is held twice a year. The conference is a cross-jurisdictional forum for Commonwealth, state and territory public service commissioners and New Zealand’s State Services Commissioner. The conference provides opportunities for commissioners to discuss contemporary challenges in public administration. It also serves as a forum for exchanging information and sharing experience.

The Commission provides secretariat and research support to the conference.

Sub-program 1.2: Development programs and employment servicesSummary

Components

The sub-program consists of:

employment services international assistance and organisations leadership services program delivery national/international programs Indigenous employment promote better practice.

Objectives

The Commission’s objectives under this sub-program in 2009–10 were to:

continue to develop and offer leadership, learning and development programs that build knowledge, capabilities, skills and behaviours that departments and agencies require of their employees in the modern APS environment

continue to develop and present leadership and development programs which challenge and stretch current and future APS leaders’ thinking about approaches to leadership, cooperation and collaboration in pursuit of improved service delivery

support leadership excellence through international programs and work with the states and territories on public sector educational training needs

deliver the APS Employment and Capability Strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employees, including supporting APS agencies to increase employment and retention of Indigenous employees in the APS; build skills and capabilities of Indigenous employees; and improve the representation of Indigenous employees across agencies

build APS capability to provide more effective service and program delivery analyse and provide advice on better practice service delivery, talent management and

succession planning continue to provide a range of services to APS employees and agencies to help them

meet their legislative responsibilities.

Priorities

To achieve these objectives, the Commission’s corporate plan identified the following priorities for 2009–10:

design and deliver leading-edge programs and events to support leadership development for the SES and its feeder group and reinforce the concept of an SES leadership cadre

develop new thinking and innovative approaches to learning, professional development and qualification pathways through enhanced use of research, evaluation, links with academia and best practice

become a centre of excellence in ideas and practice for public sector leadership development, by extending our capacity and depth of expertise through strategic alliances and developing a pool of associates

support the work of the Ethics Advisory Service by building on current programs and develop products that support the government’s ethics agenda

research and develop approaches to best practice human resource management implement whole-of-government recruitment programs for Indigenous Australians and

support agencies in the development of Indigenous employees through the design and delivery of tailored and structured programs

design and deliver employment and strategic human resource–related services nationally, to assist agencies in managing their workforce needs in a collaborative and contemporary way.

Achievements

During 2009–10, the Commission:

continued to make a strong contribution to the government’s long-term policy direction for building capability in the APS, and supporting the contemporary leadership and workforce needs of the SES and feeder groups

developed a new and innovative framework for the Leadership across borders program by taking on the role of initial host country and providing participants with a significantly enhanced community experience that demonstrated health policy in practice

strengthened relationships with the tertiary sector and SES leaders through a series of alumni events for past participants of the Commision’s flagship leadership programs

undertook an in-depth external survey of participants at our key leadership programs and commissioned research into program models to build future capability in strategic policy leadership

promoted innovation in our learning delivery through successful redesign of the Executive Level Leadership Network events and the launch of new expertise products in briefing ministers, developing cabinet submissions and ICT awareness

built new strategic alliances with universities to expand our approaches to program design and delivery

as a registered training organisation, continued to deliver Graduate Certificates in Public Sector Management through the Public Sector Management Program in conjunction with Flinders University and developed several new agency-specific programs leading to certificate or diploma-level qualifications

published the SES census, which identified the SES capabilities that will be required over the next five years and the need to rethink current strategies for the long-term learning and development of the SES

conducted the Ethics hypothetical for 354 participants, the highly successful A taste of government seminar for 800 graduate entrants to the APS, the Candid reflections program for 280 participants, and the Great APS graduate debate, attended by 700 participants

established a Disability Steering Group, which shares improvements in recruitment and retention policies and practices, and redeveloped the website page on disability issues with improved information for people with disability and employers, including access to the Ability at Work suite of publications

conducted a second census of Indigenous APS employees to canvass and record their views on a range of issues, including the pathways to employment, work–life balance, job satisfaction, people management, and learning and development opportunities

assisted agencies in the redeployment of change-affected employees through the Career Transition and Support Centre, and other career advisory services

assisted agencies to conduct a variety of recruitment activities using streamlined processes which resulted in merit-based employment decisions.

Key performance indicators

Table 9 summarises sub-program 1.2 performance against its key performance indicators for 2009–10.

Table 9: Summary of sub-program 1.2 performance against key performance indicators, 2009–10

Key performance indicator2009–10

Target(%)

Actual(%)

Responding surveyed participants consider that the Commission programs have equipped them with the knowledge and skills they need in order to perform their roles more effectively

85 89

Responding surveyed participants consider that the Commission program learning objectives were met effectively 85 87

Responding surveyed participants agreed that attending Commission programs and/or events assisted in building their awareness of issues, developments and priorities to enable them to work more effectively

85 90

Responding surveyed participants agreed that attending Commission leadership development activities increased their leadership skill, capability and knowledge

85 na

Note: These are new performance indicators introduced in the 2009–10 Budget, so no trend information is available.

Program deliverables

Table 10 summarises sub-program 1.2 performance against its deliverables for 2009–10 and the previous two years.

Table 10: Summary of sub-program 1.2 performance against deliverables, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Deliverables2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Actual Actual Target Actual

Seminars and forums delivered (page 46) 144 127 125 131

Leadership programs delivered (page 46) na 51 55 55

Agencies using the capability development panel (formerly known as the leadership learning and development panel) to deliver training (page 57)

40 60 30 60

APS 1–6 and Executive Level programs delivered (pages 55–6) 2,371 801 735 603

Agencies engaged through at least one scheduled event, activity or network focused on leadership (page 46)

90% 73% 75% 78%

New SES attending orientation program (page 48) 69% 38% 80% 42%

SES and Executive level programs were rated 5 or 6 on a 6-point scale for relevance, usefulness and administration and coordination (page 46)

84% 88% 85% 88%

Panel services were rated 5 or 6 on a 6-point scale for how well the program was delivered and coordinated (page 57)

91–100% 97% 85% 94%

Accreditation services were rated 5 or 6 on a 6-point scale for delivery, administration and coordination (page 60)

nm 83–92% 85% 90%

Fee-for-service employment related services (page 43) 886 430 530 451

Better practice forums developed and offered (page 63) 81 76 75 81

Responding participants attending better practice forums, give rating of 5 or 6 on a 6-point scale for achieving objectives, program content, quality of presenters or relevance, usefulness and high quality

AchievedAchieved85% na*

* Given the nature of better practice forums, the data is no longer collected.

na = not available; nm = new measure.

Employment services

The Commission provides a range of employment services to APS employees and agencies to help them meet their legislative responsibilities.

The Commission also delivers a job seeker website (APSjobs.gov.au) and statutory services, including advising the SES on staffing matters and machinery of government changes.

SES engagements, promotions and termination of employment casework

The Commissioner has a number of responsibilities in relation to SES staffing arrangements, including endorsing selection exercises, agreeing to amounts proposed to be paid as incentives to retire under section 37 of the PS Act, and termination.

In 2009–10, 234 selection exercises were submitted for the Commissioner’s consideration, all of which were endorsed. There were 64 section 37 retirements with an incentive agreed, which is almost identical to the previous year’s total of 65 cases. These cases were spread across 30 agencies.

Before an SES employee’s employment can be terminated under one of the grounds listed in section 29(3) of the PS Act, the agency must request the Commissioner to issue a certificate under section 38 of the PS Act, certifying that the Commissioner is satisfied that the requirements of the Commissioner’s Directions have been met and the termination is in the public interest. The Commissioner issued one such certificate in 2009–10 allowing an agency head to proceed with the termination of an SES employee. A certificate issued by the former Commissioner in 2008–09 was rescinded on procedural grounds as a result of a Federal Court challenge by the SES employee.

Senior Executive Service advisory service

The Commission’s SES adviser provides SES employees across the APS with an avenue to seek advice from a senior member of the Commission about employment matters. Such discussions are generally confidential.

In 2009–10, 59 queries were raised with the SES adviser (79 in 2008–09).

In addition, all members of the Commission’s Executive provide advice to SES employees and agency heads on sensitive employment matters. SES employees can also call the EAS if they have questions about the interpretation of the APS Values or ethical decision-making.

Machinery of government changes

The Commission managed 15 machinery of government changes in 2009–10. The most significant changes included:

the establishment of the new Fair Work institutions (Fair Work Australia and the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman)

the establishment of two new APS agencies—the Australian Transport Safety Bureau and Safe Work Australia

the movement of energy efficiency and renewable energy functions from the Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts to the renamed Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency.

The Commission prepared and executed the necessary legislative instruments to give effect to these machinery of government changes to meet the timeframes set by the government and by individual agencies.

Ensuring leadership continuity

As part of managing talent at the senior levels of the SES, the Commissioner met each departmental secretary to discuss the quality of Band 3 and high-performing Band 2 employees in each portfolio.

SES Notes

SES Notes is a quarterly newsletter provided online and by email. It serves as one of the principal means of disseminating information to all members of the SES. It provides views and information from the Commission and other contributing agencies on current developments and leadership issues relevant to the SES. The content focuses on whole-of-government issues as well as other topics of relevance to the SES. The Commissioner sent out five issues of SES Notes during the year. Topics covered included:

integrity in relationships with ministers, their offices and lobbyists innovation in the public sector employment of people with disabilities the national compact with the third sector.

Career Transition and Support Centre

In May 2008 the Commission established the Career Transition and Support Centre (CTSC) to assist agencies with the redeployment of excess staff. The underpinning redeployment principles—agreed by agencies—were to retain critical skills within the APS, maintain agency performance and minimise the effects of change on excess staff.

Since its inception the CTSC reported 306 referrals from 46 participating agencies. While the number of referrals was less than anticipated, it was pleasing that many agencies had developed systems and procedures to manage change-affected staff without CTSC intervention.

Since May 2008, 129 of the 306 referrals (42%) had been redeployed through the centre. Fourteen were redeployed within their home agency and 91 accepted voluntary redundancy.

A measure of the CTSC’s success is the increased level of cooperation between agencies, and the informal arrangements that now exist between change-affected agencies and those seeking to acquire staff.

Specific funding for the CTSC expired on 30 June 2010. The Commission will continue to assist agencies with change-affected staff by providing career advice on a fee-for-service basis.

Fee-for-service employment-related matters

In 2009–10, the Commission continued to provide employment services covering a range of activities to agencies on request. These services are provided on behalf of the Commissioner and Merit Protection Commissioner. The services include activities relating to the recruitment and selection of staff. Other fee-for-service employment activity centred on career counselling, mediation and provision of best practice advice.

In total 451 (430 in 2008–09) employment-related requests were received and actioned during the financial year, using a national team of non-ongoing, part-time staff. A feature of 2009–10 has been the upsurge in requests for Commission expertise in large-scale employment and staff realignment activities.

The employment services activity has provided an insight into agency human resource management and practice, and has enabled the Commission to partner with agencies to implement faster, more streamlined approaches to APS recruitment and allied employment policy matters.

From September 2010, employment services will be managed nationally out of the Commission’s Sydney office.

APSjobs—the electronic APS Employment Gazette

The Commission’s Public Service Gazette—APSjobs—is an online employment portal for the APS. APSjobs has a user-friendly search system for job seekers and other users interested in a career in the APS. It notifies the public of all employment opportunities, recruitment outcomes and other APS employment decisions. Fifty editions of APSjobs are published each year. APSjobs is a cost-recovery activity.

In 2009–10 the number of notices lodged decreased by 8.29% compared to the number lodged in 2008–09 (see Table 11). This result is attributable in part to a change in the pattern of employment strategies, with many agencies using bulk recruitment campaigns, mobility registers and merit lists to fill vacancies.

Table 11: Comparative number of gazette notices lodged, 2006–07 to 2009–10

Number of notices lodged Percentage difference on previous year

2006–07 58,044 –

2007–08 55,418 –4.52

2008–09 41,670 –24.81

2009–10 38,214 –8.29

There was an increase in registered users to over 130,000, and interactive email alerts for job seekers were regularly sent to over 5,000 users per week. There was also an increase in use by agencies of the site’s featured recruitment campaign area to advertise opportunities.

Agency support of Fin@nceJobs increased, with a total of 36 agencies now participating in the initiative. The number of candidates registered with the campaign has reached 4,523, giving agencies a significant database of suitable finance and accounting professionals from which to fill vacancies.

The Commission is looking to re-invigorate APSjobs as the central portal for employment in the APS in 2010–11.

Career expos and trade fairs

The Commission actively promoted the APS as an employer of choice, and provided resources such as Cracking the code and the APSjobs website, at various career expos and employment trade fairs. The Commission attended the CeBIT Australia expo in Sydney in May 2010, and participated in Centrelink’s National Jobs Expos in 2009. Commission staff provided various marketing materials to promote careers in the APS to many universities across Australia and at various career fairs.

International assistance and organisations

The Commission supports the objectives of the Australian Government in building public sector capacity throughout the Asia–Pacific region—particularly in the Pacific, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia—and partners with AusAID to deliver programs that support these objectives.

The Commission also works with other whole-of-government partners, the Australia and New Zealand School of Government, and the Commission’s New Zealand government partners to assist countries in the region to build their public sector capacity.

The Commission actively engages in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Public Governance Committee and the Board of the Commonwealth Association of Public Administration and Management, as well as sharing information and knowledge on public sector reform by hosting visiting delegations.

Supporting public sector reform in the Pacific

The Commission undertook a number of activities during the year to support public sector reform in the Pacific. These included:

contributing to capacity building in 14 Pacific Island countries and assisting partner governments in their progress towards building better governance

attending the 2009 Pacific Public Service Commissioners’ Conference, and providing guidance and support to the host country and its regionally based secretariat

facilitating the Pacific Human Resource Managers Network and coordinating its fourth annual conference

providing training opportunities for 31 Pacific officials at senior and middle management levels.

Supporting public sector reform in Papua New Guinea

The Commission assists building capacity in the PNG public service as part of the Papua New Guinea – Australia Partnership for Development. The Commission’s activities are funded by AusAID.

Achievements in 2009–10 included:

simplification of the PNG public service code of conduct and the development of a draft set of values for consideration

development of a customised version of the vocational qualification Certificate IV in Training and Assessment for delivery in Papua New Guinea

delivery of the pilot Certificate IV in Training and Assessment program successfully to 29 participants at the PNG Institute of Public Administration.

Supporting public sector reform in Indonesia

Since 2006, the Commission has assisted Indonesia with civil service reform under the Government Partnership Fund administered by AusAID. Two Jakarta-based Commission staff provide regular policy and technical advice to assist Indonesian agencies in achieving long-term and sustainable reform.

Achievements in 2009–10 included:

the trialling of human resource management policy reforms, including merit-based recruitment and promotion processes, in central agencies

provision of training to support trialling and implementation of competency standards the development of a blueprint to propose reforms for the Indonesian Government’s

second phase of bureaucratic reform (2010 to 2014).

International forums and visits

In 2009–10, the Commission participated in a number of international forums, including the Singapore Human Capital Summit in September 2009. These forums provide opportunities to share information on contemporary public administration issues including governance, public sector reform and challenges for all public sectors.

The Deputy Commissioner attended the 40th and 41st OECD Public Governance Committee meetings in Paris in October 2009, where she was elected Vice Chair, and April 2010. While attending the April meeting, the Deputy Commissioner also met with senior government officials in the United Kingdom to discuss a range of issues relating to APS reform.

The Merit Protection Commissioner attended the International Business and Leadership Symposium in Brussels and visited Canada, the Netherlands and France to discuss a range of issues with senior government officials in October and November 2009.

Visits by overseas delegations

Twenty-four international delegations visited the Commission during the year to discuss issues relating to public sector reform and the Commission’s roles and responsibilities. The visitors were from Bangladesh, Canada, China, Denmark, The Gambia, Hungary, India, Iraq, Japan, Kenya, Korea, Lao, Nepal, the Netherlands, South Africa, Thailand, Timor-Leste and Vietnam.

Leadership services

Throughout 2009–10, the Commission continued to make a strong contribution to the government’s long-term policy direction for building capability in the APS, and supporting the contemporary leadership and workforce needs of the SES and feeder groups in a challenging policy environment. Strategies included training, briefings and support in qualification attainment.

The Blueprint recommends that the Commission establish and operate a Leadership Development Centre overseen by an Advisory Board. It proposed that the Commission would develop an annual learning and development strategy, in consultation with the board based on the Human Capital Plan across four broad elements of learning and development. In response, the Commission has established the Strategic Centre for Leadership and Development. This centre has a remit to address these recommendations of the Blueprint and also to promote and in some instances practice talent management across the APS. To promote a strong alignment between this work and the strategic human capital priorities of the APS (as understood by the Secretaries Board) an Advisory Board has been established comprising the Commissioner, four members of the Secretaries Board (Dr Jeff Harmer AO, Ms Robyn Kruk AM, Mr Finn Pratt PSM and Dr Ian Watt AO) and two members drawn from the commercial sector (Mr Chris Blake of Australia Post and Ms Ann Sherry AO of Carnivale Australia).

Senior Executive Service programs and forums

The Commission delivers a number of residential and non-residential leadership programs for SES Band 1 to 3 officers that address a range of development needs. The programs held in 2009–10 are summarised in Table 12.

Table 12: Senior Executive Service programs and forums, 2009–10

Program title Content/focusNo

.Attendanc

e

Leadership mastery

This program tests the ability of current SES Band 3 officers to engage with peers and eminent practitioners about key issues facing them as leaders and forge collaborative and effective relationships to achieve results in complex situations

1 16

Leading across boundaries

This program strengthens the development of ‘whole-of-government’ leadership capabilities for SES Band 2 officers

2 38

New leadership horizons

This program assists SES Band 1 officers who have been appointed in the past three years to gain confidence in their new roles and leverage their experience to make a significant contribution to their organisation and across the APS

3 43

Transforming leadership

This program is designed for SES officers with three or more years’ experience at Band 1 level and aims to enhance leadership capability by helping participants to identify, share and leverage their considerable experience in the APS

3 42

SES breakfast seminar series

These seminars provide a forum for participants to interact with speakers and colleagues on contemporary issues that often lie outside their areas of direct responsibility and to discuss matters that span major areas of public debate

5 278

SES update forum

These forums provide an opportunity for SES officers to keep up-to-date with major changes that affect the APS and the environment it operates in

2 70

SES Band 3 forum

This forum offers the opportunity for peers to come together from different agency contexts to explore and further their understanding of issues that affect the APS

2 54

Participants on these courses are surveyed as part of a continuous improvement approach to the Commission’s leadership programs. In 2009–10, 90% of those responding agreed that attending Commission programs and events assisted in building their awareness of issues, developments and priorities to enable them to work more effectively.

Evaluation is routinely undertaken at all stages of the program design, development and delivery process. In addition, in 2009–10, the Commission engaged an independent research body to conduct a comprehensive survey of participants’ views on the Commission’s suite of SES leadership residential programs. The evaluation process included a survey of almost 50% of 2008–09 residential program participants. The evaluation report indicated that the SES residential programs were meeting the needs of participants. The evaluation report made a

number of recommendations to improve the programs and these are under consideration, together with a more comprehensive analysis of the Commission’s current suite of programs that has been commissioned.

In response to feedback from agencies, extensive research into the development of strategic policy leadership was conducted by external consultants in 2009. This research will be used to develop initiatives to build agency capability in the strategic policy development area into the future.

SES orientation

In 2009–10, the Commission offered two SES orientation programs—one focused on SES promoted within the APS and the other tailored specifically for lateral recruits to the SES. Both programs provide senior executives with information and networking opportunities to help them operate effectively in the APS environment. Topics covered include accountability, governance and the relationship between ministers and the APS. The program for lateral recruits to the SES also addresses the different needs of this group by exploring the complexity of the APS operating environment, interactions and the regulatory and legislative imperatives.

During 2009–10, the Commission delivered 11 SES orientations to 167 senior executives. Two SES orientations for lateral recruits were delivered to 16 senior executives.

While the percentage of new SES attending these programs continues to be less than optimal (42%), there are a number of reasons for this, including busy work schedules, previous experience in the SES and in the APS, and comprehensive induction at the agency level. However, more needs to be done to increase attendance at these programs to support the aspiration of a unified SES.

Connections: insights from the front line

In October 2009 the Commission developed the Connections program to facilitate short workplace visits by SES Band 3 leaders to front-line service delivery agencies. The program provides participants with the opportunity to gain an enhanced understanding of citizens’ experiences and needs when accessing government services and support and the challenges of implementing policy and regulations.

Participants are sponsored by their agency and itineraries are individually tailored by host agencies. In 2009–10 participants visited agency state offices, major international airports, service delivery shopfronts, detention centres and rural and Indigenous communities.

Both Connections participants and the host agencies have strongly indicated the program is highly successful and is valued by all stakeholders involved. Host agencies have benefited from discussions with senior policy leaders, and senior policy leaders have shared their observations and reflections and explored options around continuous improvement with both operational managers and policy employees upon their return to their policy agency.

Broader leadership activities

Expertise development programs

The Commission offers programs to assist the SES and feeder groups to develop their knowledge and skills in specific areas. These programs assist participants to embrace new roles, responsibilities and professional challenges. Two new programs, Briefing ministers and Developing cabinet submissions, were offered to build the capability of senior public servants to effectively support the needs of ministers and the government.

The programs held during the year are summarised in Table 13.

Table 13: Expertise development programs, 2009–10

Program title Content/focusNo

.Attendanc

e

Briefing ministers This program involves participants in real-life briefing scenarios that simulate the high-pressure and high-stakes nature of ministerial briefing

5 67

Developing cabinet submissions

Aimed at SES and EL 2s, this program provides insight and techniques to prepare cabinet submissions that clearly advocate, articulate and meet the government’s goals

8 103

Learn to be an effective coach

This practical workshop seeks to enhance the communication, coaching and mentoring skills of senior leaders in the APS

2 23

Mastering your financial environment

This program is aimed at SES who are new to the public service or who need to refresh their knowledge in the area of financial compliance

3 51

Preparing to appear before parliamentary committees

This program focuses on building confidence, public presentation skills and personal communication skills to support executives who may appear at Senate Estimates hearings

11 60

Leader to leader series

The Leader to leader series enables the heads of public sector agencies and their equivalents to present and share their views on APS-wide challenges and the need to address emerging policy and reform agendas. Seven Leader to leader events attracted 604 people during the year. Speakers and topics were:

Chris Richardson, Director of Access Economics, ‘The global financial crisis—An alternative view’

Kerry Schott, Managing Director of Sydney Water, ‘Infrastructure provision in good and bad economic times’

John Hinshaw, Chief Information Officer and Vice President, Information Technology, The Boeing Company, ‘Leveraging IT to drive productivity and innovation’

Roel Bekker, Former Secretary General of Government Reform in the Netherlands, ‘Reforming public service in Europe: An OECD study’

Jonty Olliff-Cooper, Senior Researcher and head of the Progressive Conservatism Project, Demos, UK, ‘Why the public sector must reform’

Ann Sherry AO, CEO of Carnival Australia, ‘Future proofing: The case for strategic human capital planning’

Thérèse Rein and the Hon Bill Shorten MP, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services, ‘Inspire, include, recruit—The business of ability’.

New directions: Ministers’ views

The New directions: Ministers’ views series provides the opportunity for agency heads and feeder groups to hear directly from ministers on policy perspectives and expectations about policy implementation in a whole-of-government context.

Two events were held in 2009–10 with a total of 206 people attending:

Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig, Cabinet Secretary and Special Minister of State, ‘Setting the agenda on accountability and integrity’

Senator the Hon Nick Sherry, Assistant Treasurer, ‘Advice to Ministers: Sources, content and value’.

Ethics hypothetical

On 25 March 2010, 354 people attended a special event to promote the ethics agenda in the APS.

The event was conducted as a panel discussion of ethical challenges for the public service and public servants on the theme ‘The practice and ethics of disaster response’. It was based around a hypothetical scenario that addressed the organisational and personal challenges of policy development and implementation. The hypothetical was facilitated by leading educator and broadcaster Mr Peter Thompson.

Executive Level Leadership Network

The Executive Level Leadership Network (formerly the Leadership Development Network) consists of an annual forum and breakfasts for Executive Level staff. The network provides opportunities for information sharing and developing strong communities of interest. The Commission coordinates and currently chairs the network.

