• Appendix

    Attention

    Warning:

    This information may not apply to the current year. Check the content carefully to ensure it is applicable to your circumstances.

    End of attention
    Reliability criteria

    The indicators vary in their reliability, depending on the quality of the data, whether the indicator was measured on a consistent basis, the extent to which the indicators are based on assumptions and the presence of bias in the data or methodology. Below is the criteria used to evaluate the reliability of each indicator. If the majority of criterion were met at a particular range then the indicator was deemed to have that level of reliability.

    Scale

    Low

    • Indicator is based on low quality data or data heavily dependent on assumptions.
    • There is a large gap between the period covered by the data and when it becomes available for use.
    • There is a significant bias in the data or methodology.
    • Trends are not clearly attributable to improved levels of participation.
    • Indicator is not measured on a consistent basis over time.

    Medium

    • Indicator is based on reasonably accurate data or uses adjusted data with small, sound assumptions.
    • There is a small time delay between the period covered by the data and when it becomes available for use.
    • There is minimal bias in the data or methodology.
    • Trends are mostly attributable to improved levels of participation.
    • Indicator is measured with only minimal change in methodology over time.

    High

    • Indicator is based on robust and accurate data.
    • Minimal gap between the period covered by the data and when it becomes available for use.
    • Negligible or no bias in the data.
    • Trends are directly attributable to improved levels of participation.
    • Indicator is measured consistently over time.

    The ATO will continue to work on improving the reliability of these indicators.

      Last modified: 25 Feb 2011QC 24195