Territory Stories

Overcoming indigenous disadvantage - key indicators



Overcoming indigenous disadvantage - key indicators


Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision


E-Publications; E-Books; PublicationNT




The OID report measures the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians have been actively involved in the development and production of the report. Section 1.1 describes the origins of the report, and section 1.2 describes its key objectives. Section 1.3 provides contextual information on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population. Section 1.4 includes a brief historical narrative to help put the information in the report into context. Section 1.5 summarises some recent developments in government policy that have influenced the report and section 1.6 provides further information on the Steering Committee and the OID Working Group that advises it.


"These reports generally uses the term ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians’ to describe Australia’s first peoples and ‘non-Indigenous Australians’ to refer to Australians of other backgrounds, except where quoting other sources." Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should be aware that this publication may contain images of deceased people.

Table of contents

Preliminaries -- Overview chapter -- Introduction -- The framework -- Key themes and interpretation -- COAG targets and headline indicators -- Governance, leadership and culture -- Early child development -- Education and training -- Healthy lives -- Economic participation -- Home environment -- Safe and supportive communities -- Outcomes for Torres Strait Islander people -- Measuring factors that improve outcomes -- Appendices.




Aboriginal Australians -- Ecoomic conditions; Aboriginal Australians -- Social conditions; Public welfare administration -- Australia; Aboriginal Australians -- Services for; Closing the Gap of Indigenous Disadvantage (Australia)

Publisher name

Australia. Productivity Commission for the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision

Place of publication

Canberra (A.C.T.)


5 volumes (various pagings) : charts, colour map ; 30 cm.

File type



9781740375917 (Print); 9781740375900 (PDF)


1448-9805 (Print); 2206-9704 (Online)



Copyright owner

Australia. Productivity Commission for the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision



Parent handle


Citation address


Related items

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/445153; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/445154; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/445156; https://hdl.handle.net/10070/445151

Page content

2.8 OVERCOMING INDIGENOUS DISADVANTAGE 2016 The first criterion notes the requirement to align relevant indicators in the OID report with indicators in the NIRA. The second criterion notes the OID reports emphasis on measurable outcomes (impacts on individuals or communities) rather than inputs (resources spent) or outputs (services provided). In some cases, where there is strong evidence that certain inputs or outputs are closely linked to an outcome, those inputs or outputs may be included as proxy indicators of that outcome (for example, access to primary health care and quality antenatal care). The next three criteria are closely related the whole framework is geared toward measuring progress toward the priority outcomes. The report draws its strength from the evidence base or underlying theory of causality that links improvement in a strategic change indicator to improvement in the COAG targets and headline indicators, and therefore progress toward the priority outcomes. For most indicators, empirical evidence provides the causal link. For some indicators, despite limited empirical evidence, persuasive logic and compelling feedback from consultations provide the link. The sixth and seventh criteria are also closely linked. The terms of reference for the report require it to inform Australian governments about the impact of policy programs and interventions, and to be meaningful to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. All indicators have been formally agreed by all Australian governments, and accepted as meaningful by a broad range of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and individuals (see chapter 1 on engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians). The eighth criterion recognises that, to be most useful, an indicator should be clear and unambiguous. Most indicators in this report are relatively easy to understand, and it is intuitively obvious whether progress is being made. However, in some cases, important indicators may yield ambiguous results; for example, an increase in notifications of child abuse or neglect might reflect declining child welfare but, alternatively, might reflect an increase in the proportion of incidents being reported, investigated and addressed. Where indicators are potentially ambiguous, the report includes explanatory text to assist interpretation. The final criterion recognises the practical need for relevant data to report against an indicator. In some cases, proxy measures are reported and, in a few cases, important indicators have been included even though data are substantially qualified, not available for all jurisdictions or not available at all (and qualitative information is reported instead). Some of these indicators have been identified as high priorities by COAG (for example, teacher quality and school engagement) and data strategies are being developed. Relationships between the indicators Causal relationships are at the heart of the indicator framework, linking strategic change indicators with the COAG targets and headline indicators, and therefore the priority outcomes. Chapter 3 looks at interactions across the framework and chapter 13 examines

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.