Speakers and topics in 2009–10 included:

Ms Amanda Horne, Executive Coach and Founding Member, Positive Workplace International, ‘Green shoots leading—Positive psychology in the workplace’ (130 participants)

Mr Phil Minns, Deputy Secretary, Department of Defence, ‘Building a positive employment culture in large and diverse organisations’ (98 participants)

Mr James Adonis, Managing Director, Team Leaders, ‘Generation why: Managing diversity in the workplace’ (127 participants)

Mr Carl Murphy, Assistant Secretary, People Management Branch and Ms Leanne Elliott, Assistant Director, Leadership Development, People Management Branch, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts, ‘Innovations in leadership development’ (86 participants).

The network’s annual forum was held in June 2010 and attracted 178 people. The topic for the 2010 forum was ‘The APS Reform Blueprint—Working together to get ahead of the game’.

Career Development Assessment Centre

The Career Development Assessment Centre assesses the leadership capability and development priorities of high-performing Executive Level 2 staff from across the APS. This is one of the Commission’s key strategies for strengthening the SES feeder group.

There were 12 sessions run during the year, with 141 participants attending from 48 agencies.

Regional events

The Commission’s area offices maintain a strong facilitation role in promoting effective leadership with senior staff in the regions through various groups and activities. This work is primarily done through engagement with the Australian Government Leadership Network in each state, which are supported by the Commission.

The purpose of these networks is to support senior leaders of the APS by providing a forum for:

leadership development exchange of innovative thinking, ideas, knowledge and experiences peer support and collegiality facilitation of whole-of-government approaches to public sector activities member contributions to the development of local and strategic public sector initiatives reducing the impact of geographical isolation from national offices.

Events include monthly forums and annual conferences that address these themes.

Speakers at the 2009–10 annual conferences brought a wealth of knowledge and experience of contemporary issues facing the public service which they shared with conference participants. Speakers included:

Mr Terry Moran AO, Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Senator the Hon Joe Ludwig Professor John Wanna, Sir John Bunting Chair of Public Administration, Australian

National University Ms Olya Booyar, General Manager, Content, Citizen and Consumer Division, Australian

Communications and Media Authority Mr Andrew Podger, National President, Institute of Public Administration Australia Ms Karen Curtis, Privacy Commissioner Professor Peter Shergold AC, Macquarie Group Foundation Professor, Centre for Social

Impact, University of New South Wales.

In addition, the Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and other senior Commission staff delivered briefings on the 2008–09 State of the Service Report in regional areas. In conjunction with these briefings, meetings were also held with senior staff in the regions, providing an opportunity for discussion of the government’s agenda and public sector reform.

Other regional events during the year included:

delivery of Better practice series workshops relating to areas of recruitment, workforce planning and attendance

International Women’s Day celebrations presentations by the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet

and the Public Service Commissioner on the Blueprint, which were held in nine regional locations in May and June 2010.

Special event— 25th anniversary of the SES

On 26 November 2009, the Commission held an event to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the creation of the SES. This event celebrated an important moment in the history of the APS, reflected on 25 years of leadership and marked achievements, and looked forward to the challenges ahead. The event was attended by 330 SES.

Mr Terry Moran AO, Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and Mr Michael Keating AC, former Secretary, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (1991–96), were guest speakers.

Mr Moran launched two publications on behalf of the Commission:

a factual account of the origins of the SES, from Federation to the present the findings of a survey of the current SES in which they were asked to scan the horizon

and comment on the medium-term future of the APS, taking a five-year timeframe.

In launching the publications Mr Moran noted that the creation of the SES had been critical to Australia’s success story. It had helped to produce a flexible and adaptable class of apolitical and professional public servants who serve and are responsive to the government of the day. These attributes remain critical in today’s rapidly changing devolved environment which

demands organisational agility and responsiveness and a flexible approach to public administration.

The Acting Public Service Commissioner, Ms Carmel McGregor, also noted that APS leaders will face greater economic uncertainty, higher citizen expectations, increasing policy complexity, more rapid technological change and a tighter labour market. These challenges will require the SES leadership group to develop new capabilities and lead their staff in new ways of working—cross-agency, cross-jurisdictional and cross-sector.

Integrated Leadership System

The Integrated Leadership System describes the leadership capabilities and behaviours expected of employees at all APS levels. It underpins all of the Commission’s development programs and contains a range of specific tools to help agencies and individuals implement it in their workplaces.

The Commission provided information sessions and presentations on the system to a variety of forums during 2009–10. In particular, 16 training and familiarisation sessions were delivered to staff at all levels in a range of agencies, including IP Australia, the Department of Defence and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship.

Program delivery

During 2009–10, the Commission continued to work in partnership with APS agencies to build capability by strengthening the knowledge, skills and experience of non-SES employees. Approaches taken included the delivery of a suite of core technical skill and leadership programs, offered through public calendars and tailored in-house delivery.

Induction and graduate programs

APS induction

The APS induction program equips employees with a broad understanding of the APS relationship with the Australian Government, the parliament and the public. The program aims to provide them with the wider contextual knowledge they need to be effective public servants. The APS induction e-learning modules are accessible either directly from the Commission’s website or by downloading to an intranet site or learning management system. The Commission also offers APS induction as a facilitated half-day training program.

Graduate development

Development of graduates remained an important focus for the Commission during the year. The annual A taste of government seminar and Candid reflections from inspiring APS leaders program, complemented by the APS 1–6 development programs, were once again popular with graduate recruits. Agencies continue to view these events and programs as an important element of a well-rounded graduate year in the APS.

This year’s A taste of government seminar attracted increased interest, with a record number of 800 graduates attending. The Cabinet Secretary and Special Minister of State, the Hon Joe Ludwig; the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Mr Terry Moran AO; and the Commissioner presented the seminar.

The 2010 Great APS graduate debate involved two teams of selected APS graduates debating the topic ‘Citizen-centred service delivery is a cinnamon doughnut: a hole lot of nothing’. An expert panel including Ms Felicity Hand, Deputy Secretary, Department of Immigration and Citizenship; Mr Blair Comley, Deputy Secretary, Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency; and Mr Andrew Tongue, Deputy Secretary, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs adjudicated, resulting in a highly entertaining and energised debate, with the team for the negative being declared the winning side.

Following the success of the Small Agencies Graduate Development Program in 2009, the Commission launched a whole-of-government program in 2010. One hundred and nineteen graduates from 11 agencies are participating in the program. The 11-month program includes 23 face-to-face training days, a major project, ongoing assessment, an individual coaching session, and application of psychometric tools. The program culminates in a formal project presentation and an awards ceremony, where the graduates are presented with their Diploma of Government.

Programs and activities for non-SES employees

APS 1–6 programs

The Commission provides a comprehensive and coordinated suite of leadership, learning and development programs, events and services for APS 1–6 employees. These programs support APS employees in developing the capability to deliver on government priorities, objectives and outcomes.

In 2009–10, the most popular public calendar programs were:

Essential writing for APS 1–4 levels Essential writing for APS 5–6 levels Strategic thinking Policy formulation and advice: Introduction APS job applications and interview skills: Applying for jobs up to the APS 6 level Minute taking skills.

The Commission delivered 168 programs in Canberra, which attracted 2,746 participants.

Executive Level programs

The Commission provides Executive Level employees with learning and development programs that build core APS knowledge and capabilities and address development needs relevant to the SES feeder group. Program areas include people management, leadership and financial management, communication, stakeholder engagement, strategic thinking, policy development, self-development, and governance and regulation.

In 2009–10, the Commission delivered 93 Executive Level programs in Canberra, which attracted 1,577 participants.

The most popular programs were:

Shaping strategic thought EL 1 transition Essential writing for Executives.

The Commission also provides a number of residential and non-residential programs for Executive Level employees. Table 14 summarises the programs offered in 2009–10.

Table 14: Executive Level residential and non-residential programs, 2009–10

Program title Content/focusNo

.Attendanc

e

Executive leadership dimensions

This program focuses on practical aspects of leadership in the APS and provides an opportunity for participants to reflect on their professional role and the contemporary behaviours needed to be a highly effective EL 2 leader

6 117

APS professional practical leadership

This program has been designed for EL 1s who currently manage or will soon manage a small to medium-sized team. The program has a focus on contemporary thinking about how to manage performance in a public sector environment

4 90

The professional public service: An EL 1 master class

This program has been designed for EL 1s who wish to fine tune and advance their strategic thinking and policy advising skills in the context of a contemporary APS

4 85

In-house program delivery

In addition to public calendar programs, the Commission offers in-house delivery of core programs to meet the particular needs of agencies in a flexible and cost-effective manner. These are usually delivered to an agency in its own training or meeting rooms.

The programs can be tailored to address agency-specific challenges and procedures. Facilitators delivered 272 core programs around Australia in 2009–10 (99 in the ACT and 173 in regional areas). The two most popular programs in 2009–10 related to APS job applications and interview skills and the APS Values and Code of Conduct.

Table 15 provides a summary of programs and activities for non-SES employees in 2008–09 and 2009–10.

Table 15: Summary of programs and activities for non-SES employees, 2008–09 and 2009–10

Program 2008–09 2009–10

ACT APS 1–6 162 168

Focus on people 10 1

ACT Executive Level 102 93

Executive Level 1 residential 1 4

Executive Level 1 non-residential 2 4

Executive Level 2 residential 4 4

Executive Level 2 non-residential 3 2

ACT in-house deliveries 126 99

Regional programs calendar and in-house deliveries 382 243

Panel services

The Commission’s capability development panel currently includes more than 220 leading corporate management consultancy firms with public and private sector expertise. The Commission, through the panel, customises programs and services to meet specific needs of agencies.

The key benefit for agencies that access the Commission’s panels is a reduction in cost and greater efficiency in procuring services. The panels satisfy the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines and therefore obviate the need for agencies to undertake time-consuming and costly tender processes. Agencies also have the confidence that the consultancy firms on the panels have been rigorously assessed against their key areas of expertise and are subject to ongoing quality assurance through regular evaluations. Table 16 provides details of panel service programs delivered from 2007–08 to 2009–10.

To complement new methods of program development and delivery, the Commission also has an e-learning support and solutions panel. This panel is made up of 22 specialist e-learning firms.

Table 16: Panel service programs presented, 2007–08 to 2009–10

ProgramNo. of programs presented

2007–08 2008–09 2009–10

Writing skills 122 181 147

Leadership/management skills 220 162 150

Procurement and contract management60 72 54

Project management 45 63 78

Coaching services 71 96 64

Policy 135 51 20

E-learning services 0 25 25

Other consultancy services 756 554 560

Total 1,491 1,204 1,098

National and international programs

The Commission continued to support leadership excellence through the development, delivery and coordination of international and national programs for staff at all levels in the APS. Accredited learning programs leading to nationally recognised qualifications were accessible by all APS employees, and a range of study tours were available for senior executive members.

International programs

Leading Australia’s future in Asia

The Leading Australia’s future in Asia (LAFIA) program brings together senior executives from the Australian, state and territory public services to increase their understanding of significant drivers of change in the region. The study programs include meetings with government officials and business and community leaders. LAFIA aims to:

provide background and context for the international dimension of senior executive responsibilities

enable senior executives to respond strategically to changes in the Asia–Pacific region develop networks and contacts among Australian participants and with their overseas

equivalents.

The Crawford School of Economics and Government at the Australian National University provides the academic content for the program.

In 2009–10 the Commission led two LAFIA programs—one to the Pacific and one to Asia. Thirteen senior leaders undertook a two-week study tour of Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Vanuatu. Ten senior leaders undertook a three-week study tour of China and South Korea.

Leadership across borders—A four country program

The Leadership across borders—A four country program is an international leadership initiative designed for senior public leaders working within a Westminster system.

The program aims to challenge and shape a new generation of public service leaders. In particular, the program enables participants to:

enhance their leadership skills in dealing with complex public service issues that cross jurisdictions

acquire fresh ideas and new ways of thinking about common public service challenges in order to deliver results

compare best practices among the four countries in dealing with the modern public service environment

develop strong networks of senior public service leaders across four countries.

The Commission (also representing New Zealand), the Canada School of Public Service and the United Kingdom National School of Government have collaborated to create this program. With week-long modules in each of the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada, the program creates a unique network of high-potential senior leaders covering both hemispheres.

The inaugural program was held in February 2008. The 2009 program attracted 12 Australian, two New Zealand, 13 Canadian and 13 United Kingdom SES Band 2 (or equivalent) participants. The 2010 program attracted 13 Australian, 14 Canadian, 11 United Kingdom and two New Zealand SES Band 2 (or equivalent) participants.

National programs

Australia and New Zealand School of Government

The Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG) is a first-tier professional school established collaboratively in 2002 by a consortium of Australian and New Zealand governments, universities and business schools to assist in developing the skills of future public sector leaders.

The Australian Government is a foundation member of ANZSOG. Dr Ian Watt, Secretary of the Department of Defence, became the government’s representative on the ANZSOG board in July 2008. Dr Ken Henry, Secretary to the Treasury, continues as chair of the ANZSOG Research Committee.

Since 2003, the Commission, in consultation with other agencies, has supported ANZSOG to ensure it meets APS needs by providing high-quality, high-profile programs that represent value for money. Each year, the Australian Government selects leaders and potential leaders to participate in ANZSOG’s annual flagship teaching programs:

the 2009 Executive Fellows Program, a three-week residential for SES Band 2 and Band 3 officers, attracted 74 participants from Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Malaysia, of whom 13 (18%) were from the APS

the 2010 Executive Masters of Public Administration, a two-year part-time program for high-performing Executive Level 2 officers and equivalents, attracted 128 students, of whom 27 (21%) were APS employees.

Public Sector Management Program

The Public Sector Management Program instills in mid-level managers (APS 6 to EL 2 and their equivalents) an understanding of what it means to work collaboratively across the three tiers of government. The program helps participants to develop a greater understanding of the public sector operating environment. It also explores the broad context of the three tiers of government and the political and legal institutions and structures that authorise their activities. The program provides an opportunity for participants to establish networks across agencies.

In 2009–10, the Commission continued to coordinate Commonwealth, state and territory governments’ participation by providing secretariat services to a board of management that oversees the strategic direction of the program.

The Commission also delivers the program in the Australian Capital Territory. Seventy-seven participants from the Commonwealth and ACT governments enrolled in the Public Sector Management Program during 2009–10, 17 more than forecast.

Registered training organisation status

The Commission began operating as a registered training organisation from 1 July 2008. As a registered training organisation, the Commission offers accreditation services in the qualifications of:

Certificate IV in Government Certificate IV in Government (Injury Rehabilitation Management) Certificate IV in Training and Assessment Diploma of Government Diploma of Government (Management) Diploma of Government (Contract Management).

There are currently 284 APS employees undertaking qualifications through the Commission, and 221 employees completed qualifications in 2009–10.

The Commission worked closely with several agencies during the year to tailor and adapt qualifications and assessment options to meet agency-specific needs. For example, the Commission worked with the Department of Human Services to provide a Diploma of Government (Management) qualification pathway to 120 team leaders in the Child Support Program.

The Commission also commenced providing a Diploma of Government qualification to 16 New South Wales–based staff from various agencies under the NSW Department of Education and Training Productivity Places Program.

Indigenous employment

Increasing Indigenous representation in employment and reducing the overall level of disadvantage among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are essential elements of the Australian Government’s agenda. The National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation aims to increase levels of Indigenous employment and help Indigenous Australians participate in the broader economy in order to ‘close the gap’ between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

The agreement provides for a review of public sector Indigenous employment and career development strategies to increase Indigenous employment across all classifications to reflect a national Indigenous working-age population share of at least 2.6% by 2015. The Australian Government has committed to a target of 2.7% for the public sector workforce.

In the 2009–10 Budget, the APS Employment and Capability Strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employees (the Strategy) was allocated funding of $6 million over three years for the continuation of the Strategy to 30 June 2012. The Strategy aims to deliver increased employment and retention of Indigenous employees in the APS; build the skills and capabilities of Indigenous employees; and improve the representation of Indigenous employees across agencies.

Target for Indigenous representation

The Commission continued to collaborate with DEEWR to help agencies enhance their existing recruitment strategies and develop alternative techniques to increase engagements and improve retention of Indigenous people.

During 2009–10, the Commission:

provided advice on a range of issues, including existing practices and forums appropriate to the distribution of information to APS agencies about the implementation of the target for Indigenous representation

worked with DEEWR to analyse agencies’ submissions regarding their plans for increasing Indigenous representation in their workforces.

Review of the Strategy

The Commission continued to promote the initiatives under the Strategy to other APS agencies and supported them to develop agency-specific Indigenous employment strategies that will meet their business needs.

Since its implementation, the Strategy has succeeded in stabilising Indigenous representation in the APS, which was at 2.1% at 30 June 2009. During 2009–10, the Commission refocused the objectives of the Strategy to:

attract more Indigenous Australians to the APS and facilitate pathways to their employment through the Commission’s centralised recruitment programs

provide current Indigenous employees with opportunities for skills and career development across APS agencies, including staff in regional and remote areas

assist agencies to create and maintain supportive and culturally respectful workplaces to ensure Indigenous employees’ positive experience in the APS and improve retention rates

support employers to enhance their own skills and those of their agency in working with and sustaining Indigenous staff.

The Commission’s publication Building an Indigenous employment strategy—A starter kit for APS agencies continues to be a cornerstone for this element of the Commission’s work.

Indigenous APS employees’ census

The Commission conducted a second census of Indigenous APS employees in October–November 2009 to canvass and record the views of Indigenous APS employees on a range of issues, including the pathways to employment, work–life balance, job satisfaction, people management, and learning and development opportunities. The 2009 census report is available on the Commission’s website.

The findings were compared with the results from the 2005 census, as well as with those from the State of the Service Report 2008–09. The Commission is working with agencies to develop robust strategies in response to the key findings. This will assist agency contributions to achieving the target for Indigenous representation and the government’s ‘closing the gap’ agenda, particularly in terms of workforce planning and career development strategies.

Pathways into APS employment

In 2009–10, the Commission worked in partnership with around 50 agencies to provide targeted recruitment programs under the pathways to employment program, which includes opportunities for Indigenous graduates, cadets and trainees. This approach provides cost-effective avenues for agencies to attract and recruit from a wider pool of applicants. A comprehensive marketing campaign, involving increased engagement with universities, schools and other key stakeholders such as Job Services Australia providers, has resulted in an increased number of applications for the 2011 intakes. In 2009–10:

32 graduates were employed in 17 agencies 45 cadets were employed in 16 agencies.

Supporting Indigenous employees

The Commission continued to provide support to Indigenous employees through a range of development and networking opportunities:

the Indigenous career trek program delivers learning and development opportunities to support career development and advancement for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employees at all levels in the APS. In 2009–10, 458 Indigenous employees participated in this program

Indigenous APS Employees Networks (IAPSENs) are run by Indigenous employees for Indigenous employees, with membership spanning a wide range of classification levels across Australia. In 2009–10, the Commission supported two meetings of IAPSEN chairs to discuss common issues to ensure the continued success of IAPSENs

the third National Indigenous Employees Conference is being organised for late 2010. The conference provides a forum for APS-wide issues to be discussed and workshopped among Indigenous employees

the APS Indigenous Alumni Network provides opportunities for new and previous graduates, cadets and trainees to share their knowledge, insights and experiences.

Supporting employers

Working collaboratively and providing support for agencies continues to be a priority under the Strategy. In 2009–10, the Commission partnered with over 70 agencies to develop programs and strategies to assist with recruitment, training and retention of Indigenous staff. Two key elements of that support are the Commission’s Indigenous Liaison Officer and the Indigenous Employment HR Coordinators Forum.

Indigenous Liaison Officer

The Commission’s Indigenous Liaison Officer contacted every agency identified in the 2008–09 State of the Service Report as not having an Indigenous employment strategy to provide advice and support on developing agency-specific Indigenous employment strategies.

Indigenous Employment HR Coordinators Forum

This forum brings together human resource practitioners who have responsibility for Indigenous employment strategies for their agency. Meetings are held quarterly. The key role of the forum is to provide opportunities for agencies to share information on Indigenous employment strategies and initiatives and help members increase their skills in and knowledge and understanding of APS Indigenous employment issues.

Promote better practice

The Commission continued to support agencies to improve strategic people management practices and overall organisational capability, providing better practice advice and information on key challenges facing the APS.

Workplace diversity—employment of people with disability

The Commission continued to promote and provide best practice advice to agencies regarding the recruitment and retention of people with disability. In its annual State of the Service Report, the Commission continues to monitor and report on agencies’ implementation of the objectives of Management Advisory Committee Report No. 6, Employment of people with disability in the APS.

The Commission established a Disability Steering Group for human resource practitioners across the APS, which develops and shares improvements in recruitment and retention policies and practices for application by agencies. The Commission’s website page on disability issues has also been redeveloped with improved information for people with disability, employers and disability employment service providers, including access to the Ability at Work suite of publications.

A virtual APS Disability Network has been created online for use by APS staff using GovDex tools provided by the Department of Finance and Deregulation. This allows documents such as agency disability plans to be centrally located. It takes advantage of existing and user-generated content to share, create and promote successful practices and experiences in a protected and secure online environment.

The Commission also organised events promoting the employment of people with disability in the APS. On 17 May 2010, Ms Thérèse Rein and the Hon Bill Shorten MP, Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services, spoke at an event targeted to APS senior executives about focusing on the capabilities, skills and talents that people with disability can bring to the APS, and the need for the APS to take a leadership role in this area.

Supporting forums and networks

Heads of Corporate Forum

The Heads of Corporate Forum combines the Commission’s previous Corporate Management Forum and DEEWR’s Heads of Corporate Meeting. Membership in the forum is open to SES-level heads of corporate (or their equivalent) in APS departments and agencies. The role of the forum is to provide frank exchange between APS heads of corporate at the SES level, by encouraging the open flow of ideas, identifying significant issues for discussion and providing opportunities for members to further develop peer relationships. The forum met three times during 2009–10.

HR Directors Forum

The HR Directors Forum is open to human resources directors and managers in APS departments and agencies. The role of the forum is to provide an opportunity for human resource professionals to meet colleagues from other departments and discuss whole-of-government issues at the executive level. The forum met four times during the year.

Part 3 Management and accountabilityThis part provides an overview of the Commission’s approach to corporate governance and the management of its resources.

AchievementsThe Commission’s activities continued to be delivered against the background of a tight budgetary climate, pressures on the Commission’s fee-for-service activities and ongoing organisational change directed towards improved efficiency and effectiveness and better service delivery.

In 2009–10, the Commission:

completed negotiations to establish a new enterprise agreement, which commenced on 2 October 2009 and expires on 30 June 2011, delivering modest salary increases to staff

introduced revised work level standards for APS and Executive Level classifications bedded down a major ICT infrastructure transition to leverage DEEWR’s well-established

ICT infrastructure completed the redevelopment of the intranet to take advantage of improved knowledge

management capabilities revised its fraud control plan, records management plan, business continuity plan,

environmental management plan and sponsorship policy implemented an e-recruitment system which enables potential employees to apply for

advertised positions at the Commission through a streamlined process via the web.

Corporate governance frameworkThe Commission’s outcome and anticipated use of resources are set out in its Portfolio Budget Statements and corporate plan. Actions to achieve the Commission’s outcome are detailed in group business plans and individual performance agreements, which provide the framework for staff compliance and accountability.

Enabling strategies

The Commission’s Corporate Plan 2009–10 identified priorities for the Commission’s enabling strategies to:

develop and implement workforce planning strategies that position the Commission to be agile and responsive

build leadership capability, including by broadening individual roles and active talent management

build an integrated client and communications unit to develop strong client engagement strategies, systems and feedback loops

work actively with agencies, including building communities of interest, to influence and provide services that meet their business and operational needs.

The Commission’s corporate governance framework brings together all the components necessary to manage and monitor the achievement of the Commission’s outcome.

The Commission’s corporate governance framework is described in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Corporate governance framework, 2009–10

Corporate committees

The Executive establishes the directions and work program of the Commission and directs the agenda for the Commission Management Committee. The Executive approves business plans and budgets and determines senior staffing matters. It meets regularly as a group on a needs basis.

Five advisory committees support the Executive in its management and accountability role.

