Published on Australian Maritime Safety Authority (https://www.amsa.gov.au)


Non-financial performance measures

Consistent with section 16EA of the PGPA Rule 2014 and the Department of Finance’s Resource Management Guide 131 Developing good performance information, AMSA reviews its non-financial performance measures annually to ensure they: 

Our measures are predominantly at an outcome level and measure the achievement of our purpose and vision – safe and clean seas, saving lives. We also include some measures that demonstrate our performance against the three principles of regulator best practice described in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s Regulator Performance Guide (June 2021):

To help readers follow year-on-year performance, any changes to measures are explained in the rationale and footnotes.

Consistent with the PGPA Act section 37, AMSA has a measures library which provides the detailed evidence base for reporting, including measure owners, definitions, targets, tolerances, data sources and calculation methods.

Safe seas

#MeasureTargetMethodSystem7RPG
1Safety of foreign-flagged ships and Australian-flagged ships (under the Navigation Act 2012) operating in Australian waters is demonstrated through the proportion of very serious and serious incidents to total port arrivals<1.5%QuantitativeShipsys2. Risk-based and data driven
Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) measure
Rationale: Indicates whether standards are being met
Marine incidents are classified by AMSA into one of three severity levels: (1) very serious; (2) serious; and (3) less serious. Several factors are considered by AMSA to decide whether an incident is deemed very serious and/or serious. These include, fatalities, serious injuries, loss of vessel, damage to vessel and equipment; serious pollution and other incidents that result in serious consequences (i.e. fire; grounding; collisions etc.) Incidents are categorised individually
2Port State Control (PSC) risk-based inspection targets are met100%QuantitativeShipsys2. Risk-based and data driven
Rationale: Demonstrates that AMSA’s PSC inspections are focused on higher risk ships which ensures resources are concentrated on those ships that pose the greatest threat to safety and the environment
Using the risk profile (P1=high, P4=low) of individual ships as a basis, our inspection regime – as a preventative measure – ensures we concentrate our resources on those ships that pose the greatest threat to safety and the environment.
3Improvement in the safety of domestic commercial vessels is demonstrated through:
3.1The average number of passenger fatalities on domestic commercial vessels since 2018 trending downwardsTrending downwardsQuantitativeIncident reporting system1. Continuous improvement and building trust
3.2The five-year rolling average fatality rate (crew)8 on domestic commercial vessels in Australia.≤79QualitativeIncident reporting system2. Risk-based and data driven
Rationale: Both sub-measures indicate whether AMSA’s regulatory regime and compliance monitoring are increasingly preventing serious safety incidents. The monitoring of this data focuses AMSA on regulatory changes to those areas which will have the greatest impact and our compliance activities to the highest risk operations.

Clean seas

#

Measure

Target

Method

System7

RPG

4

Reducing trend in the number of significant pollution incidents10

Trending downwards

Quantitative

NEMO

1. Continuous improvement and building trust

 

Rationale: AMSA’s operations, such as ship inspections, safety education and regulation, are preventative measures that reduce the risk of a significant pollution incident. A reducing trend in the number of significant pollution incidents is an indicator of the success of these measures, which collectively contribute to preventing marine pollution.

A significant pollution incident is now defined as a Level 2 (or higher) incident in accordance with the National Plan for Maritime Environmental Emergencies.

 

 

 

 

5

Timeliness of response to significant oil spill incidents

within 4 hours of report received

Quantitative

NEMO and audit reports

1. Continuous improvement and building trust

 

PBS measure

Rationale: The time taken to ready AMSA oil spill response equipment and response personnel for mobilisation to a Level 2 (or higher) oil spill incident is an indicator of the effectiveness and efficiency of AMSA’s marine pollution response arrangements.

 

 

 

 

Saving lives

#

Measure

Target

Method

System7

RPG

6

Coordinate responses within the Australian Search and Rescue (SAR) region to save as many lives as possible of those at risk11

100%

Quantitative12

Nexus

Not applicable

 

PBS measure

Rationale:

Measures AMSA’s overall search and rescue (SAR) coordination capability to respond to persons at risk within the Australian search and rescue region.

A person at risk includes both the NATSAR defined “person in distress” (a person is considered to be in distress when threatened by grave and imminent danger and requiring immediate assistance); and any person who, without a SAR response, is in danger of being in distress.

A life is considered to have been saved (as defined by NATSAR and AMSA) “when the person has been retrieved from a distress situation, provided for initial medical or other needs, and delivered to a place of safety.”

Lives assisted are defined by NATSAR and AMSA as, “persons that were not in distress but were provided assistance and, if not assisted, would be at risk of exposure to grave and imminent danger.”

AMSA’s intention is to coordinate the response to save all lives at risk (100 per cent). In practicality, the circumstances surrounding individual incidents — for example, severe medical conditions requiring specialist treatment, bad weather— affect the possibility of success of a search and rescue response. This reality is reflected in the previous results, ranging between 95-99 per cent annually.

 

 

 

 

Regulatory performance

#

Measure

Target

Method

System7

RPG

7

Specific activities and performance that contribute to continuous improvement and building trust

Various

Qualitative

Various13

1. Continuous improvement and building trust

 

Rationale: Responsiveness, resolution of issues and inquiries, clarity of guidance and simple access to quality, consistent material and interactions build trust in a regulator.

Information from stakeholders through reported issues, difficulties and inquiries, assists AMSA to refine its guidance, understand industry concerns and improve accessibility of materials and systems. This in turn, demonstrates we understand the issues, are listening and evolving our systems and capabilities to improve.

A focus on continuous improvement is a key requirement of ISO certification, evidenced by case studies.

Composite measure: contributing measures: satisfaction with the resolution of inquiries through AMSA Connect (quantitative – target 90%); maintenance of ISO certification (quantitative – achieved); business improvement case studies (qualitative).14

 

 

 

 

8

Specific activities and performance that contribute to collaboration and engagement

Various

Qualitative

Various15

3. Collaboration and engagement

 

Rationale: It is important that AMSA provides stakeholders with the opportunity to influence regulation that impacts on them through open, transparent and timely consultation.

It is also important that AMSA provides clear, up-to-date guidance and information so our regulated community understand their obligations and responsibilities, which in turn encourages voluntary compliance.

Feedback from our stakeholders helps us to improve, including understanding how effective and practical the regulation was to implement and apply.

Composite measure: contributing measures: effective communication to stakeholders (quantitative – target annual increase in audience reach and engagement across AMSA’s digital channels); level of regulated community awareness of their obligations and responsibilities (quantitative – target 10% of website users and sessions have resulted from campaigns); consultation with our regulated community and key stakeholders is open, transparent, and timely (Quantitative – target 100% of regulatory changes publicly consulted with impacted stakeholders and outcomes informed by industry feedback); regulator stakeholder survey (quantitative – target average greater than or equal to 3 on a scale of 1–6).16

 

 

 

 

 

Footnotes