Audit findings and recommendations
Audit Outcomes
At the completion of the audit the MPC must determine whether the selection process meets the
- elements of the merit principle as defined in Section 10A Public Service Act 1999 and
- requirements of a merit-based recruitment detailed in the APS Commissioner’s Directions 2022.
The table below explains the possible audit outcomes. The MPC will provide a written report with reasons for its decision, and suggestions for improvement to support continuous improvement. The Agency Head has the responsibility for implementing the recommendation and any process improvements suggested by the MPC.
| Review findings | Recommendations |
|---|---|
| Selection exercise is merit based |
If the selection process has met the requirements of the merit principle and the Commissioner’s Directions, a report will be provided to Agency Head with observations on the selection process. No further action needs to be taken. Any merit pool, ranked merit pool or merit list can continue to be used. |
| Selection exercise is not merit based but the outcome not materially different |
If the selection process is not compliant with the requirements of the merit principle or the Commissioner's Directions, however the MPC finds that the outcome would not have been materially different - a report will make recommendations for improvement. This will include advice on how to avoid a re-occurrence of the non-compliance. Any merit pool, ranked merit pool or merit list can continue to be used. |
| Selection exercise is not merit based but the outcome is materially different |
If the non-compliance is serious and was material to the outcome, the MPC must recommend the selection process should not be used to fill a vacancy (other than a vacancy that has already been filled). Any merit pool, ranked merit pool or ranked merit list should not be used on or after the day the report is given to the Agency Head. Any promotion decision notified in the APS Gazette or offer of employment (including engagements) can stand. |
What is 'materially different'
In the context of a promotion review, it is when we have found an issue or an error in the recruitment process but the error or issue did not influence the outcome. In that case, the issue or error was not material to the outcome.
Whether or not an error has made a material difference to an outcome will depend on the scale, impact and nature of the non-compliance (which resulted in the finding that the selection process was not merit-based). The MPC must decide whether the promotion decision could realistically have been different if the error had not occurred.
Our regulatory approach recognises that it is not necessary to take action for every error or concern identified in a review. Rather, wherever possible, we will focus on building capability and service improvement.
Does an Agency Head have to accept an audit recommendation?
An Agency Head is responsible for making sure the MPC recommendations are followed, and any process improvements are made. An Agency Head must notify the MPC of what action they propose to take, within 14 days from the date they were informed about the outcome.
If an Agency Head does not agree with an audit recommendation the MPC must notify the APS Commissioner that it was not accepted and provide the reasons given by the Agency Head for not accepting the recommendation.