Commission Management Committee

The Commission Management Committee is chaired by the Commissioner and comprises the Executive, Group Managers, and the Principal Adviser Review and Legal. The committee meets weekly and is the forum for scoping strategic challenges and direction and for providing information updates about Commission activities.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee is established in accordance with the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and its responsibilities are detailed in the Audit Charter. The committee met five times in 2009–10.

In accordance with the Audit Charter, the committee reviewed the charter in 2010 and agreed to a number of minor changes.

Information Technology Advisory Committee

The Information Technology Advisory Committee is responsible for guiding and managing the Commission’s information services and oversees the development and implementation of the Commission’s information and communication technology strategy. The committee meets on a bi-monthly basis.

Workplace Relations Committee

The Workplace Relations Committee is responsible for advising the Commissioner on the implementation and development of the Commission’s enterprise agreement. The committee met three times in 2009–10.

Occupational Health and Safety Committee

The Occupational Health and Safety Committee is responsible for advising the Commissioner on the administration of the Commission’s occupational health and safety policies and practices. The committee met four times in 2009–10.

Other governance arrangements

Following the government’s agreement to the Blueprint recommendations, the Commission set up a Project Management Office and an Internal Change Management Team to support its new work agenda and the development and implementation of a new structure.

Project Management Office

The Project Management Office was formed to help develop a more disciplined project management regime in the Commission to support its significant new work agenda in implementing the recommendations from the Blueprint. A Project Management Steering Committee oversees implementation of the Commission’s reform projects.

Internal Change Management Team

The Internal Change Management Team was set up to manage the significant internal change process within the Commission and the transition to a new organisational structure. As part of its communication strategy, the team established a change management forum on the

Commission’s intranet to keep staff informed of developments, seek comments from staff and respond to any questions that arose.

Risk management framework

The Commission’s risk management framework is reviewed each year and consists of:

a risk management statement from the Commissioner, which is published on the Commission’s external website

a risk management policy a risk assessment handbook.

The Commission continued to participate in Comcover’s annual risk management benchmarking survey. In 2009–10, the Commission again received an overall rating higher than the all-agencies average and received a further increase in the discount on its Comcover insurance premium for 2010–11.

Commission plans

Corporate plan

The Commission’s strategic priorities for 2009–10 were:

supporting the APS to be ready for the future embedding the government’s ethics and integrity agenda strengthening our engagement with clients and ensuring delivery around their needs driving agency performance and capability leading by example.

These strategic priorities are reflected in specific objectives and deliverables under the Commission’s two sub-programs and group business planning. All involve a whole-of-Commission approach. Progress against these strategic priorities is monitored quarterly by the Commission Management Committee.

Fraud control plan

In late 2009, the Commission revised its fraud control plan.

The Commission’s Fraud Control Plan 2010–11 complies with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines and meets the Commission’s obligations in fraud prevention, detection, investigation, reporting and data collection.

Business continuity plan

In 2009–10, the Commission reviewed its business continuity plan.

The plan’s objective is to maintain the continuity of essential services by the Commission as far as is practicable and to minimise the impact on clients of any disruption to the availability of services. The plan provides practical assistance and guidance to staff on how to ensure that the Commission is able to resume normal business operations following a disaster and is reviewed regularly.

Environmental management system

In 2009–10, the Commission revised its environmental management system.

The Commission aims to minimise the use of non-renewable resources. Significant activities include continuing to use recycled paper products for most work activities, maximising the benefits from energy-saving devices, and undertaking purchasing with energy efficiency in mind. Appendix F provides details of the Commission’s environmental performance.

Reconciliation Action Plan 2007–10

The Commission recognises that as a central agency involved in development of employees, leaders and the culture of the APS, it is vital that we take a leadership role in reconciliation with Indigenous people.

The specific objectives of the reconciliation action plan are:

to establish a culturally competent, diverse and inclusive organisational culture within the Commission

to promote, influence and lead the embedding of a culturally competent, diverse and inclusive organisational culture across the APS.

The Commission will review the plan in its final year of operation and develop a plan for future years.

Client engagement

The Corporate Plan 2009–10 proposed that the Commission would build an integrated client and communications unit to develop strong client engagement strategies, systems and feedback loops.

As part of its new structure, the Commission has established a Client Engagement Group with responsibility for working collaboratively with agencies and building the organisation’s capability.

Compliance and accountability

During 2009–10, the Commission revised its:

records management plan business continuity plan environmental management plan sponsorship policy.

Ethical standards

The Commission supports a culture of a strong commitment to the APS Values. Activities in 2009–10 included:

incorporating references to the relevant APS Values in management policies, guides and instructions released during the year

providing information to new staff at induction about the APS Values and Code of Conduct

assessing behaviour consistent with the APS Values through the performance appraisal scheme

dealing promptly with allegations of staff misconduct.

Internal audit

In October 2008, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu was engaged as internal auditor for a period of two years, with the option of two one-year extensions at the end of the second year.

The Commissioner in March 2009 approved the strategic internal audit plan covering the years 2009–10 to 2011–12. The 2009–10 internal audit plan included audits of the:

APS Employment and Capability Strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employees (performance)

APS Employee Database (performance) financial process (data analytics).

As at 30 June 2010, the Indigenous employment strategy and APSED audits were in progress, and the financial process audit had been completed.

During 2009–10, the following performance audits were completed and the Commission is implementing the accepted recommendations:

Stakeholder Engagement Framework (2008–09) Review of better practice alignment with a focus on workforce planning/succession

planning and leadership, learning and development (2008–09).

External scrutinyReports by the Auditor-General

There were no reports into the operations of the Commission by the Auditor-General in 2009–10. Reports of general application are considered by the Commission’s Audit Committee.

Court and tribunal decisions

There were no judicial decisions or decisions of administrative tribunals that have had a significant impact on the operations of the Commission. However, the Commission was involved in legal proceedings that generated some interest in the media. The case concerned the termination of employment of an SES employee from another government department. In April 2010, consent orders were entered into which set aside the relevant termination decisions on the basis of jurisdictional error. As a result, the employee was reinstated.

People managementThe Commission’s people management approach combines workforce planning strategies, recruitment plans and a remuneration framework that rewards performance, with a strong performance management system, a safe working environment, and learning and development strategies that provide an environment where our staff can excel.

Staff profile

At 30 June 2010, the Commission employed 193 staff, excluding Executive Level 1 casual employees employed in the Commission’s area offices who provide fee-for-service work. Of these 193 staff, the majority were based in Canberra (93%), and 175 were employed on an ongoing basis.

More detailed information about the Commission’s workforce is set out in Appendix G.

Notable trends in the Commission’s staffing are:

the proportion of women working in the Commission at June 2010 declined to 69.9% compared with 73.6% at June 2009

the proportion of employees identifying as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent increased from 4.1% at June 2009 to 5.7% at June 2010

the proportion of staff identifying as having a disability at June 2010 increased slightly to 6.7% compared with 6.4% at June 2009

five Senior Executive Service staff were employed at 30 June 2010, including one AusAID-funded staff member deployed overseas.

Workforce planning

The Commission’s workforce requirements are identified each year as a key component to business planning that flows from the corporate plan. Strategies are developed to address identified skill gaps and inform recruitment processes.

In addition, the Blueprint recommended a number of substantial additions and changes to the responsibilities of the Commission in 2010–11 and beyond (see pages 9–10 for a summary of the report’s recommendations). Many of these lead to both an increase in the number of Commission staff and changes in capability needs.

The Commission has developed a workforce transition plan for 2010 that addresses the immediate capacity and capability issues arising from the Commission’s restructure following the release of the Blueprint. A more detailed workforce plan for 2011–13 is also in development to support longer-term business planning and risk mitigation.

Recruitment strategy

The Commission’s recruitment strategy is informed by a workforce planning strategy and governed by a recruitment policy.

The workforce policy provides that before any recruitment action, consideration should be given to alternatives such as redesign of workflows, restructuring of the work area or redistribution of duties to other staff. Where duties are still available, the appropriate classification is determined using the Commission's work level standards as a guide before taking any recruitment action.

In 2009–10, the Commission introduced an e-recruitment system that enables potential employees to apply for advertised positions at the Commission through a streamlined process via the web.

In 2009–10, the Commission recruited two graduates and supported one Indigenous cadet and one Indigenous trainee.

Remuneration framework

The new Fair Work Act 2009 took effect on 1 July 2009. This Act provides the framework for agreement-making processes.

During the year, the Commission finalised negotiations to establish a new enterprise agreement which commenced on 2 October 2009 and expires on 30 June 2011. The new agreement delivered modest salary increases to staff and addressed several issues relating to staffing matters.

The salary ranges for the Commission’s classification levels covering the enterprise agreement and section 24(1) determinations are set out in Table 17.

Table 17: Salary ranges, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Classification 2007–08($’000)

2008–09($’000)

2009–10($’000)

APS 1–2 34–44 36–45 37–47

APS 3–4 46–54 47–56 49–58

APS 5–6 56–70 59–74 60–75

EL 1 75–93 78–97 83–100

EL 2 87–115 90–127 105–132

SES 1 120–155 135–161 149–168

Note: During 2009–10 the Commission employed one SES Band 3 employee not included in this table.

There are grandfathered pay points in the EL 1 and EL 2 classifications that are available only to employees on the relevant salary immediately prior to commencement of the enterprise agreement.

Performance management

The Commission’s performance appraisal scheme directly links annual assessment of individual performance with remuneration. The scheme integrates corporate, group and individual performance with Commission strategic priorities, providing a basis for identifying individual development needs and, where necessary, management of poor performance.

The scheme provides that staff who are eligible for assessment and review and who achieve a rating of 2 or 3 may be eligible for performance-based salary advancement.

The new enterprise agreement and section 24(1) determinations no longer provide for the payment of performance bonuses.

In July 2009, the Commission paid $96,796 in performance bonuses to 24 employees covered by Australian workplace agreements or section 24(1) determinations for the 2008–09 assessment cycle.

Details of payments made to staff in 2009–10 are provided in Table 18.

Table 18: Performance payments made in 2009–10

Classification No. of staff No. receiving Total payment ($) Average payment ($) Range ($)

APS 1-6 105 1 2,250 2,250 1,500–3,000

EL 1 70 8 23,000 2,875 2,000–3,000

EL 2 34 12 44,250 3,688 3,000–5,500

SES 7 3 27,296 9,099 4,240–21,620

Note: These amounts represent payments for the 2008–09 performance cycle and were paid in July 2009.

Health and lifestyle

The Commission launched its Health, Safety and Wellbeing Program in 2009–10. The aim of the program is to increase staff awareness of health, safety and wellbeing issues and provide opportunities for staff to participate in a number of wellbeing activities.

More information about the program is in the Commission’s report on occupational health and safety at Appendix C.

Learning and development strategies

The Commission identifies learning and development needs of staff annually through the performance appraisal scheme. This information is used to develop a learning and development strategy for the Commission that draws on a range of leadership and learning interventions including the Commission’s own programs.

The Commission spent $302,000 on learning and development activities across all categories in 2009–10.

Unscheduled absences

The Executive and senior management continued to monitor unscheduled absences and to focus on providing early intervention services and support to staff to return to work. The Commission’s overall unscheduled leave increased from 10.33 days per employee in 2008–09 to 11.31 days per employee in 2009–10.

Information and communication technologyThe Commission’s ICT infrastructure services are provided under a memorandum of understanding with DEEWR.

The Commission continues to develop and support in-house applications.

The Blueprint made a number of recommendations that require an information technology response by the Commission to effectively achieve the outcomes proposed by the report. These include:

establishing a central portal for the management of graduate applications and the reinvigorating of APSjobs to encourage and assist employees to pursue diverse work opportunities to develop their capability

identifying appropriate information technology systems to collect reliable and sufficient data about APS employees, including the SES, to facilitate the development of human capital and workforce plans and talent management across the APS

undertaking major enhancements to APSED to accommodate the initiatives detailed in the report.

The Commission is currently updating its ICT strategic plan to take account of the recommendations of the Blueprint and its ongoing business requirements.

Financial performanceThis section provides a summary of the Commission’s financial performance during 2009–10. Further information is available in Part 5, which includes the independent auditor’s report and the Commission’s audited financial statements for the period to 30 June 2010.

2009–10 income

The Commission’s total income for 2009–10 was $40.69 million. Appropriation from government accounted for 50.9%, and sales of goods and services accounted for 49.0%. Table 19 compares the sources of income since 2007–08.

Table 19: Income sources, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Income source 2007–08 (%)

2008–09 (%)

2009–10 (%)

Appropriation from government 51.7 53.3 50.9

Sale of goods and services 48.2 46.6 49.0

Other income (gains from sale of assets and resources received free of charge) 0.1 0.1 0.1

Appropriation funding

Appropriation funding decreased from $22.13 million in 2008–09 to $20.73 million in 2009–10 due to one-off funding for the establishment of the Ethics Advisory Service in 2008–09, the reduced funding to address Indigenous recruitment and retention issues and portfolio saving

measures. A further reduction of $0.250 million in funding resulted from the whole-of-government departmental efficiency measure introduced in the 2009–10 Additional Estimates.

Non-appropriation income

Income from the sale of goods and services in 2009–10 was earned from development programs 69.0% (65.5% in 2008–09), employment services 15.5% (19.0% in 2008–09), international assistance 12.0% (11.4% in 2008–09), better practice and evaluation 2.5% (4.0% in 2008–09) and other services 1.0% (0.1% in 2008–09).

Income from development programs amounted to $13.8 million in 2008–09 ($12.71 million in 2008–09) and made up 33.9% (30.6% in 2008–09) of the Commission’s total income from all sources. This income is earned in an open market, where agencies have a choice about where they source their services and the level of services required. As demand can be unpredictable, the Commission devotes considerable effort to estimating income and expenditure and to monitoring its financial performance during the year.

Table 20 details Commission income since 2007–08.

Table 20: Commission income, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08($ million)

2008–09($ million)

2009–10($ million)

Appropriation 20.804 22.132 20.731

Non-appropriation 19.427 19.365 19.922

Total 40.231 41.497 40.653

Operating result

The Commission’s operating result for 2009–10 was a surplus of $0.799 (deficit of $0.052 million in 2008–09). The surplus is mainly due to lower expenditure from effective management of staff numbers and increased revenue from the Commission’s delivery of learning and development programs.

Table 21 details operating results since 2007–08.

Table 21: Operating result, 2007–08 to 2009–10

2007–08($ million)

2008–09($ million)

2009–10($ million)

Surplus 0.097 0.799

Deficit 0.052

Budget outlook

The Commission’s revenue from government will increase in 2010–11 by $12.451 million as a result of the Budget measure ‘Australian Public Service Reform’. The income from the sale of goods is projected to be $2.203 million lower than the 2009–10 levels. The projected reduction in income results from the expected continued volatility in demand for the Commission’s learning and development programs.

PurchasingThe Commission’s purchasing is undertaken in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines. Further guidance is provided to staff through the Commission Purchasing Guide and the Chief Executive Instructions.

The Commission has also established a framework for managing the risks inherent in procurement activities and has operational guidelines to support staff in assessing the risks associated with their projects.

The Commission has published the annual procurement plan on AusTender (as required by the procurement guidelines) to facilitate early procurement planning for 2010–11.

ConsultantsThe Commission engages consultancy services in circumstances where it requires particular expertise that is not available internally. During 2009–10, the Commission entered into 14 (11 in 2008–09) new consultancy contracts, involving total actual expenditure of $727,000 ($613,000 in 2008–09). In addition, six ongoing consultancy contracts were active during 2009–10, involving total actual expenditure of $206,000.

Information on the value of contracts and consultancies for 2009–10 is available through the AusTender website (www.tenders.gov.au). Additional details for consultancy contracts over $10,000 can be found on the Commission’s website.

Table 22 details expenditure on consultancy contracts between 2007–08 and 2009–10.

Table 22: Expenditure on consultancy contracts, 2007–08 to 2009–10

Number of new consultancies

let

Number of ongoing

consultancy contracts that

were active

Total actual expenditure on

new consultancy contracts

($’000)

Total actual expenditure on

ongoing consultancy

contracts that were active($’000)

Total actual expenditure on

consultancy contracts

($’000)

2007–08 13 9 258 313 571

2008–09 11 11 276 337 613

2009–10 14 6 521 206 727

Australian National Audit Office access clausesThe Commission’s standard form contracts for services and consultancies provide for access by the Australian National Audit Office.

Asset managementThe Commission manages assets with a gross value of $8.21 million ($8.40 million in 2008–09). These assets are managed by groups to meet their business needs.

During 2009–10, two major changes to the Commission’s asset base occurred:

as part of the new ICT arrangements with DEEWR, the Commission replaced all its desk-top computers and disposed of its old computers through the Computer Technology for Schools Program

the lease to the Commission’s Melbourne and Brisbane area offices expired, and the small number of staff in these offices were co-located with another agency.

The Commission conducts annual reviews of its capital budget and plan. A four-year capital investment plan is developed from which the Commission manages its future asset purchases and disposals. All assets owned by the Commission, including any information technology assets, are subject to an annual stocktake to verify the accuracy of asset records. Assets are depreciated at rates applicable for each asset class, as verified by the Australian National Audit Office.

AccommodationAs part of the implementation of the Commission’s revised organisational structure, minor changes were made to the Commission’s accommodation in Canberra and to co-locate the small number of staff in Melbourne and Brisbane with another agency.

As a result of the recommendations of the Blueprint, the Commission received funding in the 2010–11 Budget for additional staff. In 2010–11 the Commission will need to find suitable accommodation both in Canberra and in some states to cater for this staff increase.

Exempt contractsThe Commissioner may direct that contract details are not to be reported on AusTender if they would be subject to an exemption under the Freedom of Information Act 1982, and the Commissioner considers that the information is genuinely sensitive and harm is likely to be caused by its disclosure.

The Commission did not issue any exemptions during 2009–10 (nil in 2008–09).

Grant programsThe Commission did not administer any grant programs in 2008–09 or 2009–10.

Part 4 Annual report of the Merit Protection Commissioner

Letter of transmittalMERIT PROTECTION COMMISSIONER

The Hon Gary Gray AO MPSpecial Minister of State for the Public Service and IntegrityParliament HouseCANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Minister

I am pleased to present the Merit Protection Commissioner’s report for the period 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 as part of the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s annual report required by section 51 of the Public Service Act 1999.

This report is prepared in accordance with the guidelines approved on behalf of the Parliament by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit as required by subsection 51(2) of the Public Service Act 1999. In accordance with the provisions of the Public Service Act 1999, detailing the administrative arrangements to support the performance of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions, some of the required information is published within the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s annual report.

In presenting you with the report on the activities of the Merit Protection Commissioner, I take this opportunity to express my thanks to the staff of the Australian Public Service Commission for their assistance in a time of substantial organisational change.

Yours sincerely

Annwyn Godwin

Merit Protection CommissionerOctober 2010

Merit Protection Commissioner’s reviewPurpose and nature of role

The Merit Protection Commissioner is an independent statutory office holder who contributes to maintaining high standards of public administration through:

ensuring that the Australian Public Service (APS) Values are applied effectively improving the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of agency employment-related

decisions and the management of merit-based employment supporting agencies to maintain fair review procedures promoting the highest ethical standards.

In particular, the Merit Protection Commissioner is responsible for:

overseeing the APS review of employment actions scheme by providing independent review as well as guidance and feedback to agencies on review arrangements and employment-related decision-making

working with APS agencies to deliver effective, merit-based selection processes including establishing Independent Selection Advisory Committees to assist in agency recruitment programs

supporting public sector agencies more broadly, and other organisations, with employment-related services on a fee-for-service basis

inquiring into whistleblowing reports conducting inquiries at the request of the minister responsible for the public service.

The staff who support the Merit Protection Commissioner in the performance of these functions are employed in the Australian Public Service Commission (the Commission) and are made available by the Public Service Commissioner.

Focus this year

The 2009–10 financial year has been a challenging one largely owing to the structural changes in the Commission. As a member of the Commission’s Executive I have been a contributor to these decisions and a significant proportion of my time has been taken up with their implementation.

Nevertheless, during this time of change my focus was twofold: fulfilling my statutory responsibilities by maintaining high-quality independent review and employment services to agencies; and assisting the Public Service Commissioner to develop and promote an ethical APS. These two roles complement each other.

Providing high-quality review and employment services

One of the key APS Values requires the APS to provide a fair system of review of employment decisions taken with respect to APS employees. My independent review role functions as both the carrot and the stick by encouraging agencies to make sound and ethical decisions and giving employees confidence that their grievances can be heard in a professional and impartial manner. I have a particular interest in improving ethical decision-making as my review work allows me a unique insight into the workings of agencies and therefore, by providing agencies with feedback on their decision-making processes, I also contribute to the overall standard of reviews and people management practices.

An important aspect of my work has been promoting more informed decision-making by agencies with regard to employment matters. I have worked to improve the communication channels with agencies in different ways.

One significant initiative this year has been to use the new information sources available to refine the review function. The Ethics Advisory Service (EAS), established within the Commission in May 2009, has provided a valuable insight into the ethical dilemmas facing employees. I have also accessed the EAS Implementation Advisory Group (IAG) as a source of advice on the broader ethics work of the Merit Protection Commissioner role and found the strategic and operational input from the membership valuable. While the IAG was initially established to oversee the operational issues of how to set up and run the EAS, its focus has now shifted to consider broader ethics and integrity questions.

One issue discussed by the IAG at meetings through the year has been how best to raise the quality of investigations into suspected breaches of the APS Code of Conduct. I know from the reviews I conduct that the standard of these investigations is variable. Discussions with agencies indicate that it is difficult to find investigators, particularly those from outside the APS who have the necessary skills and experience to undertake such investigations which are usually complex and sensitive.

As a consequence, the Commission has developed criteria for assessing and endorsing the objectives and broad content of learning and development programs for investigators as a first step towards raising standards in this highly specialised area. The Australian Government Solicitor submitted its program for assessment in May 2010 which has been endorsed by the Commission. It is expected that other programs will be endorsed in the future as other suitably qualified organisations submit their programs for assessment. Other work underway includes the development of a guide for agencies to assist with choosing a suitable investigator.

The IAG has also provided guidance on the scope and conduct of the review of action evaluation I commissioned in 2008–09. I would like to thank the six agencies that participated in the evaluation—the Australian Taxation Office, the National Library of Australia, the Department of Defence, Comcare, the Department of Finance and Deregulation and the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations—for their input and support. One outcome of the evaluation has been the development of a better practice guide for APS employees.

The guide, to be released in early 2010–11, discusses better practice in the management of individual employee grievances and disputes between employees, and suggests strategies for responding to and managing conflict in the workplace. In particular, how grievance and review procedures are perceived in the wider human resource framework is identified as an important early indicator of how an issue will be addressed. I am confident that the guide will bring some commonality to the wide variety of practice across the APS and, in particular, help small agencies that have little experience with reviews because of their infrequency, learn from the experience of others.

During the year, the Principal Adviser Review and Legal, and I have continued to meet with senior agency managers to discuss trends and provide practical feedback on issues arising from reviews of action casework. Such meetings have provided me with feedback on agencies’ experiences with the review function within the Commission and have contributed to greater openness and transparency in interactions with agency representatives. Agencies have also found the meetings valuable as they have improved understanding of the reasoning behind decisions and I have provided an analysis on ‘hot spots’ and recurring issues that may not otherwise have become apparent. This has assisted agencies to improve internal review procedures and has provided guidance to decision-makers.

Over a period of nine months I actively engaged in significant consultation with agency heads and relevant unions concerning changes to the time limits for lodging reviews of actions under the Public Service Regulations. This resulted in a quiet revolution of support for what is a fundamental change to the review function. Amendments to the Regulations were signed by the Governor-General on 29 June 2010 to come into effect on 2 August 2010.

In practice, the 12-month timeframe for lodging a review did not meet the policy objective of dealing with employees’ concerns quickly. Reviews were often lodged long after the original action, unnecessarily protracting resolution of the issue. Moreover, the timeframe did not encourage productivity and harmony in the workplace as, over the 12-month period, working relationships often broke down. While the timeframe to lodge a review has been reduced, there has been no change to the existing discretion to allow for applications to be made outside the specified periods when there are ‘exceptional circumstances’, such as circumstances causing delay that are beyond the control of the applicant.

