Regulatory Performance Framework KPI Measures

1. KPI 1 – Regulators do not unnecessarily impede the efficient operation of regulated entities

Measures of good regulatory Potential output/evidence performance

2. Demonstrated understanding of the Evidence of engagement with industry and operating environment of regulated industry associations, for example: entities  strategic consultative committee,  attendance at industry meetings/forums  industry presentations to NICNAS staff Evidence would be quantitative where possible (eg. number of meetings held/attended)

3. Actions taken to minimise the Percentage of new chemical assessments, potential for unintended negative secondary notification assessments and impacts of regulatory activities on Priority Existing Chemical assessments regulated entities completed in legislative timeframes Number of assessments completed under Inventory Multi-tiered Assessment and Prioritisation framework

4. Continuous improvement strategies Evidence of international collaboration, for implemented to reduce costs of example: compliance for regulated entities  bilateral arrangements with Canada, through effective contribution to ECHA, US EPA, NZ: international harmonisation  OECD activities (Task Force on Hazard Assessment, Task Force on Exposure Assessment, Working Party on Manufactured Nanomaterials,).  APEC activities Evidence would be quantitative where possible (eg., how many assessments conducted under bilateral arrangements)

5. KPI 2 – Communication with regulated entities is clear, targeted and effective

Measures of good regulatory Examples of output/activity-based performance evidence

1. Guidance material is kept up to date Guidance material reviewed including: and complies with government  published guidelines accessibility guidelines Measures of good regulatory Examples of output/activity-based performance evidence

 website content Percentage of documents on NICNAS website that comply with the Australian Government accessibility requirements

6. Targeted stakeholder consultation and Evidence of targeted consultation engagement with regulated entities, to undertaken and feedback considered (e.g. on provide feedback as appropriate guidance material and chemical assessments)

7. Regulatory decisions and advice are Percentage of decisions made within consistent and provided in a timely legislated timeframes manner. Number of matters referred to the AAT for review, and outcome of review

8. KPI 3 – Actions undertaken by regulators are proportionate to the regulatory risk being managed

1. Assessment effort is proportionate to Information on risk-based assessment the risk of the chemical approach documented and published Chemicals that present lower risk are subject to lower regulatory burden

9. Compliance, monitoring and Information on compliance strategy and enforcement actions are proportional enforcement framework published and to risk and regularly reassessed updated as appropriate Compliance actions (eg. monitoring, compliance and enforcement actions) are targeted to areas of greatest risk

10. KPI 4 – Compliance and monitoring approaches are streamlined and coordinated

1. Coordinated programmes and shared Evidence of coordinated programmes and information with other regulatory information sharing with other agencies Commonwealth and state and territory agencies, e.g. Customs, TGA, Dept. of the Environment, ACCC

11. Requests for information from Need for information can be clearly industry are made only when demonstrated necessary. Information shared Evidence of use of information received internally where appropriate. Evidence of internally coordinated Measures of good regulatory Examples of output/activity-based performance evidence

compliance activities

12. KPI 5 – Regulators are open and transparent in their dealings with regulated entities

1. Regulatory activities are reported Information on activities published through: appropriately  Portfolio Budget Statement  Cost Recovery Implementation Statement  Annual Report  Regulatory Performance Framework self-assessment report  NICNAS Gazette  NICNAS Bulletin

13. Industry workshops and training Number of industry workshops and training activities conducted activities held

14. Open and responsive to requests from Information on NICNAS Service Charter regulated entities regarding the published operation of the regulatory framework Number of formal complaints and the manner in which they were addressed

15. Risk based frameworks are published Information on risk-based assessment and available in a format that is clear, approach documented and published; understandable and accessible compliance strategy and enforcement framework published and updated as appropriate

16. KPI 6 – Regulators actively contribute to the continuous improvement of regulatory frameworks

1. Cooperative and collaborative Business improvement projects aimed at relationships with regulated entities reducing regulatory costs established to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the regulatory framework and to develop mechanisms to reduce the regulatory burden and compliance costs where appropriate to do so

2. Participate in regulators’ forums Attendance at regulator forums: Measures of good regulatory Examples of output/activity-based performance evidence

 Department of Health Regulators Forum  Community of Practice for Commonwealth Regulators.

17. Effective liaison with relevant policy Evidence of interactions with policy agencies agencies

18. Effective engagement with risk Evidence of interactions with risk management agencies management agencies