Following structural changes within the Commission in May 2009, there have been improvements in the way services are provided to agencies and employees arising from the co-location of the review and ethics functions in the Commission’s Ethics Group. Lessons learned from review and whistleblower casework have more easily fed into the development of ethics-related policy and the advice provided through the Ethics Advisory Service adviceline. Similarly, review advisers have appreciated the ready access to policy expertise.

These changes, when combined with other initiatives such as the forthcoming best practice guide on review of actions and ongoing agency feedback, are aimed at better supporting agencies and applicants to address difficult workplace issues in a positive and respectful way.

I also consult with colleagues in other jurisdictions to share experiences and to consider whether there are more effective ways of undertaking reviews. The Commission was scheduled to host the annual National Public Sector Appeals Conference, which provides an opportunity

for the exchange of views by senior Commonwealth, state and territory public sector representatives engaged in external review of employment-related decisions. Unfortunately, due to a range of constraints on agencies including budgetary restrictions, the conference was unable to proceed as planned.

During the year I have worked with my staff to further streamline handling of the review casework and to promote fee-for-service work. To help improve timely case-handling, greater use has been made of templates to assist applicants to better understand the review process, marshal the information they need to provide and manage their expectations. For example, application forms are available on the web, which assists applicants in identifying relevant information needed for the review and their desired outcomes.

My staff and I have also raised with agencies the advantages of using Independent Selection Advisory Committees (ISACs) for staff selection, particularly for large or sensitive processes where the maintenance of good working relations may be at risk if the process is not perceived to be independent. At the same time I have emphasised that ISACs are not to be considered as ‘just another selection process’. As the unsuccessful applicants are unable to seek promotion review following a unanimous decision, an ISAC is a powerful tool to deliver quality merit-based and impartial selection decisions in a timely way.

Supporting the ethical standards of the APS

During the year, I promoted my role and functions and the Commissioner’s ethical agenda in a number of practical ways. I published a monograph titled The Merit Protection Commissioner and ethical decision-making, which was distributed to APS agencies and published on the Commission’s website. I contributed articles for SES Notes, a quarterly e-newsletter published by the Public Service Commissioner for members of the Senior Executive Service (SES), covering practical aspects of review work, such as the crucial conversations when conducting a review, and factors to consider in applying appropriate sanctions for breaches of the Code of Conduct. I also addressed five agency conferences and networks of senior employees on ethical decision-making, leadership and related topics. In addition, I regularly spoke at SES orientation programs on the APS Values and Code of Conduct and performance and conformance issues. I consider this to be an important way to emphasise with new SES leaders their ethical responsibilities and reinforce expectations of their leadership role.

I assisted the Public Service Commissioner in supporting international public sector reform. In this capacity, I represented the Commission’s Executive and gave the keynote address at the Public Service Commissioners’ Conference in the Solomon Islands in September 2009. I, and the staff assisting me, also met with a senior member of parliament from Hungary and senior public servants from Papua New Guinea and Thailand, and I briefed an international delegation from Kenya. Our work with our international colleagues continues to be both challenging and rewarding, particularly as we share information on, and experience in, the areas of embedding values-based principles.

In October 2009 I met officials in Canada and Europe to gain a better understanding of emerging ethical issues in their public and private sectors and to share Australia’s experiences. My Canadian counterparts were undertaking a five-year review of their legislation, and the

similarities in our democratic heritage and geographical dispersion meant there was a lot of mutual benefit in discussing ideas and experiences. Common themes emerged from these discussions around the importance of independent review roles in:

providing accountability and oversight of the integrity of employment arrangements supporting a strong ‘disclosure of wrong-doing culture’ and regimes identifying hard and soft barriers to embedding values-based, open and transparent

decision-making.

I concluded that Australia is well regarded in the review field and considered to be a leading performer in balancing the needs of clients, the wider issues affecting public services and independence. While the emphasis of our discussions was on review-type work, Australia’s continuing rating in the top 10 nations by the Transparency International Corruptions Perceptions Index is testament to our standing more generally in the ethics field.

I also held discussions with colleagues from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the European Union and with senior officials from the Netherlands. These latter discussions were of interest as the development and direction taken by the Dutch Civil Service questions a number of assumptions about roles and responsibilities that underpin the Australian approach to the Westminster system. In particular, the concept of ‘employership’ and ‘employeeship’ as they practically balance enforcement of, and support for, public servants to ‘do the right thing’, has considerable relevance to the Australian environment. In addition, the Netherlands’ experience of proactively integrating this concept into the wider, mainstream approach to people management also resonates with and reinforces our own research conducted for my forthcoming better practice guide on review of actions.

While in Europe I also attended the sixth conference of the International Business and Leadership Symposium in Brussels, which explored the concepts of ethics, corporate culture and leadership in shaping a sustainable future for organisations. The information I gathered has been useful in contributing to furthering the ethics agenda within the APS, particularly in the area of the link between ethics and long-term agency health.

I also assisted the Public Service Commissioner as an independent member of a statutory officer appointment committee for the Migration Review Tribunal and the Refugee Review Tribunal. This was a major nationwide exercise with over 370 applications resulting in 42 appointments.

Outcomes

For the second year in a row, the review function has met its target of over 70% of reviews of actions completed within time. The result of 82% is lower than the 86% of reviews of employment actions completed within target timeframes in 2008–09 but still significantly higher than the 41% achieved in 2007–08. The work undertaken in improving the timeliness of reviews was acknowledged in January 2010 when my Principal Adviser and the review team members were awarded Australia Day medals.

This year there has been a 23% increase in the number of review applications received, with the number of employees seeking primary review of matters other than Code of Conduct more than doubling. Of the review applications only around two-thirds were accepted. This increase in applications that were not accepted significantly increased the workload of the office as determining eligibility is resource intensive and diverted resources from other reviews. The main reasons for non-acceptance of cases were the matters raised were more than a year old or the issues raised by applicants needed to be reviewed by the agency head in the first instance. There was also a spike in the number of reviews received mid-year—between December 2009 and February 2010, 71 review of actions applications were received in comparison to 30 the year before.

In almost 9% of cases, it was recommended that the agency’s original decision be varied or set aside. The majority of these recommendations were made in reviews of determinations of breaches of the Code of Conduct and/or the sanction imposed as a consequence. In 2009–10 all recommendations were accepted by the agency concerned.

Last year I reported that the work of my office was affected by the reduction in recruitment activity in the APS. In 2009–10, work levels stabilised and in the second half of the year there was a slight recovery in demand for employment services. The number of ISACs established by the Merit Protection Commissioner increased to 56 in 2009–10 compared to 41 in 2008–09—though this is still 23% less than in 2007–08. It is too early to predict with certainty, but there does appear to be a continuing uptake in ISACs with 14 on hand, including five large recruitment exercises from the Australian Taxation Office comprising in excess of 3,300 applicants. The benefits of ISACs, particularly the recognition and credibility of an independent selection process, for large, sensitive or complex exercises are becoming better known.

There was also a small increase in the total demand for other employment services, in large part because of a 61% increase in the use of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s recruitment services by the Australian Federal Police.

There was little change in the number of promotion reviews (59 compared to 58 in 2008–09) and the numbers appear now to have stabilised following the 40% decrease from 2007–08. While the number of promotion review committees established is similar, the number of applicants for promotion reviews has fallen by 31%—only 117 employees applied for promotion review in 2009–10 compared to 170 in 2008–09.[1]

There has been deterioration in performance with respect to the time taken to complete promotion reviews. The average completion time for promotion reviews increased to 8.39 weeks from 5.98 weeks in 2008–09. Just under half of promotion reviews were completed within the target timeframe of eight weeks compared to 94% in 2008–09. Only two agency promotion decisions were overturned in 2009–10, which reflects well on the integrity of agency selection practices.

The problem with meeting performance targets originated in the second half of the year—for the first six months the target was met in 92% of completed reviews. The contributing factors included a spike, as noted before, in the total number of all reviews, including promotion reviews, received in the period December to February which coincided with reduced staff availability through internal staff movements and scheduled leave. The backlog that developed

over that period carried over through the remainder of the year. A reduction in recruitment activity more generally within the Commission in response to financial constraints made it difficult to replace staff until later in the year when temporary employees were engaged. Some delay in finalising promotion reviews was also the result of scheduling issues with applicants and panel members external to the Commission being unavailable. The database used to manage review work has been modified to enable recording of data on reasons for delays for future reporting.

The number of whistleblower reports I considered in 2009–10 was 10, four more than the previous year. The outcome of these reports and the matters covered are discussed below under ‘Review of performance’.

Outlook

The APS has entered into a period of major reform following the release of the Blueprint for reform and the acceptance by the government of its recommendations. This has resulted in significant restructuring within the Commission to enable the organisation to meet its new objectives. One outcome of the restructure will significantly dominate my priorities for 2010–11.

Last year my review function was centralised in Canberra, which resulted in a wide range of efficiencies and enhanced performance. In order to maintain a viable agency presence in areas outside Canberra, the Public Service Commissioner decided in May 2010 to move the Merit Protection Commissioner responsibilities—the review function and fee-for-service activities—to the Commission’s Sydney office. I and my Principal Adviser remain based in Canberra. The existing review team employees decided not to move with their function and their skills and abilities were quickly recognised and they have been deployed to other work within the Commission. I acknowledge the support, commitment and professionalism of these staff during the transition period and the positive approach they have consistently modelled. Recruitment for the Sydney office commenced in late June 2010 and I expect the new employees to commence work in August 2010.

My most pressing priority will be to ensure that the transition of the function to Sydney is handled efficiently and to minimise the effects on productivity. There have been changes in staffing of the review function before, but to my knowledge, this is the first time that all employees will be new. Training and development for the new review employees, supplemented by mentoring from former staff, is being progressively implemented. The policy area supporting the Merit Protection Commissioner within the Ethics Group will act as an advisory service and will be a source of information for the new staff.

To assist the transition, I have asked for an examination of promotion processes and the procedures for ISACs with a view to simplification and streamlining while maintaining rigour and integrity. This complements work already undertaken on review of action processes. I will also continue with my emphasis on improving both the quality and timeliness of review casework.

I anticipate that timeliness statistics for reviews will suffer in the short term as there is a steep learning curve facing the new staff before they can achieve peak productivity. I am also conscious that there is a significant residual caseload carried over that is outside or close to being outside the target of 14 weeks which will be exacerbated by the transition. I will be reflecting on the lessons learnt this year and in particular on the need to respond quickly once the workload, which is applicant driven, becomes too great for the allocated resources.

In the first half of the year, I will work with agencies to raise awareness of the amendment to the Regulations that reduce the time limits for lodging an application for review. The new time limits will come into effect on 2 August 2010 for actions occurring after that date. During 2010–11, all staff involved with review will need to be aware that the time limits to be applied will be dependent on when the action or decision to be reviewed occurred. A circular on the amendments was issued in early July 2010 and my website has been updated to provide advice for agencies and affected employees. To assist agencies, I have asked that a series of frequently answered questions be developed and placed on the website.

Depending on the government’s budget decisions that impact on the levels of recruitment in the APS, I will continue to promote the fee-for-service functions available, in particular, the use of ISACs. While there has been take-up by agencies such as the Australian Taxation Office, other agencies could make productivity savings from use of ISACs for APS 2–6 classifications by avoiding time-consuming promotion reviews and ensuring staff are on deck quickly.

In 2010–11, I intend to continue my meetings with agencies to discuss issues arising out of the review casework. The feedback I receive is that these meetings add value to agencies in targeting policy and revision of procedures. I will also be collecting feedback on the review function so as to continue to improve responsiveness and communication. I also look forward to exploring alternative ways to receive feedback from applicants to enhance their experience of reviews.

My external focus for the year will continue to be assisting the Public Service Commissioner to promote an ethical environment and taking advantage of opportunities to discuss and explore ethical matters with APS employees and other organisations. Where appropriate, I will also continue to support our Pacific neighbours.

During the year I will be working closely with the Commissioner in the implementation of the APS reform recommendations. Ensuring efficient implementation of reform initiatives will require a consideration of ethical and accountability issues. One specific initiative for which I have direct interest is the revision of the APS Values. I will be acting in an advisory capacity to the project team working on revising the APS Values to a set of meaningful and effective core values. I will also continue to head the Commission’s Internal Change Management Taskforce to help ensure a smooth transition as the new structure comes into effect after 1 July 2010.

Role, function and structureThe office of the Merit Protection Commissioner, established under section 49 of the Public Service Act 1999 (the PS Act), is an independent office located with the Australian Public Service Commission.

Function

Section 50 of the PS Act and Parts 2, 4, 5 and 7 of the Public Service Regulations 1999 set out the functions of the Merit Protection Commissioner. They include:

reviewing employment actions and promotion decisions undertaking inquiries into whistleblower reports made to the Merit Protection

Commissioner by APS employees alleging breaches of the APS Code of Conduct providing employment services for APS agencies, in particular Independent Selection

Advisory Committees conducting other reviews, in particular reviews of the entitlements on separation of

former APS employees and reviews of the employment-related actions of statutory office holders

providing employment services to non-APS organisations on request including agencies in other jurisdictions

providing other inquiry functions including inquiries into alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct by the Public Service Commissioner and inquiries into APS actions at the request of the Public Service Minister.

The Merit Protection Commissioner charges a fee for establishing ISACs and for providing employment services.

Organisational structure

In accordance with section 49 of the PS Act, the Public Service Commissioner makes available staff to assist the Merit Protection Commissioner in the performance of her functions.

In May 2009, the review and fee-for-service work were centralised in the Canberra office in the Ethics Group and the National Business Centre respectively. The Ethics Group in Canberra also provides coordination and policy support for the Merit Protection Commissioner.

Following the restructure of the Commission, from July 2010 the Merit Protection Commissioner’s review and fee-for-service activities will be located in the Commission’s Sydney office.

This report and further information about the Merit Protection Commissioner’s role and services are available on the Commission’s website.

Management and accountabilityCorporate governance

The Public Service Commissioner, as the head of the Australian Public Service Commission, is responsible for its corporate governance. The Merit Protection Commissioner is a member of the Commission’s Executive—a senior management group chaired by the Public Service Commissioner.

The Merit Protection Commissioner also assists in the Commission’s governance arrangements by chairing the Audit Committee and the Information Technology Advisory Committee and providing management oversight to the Ethics and Corporate Groups as appropriate. To avoid any perceptions of a conflict of interest with regard to employment-related decisions made within the Commission that could be the subject of review, the Merit Protection Commissioner provides an oversight rather than direct management role to these groups.

In 2009–10, the Merit Protection Commissioner was also the Commission’s representative on the Internal Red Tape Task Force established by the Department of Finance and Deregulation and coordinated the Commission’s response to the recommendations as well as appearing before the parliamentary inquiry into whistleblowing. Other APS-wide initiatives flagged for involvement in the next financial year include the Government 2.0 Steering Group and coordination of the Senate inquiry into the reform of Australian Government administration.

In the last quarter, there was a significant workload in heading the Internal Change Management Team. This team was established to align the Commission with its new responsibilities arising out of the APS reform recommendations accepted by the government. The team assisted senior managers with the internal restructure of the Commission, established an internal communication network, and worked with directly affected staff, and other staff more broadly, to determine employment preferences for internal employee movements. The Corporate Group played a significant and lead role in the actual implementation of the outcomes.

The Merit Protection Commissioner and the Public Service Commissioner have a memorandum of understanding for the provision of staff to assist the Merit Protection Commissioner. The Commission’s Principal Adviser Review and Legal, is currently the main delegate of the Merit Protection Commissioner for review decision-making, although this may change under the restructured approach.

Review of performanceContribution to outcomes 2009–10

The Commission is included in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet’s Portfolio Budget Statements. The Public Service Commissioner, as head of the Commission, is responsible for the Commission’s financial and human resources and for assessing the level of the Commission’s achievement against its output structure.

The performance indicators and targets relevant to the Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions are provided under ‘Sub-program 1.1—APS policy, review and evaluation’ in Part 2 of the Public Service Commissioner’s annual report.

The information on activity and performance provided below in Tables M1 to M9 refers to the Merit Protection Commissioner’s statutory functions.

Review of employment actions

Section 33 of the PS Act and Part 5 of the Regulations provide a scheme for the review of employment actions affecting individual APS employees. A broad range of employment matters affecting the individual employee in the workplace can be reviewed. The legislation excludes certain employment decisions from the review framework, most notably review of termination of employment.

The Merit Protection Commissioner conducts three main categories of reviews of actions:

reviews of breaches of the APS Code of Conduct reviews of other employment actions reviews of promotion decisions.

The information in this section concerns reviews other than promotion reviews. Information on promotion reviews is provided under ‘Review of promotion decisions’.

Table M1 provides information on the number of applications for review received and reviews completed in 2009–10 compared with 2008–09. Table M2 provides information on the timeliness with which these functions were performed in comparison with 2008–09.

The tables refer to ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’ reviews. Primary reviews are reviews conducted by the Merit Protection Commissioner without first being reviewed by the agency head. The majority of primary reviews involve reviews of decisions that an APS employee has breached the Code of Conduct, and the sanctions imposed as a result of that breach. There are also provisions in the Regulations for review of employment matters where it would be inappropriate for the review to be conducted within the agency.

Secondary reviews are conducted by the Merit Protection Commissioner where the employee is dissatisfied with the review conducted by the agency head. They also include cases where the agency head has told the employee that the matter is not reviewable, but the Merit Protection Commissioner considers that it is.

In addition, the Merit Protection Commissioner reviews complaints by former APS employees about the final entitlements they received upon separation from the APS.

In 2009–10, the Merit Protection Commissioner received 196 applications for review and carried over 43 cases from the previous year. This represents a 23% increase in applications over the 159 received in 2008–09.

A total of 183 cases were finalised in 2009–10, of which 76 were reviewed (that is, they were not ruled ineligible or withdrawn before the review was finalised). In 2009–10, only 42% of cases received were assessed as reviewable compared to 50% in 2007–08 and 56% in 2008–09. There is no obvious reason for the large increase in numbers of review applications submitted that were not accepted for review, although, as noted previously, the complexity of cases often requires extensive research and analysis before a decision of this nature can be made. If this level of non-reviewable applications continues, the Merit Protection Commissioner will examine the guidance material to see whether the advice on eligibility can be made clearer.

Table M1: Review of employment actions workload for 2009–10, including a comparison with 2008–09

Cases

Primary reviews—Code of Conduct

Primary reviews—

other

Secondary reviews

Complaints by former employees Total

2009–10 2008–09

2009–10

On hand at start of year 13 1 29 0 41 43

Received during the period 42 42 112 0 159 196

Reviewed 32 7 37 0 88 76

Not accepted 3 30 54 0 47 87

Lapsed or withdrawn 1 4 15 0 22 20

Total finalised during period 36 41 106 0 157 183

On hand at end of year 19 2 35 0 43 56

Table M2 compares timeliness figures for 2009–10 with those for 2008–09. The target timeframe for completion of reviews in all these categories is 14 weeks from receipt of

application. There has been a small fall in the percentage of cases completed within target times in 2009–10 (82%) compared to 2008–09 (86%). The average time for Code of Conduct and secondary reviews rose slightly in 2009–10, while the time taken for other primary reviews fell.

The office is carrying over 56 cases to the next financial year, which is a slight increase over the previous two years. Of these unfinalised cases, 18 had exceeded the target date on carryover. In 2008–09 only two of the 43 cases carried over were completed outside the 14-week target date.

The reasons for this slight decrease in timeliness are consistent with the information provided under the heading ‘Outcomes’.

Table M2: Comparison of timeliness in handling reviews, 2008–09 and 2009–10

Review type

Average time to complete reviews(weeks)

Completed within target timeframes

(%)

Average time to complete reviews(weeks)

Completed within target timeframes

(%)

2008–09 2009–10

Primary reviews— Code of Conduct 12.12 85 12.30 75

Primary reviews— other 8.33 100 7.91 100

Secondary reviews 12.31 87 12.70 80

Former employees 1 100 0 –

Enhanced case management and streamlining of processes and procedures have meant that the increase in 2009–10 in the time taken to complete reviews as a result of resource issues has been minimised. This office aims for timely review without any loss in quality, as resolution of cases is beneficial to both the employee and employer as it improves the prospect of successfully reintegrating the employee into the workplace.

Table M3 provides a breakdown of the number of reviews by agency. As has been the case for the last few years, the agencies with the highest number of applications for review were the large employers, namely the Australian Taxation Office, Centrelink and the Department of Defence. These three agencies continue to account for just over 60% of completed reviews (61% in 2009–10 and 60% in 2008–09).

Table M3 also provides a benchmark indicator of the review cases per number of staff which may be expected across APS agencies. The number of reviews in individual agencies varies between years; however, the number of review cases as a percentage of total APS staff in 2009–10 has remained steady at 0.07%. While some smaller agencies may, from time to time, be addressing a particular issue which registers as a peak of cases for review, most large agencies can expect to have a rate of cases that falls around the benchmark. Where a medium to large agency has a rate of review cases either well above or below this benchmark, this is

usually an indicator that further questions need to be asked of that agency about its procedures or the information it provides to employees about the review of action scheme with the option to share best practice and lessons learnt depending on the indicator.

The types of employment matters for which review is sought are shown in Figure M1. Breaches of the Code of Conduct accounted for 32 reviewed cases (43% of the total)—an increase in both number and proportion compared to 26 and 30% in 2008–09. There was a decrease in both the number and proportion of performance management cases (5% in 2009–10 compared with 14% in 2008–09) and conditions of employment cases (14% in 2009–10 compared with 23% in 2008–09). While there was an increase in the proportion of harassment cases (13% in 2009–10 compared with 11% in 2008–09), the number of cases (10) stayed the same.

Table M3: Reviews completed, by agency, 2009–10

Agency

Primary reviews—

Code of Conduct

Primary reviews—

other

Secondary reviews

Complaints by former

employeesTotal

Review cases as a percentage of

total staff

Note: The data on total employment in Table M3 is taken from the APS employment database as at 31 December 2009.

Australian Taxation Office 12 0 12 0 24 0.11

Centrelink 3 0 12 0 15 0.06

Department of Defence 2 0 5 0 7 0.03

Medicare Australia 3 0 0 0 3 0.05

Australian Crime Commission 0 2 1 0 3 0.62

Department of Immigration and Citizenship

3 0 0 0 3 0.04

Department of Veterans’ Affairs 0 0 2 0 2 0.10

Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

1 1 0 0 2 0.04

Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations

1 1 0 0 2 0.04

Australian Customs and Border

2 0 0 0 2 0.03

Table M3: Reviews completed, by agency, 2009–10

Agency

Primary reviews—

Code of Conduct

Primary reviews—

other

Secondary reviews

Complaints by former

employeesTotal

Review cases as a percentage of

total staff

Protection Service

Department of Health and Ageing 1 0 1 0 2 0.04

Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

1 0 1 0 2 0.07

Nine other agencies (one review each) 3 3 3 0 9 na

Total 32 7 37 0 76 0.07

Figure M1: Cases reviewed by subject, 2009–10

Breaches of the Code of Conduct

There were 42 applications for review of a decision that an employee had breached the Code of Conduct and/or of the sanction imposed for a breach. Thirty-two cases were reviewed during the year.

Of these 32 cases, 12 were primarily concerned with inappropriate use of information technology (IT) systems, including internet and email. Three of these cases concerned browsing of client databases. Two cases involved excessive use of mobile phones.

Six cases were primarily concerned with behaviour towards colleagues, including allegations of harassment and lack of respect. One case also involved sending inappropriate emails to colleagues.

There were four cases in which employees were found to have failed to follow a direction or instructions given by their employer. In 11 of the cases concerning the misuse of IT systems, the employees were also found to have breached directions given by the employer on the authorised use of IT.

Three cases concerned employees’ failure to record their attendance accurately.

There were six cases in which employees were found to have failed in their duty as public servants. In two cases this involved a failure to declare a conflict of interest and in another two, the employees were accused of inappropriately disclosing information. The remaining two cases involved vandalism and keeping poor financial records for a social club.

The Merit Protection Commissioner confirmed the agency’s decision in 22 of the 32 Code of Conduct decisions reviewed. In the remaining 10 cases, the Merit Protection Commissioner recommended that the agency change its decision.

In five of the 10 cases, the Merit Protection Commissioner found that the employee had breached the Code of Conduct but took a different view from the agency decision-maker about which elements of the Code of Conduct had been breached. While the Merit Protection Commissioner has the option to increase, uphold or reduce a sanction, in two cases the Merit Protection Commissioner made a recommendation to lessen the sanction. In another case, the recommendation was to confirm both the breach and the sanction but to annotate on the applicant’s personnel file that one behaviour had not been substantiated.

In the remaining two cases, the Merit Protection Commissioner recommended for one that the decision be set aside and be remade because of a procedural defect and in the second noted errors in the process and a lack of evidence to support the finding.

The recommendations made to agencies were accepted in all cases.

Investigation of complaints by former employees

Regulation 7.2 provides that the Merit Protection Commissioner may investigate a complaint by a former APS employee that relates to the employee’s final entitlements on separation from the APS. During 2009–10, no applications were received under this Regulation.

Review of promotion decisions

The Merit Protection Commissioner conducts merits review of promotion decisions made for jobs in APS classification groups 2 to 6. These reviews are conducted by a three-member Promotion Review Committee comprising a nominee from the relevant agency, a convenor and a third member nominated by the Merit Protection Commissioner.

The only ground for a review of a promotion decision is greater merit. The committee has the power to confirm the promotion decision made by the agency or substitute a different decision.

Details of the promotion review caseload are in Table M4. In this table, ‘case’ means an application by one or more APS employees for review of a promotion decision (or decisions) arising from a discrete agency selection exercise.

The number of applications for promotion reviews (59) was similar to 2008–09 but still represents a fall of 40% from 2007–08 levels. The number of Promotion Review Committees convened to consider them (34) is also similar to 2008–09 when the number of cases on hand (13) is taken into account. All the cases on hand at 30 June 2010 are within the target time of eight weeks with the average time taken being 4.4 weeks.

Although the number of cases finalised within the year was significantly lower in 2009–10, the average time taken to review cases has increased by almost 2.5 weeks and is now above the target time of eight weeks. As a result of this, the percentage of cases completed within the target time (47%) is half that of 2008–09 (94%). The reasons for this have been discussed earlier.

Table M4: Promotion review caseload, 2008–09 and 2009–10

Promotion review cases 2008–092009–10

On hand at start of year 5 1

Received during the period 58 59

Reviewed 48 34

Not accepted 2 1

Lapsed or withdrawn 12 12

Total finalised during period 62 47

On hand at end of year 1 13

Target completion time (weeks) 8 8

Average completion time for reviewed cases (weeks)5.98 8.39

Table M4: Promotion review caseload, 2008–09 and 2009–10

Promotion review cases 2008–092009–10

Completed within target time (number) 45 16

Completed within target time (percentage) 94 47

Table M5 provides information on the agencies whose promotions attracted review applications as well as a breakdown of the number of ‘active’ and ‘protective’ applications. Unsuccessful candidates for a promotion may lodge an ‘active’ application seeking review of a promotion decision. Employees who have been promoted and whose promotion may be subject to review may lodge a ‘protective’ application against the promotion of other successful candidates.

During the year, applications for reviews were received in relation to promotion decisions made in 12 agencies. The three agencies with four or more applications for review are identified. Nine other agencies with less than three applications for review are not separately identified.

Promotion Review Committees varied two (2%) of the 98 promotion decisions reviewed. This is lower than the percentage of promotion decisions varied in 2008–09 (2.7%). In recent years the proportion of decisions varied has ranged between 2% and 5%. The trend of a small proportion of decisions varied over years with fluctuating levels of APS recruitment indicates that agency recruitment decision-making at these classification levels is effective.

The size of cases fell by nearly one-third in 2009–10 with 117 applicants compared to 170 in 2008–09. In previous years, there have been instances of agency selection exercises that have resulted in promotion review applications of 100 or more. This commonly occurs in ‘bulk’ recruitment rounds and can significantly delay the capacity of agencies to fill vacant jobs.

This year the largest number of applications for a single finalised exercise was 20. Only four cases had 10 or more review applications, with three-quarters having five or fewer applications. The average number of applications per case was 3.4.

Centrelink accounted for half of the finalised cases (17), with the number of applicants in each case ranging from one to 20. One Centrelink promotion review underway at 30 June 2010 has the highest number of applicants since 2007–08 with 52 applications.

Table M5: Review of promotion decisions, by agency, 2009–10

AgencyTotal

applications received

‘Active’ applications

received

‘Protective’ applications

received

Promotion decisions

considered

Promotion decisions

varied

Centrelink 87 33 54 69 0

Department of Defence 15 8 7 10 0

Department of Veterans’ Affairs

4 3 1 6 0

Nine other agencies 11 11 0 13 2

Total 117 55 62 98 2

Note: An APS employee may make an application for review of one or more promotion decisions. Not all applications are considered by a Promotion Review Committee. Some applications are withdrawn, held invalid or, in the case of ‘protective’ applications, not activated.

Independent Selection Advisory Committees

Independent Selection Advisory Committees are established by the Merit Protection Commissioner at an agency head’s request, usually on a fee-for-service basis. ISACs are independent three-member committees that undertake a staff selection exercise on behalf of agencies and make recommendations to the agency about the relative suitability of candidates.

An ISAC consists of a convenor nominated by the Merit Protection Commissioner and two members, one nominated by the Merit Protection Commissioner and one nominated by the agency head. ISACs work within agency recruitment policies and have the flexibility to accommodate a range of selection assessment techniques.

ISACs may be used for any job vacancies in APS classification groups 2 to 6. An ISAC’s recommendation is not binding on an agency, but if it is accepted then any resulting promotions decisions are not subject to promotion review.

Agencies may choose to use ISACs for a variety of reasons. The most common ones are to provide assurance about the fairness and integrity of their recruitment decisions and to avoid delays in placing staff resulting from review of promotion decisions. An order of merit established by an ISAC can also be used to fill similar employment opportunities for 12 months from the date of the original vacancy notification.

Table M6 provides information on the ISAC activity in 2009–10 and the previous year.

There was a 37% increase in the number of requests for ISACs in 2009–10 (56 compared to 41 in 2008–09), although this is still lower than the 73 and 101 requests in the previous two years

respectively. This reflects an increase in recruitment activity in the APS over the past year as the effects of the global financial crisis lessened.

Table M6: Independent Selection Advisory Committees—workload and work completed, 2008–09 and 2009–10

2008–09 2009–10

Note: The number of cases on hand at the end of 2008–09 is reported as 7 in Table M6 on page 105 of the 2008–09 annual report. This was a data error and the correct figure is 4.

On hand at start of year 17 4

Received during the period 41 56

Completed 50 43

Lapsed/withdrawn 1 3

Total finalised during the period 51 46

On hand at end of year 4 14

While interest in the use of ISACs is increasing, the average size and number of candidates recommended for positions has fallen. ISACs considered 8,027 applications in 2009–10 and recommended 1,271 applicants as detailed in Table M7. In 2009–10, there was an average of 187 applications with 30 recommendations of suitable candidates, compared to the average of 255 applications and 45 recommendations in 2008–09.

Table M7: Independent Selection Advisory Committees by agency, 2009–10

Agency Committees established and completed

Candidates considered

Candidates recommended

Centrelink 10 690 135

Australian Taxation Office 5 5,353 877

Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service 3 227 60

Department of Defence 17 312 49

Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority 4 451 40

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade 3 978 107

Bureau of Meteorology 1 16 3

Total 43 8,027 1,271

Employment-related services (fee-for-service)The Regulations provide that the Merit Protection Commissioner may undertake a range of employment-related functions on behalf of non-APS bodies, such as Commonwealth authorities to which the PS Act does not apply or other government bodies. The Merit Protection Commissioner may charge a fee for such services. Some of the services are provided on an ongoing basis under a memorandum of understanding.

Fee-for-service work can include staff selection services and training relevant to the Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions such as scribing, as well as investigating grievances and providing mediation services and career advice. Over the last few years, a significant proportion of this fee-for-service work has been the provision of members of selection panels for the Australian Federal Police.

There was a 51% increase in the number of completed services in 2009–10. The increase reflects greater demand by the Australian Federal Police for staff selection services. Requests for other services were similar to 2008–09 levels and remain significantly lower (9) than those of 2007–08 (30). The number of requests received in 2009–10 (70) was double that of 2008–09 with 59 completed compared to 39.

Table M8 provides information on the level of fee-for-service activity performed by the Merit Protection Commissioner (excluding ISACs) in 2009–10, in comparison with the previous year.

Table M8: Other fee-for-service functions—workload and work completed, 2008–09 and 2009–10

Other fee-for-service functions

2008–09 2009–10

On hand at start of year 9 3

Received during the period 35 70

Completed 39 59

Lapsed/withdrawn 2 1

Total finalised during the period 41 60

On hand at end of year 3 13

Table M9 provides information on the nature of the employment-related services provided by the Merit Protection Commissioner on a fee-for-service basis in 2009–10, compared with the previous year.

Table M9: Employment-related services, 2009–10

Nature of serviceNumber completed

2008–09 2009–10

Australian Federal Police selection panels 31 50

Training 2 4

Member of Independent Selection Advisory Committee 5 4

Scribing services for Independent Selection Advisory Committees1 0

Investigation of grievances 0 0

Career advising 0 1

Total 39 59

Whistleblowing

The PS Act and Regulations provide a scheme for APS employees to report alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct (such reports are known as whistleblowing reports).

Agency heads are responsible for establishing procedures for handling whistleblowing reports. In the first instance, such reports are expected to be made to, and investigated by, the relevant agency head. Where the employee is not satisfied with the agency’s response to their report, or in other circumstances (for example, where it is not appropriate for the agency head to deal with the matter), a whistleblowing report may be referred to the Public Service Commissioner or the Merit Protection Commissioner. Information on whistleblowing reports made to the Public Service Commissioner is contained in Part 2 of the Commissioner’s annual report.

In 2009–10, the Merit Protection Commissioner had a whistleblowing caseload of 10 (including cases on hand at the start of the year), compared to six in 2008–09. Two inquiries were completed. Three of the reports were not accepted as it was determined the matter was appropriate for investigation by the agency head. In one case the report was withdrawn and one report was considered to be invalid. There were three reports on hand at the end of the reporting period.

Allegations made included bullying and harassment, misconduct issues in regard to employment decisions, fraud and financial irregularities. In the two cases investigated, the Merit Protection Commissioner did not recommend that any employees should be investigated under the relevant agency procedures for breaches of the Code of Conduct.

Other functions

Under the PS Act, the Public Service Minister can ask the Merit Protection Commissioner to inquire into an APS action and report to the minister on the results of the inquiry. No such requests were received during the reporting period.

The PS Act also provides for the Merit Protection Commissioner to inquire into alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct by the Public Service Commissioner and to report to the Presiding Officers on the results of such inquiries. One allegation was received during the reporting period. The Merit Protection Commissioner is considering this allegation.

Reviews of employment actions—discussion issuesThe subject matter of review cases does not vary significantly from year to year. There are, however, issues or trends that arise through the casework that suggest improvements can be made in agency decision-making and policies and procedures.

Code of Conduct

Procedural concerns

The Federal Court decision in October 2009[2] concerning an APS employee has emphasised the importance of following agency procedures established for investigating alleged misconduct; ensuring that employees have a reasonable opportunity to respond to evidence; and ensuring that the decision-maker is demonstrably bringing an unbiased mind to the matter.

In undertaking a review of a Code of Conduct decision, one question that the Merit Protection Commissioner always considers is whether there was substantial compliance with agency procedures, as well as the requirements of procedural fairness.

The need to ensure procedural fairness was reinforced by a second case. An APS employee commenced proceedings in the Federal Court following a Code of Conduct process. Review was sought of the agency Code of Conduct decision, the recommendations of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s delegate following a primary review and the decision by the agency to adopt the Merit Protection Commissioner’s recommendations. The case was settled by the agency with relevant decisions being set aside because of defects in the original agency decision-making. One defect identified was that the agency delegate had taken into account matters adverse to the employee which had not been put to the employee. An order for costs was made against the Commonwealth and the matter was sent back to the agency head for determination according to law.

This year the Merit Protection Commissioner recommended that a Code of Conduct decision be set aside for a serious procedural defect. In this case it was considered that the delegate who determined the breach had based the decision on adverse evidence that was not put to the applicant, thereby denying them the opportunity to provide a reasonable explanation for consideration. The case was referred back to the agency, as a review conducted by the Merit Protection Commissioner is unable to ‘cure’ a procedural breach. The presence of such a breach leaves both the original decision and any subsequent review vulnerable to judicial review.

Agency delegates need to ensure that they have been alerted to or identify any procedural issues prior to making a determination or imposing a sanction. It is not sufficient to just assess the evidence, as a failure to comply with procedures can undermine the investigation.

Imposition of sanctions

Decisions relating to behaviour involve assessing available evidence about an employee’s behaviour and making a determination about whether that behaviour breaches the Code of Conduct. Should it be decided that there was a breach, the delegate needs to consider whether under the circumstances a sanction should be imposed.

It is important that when imposing a sanction agencies focus on the actual behaviour of the employee. The Commission publication Handling misconduct acknowledges there should be a degree of consistency for the same type of misconduct but cautions against a formulaic approach and suggests the sanction should reflect the particular circumstances of both the employee and the misconduct. The publishing of information on actual cases on the Merit Protection Commissioner’s website, de-identified to protect privacy, is an important step in sharing information to improve the degree of consistency for both review applicants and agencies.

One sanction was varied by the Merit Protection Commissioner following consideration of the mitigating circumstances. In this case the applicant received an email which they forwarded to their home email unopened. There was nothing to indicate that the email contained pornographic images. The agency has a clear policy on email usage that employees are not to use email in an unacceptable way and that they are personally responsible for any actions. The agency concluded the employee had made a conscious decision to forward pornographic images.

The Merit Protection Commissioner upheld the breach of the Code of Conduct but considered the applicant had only made a conscious decision to forward an email not a decision to forward pornography. The Merit Protection Commissioner considered that in sending the email the employee had failed in their responsibility to ensure what was sent was not offensive. The sanction was varied from a reduction in classification to a reduction in salary reflecting the need to demonstrate that such behaviour is not acceptable and that it was a serious lapse in conduct.

Employment-related issues

Managerial responsibility to act on conduct issues

In previous reports the Merit Protection Commissioner has commented that it is important for line managers to identify and address performance and behavioural issues with employees before they become a formal dispute. Taking a preventative approach through timely identification of issues and early intervention can minimise the potential damage to workplace relationships and productivity caused by complaints about decisions or conflict.

In the experience of the Merit Protection Commissioner, many secondary review cases are the culmination of a lot of little, seemingly unimportant and incidental issues that have not been

dealt with and have coloured the perception of both the review applicant and the manager. When these issues—particularly those involving subjective judgment such as performance management or unrealistic job expectations or harassment allegations—are not addressed, they tend to compound.

These small concerns and untested assumptions, particularly about the motives of other people, escalate until almost every action (or inaction) of the person or persons involved is seen through a particular mindset which often may lead to perception becoming reality. Thus, one more small and seemingly insignificant event can set off a reaction that appears to the manager, and often to members of the work group, to be out of proportion to the actual event. For the review applicant, however, this event is intricately bound to all of the other unresolved issues and the reaction is seen as proportionate to the whole, not the individual event.

Recordkeeping

APS agencies rely on employees to accurately record attendance at work for purposes connected with the employees’ APS employment, in particular, payment of salary and as a record of whereabouts for workers’ compensation or occupational health and safety matters. The use of information technology provides agencies with additional sources of monitoring attendance such as computer log on/log off times and building entry and exit times. The Merit Protection Commissioner considers that such information can be used to support a pattern of inaccurate recordkeeping but in most circumstances the data is not itself proof of misconduct. Agency recordkeeping policies should alert employees if reliance is to be placed on electronic methods of monitoring timekeeping for Code of Conduct investigations.

In one case the Merit Protection Commissioner upheld a sanction imposed for inaccurate recordkeeping noting that while there is room in the Code of Conduct for an honest or reasonable mistake, the inaccurate recordkeeping by the employee occurred over a long period and involved a significant number of discrepancies.

Information technology

Each year the Merit Protection Commissioner reviews Code of Conduct cases concerning the inappropriate use of the internet and email. This year was no exception with over one-third of cases involving IT issues. With the increased uptake of technology, particularly among younger employees, different IT issues are emerging and all agencies need to monitor existing guidance to ensure continued relevance of both intent and application.

Two cases included the excessive use of a work-issued mobile phone. Both employees argued that the respective agency policies allowed for occasional private phone usage and that there were no numerical limits provided by the agencies. In both cases the Merit Protection Commissioner upheld the agencies’ decisions, noting that the pattern of usage and the total volume of calls in one case could not be described as incidental personal use. In the second case, the Merit Protection Commissioner was satisfied that the number of calls made in the period represented a usage far more regular and frequent than the policy envisaged.

The Merit Protection Commissioner also considered a case involving inappropriate use of electronic media. The applicant sought review of the decision that they had breached the Code of Conduct by failing to follow a direction to remove references to the employing agency in a personal blog and not ensuring that future postings complied with the APS Values. The Merit Protection Commissioner upheld the agency finding, but noted that in making that recommendation the full extent of the directions given and all the circumstances of the alleged behaviour had not been considered as it was only necessary to establish if there had been a breach of the Code. A number of the applicant’s submissions were more relevant to whether the sanction was proportionate to the nature of the breach, which was not subject to review.

In this case, the Merit Protection Commissioner commented that a direction must be tightly drafted and specify exactly what actions should and should not be taken. This is particularly important when providing guidance on emerging areas where the boundaries of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour are less clearly defined.

The publication APS Values and Code of Conduct in practice available on the Commission’s website is regularly updated to reflect current advice on ethical issues affecting the APS. This guide is a valuable source of advice in this area.

Part 5 Financial statements This part includes the independent auditor’s report and the Commission’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010.

Independent Auditor's report

To the Special Minister of State

I have audited the accompanying financial statements of the Australian Public Service Commission for the year ended 30 June 2010, which comprise: a Statement by the Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer; Statement of Comprehensive Income; Balance Sheet; Statement of Changes in Equity; Cash Flow Statement; Schedule of Commitments; Schedule of Contingencies; Schedule of Asset Additions and Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statements, including a Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.

The Responsibility ofthe Chief Executive for the Financial Statements

The Australian Public Service Commission's Chief Executive is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with the Finance Minister's Orders made under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997, including the Australian Accounting Standards (which include the Australian Accounting Interpretations). This responsibility includes establishing and maintaining internal controls relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; selecting and applying appropriate accounting policies; and making accounting estimates that are reasonable in the circumstances.

Auditor's Responsibility

My responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on my audit. I have conducted my audit in accordance with the Australian National Audit Office Auditing Standards, which incorporate the Australian Auditing Standards. These auditing standards require that I comply with relevant ethical requirements relating to audit engagements and plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement. An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor's judgement, including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditor considers internal control relevant to the Australian Public Service Commission's preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Australian Public Service Commission's internal control. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates made by the Australian Public Service Commission's Chief Executive, as well as evaluating the overall presentation ofthe financial statements.

I believe that the audit evidence I have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for my audit opinion.

Independence

In conducting the audit, I have followed the independence requirements of the Australian National Audit Office, which incorporate the requirements of the Australian accounting profession.

Auditor's Opinion

In my opinion, the financial statements of the Australian Public Service Commission:

a. have been prepared in accordance with the Finance Minister's Orders made under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997, including the Australian Accounting Standards; and

b. give a true and fair view of the matters required by the Finance Minister's Orders including the Australian Public Service Commission's financial position as at 30 June 2010 and its financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended.

Australian National Audit Office

Lorena SkipperSenior Director

Delegate of the Auditor-General

Canberra16 September 2010

Australian Public Service CommissionStatement by the Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer

In our opinion, the attached financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2010 are based on properly maintained financial records and give a true and fair view of the matters required by the Finance Minister's Orders made under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997, as amended.

Stephen SedgwickChief Executive15 September 2010

David MylanChief Finance Officer15 September 2010

Australian Public Service CommissionStatement of comprehensive incomefor the period ended 30 June 2010

Notes

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Expenses

Employee benefits 3a 21,31222,653

Supplier expenses 3b 17,12017,293

Depreciation and amortisation 3c 1,376 1,569

Finance costs 3d 22 31

Write-down and impairment of assets 3e 2 8

Losses from asset sales 3f 61 34

Total expenses 39,89341,588

LESS:

Own source income

Own-source revenue

Sale of goods and rendering of services 4a 19,92219,365

Total own-source revenue 19,92219,365

Gains

Resources received free of charge 4b 39 39

Total gains 39 39

Total own-source income 19,96119,404

Net cost of / (contribution by) services 19,93222,184

Revenue from Government 4c 20,73122,132

Surplus / (deficit) 799 (52)

Other comprehensive income

Changes in asset revaluation reserves - 289

Total other comprehensive income - 289

Total comprehensive income / (loss) 799 237

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes

Australian Public Service CommissionBalance sheetas at 30 June 2010

Notes 2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Assets

Financial assets

Cash and cash equivalents 5a 469 443

Trade and other receivables 5b 18,017 15,059

Total financial assets 18,486 15,502

Non-financial assets

Land and buildings 6a,d 3,244 3,784

Property, plant and equipment 6b,d 1,812 2,259

Intangibles 6c,d 691 961

Inventories 6e 189 263

Prepayments paid 6f 449 545

Total non-financial assets 6,385 7,812

Total assets 24,871 23,314

Liabilities

Payables

Suppliers 7a 4,042 3,980

Prepayments received 7b 5,844 3,940

Other payables 7c 633 615

Total payables 10,519 8,535

Interest bearing liabilities

Lease incentives 8a 1,597 1,766

Total interest bearing liabilities 1,597 1,766

Provisions

Employee provisions 9a 4,850 5,709

Provision for restoration obligations 9b 332 530

Total provisions 5,182 6,239

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

Notes 2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Total liabilities 17,298 16,540

Net assets 7,573 6,774

Equity

Contributed equity (1,300) (1,300)

Asset revaluation reserve 1,302 1,302

Retained surplus / (accumulated deficit) 7,571 6,772

Total equity 7,573 6,774

Australian Public Service CommissionStatement of changes in equityfor the period ended 30 June 2010

Item

Retained earnings

Asset revaluation reserve

Contributed equity / capital Total equity

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Opening balance 6,772 6,824 1,302 1,013 (1,300) (1,004) 6,774 6,833

Comprehensive income

Other comprehensive income* - - - 289 - - - 289

Surplus / (deficit) for the period 799 (52) - - - - 799 (52)

Total comprehensive income 799 (52) - 289 - - 799 237

Transactions with owners

Contributions by owners:

Appropriation (equity injection) - - - - - (296) - (296)

Sub-total transactions with owners - - - - - (296) - (296)

Closing balance as at 30 June 7,571 6,772 1,302 1,302 (1,300) (1,300) 7,573 6,774

* See Note 6a for details of revaluation adjustments.

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

Australian Public Service CommissionCash flow statementfor the year ended 30 June 2010

Notes 2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Operating activities

Cash received

Goods and services 23,92123,246

Appropriations 20,73122,132

Cash received from the OPA 14,494-

Other cash received 496 854

Total cash received 59,64246,232

Cash used

Employees 22,73223,112

Suppliers 18,77819,321

Net GST paid 128 232

Cash transferred to the OPA 17,2942,400

Other cash used 511 697

Total cash used 59,44345,762

Net cash from / (used by) operating activities 11 199 470

Investing activities

Cash received

Proceeds from sales of property, plant and equipment 12 19

Lease incentive - 710

Total cash received 12 729

Cash used

Purchase of property, plant and equipment 71 1,202

Purchase of intangibles 114 275

Total cash used 185 1,477

Net cash from / (used by) investing activities (173) (748)

Financing activities

Notes 2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Cash received

Contributed equity - 179

Total cash received - 179

Net cash from / (used by) financing activities - 179

Net increase / (decrease) in cash held 26 (99)

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the reporting period 443 542

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the reporting period 5a 469 443

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

Australian Public Service CommissionSchedule of commitmentsas at 30 June 2010

2010$’000

2009 $’000

By maturity

GST recoverable on commitments

One year or less (846) (841)

From one to five years (1,371) (1,415)

Over five years (1,553) (1,788)

Total GST recoverable on commitments (3,770) (4,044)

Capital commitments

One year or less 98 240

From one to five years - -

Over five years - -

Total capital commitments 98 240

Operating lease commitments

One year or less 2,309 2,497

From one to five years 9,722 9,555

Over five years 16,843 19,388

Total operating lease commitments 28,874 31,440

Other commitments

One year or less 6,901 6,509

From one to five years 5,355 6,015

Over five years 243 279

Total other commitments 12,499 12,803

Net commitments by maturity 37,701 40,439

NB: Commitments are GST inclusive where relevant.

The above schedule should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

Australian Public Service CommissionSchedule of contingenciesas at 30 June 2010

2010$’000

2009$’000

Contingent assets - -

Contingent liabilities - -

Net contingent assets / (liabilities) - -

The above schedule should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

Australian Public Service CommissionSchedule of asset additionsfor the year ended 30 June 2010

The following non-financial non-current assets were added in 2009-10:

Buildings$’000

Other property, plant & equipment

$’000

Intangibles$’000

Total$’000

By purchase – appropriation equity - - 24 24

By purchase – appropriation ordinary annual services 41 45 81 167

By purchase – other - - - -

By finance lease - - - -

Total additions 41 45 105 191

The following non-financial non-current assets were added in 2008-09:

Buildings$’000

Other property, plant & equipment

$’000

Intangibles$’000

Total$’000

By purchase – appropriation equity - - 116 116

By purchase – appropriation ordinary annual services 472 725 178 1,375

By purchase – other - - - -

By finance lease - 141 - 141

Total additions 472 866 294 1,632

Australian Public Service CommissionNotes to and forming part of the Financial statementsfor the year ended 30 June 2010

Note 1. Summary of significant accounting policies

1.1 Objective of the APSC

The APSC’s mission is to support a high-performing Australian Public Service.

The APSC is structured to meet one outcome, increased awareness and adoption of best practice public administration by the public service through leadership, promotion, advice and professional development, drawing on research and evaluation.

The continued existence of the APSC in its present form and with its present programs is dependant on Government policy and on continuing appropriations by Parliament for the APSC’s administration and programs.

Activities contributing toward this outcome are classified as either departmental or administered. Departmental activities involve the use of assets, liabilities, income and expenses controlled or incurred by the APSC in its own right. Administered activities involve the management or oversight by the APSC, on behalf of the Government, of items controlled or incurred by the Government. The APSC does not manage any administered activities

1.2 Basis of preparation of the Financial Statements

The financial statements are required by section 49 of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 and are general purpose financial statements.

The Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with:

Finance Minister’s Orders (or FMO) for reporting periods ending on or after 1 July 2009 and

Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) that apply for the reporting period.

The financial statements have been prepared on an accrual basis and in accordance with the historical cost convention, except for certain assets at fair value. Except where stated, no allowance is made for the effect of changing prices on the operating result or the financial position.

The financial report is presented in Australian dollars and values are rounded to the nearest thousand dollars unless otherwise specified.

Unless an alternative treatment is specifically required by an accounting standard or the FMO, assets and liabilities are recognised in the balance sheet when and only when it is probable that

future economic benefits will flow to the entity or a future sacrifice of economic benefits will be required and the amounts of the assets or liabilities can be reliably measured. However, assets and liabilities arising under agreements equally proportionately unperformed are not recognised unless required by an accounting standard. Liabilities and assets that are unrecognised are reported in the schedule of commitments and the schedule of contingencies.

Unless alternative treatment is specifically required by an accounting standard, income and expenses are recognised in the statement of comprehensive income when and only when the flow, consumption or loss of economic benefits has occurred and can be reliably measured.

1.3 Significant Accounting Judgements and Estimates

No accounting assumptions or estimates have been identified that have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next accounting period.

1.4 Changes in accounting standards

Adoption of new Australian Accounting Standard requirements

No accounting standard has been adopted earlier than the application date as stated in the standard.

New and revised standards, interpretations and amending standards that were issued prior to the signing of the statement by the chief executive and chief financial officer and are applicable to the current reporting period did not have a material financial impact, and are not expected to have a material future financial impact on the entity.

Future Australian Accounting Standard requirements

New and revised standards, interpretations and amending standards that were issued prior to the signing of the statement by the chief executive and chief financial officer and are applicable to the future reporting period are not expected to have a material future financial impact on the entity.

1.5 Revenue

Revenue from Government

Amounts appropriated for departmental outputs for the year (adjusted for any formal additions and reductions) are recognised as revenue when the APSC gains control of the appropriation, except for certain amounts that relate to activities that are reciprocal in nature, in which case revenue is recognised only when it has been earned.

Appropriations receivable are recognised at their nominal amounts.

Other revenue

Revenue from the sale of goods is recognised when:

the risks and rewards of ownership have been transferred to the buyer the APSC retains no managerial involvement nor effective control over the goods the revenue and transaction costs incurred can be reliably measured and It is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the

entity.

Revenue from rendering of services is recognised by reference to the stage of completion of contracts at the reporting date. The revenue is recognised when:

the amount of revenue, stage of completion and transaction costs incurred can be reliably measured and

the probable economic benefits with the transaction will flow to the APSC.

The stage of completion of contracts at the reporting date is determined by reference to the proportion that costs incurred to date bear to the estimated total costs of the transaction.

Receivables for goods and services, which have 30 day terms, are recognised at the nominal amounts due less any allowance for impairment. Collectability of debts is reviewed at balance date. Allowances for impairment are made when collectability of the debt is no longer probable.

1.6 Gains

Resources received free of charge

Resources received free of charge are recognised as gains when and only when a fair value can be reliably determined and the services would have been purchased if they had not been donated. Use of those resources is recognised as an expense.

Resources received free of charge are recorded as either revenue or gains depending on their nature.

Contributions of assets at no cost of acquisition or for nominal consideration are recognised as gains at their fair value when the asset qualifies for recognition, unless received from another Government agency as a consequence of a restructuring of administrative arrangements (refer to Note 1.7).

Sale of assets

Gains from the disposal of non-current assets are recognised when control of the asset has passed to the buyer.

1.7 Transactions with the Government as owner

Equity injections

Amounts appropriated which are designated as ‘equity injections’ for a year (less any formal reductions) are recognised directly in contributed equity in that year.

Restructuring of Administrative Arrangements

Net assets received from or relinquished to another Australian Government agency or authority under a restructuring of administrative arrangements are adjusted at their book value directly against contributed equity.

Other distributions to owners

The FMO require that distributions to owners be debited to contributed equity unless in the nature of a dividend.

In 2009-10, by agreement with the Department of Finance and Deregulation, the APSC relinquished control of surplus departmental appropriation funding of $250,000. On 30 June 2010, the Finance Minister issued a determined to reduce Departmental Output Appropriations by $250,000.

1.8 Employee benefits

Liabilities for ‘short-term employee benefits’ (as defined in AASB 119 Employee Benefits) and termination benefits due within 12 months of balance date are measured at their nominal amounts. The nominal amount is calculated with regard to the rates expected to be paid on settlement of the liability.

Other long-term employee benefits are measured as net total of the present value of the defined benefit obligation at the end of the reporting period minus the fair value at the end of the reporting period of plan assets (if any) out of which the obligations are to be settled directly.

Leave

The liability for employee benefits includes provision for annual leave and long service leave. No provision has been made for sick leave as all sick leave is non-vesting and the average sick leave likely to be taken in future years by employees of the APSC is estimated to be less than the annual entitlement for sick leave.

The leave liabilities are calculated on the basis of employees’ remuneration at the estimated salary rates that applied at the time that the leave is taken, including the APSC’s employer superannuation contribution rates to the extent that the leave is likely to be taken during service rather than paid out on termination.

The liability for long service leave is recognised and measured at the present value of the estimated future cash flows to be made in respect of all employees at 30 June 2010. In determining the present value of the liability, the APSC has used the Australian Government shorthand method.

Separation and redundancy

Provision is made for separation and redundancy benefit payments. The APSC recognises a provision for termination when it has developed a detailed formal plan for the terminations and has informed those employees affected that it will carry out the terminations.

Superannuation

Staff of the APSC are members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS), the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme (PSS) or the PSS accumulation plan (PSSap).

The CSS and PSS are defined benefit schemes for the Australian Government. The PSSap is a defined contribution scheme.

The liability for defined benefits is recognised in the financial statements of the Australian Government and is settled by the Australian Government in due course. This liability is reported by the Department of Finance and Deregulation as an administered item.

The APSC makes employer contributions to the employee superannuation scheme at rates determined by an actuary to be sufficient to meet the cost to the Government of the superannuation entitlements of the APSC’s employees. The APSC accounts for the contributions as if they were contributions to defined contribution plans.

The provision for superannuation recognised as at 30 June represents the estimated superannuation payable on the provision for annual leave and long service leave.

1.9 Leases

A distinction is made between finance leases and operating leases. Finance leases effectively transfer from the lessor to the lessee substantially all risks and rewards incidental to ownership of leased non-current assets. An operating lease is a lease that is not a finance lease. In operating leases, the lessor effectively retains substantially all such risks and benefits.

Where an asset is acquired by means of a finance lease, the asset is capitalised at either the fair value of the lease property or, if lower, the present value of minimum lease payments at the inception of the contract and a liability is recognised at the same time and for the same amount

The discount rate used is the interest rate implicit in the lease. Leased assets are amortised over the period of the lease. Lease payments are allocated between the principal component and the interest expense.

Operating lease payments are expensed on a straight line basis which is representative of the pattern of benefits derived from the leased assets.

Lease incentives taking the form of “free” leasehold improvements, contributions and rent holidays are recognised as liabilities. These liabilities are reduced by allocating lease payments between rental expense and reduction of the liability.

1.10 Borrowing costs

All borrowing costs are expensed as incurred.

1.11 Cash

Cash and cash equivalents includes cash on hand, cash held with outsiders, demand deposits in bank accounts with an original maturity of 3 months or less that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and subject to insignificant risk of changes in value. Cash is recognised at its nominal amount.

1.12 Financial assets

The APSC classifies its financial assets in the following categories:

financial assets at fair value through profit or loss held-to-maturity investments available-for-sale financial assets and loans and receivables.

The classification depends on the nature and purpose of the financial assets and is determined at the time of initial recognition.

Financial assets are recognised and derecognised upon trade date.

Effective interest method

The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial asset and of allocating interest income over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash receipts over the expected life of the financial asset, or, where appropriate, a shorter period.

Income is recognised on an effective interest rate basis except for financial assets at fair value through profit or loss.

Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss

Financial assets are classified as financial assets at fair value through profit or loss where the financial assets:

have been acquired principally for the purpose of selling in the near future are a part of an identified portfolio of financial instruments that the APSC manages

together and has a recent actual pattern of short-term profit-taking or are derivatives that are not designated and effective as a hedging instrument.

Assets in this category are classified as current assets.

Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss are stated at fair value, with any resultant gain or loss recognised in profit or loss. The net gain or loss recognised in profit or loss incorporates any interest earned on the financial asset.

Available-for-sale financial assets

Available-for-sale financial assets are non-derivatives that are either designated in this category or not classified in any of the other categories.

Available-for-sale financial assets are recorded at fair value. Gains and losses arising from changes in fair value are recognised directly in the reserves (equity) with the exception of impairment losses. Interest is calculated using the effective interest method and foreign exchange gains and losses on monetary assets are recognised directly in profit or loss. Where the asset is disposed of or is determined to be impaired, part (or all) of the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in the reserve is included in profit for the period.

Where a reliable fair value cannot be established for unlisted investments in equity instruments, cost is used. The APSC has no such instruments.

Held-to-maturity investments

Non-derivative financial assets with fixed or determinable payments and fixed maturity dates that the APSC has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified as held-to-maturity investments. Held-to-maturity investments are recorded at amortised cost using the effective interest method less impairment, with revenue recognised on an effective yield basis.

Loans and receivables

Trade receivables, loans and other receivables that have fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market are classified as ‘loans and receivables’. Loans and receivables are measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method less impairment. Interest is recognised by applying the effective interest rate.

Impairment of financial assets

Financial assets are assessed for impairment at the end of each reporting period.

Financial assets held at amortised cost - if there is objective evidence that an impairment loss has been incurred for loans and receivables or held to maturity investments held at amortised cost, the amount of the loss is measured as the difference between the asset’s carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows discounted at the asset’s original effective interest rate. The carrying amount is reduced by way of an allowance account. The loss is recognised in the statement of comprehensive income.

Available-for-sale financial assets - if there is objective evidence that an impairment loss on an available-for-sale financial asset has been incurred, the amount of the difference between its cost, less principal repayments and amortisation, and its current

fair value, less any impairment loss previously recognised in expenses, is transferred from equity to the statement of comprehensive income.

Available-for-sale financial assets (held at cost) - If there is objective evidence that an impairment loss has been incurred the amount of the impairment loss is the difference between the carrying amount of the asset and the present value of the estimated future cash flows discounted at the current market rate for similar assets.

1.13 Financial liabilities

Financial liabilities are classified as either financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss or as other financial liabilities.

Financial liabilities are recognised and derecognised upon trade date.

Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss

Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss are initially measured at fair value. Subsequent fair value adjustments are recognised in profit or loss. The net gain or loss recognised in profit or loss incorporates any interest paid on the financial liability.

Other financial liabilities

Other financial liabilities, including borrowings, are initially measured at fair value, net of transaction costs.

Other financial liabilities are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method, with interest expense recognised on an effective yield basis.

The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial liability and of allocating interest expense over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the financial liability, or, where appropriate, a shorter period.

Supplier and other payables are recognised at amortised cost. Liabilities are recognised to the extent that the goods or services have been received (and irrespective of having been invoiced).

1.14 Contingent liabilities and contingent assets

Contingent liabilities and contingent assets are not recognised in the balance sheet but are reported in the relevant schedules and Notes. They may arise from uncertainty as to the existence of a liability or asset, or represent an asset or liability in respect of which the amount cannot be reliably measured. Contingent assets are disclosed when settlement is probable but not virtually certain and contingent liabilities are disclosed when settlement is greater than remote.

1.15 Acquisition of assets

Assets are recorded at cost on acquisition except as stated below. The cost of acquisition includes the fair value of assets transferred in exchange and liabilities undertaken. Financial assets are initially measured at their fair value plus transaction costs where appropriate.

Assets acquired at no cost, or for nominal consideration, are initially recognised as assets and income at their fair value at the date of acquisition, unless acquired as a consequence of restructuring of administrative arrangements. In the latter case, assets are initially recognised as contributions by owners at the amounts at which they were recognised in the transferor agency’s accounts immediately prior to the restructuring.

1.16 Property, plant and equipment

Asset recognition threshold

Purchases of property, plant and equipment are recognised initially at cost in the balance sheet, except for purchases costing less than $2,000, which are expensed in the year of acquisition (other than where they form part of a group of similar items which are significant in total).

The initial cost of an asset includes an estimate of the cost of dismantling and removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located. This is particularly relevant to the provision for restoration obligations in property leases taken up by the APSC where there exists an obligation to restore the property to its original condition. These costs are included in the value of the APSC’s leasehold improvements with a corresponding provision for restoration obligations recognised.

Revaluations

Fair values for each class of asset are determined as shown below:

Asset class Fair value measured at:

Leasehold improvements Depreciated replacement cost

Property, plant and equipment Market selling price

Following initial recognition at cost, property plant and equipment are carried at fair value less subsequent accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses. Valuations are conducted with sufficient frequency to ensure that the carrying amounts of assets do not materially differ from the assets’ fair values as at the reporting date. The regularity of independent valuations depends upon the volatility of movements in market values for the relevant assets.

Revaluation adjustments are made on a class basis. Any revaluation increment is credited to equity under the heading of asset revaluation reserve except to the extent that it reverses a previous revaluation decrement of the same asset class that was previously recognised in the

surplus / (deficit). Revaluation decrements for a class of assets are recognised directly through the surplus / (deficit) except to the extent that they reverse a previous revaluation increment for that class.

Any accumulated depreciation as at the revaluation date is eliminated against the gross carrying amount of the asset and the asset restated to the revalued amount.

Depreciation

Depreciable property, plant and equipment assets are written off to their estimated residual value over their estimated useful life to the APSC using, in all cases, the straight-line method of depreciation.

Depreciation rates (useful lives), residual values and methods are reviewed at each reporting date and necessary adjustments are recognised in the current, or current and future reporting periods, as appropriate.

Depreciation and amortisation rates applying to each class of depreciable asset are based on the following useful lives:

Asset class 2010 2009

Leasehold improvements Lease term Lease term

Plant and equipment 1 to 7 years 1 to 7 years

Impairment

All assets were assessed for impairment at 30 June 2010. Where indications of impairment exist, the asset’s recoverable amount is estimated and an impairment adjustment made if the asset’s recoverable amount is less than its carrying amount.

The recoverable amount of an asset is the higher of its fair value less costs to sell and its value in use. Value in use is the present value of the future cash flows expected to be derived from the asset. Where the future economic benefit of an asset is not primarily dependent on the asset’s ability to generate future cash flows, and the asset would be replaced if the APSC were deprived of the asset, its value in use is taken to be its depreciated replacement cost.

Derecognition

An item of property, plant and equipment is derecognised upon disposal or when no further future economic benefits are expected from its use or disposal.

1.17 Intangibles

The APSC’s intangibles comprise intellectual property, purchased software and internally developed software for internal use. These assets are carried at cost less accumulated

amortisation and accumulated impairment losses where the value of the asset exceeds $2,000 for software and $10,000 for intellectual property

Intangibles are amortised on a straight-line basis over their anticipated useful life. The useful lives of the APSC’s intangibles are between 2 to 10 years (2008-09: 2 to 10 years).

All intangible assets were assessed for impairment as at 30 June 2010.

1.18 Inventories

Inventories held for sale are valued at the lower of cost and net realisable value.

Inventories held for distribution are valued at cost, adjusted for any loss in service potential.

Costs incurred in bringing each item of inventory to its present location and condition are assigned as follows:

raw materials and stores – purchase cost on a first-in-first-out basis and finished goods and work-in-progress – cost of direct materials and labour plus

attributable costs that are capable of being allocated on a reasonable basis.

Inventories acquired at no cost or nominal consideration are initially measured at current replacement cost at the date of acquisition.

1.19 Taxation

The APSC is exempt from all forms of taxation except Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) and the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

Revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities are recognised net of GST except:

where the amount of GST incurred is not recoverable from the Australian Taxation Office and

for receivables and payables.

Note 2. Events occurring after reporting date

No matter or occurrence has come to the APSC’s attention which would materially affect the accounts or disclosures therein or which are likely to materially affect the future results or operation of the APSC.

Note 3. Expenses2010 $’000

2009 $’000

* For full disclosure on the impairment of financial assets see Note 15b.

3a Employee benefits

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Wages and salaries 15,769 16,626

Superannuation :

Defined benefit plans 2,181 2,396

Defined contribution plans 727 698

Leave and other entitlements 1,834 2,422

Separation and redundancies 801 511

Total employee benefits 21,312 22,653

3b Suppliers

Goods and Services

Consultants 747 613

Contractors 6,742 6,456

Stationery 149 179

Travel 1,644 1,863

Venue hire and catering 1,477 1,434

Publications and printing 436 429

Advertising and communications 362 150

Training 399 318

Information and communications technology 1,877 1,966

Facilities expense 287 327

Other supplier expense 359 605

Total goods and services 14,479 14,340

Goods and services are made up of:

Provision of goods - related entities 4 4

Provision of goods - external parties 667 741

Rendering of services - related entities 2,207 986

Rendering of services - external parties 11,601 12,609

Total goods and services 14,47 14,340

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

9

Other supplier expenses

Operating lease rentals - external parties [3] 2,599 2,848

Worker compensation expenses 42 105

Total other supplier expenses 2,641 2,953

Total supplier expenses17,120 17,293

3c Depreciation and amortisation

Depreciation:

Buildings 568 484

Property, plant and equipment 433 462

Total depreciation 1,001 946

Amortisation:

Computer software 248 222

Intellectual property 127 173

Assets held under finance lease - 228

Total amortisation 375 623

Total depreciation and amortisation 1,376 1,569

3d Finance costs

Finance leases - 22

Unwinding of discount on provision for restoration obligations22 9

Total finance costs 22 31

3e Write-down and impairment of assets

Asset write-downs and impairment from:

Impairment on goods and services receivable* 2 8

Property, plant and equipment – write-off on disposal - -

Total write-down and impairment of assets 2 8

3f Sale of assets

Buildings:

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Proceeds from sale - 19

Carrying value of assets sold (13) (59)

Net gain / (loss) from sale of buildings (13) (40)

Property, plant and equipment:

Proceeds from sale 12 257

Carrying value of assets sold (60) (246)

Net gain / (loss) from sale of property, plant and equipment (48) 11

Intangibles:

Proceeds from sale - -

Carrying value of assets sold - (5)

Net gain / (loss) from sale of buildings - (5)

Net gain / (loss) from sale of assets (61) (34)

[3] These comprise minimum lease payments only.

Note 4. Income2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Revenue

4a Sale of goods and rendering of services

Provision of goods - related entities 22 43

Provision of goods - external parties 3 5

Rendering of services - related entities 18,67717,781

Rendering of services - external parties 1,220 1,536

Total sale of goods and rendering of services 19,92219,365

Gains

4b Resources received free of charge

Resources received free of charge 39 39

Revenue from Government

4c Revenue from Government

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Appropriations:

Departmental outputs 20,73122,132

Total revenue from Government 20,73122,132

Note 5. Financial assets2010 $’000

2009 $’000

5a Cash and cash equivalents

Cash at bank 466 437

Cash on hand 3 6

Total cash and cash equivalents 469 443

5b Trade and other receivables

Goods and services:

Goods and services – related entities 3,243 2,696

Goods and services – external parties 161 289

Total goods and services receivable 3,404 2,985

Appropriations receivable:

for existing outputs 14,60011,800

Total appropriations receivable 14,60011,800

Other receivables:

GST receivable from the Australian Taxation Office - 259

Incentive receivable 25 25

Total other receivables 25 284

Total trade and other receivables (gross) 18,02915,069

Less: impairment allowance account - goods and services (12) (10)

Total trade and other receivables (net) 18,01715,059

All receivables are expected to be recovered in no more than 12 months.

Receivables are aged as follows:

Not overdue 17,07714,264

Overdue by:

0 to 30 days 394 413

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

31 to 60 days 456 208

61 to 90 days 33 41

More than 90 days 69 143

952 805

Total goods and services receivables (gross) 18,02915,069

The impairment allowance account is aged as follows:

Overdue by:

more than 90 days (12) (10)

Total impairment allowance account (12) (10)

Reconciliation of impairment allowance account

Opening balance (10) (2)

Amounts written-off 2 1

Amounts recovered and reversed 6 1

(Increase) / decrease recognised in net surplus (10) (10)

Closing balance (12) (10)

Note 6. Non-financial assets2010 $’000

2009 $’000

No indicators of impairment were found for intangible assets.

No intangibles are expected to be sold or disposed of within the next 12 months.

6a Land and buildings

Leasehold improvements:

Fair value 3,722 3,784

Accumulated depreciation (478) -

Total leasehold improvements 3,244 3,784

Total Land and buildings 3,244 3,784

6b Property, plant and equipment

Fair value 2,224 2,276

Accumulated depreciation (412) (17)

Total property, plant and equipment 1,812 2,259

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

All revaluations were conducted in accordance with the revaluation policy stated at Note 1. On 30 June 2009 an independent valuer Preston Rowe Paterson Australasia Pty Ltd conducted the revaluations. All assets acquired since 1 July 2009 are carried at cost, which is materially reflective of their fair value.

In 2009 revaluation increments of $370,000 for leasehold improvements and $268,000 for property, plant and equipment were credited to the asset revaluation reserve by asset class and included in the equity section of the balance sheet.

In 2009 the provision for restoration obligations was also revalued and the provision increased by $349,000. A decrement of $349,000 was debited to the asset revaluation reserve as a sufficient credit balance existed in the revaluation reserve for the relevant asset class. This decrement to the asset revaluation reserve was included in the equity section of the balance sheet.

No indicators of impairment were found for land and buildings, property, plant and equipment.

No land and buildings, property, plant or equipment is expected to be sold or disposed of within the next 12 months.

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

6c Intangibles

Computer software:

Internally developed - in use 1,178 1,151

Internally developed - in progress - 3

Purchased 41 102

Total computer software (gross) 1,219 1,256

Accumulated amortisation (670) (492)

Total computer software (net) 549 764

Intellectual property:

Internally developed - in use 1,048 1,080

Total intellectual property (gross) 1,048 1,080

Accumulated amortisation (906) (883)

Total intellectual property (net) 142 197

Total intangibles 691 961

Item

Buildings leasehold

improvements$’000

Other property, plant &

equipment$’000

Computer software

purchased$’000

Computer software internally developed

$’000

Intellectual property

$’000

Total intangibles

$’000

Total$’000

6d Analysis of property, plant, equipment and intangibles

Table A – Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment and intangibles (2009-10)

As at 1 July 2009

Gross book value 3,784 2,276 102 1,154 1,080 2,336 8,396

Accumulated depreciation / amortisation and impairment

- (17) (74) (418) (883) (1,375) (1,392)

Net book value 1 July 2009 3,784 2,259 28 736 197 961 7,004

Additions

By purchase 41 45 3 30 72 105 191

By finance lease - - - - - - -

Revaluations and impairments through equity

- - - - - - -

Depreciation / amortisation expense

(568) (433) (10) (238) (127) (375) (1,376)

Disposals

By finance lease - - - - - - -

Other disposals (13) (59) - - - - (72)

Net book value 30 June 2010 3,244 1,812 21 528 142 691 5,747

Net book value as at 30 June 2010 represented by:

Gross book value 3,722 2,224 40 1,179 1,048 2,267 8,213

Accumulated depreciation / amortisation and impairment

(478) (412) (19) (651) (906) (1,576) (2,466)

Item

Buildings leasehold

improvements$’000

Other property, plant &

equipment$’000

Computer software

purchased$’000

Computer software internally developed

$’000

Intellectual property

$’000

Total intangibles

$’000

Total$’000

Net book value 30 June 2010 3,244 1,812 21 528 142 691 5,747

Item

Buildings leasehold

improvements$’000

Other property, plant &

equipment$’000

Computer software

purchased$’000

Computer software internally developed

$’000

Intellectual property

$’000

Total intangibles

$’000

Total$’000

Table B – Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment and intangibles (2008-09)

As at 1 July 2008

Gross book value 4,017 3,844 87 1,054 1,134 2,275 10,136

Accumulated depreciation / amortisation and impairment

(532) (1,783) (62) (211) (935) (1,208) (3,523)

Net book value 1 July 2008 3,485 2,061 25 843 199 1,067 6,613

Additions

By purchase 472 725 18 100 176 294 1,491

By finance lease - 141 - - - - 141

Revaluations and impairments through equity

370 268 - - - - 638

Depreciation / amortisation expense

(484) (690) (15) (207) (173) (395) (1,569)

Disposals

By finance lease - (245) - - - - (245)

Other disposals (59) (1) - - (5) (5) (65)

Net book value 30 June 2009 3,784 2,259 28 736 197 961 7,004

Item

Buildings leasehold

improvements$’000

Other property, plant &

equipment$’000

Computer software

purchased$’000

Computer software internally developed

$’000

Intellectual property

$’000

Total intangibles

$’000

Total$’000

Net book value as at 30 June 2009 represented by:

Gross book value 3,784 2,276 102 1,154 1,080 2,336 8,396

Accumulated depreciation / amortisation and impairment

- (17) (74) (418) (883) (1,375) (1,392)

Net book value 30 June 2009 3,784 2,259 28 736 197 961 7,004

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

During 2009-10, $74,309 of inventory held for distribution was recognised as an expense (2008-09 $75,780).

All inventory is expected to be sold or distributed in the next 12 months.

6e Inventories

Inventories held for distribution 189 263

Total inventories 189 263

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

All prepayments are expected to be utilised in no more than 12 months.

6f Prepayments paid

Prepayments paid 449 545

Note 7. Payables2010$’000

2009 $’000

*All prepayments received are expected to be settled within the next 12 months.

**All other payables are expected to be settled in no more than 12 months.

7a Suppliers

2010$’000

2009 $’000

Trade creditors and accruals 2,781 3,038

Operating lease rentals 1,261 942

Total supplier payables 4,042 3,980

Supplier payables expected to be settled within 12 months:

Related entities 751 616

External parties 2,030 2,422

Total 2,781 3,038

Supplier payables expected to be settled in greater than 12 months:

Related entities - -

External parties 1,261 942

Total 1,261 942

Total suppliers payable 4,042 3,980

7b Prepayments received*

Prepayments received 5,844 3,940

7c Other payables**

GST payable to ATO 76 -

Salaries and superannuation 355 441

Separations and redundancies 185 162

Other 17 12

Total other payables 633 615

Note 8. Interest bearing liabilities2010$’000

2009 $’000

8a Lease incentives

Lease incentives are expected to be settled in:

No more than 12 months 166 169

More than 12 months 1,431 1,597

Total lease incentives 1,597 1,766

Note 9. Provisions2010$’000

2009$’000

The APSC currently has 2 agreements for the leasing of premises which have provisions requiring the APSC to restore the premises to their original condition at the conclusion of the lease. The APSC has made a provision to reflect the present value of this obligation.

9a Employee provisions

Leave 4,429 5,183

Superannuation 421 526

Total employee provisions 4,850 5,709

Employee provisions are expected to be settled in:

No more than 12 months 1,851 1,575

More than 12 months 2,999 4,134

Total employee provisions 4,850 5,709

9b Provision for restoration obligations

Carrying amount 1 July 530 141

Additional provisions made - 380

Amounts used (220) -

Unwinding of discount or change in discount rate 22 9

Closing balance 30 June 332 530

Provision for restoration obligations are expected to be settled in:

No more than 12 months 245 235

More than 12 months 87 295

Total provision for restoration obligations 332 530

Note 10. Restructuring

As a result of a machinery of government change, on 4 May 2010, the APSC assumed responsibility for Australian Government employment workplace relations policy from the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). By agreement between the APSC and DEEWR this transfer will have operational effect from 1 July 2010.

There were no restructures in 2008-09.

Note 11. Cash flow reconciliation2010 $’000 2009 $’000

During 2009-10 the APSC acquired nil and disposed of nil plant and equipment by finance lease (2008-09: acquired $141,000 and disposed of $245,000). These are non cash transactions and are not reflected in the Cash Flow Statement.

Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents as per Balance Sheet to Cash Flow Statement:

Cash and cash equivalents as per:

Cash flow statement 469 443

Balance sheet 469 443

Difference - -

Reconciliation of net cost of services to net cash from operating activities:

Net cost of services 19,932 22,184

Add revenue from Government 20,731 22,132

Adjustments for non-cash items

Depreciation and amortisation 1,376 1,569

(Gain) / loss on sale of assets 61 34

Employees benefits capitalised - (3)

Revaluation of provision for restoration obligations debited to reserves - (349)

Lease incentive received - (710)

Changes in assets / liabilities -

(Increase) / decrease in net receivables (2,958) (1,880)

(Increase) / decrease in inventories 74 (76)

(Increase) / decrease in prepayments paid 96 (1)

Increase / (decrease) in supplier payables 55 206

Increase / (decrease) in prepayments received 1,904 1,507

Increase / (decrease) in other payables 18 46

Increase / (decrease) in interest bearing liabilities (169) (426)

Increase / (decrease) in employee provisions (859) 216

Increase / (decrease) in provision for restoration obligations (198) 389

Net cash from / (used by) operating activities 199 470

Note 12. Contingent liabilities and assets

Quantifiable contingencies

As at 30 June 2010 the APSC has no quantifiable contingencies (2009: nil).

Unquantifiable contingencies

As at 30 June 2010 the APSC has no unquantifiable contingencies (2009: nil).

Significant remote contingencies

As at 30 June 2010 the APSC has no significant remote contingencies (2009: nil).

Note 13. Executive remunerationExecutive remuneration 2010 2009

* Excluding acting arrangements and part year service.

In addition to the amounts disclosed above, during the year the APSC paid $133,593 in termination benefits to senior executives (2009: nil).

Note: 1. "Other" includes motor vehicle allowances and other allowances.

13a Actual remuneration paid to Senior Executives

The number of executives who received:

Less than $145,000* - -

$145,000 to $159,999 - -

$160,000 to $174,999 - -

$175,000 to $189,999 - 2

$190,000 to $204,999 3 3

$205,000 to $219,999 2 2

$220,000 to $234,999 1 -

$235,000 to $249,999 - 1

$265,000 to $279,999 1 -

$355,000 to $369,999 1 -

$505,000 to $519,999 - 1

Total 8 9

Short-term employee benefits:

Salary (including annual leave taken) 1,407,762 1,500,343

Changes in annual leave provisions 5,259 12,275

Executive remuneration 2010 2009

Performance bonus 27,296 75,526

Other1 187,506 212,713

Total short-term employee benefits 1,627,823 1,800,857

Superannuation (post-employment benefits) 217,360 275,319

Other long-term benefits 53,939 51,525

Total 1,899,122 2,127,701

13b Salary packages for Senior Executives

Average annualised remuneration packages for substantive Senior Executives

Total remuneration:

As at 30 June 2010 As at 30 June 2009

No. SES

Base salary (including

annual leave)

Total Remuneration

package1

No. SES

Base salary (including

annual leave)

Total Remuneration

package1

* Excluding acting arrangements.

Note: 1. Non-Salary elements available to Senior Executives include:

motor vehicle allowance car park and superannuation

Performance bonuses and long service leave have not been included in the table above.Less than $145,000* - - - - - -

$145,000 to $159,999 - - - - - -

$160,000 to $174,999 - - - - - -

$175,000 to $189,999 - - - 3 136,933 185,963

$190,000 to $204,999 1 154,400 204,306 4 144,300 194,335

$205,000 to $219,999 2 155,350 208,306 - - -

$220,000 to $234,999 1 181,361 234,884 1 175,438 227,789

$265,000 to $279,999 - - - 1 216,200 275,676

Total remuneration:

As at 30 June 2010 As at 30 June 2009

No. SES

Base salary (including

annual leave)

Total Remuneration

package1

No. SES

Base salary (including

annual leave)

Total Remuneration

package1

$310,000 to $324,999 1 244,898 310,585 - - -

$415,000 to $429,999 - - - 1 331,883 422,863

$460,000 to $474,999 1 393,372 473,009

Total 6 10

Differences between Note 13a and 13b

Note 13a discloses Senior Executive remuneration based upon:

actual salary paid during the year (including payment for leave taken) performance bonuses received movement in annual leave and long service leave provisions (including revaluation of

provisions) superannuation (post-employment benefits) motor vehicle and other allowances

These amounts may differ to the remuneration package disclosed in Note 13b depending upon:

the amount of leave taken during the year part-year service periods of leave without pay acting arrangements performance bonuses received changes to base salary, salary for superannuation purposes and allowances during the

year and revaluation of employee provisions.

Note 13b discloses remuneration packages only for those Senior Executives employed as at 30 June 2009 and 30 June 2010.

Note 14. Remuneration of auditors2010 $’000

2009 $’000

No other services were provided by the Auditor-General.

Financial statement audit services are provided free of charge to the APSC.

The fair value of the services provided was: 39 39

Note 15. Financial instruments2010$’000

2009 $’000

The total interest expense from financial liabilities not at fair value from profit and loss is nil (2008-09: $9,000).

15a Categories of financial instruments

Financial Assets

Loans and receivables:

Cash and cash equivalents 469 443

Goods and services receivable 3,404 2,985

Incentive receivable 25 25

Total 3,898 3,453

Carrying amount of financial assets 3,898 3,453

Financial LiabilitiesAt amortised cost:Trade creditors 2,781 3,038

Other payables 17 12

Total 2,798 3,050

Carrying amount of financial liabilities 2,798 3,050

15b Net income and expense from financial assets

Loans and receivablesImpairment on goods and services receivable (2) (8)

Net gain/(loss) loans and receivables (2) (8)

Net gain/(loss) from financial assets (2) (8)

15c Net income and expense from financial liabilities

Financial liabilities - at amortised cost

Interest expense - (22)

Net gain/(loss) financial liabilities - at amortised cost - (22)

Net gain/(loss) from financial liabilities - (22)

15d Fair value of financial instruments

The carrying amount of all financial assets and liabilities is a reasonable approximation of their fair value. The net fair values of finance lease liabilities are based on discounted cash flows using the interest rate implicit in the lease.

15e Credit risk

The APSC is exposed to minimal credit risk as loans and receivables are goods and services receivable and incentive receivable. The maximum exposure to credit risk is the risk that arises from potential default of a debtor. This amount is equal to the total amount of goods and services and incentive receivable (see Note 15a). The APSC has assessed the risk of the default on payment and has allocated an allowance for impairment on goods and services receivable.

The APSC’s goods and services receivable are principally recoverable from other Australian Government agencies. The incentive receivable is recoverable from a building lessor, with the amount recoverable specified in the lease agreement. In addition, the APSC has policies and procedures that guide debt recovery techniques that are to be applied.

The APSC holds no collateral to mitigate against credit risk.

Credit quality of financial instruments not past due or individually determined as impaired

Not Past Due Nor Impaired 2010

$’000

Not Past Due Nor Impaired 2009

$’000

Past due or impaired 2010

$’000

Past due or impaired 2009

$’000

Financial Assets

Loans and receivables

Goods and services receivable 2,452 2,180 952 805

Incentive receivable25 25 -

Total loans and receivables 2,477 2,205 952 805

Total 2,477 2,205 952 805

Ageing of financial assets that are past due but not impaired

Year 0 to 30 days $’000

31 to 60 days $’000

61 to 90 days $’000

90+ days $’000

Total $’000

Goods and services receivable:

2010394 456 33 57 940

2009413 208 41 133 795

The following list of assets have been individually assessed as impaired

Financial Assets 2010$’000

2009 $’000

These items are assessed as impaired as they are past due by 90 + days and it will be uneconomic to pursue them.

Loans and receivables

Goods and services receivable (12) (10)

Total (12) (10)

15f Liquidity risk

The APSC’s financial liabilities are payables, finance leases and other interest bearing liabilities. The exposure to liquidity risk is based on the notion that the APSC will encounter difficulty in meeting its obligations associated with financial liabilities. This is highly unlikely as the APSC is appropriated funding from the Australian Government and the APSC manages its budgeted funds to ensure it has adequate funds to meet payments as they fall due. In addition, the APSC has policies in place to ensure timely payment are made when due and has no past experience of default.

Maturities for non-derivative financial liabilities

On demand 2010 $’000

Within 1 year 2010 $’000

1 to 2 years 2010 $’000

2 to 5 years 2010 $’000

> 5 years 2010 $’000

Total 2010 $’000

Financial Liabilities

Liabilities at amortised cost

Trade creditors - 2,781 - - - 2,781

Other payables - 17 - - - 17

Finance lease - - - - - -

Total liabilities at amortised cost - 2,798 - - - 2,798

Total - 2,798 - - - 2,798

On demand 2009 $’000

Within 1 year 2009 $’000

1 to 2 years 2009 $’000

2 to 5 years 2009 $’000

> 5 years 2009 $’000

Total 2009 $’000

Financial Liabilities

Liabilities at amortised cost

Trade creditors - 3,038 - - - 3,038

Other payables - 12 - - - 12

Maturities for non-derivative financial liabilities

On demand 2010 $’000

Within 1 year 2010 $’000

1 to 2 years 2010 $’000

2 to 5 years 2010 $’000

> 5 years 2010 $’000

Total 2010 $’000

Finance lease - - - - - -

Total liabilities at amortised cost - 3,050 - - - 3,050

Total - 3,050 - - - 3,050

15g Market risk

The APSC holds basic financial instruments that do not expose the APSC to certain market risks. The APSC is not exposed to 'Currency risk' or 'Other price risk'.

Interest Rate Risk

The only interest-bearing items on the balance sheet were 'Finance lease' liabilities'. These bore interest at a fixed interest rate that did not fluctuate due to changes in the market interest rate. The finance lease arrangement ceased on 26 June 2009.

Note 16. AppropriationsDepartmental outputs

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

1. The amounts in this line item are calculated on an accrual basis to the extent that an expense may have been incurred that includes GST but has not been paid by year end.

2. This amount excludes accruals.

FMA Act = Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997

Departmental and non-operating appropriations do not lapse at financial year end. However, the responsible Minister may decide that part or all of a departmental or non-operating appropriation is not required and request the Finance Minister to reduce that appropriation. The reduction in the appropriation is effected by the Finance Minister's determination and is disallowable by Parliament.

On 12 May 2009, the Finance Minister determined a reduction in departmental output appropriations and other departmental items (Previous Years’ Outputs) following a request by the Special Minister of State. The amount of the reduction under Appropriation Act (No. 1) of 2008-09 was $900,000 and Appropriation Act (No. 2) of 2008-09 was $296,000.

On 30 June 2010, the Finance Minister determined a reduction in departmental output appropriations following a request by the Special Minister of State. The amount of the reduction under Appropriation Act (No. 1) of 2009-10 was $250,000.

16a Acquittal of authority to draw cash from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) for ordinary annual services appropriations

Balance brought forward from previous period (Appropriations Acts) 12,259 9,995

Appropriation Act:

Appropriation Act (No.1,3 and 5) as passed 20,981 23,032

Appropriations reduced (Appropriation Act sections 10,11 and 12) (250) (900)

FMA Act:

Repayments to the Commonwealth (FMA Act section 30) 246 458

* Appropriations to take account of recoverable GST (FMA Act section 30A)1 1,586 1,647

Relevant agency receipts (FMA Act section 31) 22,181 22,521

Total appropriation available for payments 57,003 56,753

Cash payments made during the year (GST inclusive) (42,180) (44,494)

Balance of authority to draw cash from the CRF for ordinary annual services appropriations 14,823 12,259

Departmental outputs

2010 $’000

2009 $’000

Represented by:

Cash and cash equivalents 469 443

Departmental appropriations receivable 14,518 11,694

Net GST (payable to) / receivable from ATO2 (164) 122

Total as at 30 June 14,823 12,259

Non-operating

TotalEquityPrevious years’

outputs

2010$

2009$

2010$

2009$

2010$

2009$

1. The amounts in this line item are calculated on an accrual basis to the extent that an expense may have been incurred that includes GST but has not been paid by year end.

2. Payments of $104,000 were made from Equity in 2007-08 for which Previous years’ outputs appropriation funding was received in 2008-09, upon which the Equity balance was reimbursed.

FMA Act = Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997

16b Acquittal of authority to draw cash from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) for other than ordinary annual services appropriations

Balance brought forward from previous period (Appropriations Acts)

106 30 - - 106 30

Appropriation Act:

Appropriation Act (No.2,4 and 6) as passed - 75 - 400 - 475

Appropriations reduced (Appropriation Act sections 12, 13 and 14)

- - (296) - (296)

FMA Act:

*Appropriations to take account of recoverable GST (FMA Act section 30A)1

2 10 - - 2 10

Total appropriation available for payments 108 115 - 104 108 219

Non-operating

TotalEquityPrevious years’

outputs

2010$

2009$

2010$

2009$

2010$

2009$

Cash payments made during the year (GST inclusive) (26) (113)

- - (26) (113)

Transfer between categories2 - 104 - (104) - -

Balance of authority to draw cash from the CRF for other than ordinary annual services appropriations

82 106 - - 82 106

Represented by:

Departmental appropriations receivable 82 106 - - 82 106

Total as at 30 June 82 106 - - 82 106

Note 17. Special accounts

Other Trust Monies Special Account (Departmental)

Appropriation: Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; s21.

Establishing Instrument: Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; s20.

Purpose: Expenditure of monies temporarily held on trust or otherwise for the benefit of a person other than the Commonwealth.

2010$’000

2009$’000

Balance brought forward from previous period - -

Other receipts - Comcare compensation receipts 10 1

Total increase 10 1

Payments made - reimbursement to Departmental outputs(10) (1)

Balance carried to next period - -

Represented by:

Cash and cash equivalents - -

Total balance carried to the next period - -

Services for Other Government and Non Agency Bodies Special Account (Departmental)

Appropriation: Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; s21.

Establishing Instrument: Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997; s20.

Purpose: Expenditure in connection with services performed on behalf of other Governments and bodies that are not FMA Agencies.

The Finance Minister issued a determination to abolish this account, effective from 11 September 2009.

For the period 1 July 2000 to 11 September 2009, the account had nil balances and there were no transactions debited or credited to it.

Note 18. Compensation and debt relief2010

$2009

$

No ‘Act of Grace’ expenses were incurred during the reporting period (2009: nil). - -

No waivers of amounts owing to the Australian Government were made pursuant to subsection 34(1) of the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (2009: no waivers).

- -

No payments were provided under the Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) Scheme during the reporting period (2009: nil). - -

No ex-gratia payments were provided for during the reporting period (2009: nil). - -

No payments were provided in special circumstances relating to APS employment under s73 of the Public Service Act 1999 (PS Act) during the reporting period (2009: nil).

- -

Note 19. Reporting of outcomesOutcome 1

2010 $’000

2009$’000

Outcome 1 is described in Note 1.1. Net costs shown include intra-government costs that are eliminated in calculating the actual Budget outcome.

19a Net Cost of Outcome Delivery

Total expenses 39,893 41,588

Outcome 1

2010 $’000

2009$’000

Income from non-government sector

Goods and services revenue 1,223 1,541

Total 1,223 1,541

Other own-source income

Resources received free of charge 39 39

Goods and services revenue 18,699 17,824

Total 18,738 17,863

Net cost / (contribution) of outcome delivery 19,932 22,184

19b Major classes of Departmental expense, income, assets and liabilities by outcome

As the APSC only has one outcome, major classes of departmental assets and liabilities for Outcome 1 are as per the balance sheet and major classes of departmental expense and income for Outcome 1 are as per the statement of comprehensive income.

Appendix A: Agency resource and outcome resource statements

Table A1: Agency resource statement, 2009–10

Actual available appropriation for 2009–10

$’000(a)

Payments made 2009–10

$’000(b)

Balance remaining 2009–10

$’000(a)–(b)

Ordinary annual services

Departmental appropriation

Prior year departmental appropriation 12,259

Departmental appropriation1 20,731

Section 31 relevant agency receipts 22,181

Section 30 repayments 246

Total 55,417 40,594 14,823

Total ordinary annual services 55,417 40,594 14,823

Other services2

Departmental non-operating

Prior year appropriation 106

Equity injections –

Previous years’ outputs –

Total 106 24 82

Total other services 106 24 82

Special Accounts

Opening balance –

Appropriation receipts –

Non-appropriation receipts to special accounts –

Payments made –

Table A1: Agency resource statement, 2009–10

Actual available appropriation for 2009–10

$’000(a)

Payments made 2009–10

$’000(b)

Balance remaining 2009–10

$’000(a)–(b)

Closing balance –

Total resourcing 55,523 40,618 14,905

1 Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2009–10 less appropriation reductions.

2 Appropriation Act (No. 2) 2009–10

Table A2: Expenses and resources for Outcome 1, 2009–10

Outcome 1: Increased awareness and adoption of best practice public administration by the public service through leadership, promotion, advice and professional development, drawing on research and evaluation

Budget* 2009–10

$’000(a)

Actual expenses 2009–10

$’000(b)

Variation 2009–10

$’000(a)–(b)

Sub-program 1.1 - APS policy, review and evaluation

Departmental expenses

Ordinary annual services (Appropriation Act No. 1) 7,341 7,310 31

Revenues from independent sources (Section 31) 2 44 (42)

Expenses not requiring appropriation in the Budget year 79 82 (3)

Subtotal sub-program 1.1 7,422 7,436 (14)

Sub-program 1.2 - Development programs and employment services

Departmental expenses

Ordinary annual services (Appropriation Act No. 1) 13,640 12,303 1,337

Revenues from independent sources (Section 31) 18,529 19,878 (1,349)

Expenses not requiring appropriation in the Budget year 275 276 (1)

Subtotal sub-program 1.2 32,444 32,457 (13)

Outcome 1, totals by appropriation type

Departmental expenses

Ordinary annual services (Appropriation Act No. 1) 20,981 19,613 1,368

Revenues from independent sources (Section 31) 18,531 19,922 (1,391)

Expenses not requiring appropriation in the Budget year 354 358 (4)

Total expenses for Outcome 1 39,866 39,893 (27)

* Full-year budget as per the 2009–10 Portfolio Budget Statements.

2008–092009–10

Average staffing level (number)215 194

Appendix B: Report on performance under the Commonwealth Disability StrategyThe Commonwealth Disability Strategy aims to ensure that people with disability can participate fully in community life.

From 1 July 2007, agencies are required to report on their activities through the Australian Public Service Commissioner’s State of the Service Report agency survey. The Commission will report on its performance through the agency survey for 2009–10.

Appendix C: Occupational health and safetyExecutive commitment

The Commission is committed to delivering a robust occupational health and safety environment for its staff.

Occupational Health and Safety Committee

The Commission has an Occupational Health and Safety Committee, which is responsible for advising the Commissioner on the administration of the Commission’s occupational health and safety policies and practices.

The Commission’s occupational health and safety (OH&S) officer provides advice to the Committee, undertakes OH&S inspections, provides necessary training and manages any return-to-work cases.

Ongoing initiatives

During 2009–10 the Commission continued to support programs aimed at maintaining the health and wellbeing of its staff, including:

annual influenza vaccinations occupational health and safety training, including through the Commission’s online staff

induction program and face-to-face sessions regular information on health and wellbeing activities available to staff workstation assessments for all new staff and those with reported health concerns.

Health and safety management arrangements

Under section 16(2)(d) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1991 (OH&S Act), the Commission is required to develop written health and safety management arrangements in consultation with its employees. These arrangements are concerned with the management of OH&S in the Commission and are one of the main mechanisms by which the Commission demonstrates its commitment to meeting its duty of care under the Act. They provide a flexible framework for the management of occupational health and safety in a way which suits the needs of the Commission. The Commission’s health and safety management arrangements are currently being reviewed.

New initiatives

The Commission launched its Health, Safety and Wellbeing Program in 2009–10. The themes for the program are:

Zero Harm, which focuses on the prevention of workplace injury Focus on Health, which is designed to provide staff with information on how to reduce

the likelihood of developing common health ailments Wellbeing Seminars, which serve as a forum to provide staff with information in a

structured way Executive Health and Safety Program, which provides managers with information and

training required to manage the ongoing health and safety of staff A Taste of Wellbeing, which is designed to provide staff with a one- to two-week trial of

different sports and activities.

Performance assessment

The Commission’s OH&S performance is assessed against both positive performance indicators and outcome measures.

Positive performance indicators

As part of the Commission’s induction process for new staff, an OH&S induction is provided. In addition, a workstation assessment is undertaken to ensure that the work environment is appropriate for the new starter.

Table A3 details the result of the Commission’s preventive measures.

Table A3: Positive performance indicators, 2009–10

Actions MeasuresActual 2009–

10

Workstation assessments

Percentage of new staff assessed 100%

Percentage requiring corrective action 40%

OH&S induction Percentage of staff who underwent relevant OH&S induction

100%

Outcome measures

The Commission noted a decline in the number of accidents and incidents during 2009–10. Early management of reported accidents and incidents has continued to keep the Commission’s claim numbers low.

There were 12 incidents reported in 2009–10, two of which were notified to Comcare.

The Commission referred 13 early intervention cases to SRC Solutions, with three compensation cases resulting.

No directions were given to the Commission under section 45 of the OH&S Act and no notices were given under section 29, 46 or 47.

No investigations were conducted during the year.

Appendix D: Freedom of informationThis statement is published in accordance with the requirements of section 8 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act). The Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner are prescribed authorities for the purposes of the FOI Act. This statement is made on behalf of both offices.

Organisation, functions and powers (s. 8(1)(a)(i))

Public Service Commissioner

The functions of the Public Service Commissioner and the organisation of the Commission are described in Part 1 of this annual report in the Commission overview.

The principal powers exercised by the Public Service Commissioner as they affect members of the public are those relating to the issuing of Commissioner’s Directions under the Public Service Act 1999 (PS Act) in relation to each of the APS Values specified in that Act. The Commissioner’s Directions ensure that the APS incorporates and upholds the APS Values and they determine where necessary the scope or application of the APS Values.

Several of the APS Values relate to the recruitment of staff to the APS. The Commissioner’s Directions provide binding provisions relating to the framework within which people are recruited to the APS, the basic elements of which include:

merit-based employment decisions, including transparent and fair selection processes absence of discrimination and recognition of the diversity of the Australian community promotion of equity in employment provision of reasonable opportunity to all eligible members of the Australian community

to apply for APS employment.

Another of the APS Values relates to the delivery of services to the Australian public. The Public Service Commissioner has issued Directions which specify that an agency head must put in place measures directed at upholding this APS Value, including in relation to the provision to the public of information about rights and entitlements and taking into account client diversity and the right to privacy.

Area offices assist in the provision of advice and services to agencies Australia-wide, including delivery of a range of employment-related activities on a fee-for-service basis.

Merit Protection Commissioner

The organisation of the Office of the Merit Protection Commissioner is described in the body of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s annual report, which is included with the Public Service Commissioner’s annual report.

The full range of the Merit Protection Commissioner’s functions under the PS Act, which relate generally to reviewing actions affecting individual APS employees in relation to their employment, are described in the Merit Protection Commissioner’s annual report. In addition, the Merit Protection Commissioner may exercise powers of the former Merit Protection and Review Agency (MPRA), which was abolished on 5 December 1999 with the introduction of the PS Act, under the transitional provisions which apply to former MPRA casework.

The principal powers exercised by the Merit Protection Commissioner that may affect members of the public relate to some review functions, the recommendations of Independent Selection Advisory Committees and some other employment-related functions. The Merit Protection Commissioner may investigate complaints by former employees that relate to an employee’s entitlements on separation from the APS. The committees assess the suitability of candidates for engagement, promotion or assignment of duties for employment opportunities in the APS. The wide range of employment-related functions which the Merit Protection Commissioner may also perform for other bodies, if requested by the body to do, includes functions performed for state and territory departments and authorities, local government bodies, private corporations and bodies, and Commonwealth authorities whose employees are not engaged under the PS Act.

Arrangements for external bodies to participate in policy formulation or administration (s. 8(1)(a)(ii))

Public Sector Management Program Board of Management

The Public Service Commissioner is represented on the Public Sector Management Program Board of Management, whose other members include representatives of state and territory public services. The board sets the direction for and oversees the delivery of a management and leadership development course for managers at middle and senior levels throughout the Australian public sector. The Public Sector Management Program is a national strategy to deliver relevant, practically focused training that reflects the changing expectations of the public sector. All participants who meet the assessment requirements of the program will be eligible for a Graduate Certificate in Public Sector Management from Flinders University, South Australia.

Government Skills Australia Public Sector Industry Advisory Committee

The Australian Public Service Commissioner is represented on the Government Skills Australia Public Sector Industry Advisory Committee. The committee also includes representatives from the states and territories. The committee is chaired by a senior representative from the South Australian Department of Education and Children’s Services. The focus of Government Skills Australia is providing high-quality training resources and services to support the recognition of skills and professionalism in government administration, services and operations.

Categories of documents maintained (s. 8(1)(a)(iii))

Public Service Commissioner

Documents maintained by the Public Service Commissioner include those relating to:

APS Employment Database (APSED) development programs employment framework employment-related fee-for-service activities ethics advice individual review and other casework internal management leadership issues legal advisings machinery of government and administrative arrangements networks established and/or managed by the Commission outsourcing of activities performance management personnel practices recruitment, selection, promotion and staffing review of the PS Act redeployment, retrenchment and retirement of staff seminar events and related evaluations senior executive staffing submissions to inquiries surveys, studies, reviews and evaluations values and conduct policy whistleblowing workplace diversity, including equal employment opportunity.

Merit Protection Commissioner

Documents maintained by the Merit Protection Commissioner include:

information brochures about the range of functions of the Merit Protection Commissioner, Independent Selection Advisory Committees, Promotion Review Committees and reviews of actions

Merit Protection Commissioner’s Instructions on procedures for Independent Selection Advisory Committees, Promotion Review Committees and reviews of actions

documents relating to the Merit Protection Commissioner’s decision-making processes, day-to-day administration and policy matters

individual case files files relating to fee-for-service activities including records of processes submissions to inquiries policy development.

Documents maintained in relation to the powers of the former MPRA exercised by the Merit Protection Commissioner include:

decisions of Disciplinary Appeal Committees individual grievance case files.

The pre-July 1987 records of the Public Service Board are now held by the National Archives of Australia.

General

The majority of documents are held in hard-copy form, either on records management files or as individual written or printed items. Other documents are held as computer-stored data, microfiche, charts, plans, films, videotapes, audiotapes or card indexes.

Consistent with National Archives disposal authorities, both policy and casework document files are maintained. The Records Management Unit maintains a list of indexed headings covering subjects.

Documents available to the public in accordance with arrangements made by the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner include:

the Public Service Commissioner’s annual report (incorporating the Merit Protection Commissioner’s annual report)

the State of the Service series of reports Australian Public Service statistical bulletins instructions and guidelines on a variety of matters.

Most publications are available electronically on the Commission’s website or in hard copy free of charge. Details of all publications are available on the Commission’s website.

Facilities for access (s. 8(1)(a)(iv))

In relation to both the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, facilities for accessing publications or other documents available outside the scope of the FOI Act are provided via the Public Service Commissioner’s website (which incorporates the Merit Protection Commissioner site). In the event that documents cannot be located on this site, further inquiries about access should be directed to the Employment Policy Adviceline at employmentadvice@apsc.gov.au.

Where a decision has been made to give access to documents under the FOI Act they will generally be copied to applicants. Where copies are not made available, documents may be inspected at the Commission premises at 16 Furzer Street, Phillip ACT, or at area offices.

Freedom of Information procedures and initial contact point (s. 8(1)(a)(v))

Written requests for access to documents in the possession of the Public Service Commissioner or the Merit Protection Commissioner should be accompanied by a $30 application fee and directed to:

Freedom of Information CoordinatorAustralian Public Service Commission16 Furzer StreetPhillip ACT 2606

There will be changes to the requirements relating to fees when amendments to the FOI Act commence later in the year. Inquiries in this regard may be made to the number below.

There is no pro forma application document. Inquiries about access to documents may be directed to the Freedom of Information Coordinator at the above address or by telephoning (02) 6202 3571 between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm Eastern Time, Monday to Friday.

Operation of the Freedom of Information Act

In relation to both the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, five valid requests for access were received during 2009–10. No requests were outstanding at the end of the period.

A total of $120 was collected in 2009–10 in relation to the requests received under the FOI Act.

Appendix E: Advertising and market researchA total of $393,657 was paid for advertising, representing a 71% increase over the previous year.

The master advertising agency, ADCORP, was paid $358,588. This represents the only payments in 2009–10 for advertising services greater than $11,200 (inclusive of GST).

Advertising was used to promote development programs, advertise tenders or recruit employees, as well as to recruit Indigenous employees for the APS as a whole.

No market research activities assessing the attitudes of the public were undertaken and the Commission did not employ the services of polling or direct mail organisations.

To support its preparation of the State of the Service Report, a range of processes were undertaken by the Commission to assess the attitudes of APS employees.

Appendix F: Ecologically sustainable development and environmental performanceSection 516A of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 requires Australian Government organisations to include in their annual reports a report on the organisation’s contribution to ecologically sustainable development.

The Commission does not administer any legislation or have any appropriation directly related to sustainable development and environmental performance.

The Commission’s environmental activities are directed towards improving energy management and environmental practices within the Commission.

As part of the review and updating of its environmental management system, the Commission established a number of environmental objectives and targets. Table A4 details the Commission’s performance against the established targets.

Table A4: Environmental performance, 2009–10

Objective Target Result

Reduce the amount of virgin paper purchased

By December 2009: 90% of paper purchased has 60% or better recycled content

Achieved

Purchase environmentally sound stationery products

By December 2009: Reduction of 5% in the purchase of non-recycled paper

By December 2010: Further reduction of 5% in the purchase of non-recycled paper

All paper purchased has a 60% or better recycle content

Improve recycling practices to minimise the amount of general waste going to landfill

Upgrade and standardise recycling practices

Increased awareness through publicity, training of staff and championing of energy management

Separate containers for waste and recyclable materials have been provided to staff

Appointed a champion and provided awareness information to staff on a regular basis

Maintain energy-efficient systems and minimise energy consumption

7,500 megajoules (MJ)/person/year

Minimum energy performance

5,880 MJ/person/year in 2008

Obtained a 5 on the ABGR rating scale in 2009

standard (4.5 on the ABGR rating)

Note: The target of 7,500 megajoules per person per year was set in the Australian Government Energy Efficiency in Government Operations Policy 2006.

During 2009–10, the Commission continued to:

use recycled paper and co-mingle recycling and paper waste recycling purchase whitegoods and office equipment that had water- and energy-efficient

features, including sleep modes encourage the use of E10 fuel in Commission vehicles regularly provide staff with information on energy-efficient ways of working.

Appendix G: Staffing profile and equal employment opportunity Table A5 gives a breakdown of all staff in the Commission at 30 June for the last two years by type and gender. All staff, except for the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, are employed under the Public Service Act 1999.

Table A5: Ongoing and non-ongoing staff, by gender, 2008–09 to 2009–10

2008–09 2009–10

Female Male Total Female Male Total

Ongoing full-time 126 45 171 103 46 149

Ongoing part-time 23 3 26 22 4 26

Non-ongoing full-time 10 7 17 9 7 16

Non ongoing part-time 3 3 6 1 1 2

Total 162 58 220 135 58 193

Note: Figures do not include Executive Level casual employees providing fee-for-service work. Figures include 9 (16 in 2008–09) staff on long-term leave or secondment and the Public Service Commissioner and Merit Protection Commissioner, who are statutory office holders and are counted as ongoing full-time.

Table A6 shows Senior Executive Service staff at 30 June for the last two years by gender.

Table A6: Senior Executive Service by gender, 2008–09 to 2009–10

2008–09 2009–10

Female Male Female Male

Band 1 6 2 2 2

Band 2 0 0 0 0

Band 3 1 0 1 0

Total 7 2 3 2

Note: One male Band 1 (1 in 2008–09) was located overseas. Figures do not include the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, who are statutory office holders.

Tables A7 and A8 shows staff by occupational groups, gender and location for the last two years.

Table A7: Occupational groups by location and gender, 30 June 2010

ACT NSW Qld SA Vic. WA OverseasTotal

F M F M F M F M F M F M F M

Trainee APS 1 1

Cadet APS 1 1

Graduate APS 2 2

APS 1 2 2

APS 2 1 1 2

APS 3 10 4 14

APS 4 15 5 1 2 23

APS 5 8 8

APS 6 35 11 46

EL 1 32 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 57

EL 2 18 9 2 1 30

SES 1 2 1 1 4

SES 3 1 1

Statutory office holders 1 1 2

Subtotal 126 53 2 1 1 2 1 0 3 0 2 1 0 1

Total 179 3 3 1 3 3 1 193

Note: Figures do not include 56 (37 female and 19 male) Executive Level 1 and one female Executive Level 2 casual employees providing fee-for-service work. Figures include 9 staff on long-term leave and the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, who are statutory office holders and counted as ongoing full-time. Overseas employee is located in Indonesia.

Table A8: Occupational groups by location and gender, 30 June 2009

ACT NSW Qld SA Vic. WA OverseasTotal

F M F M F M F M F M F M F M

Cadet APS 1 1

Graduate APS 1 1 2

APS 1 2 2

APS 2 1 2 3

APS 3 14 3 1 18

APS 4 11 4 1 1 1 2 1 21

APS 5 11 3 14

APS 6 32 8 1 1 1 1 44

EL 1 41 18 2 1 2 3 1 1 1 70

EL 2 19 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 34

SES 1 6 1 1 8

SES 3 1 1

Statutory office holders 2 2

Subtotal 139 51 5 1 2 2 5 0 7 1 4 1 0 2

Total 190 6 4 5 8 5 2 220

Note: Figures do not include 23 (11 female and 12 male) Executive Level 1 casual employees providing fee-for-service work. Figures include 16 staff on long-term leave and the Public Service Commissioner and the Merit Protection Commissioner, who are statutory office holders and counted as ongoing full-time. Overseas employees were located in Indonesia.

Tables A9 and A10 shows the representation of equal employment opportunity groups as a percentage of staff by occupational groups for the last two years.

Table A9: Representation of equal employment opportunity groups as a percentage of staff by occupational groups, 30 June 2010

Total staff Women ATSI BO BO+ENFL PWD

No. No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Trainee APS 1 1 100.0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cadet APS 1 1 100.0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Graduate APS 2 2 100.0 1 50.0 1 50.0 0 0 1 50.0

APS 1–2 4 1 25.0 1 25.0 0 0 0 0 2 50.0

APS 3–4 37 28 75.7 4 10.8 3 8.1 2 5.4 0 0

APS 5–6 54 43 79.6 1 1.9 9 16.6 3 5.6 3 5.6

EL 1 57 36 63.2 2 3.5 9 15.8 3 5.3 6 10.5

EL 2 30 19 63.3 0 0 3 10.0 1 3.3 1 3.3

SES and SOH 7 4 57.1 0 0 1 14.3 0 0 0 0

Total 193 135 69.9 11 5.7 26 13.5 9 4.7 13 6.7

ATSI = Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander; BO = born overseas; BO+ENFL = born overseas and did not speak English as a first language; PWD = people with disability; SOH = statutory office holder.

Note: Figures do not include 56 (37 female and 19 male) non-ongoing Executive Level 1 and one female Executive Level 2 casual employees providing fee-for-service work. Figures include 9 staff on long-term leave.

As some people fall into more than one equal employment opportunity group, the components do not add to the total staff number.

Table A10: Representation of equal employment opportunity groups as a percentage of staff by occupational groups, 30 June 2009

Total staff Women ATSI BO BO+ENFL PWD

No. No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Cadet APS 1 1 100.0 1 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Graduate APS 2 1 50.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

APS 1–2 5 1 20.0 1 20.0 0 0 0 0 2 40.0

APS 3–4 39 31 79.5 4 10.3 5 12.8 4 10.3 0 0

APS 5–6 58 47 81.0 1 1.7 11 19.0 4 6.9 3 5.2

EL 1 70 49 70.0 2 2.9 10 14.3 6 8.6 6 8.6

EL 2 34 23 67.6 0 0 4 11.8 1 2.9 3 8.8

SES and SOH 11 9 81.8 0 0 2 18.2 1 9.1 0 0

Total 220 162 73.6 9 4.1 32 14.5 16 7.3 14 6.4

ATSI = Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander; BO = born overseas; BO+ENFL = born overseas and did not speak English as a first language; PWD = people with disability; SOH = statutory office holder.

Note: Figures do not include 23 (11 female and 12 male) non-ongoing Executive Level 1 casual employees providing fee-for-service work. Figures include 16 staff on long-term leave.

As some people fall into more than one equal employment opportunity group, the components do not add to the total staff number.

Appendix H: List of requirements

Description Requirement

Letter of transmittal Mandatory

Table of contents Mandatory

Index Mandatory

Glossary (abbreviations and acronyms) Mandatory

Contact officer Mandatory

Internet home page address and internet address for report Mandatory

Review by Commissioner Mandatory

Summary of significant issues and developments Suggested

Overview of department’s performance and financial results Suggested

Outlook for following year Suggested

Significant issues and developments—portfolio Portfolio departments—suggested

Overview description of department Mandatory

Role and functions Mandatory

Organisational structure Mandatory

Outcome and program structure Mandatory

Where outcome and program structures differ from the Portfolio Budget Statements, Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements or other portfolio statements accompanying any other additional appropriation bills (other portfolio statements), details of variation and reasons for change

Mandatory

Portfolio structure Portfolio departments—mandatory

Description Requirement

Review of performance during the year in relation to programs and contribution to outcomes

Mandatory

Actual performance in relation to deliverables and key performance indicators set out in the Portfolio Budget Statements, Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements or other portfolio statements

Mandatory

Performance of purchaser–provider arrangements If applicable, suggested

Where performance targets differ from the Portfolio Budget Statements or Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements, details of both former and new targets, and reasons for the change

Mandatory

Narrative discussion and analysis of performance Mandatory

Trend information Mandatory

Significant changes in nature of principal functions/services Suggested

Factors, events or trends influencing departmental performance Suggested

Contribution of risk management in achieving objectives Suggested

Social justice and equity impacts Suggested

Performance against service charter customer service standards, complaints data, and the department’s response to complaints

If applicable, mandatory

Discussion and analysis of the department’s financial performance Mandatory

Discussion of any significant changes from the prior year or from budget Suggested

Agency resource statement and summary resource tables by outcomes Mandatory

Developments since the end of the financial year that have affected or may significantly affect the department’s operations or financial results in future

If applicable, mandatory

Statement of the main corporate governance practices in place Mandatory

Names of the senior executive and their responsibilities Suggested

Senior management committees and their roles Suggested

Corporate and operational planning and associated performance reporting and Suggested

Description Requirement

review

Approach adopted to identifying areas of significant financial or operational risk Suggested

Certification that the agency complies with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines

Mandatory

Policy and practices on the establishment and maintenance of appropriate ethical standards

Suggested

How nature and amount of remuneration for SES officers is determined Suggested

Significant developments in external scrutiny Mandatory

Judicial decisions and decisions of administrative tribunals Mandatory

Reports by the Auditor-General, a parliamentary committee or the Commonwealth Ombudsman

Mandatory

Assessment of effectiveness in managing and developing human resources to achieve departmental objectives

Mandatory

Workforce planning, staff turnover and retention Suggested

Impact and features of enterprise or collective agreements, determinations, common law contracts and Australian workplace agreements

Suggested

Training and development undertaken and its impact Suggested

Occupational health and safety performance Suggested

Productivity gains Suggested

Statistics on staffing Mandatory

Enterprise or collective agreements, determinations, common law contracts and Australian workplace agreements

Mandatory

Performance pay Mandatory

Assessment of effectiveness of assets management If applicable, mandatory

Assessment of purchasing against core policies and principles Mandatory

Description Requirement

A summary statement detailing the number of new consultancy services contracts let during the year; the total actual expenditure on all new consultancy contracts let during the year (inclusive of GST); the number of ongoing consultancy contracts that were active in the reporting year; the total actual expenditure in the reporting year on the ongoing consultancy contracts (inclusive of GST); and a statement noting that information on contracts and consultancies is available through the AusTender website

Mandatory

Absence of provisions in contracts allowing access by the Auditor-General Mandatory

Contracts exempt from the AusTender Mandatory

Report on performance in implementing the Commonwealth Disability Strategy Mandatory

Financial statements Mandatory

Occupational health and safety (section 74 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act 1991)

Mandatory

Freedom of information (section 8(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 1982) Mandatory

Advertising and market research (section 311A of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918) and statement on advertising campaigns

Mandatory

Ecologically sustainable development and environmental performance (section 516A of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999)

Mandatory

Grant programs Mandatory

Correction of material errors in previous annual report If applicable, mandatory

List of requirements Mandatory

Abbreviations and acronymsALRC Australian Law Reform Commission

ANZSOG Australia and New Zealand School of Government

APS Australian Public Service

APSED APS Employment Database

APSEDII APSED Internet Interface

AusAID Australian Agency for International Development

Blueprint Ahead of the game: Blueprint for the reform of Australian Government administration

Commission Australian Public Service Commission

Commissioner Australian Public Service Commissioner

CTSC Career Transition and Support Centre

DEEWR Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations

EAS Ethics Advisory Service

EL Executive Level

FMA Act Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997

FOI Act Freedom of Information Act 1982

IAG Implementation Advisory Group

IAPSEN Indigenous Australian Public Service Employees Network

ICT information and communication technology

ISAC Independent Selection Advisory Committee

LAFIA Leading Australia’s future in Asia

MAC Management Advisory Committee

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OH&S occupational health and safety

PNG Papua New Guinea

PS Act Public Service Act 1999

SES Senior Executive Service

Strategy APS Employment and Capability Strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Employees

UNDP United Nations Development Programme