The national Indigenous health performance measurement system

Abstract

This article reviews the development of the national Indigenous performance measurement system over the last decade. Data were collected from the published and unpublished literature and review of government websites, facilitated by key informant interviews which provided information about the policy context. A number of innovations have occurred over the last decade, including the development of a conceptual framework to underpin a system-wide approach to performance measurement that is aligned with nationally agreed strategic goals. The development of mechanisms to oversee Indigenous health strategy and health data development create formal mechanisms that potentially link data development and performance measurement priorities. Innovation in the development of processes to support health system performance improvement is evident, but this needs to be prioritised, particularly with respect to those components of the health system that are not Indigenous-specific.PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT and management are increasingly important processes for health systems. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] Since the 1990s Australian governments have undertaken initiatives to develop a nationally coherent approach to health system performance measurement, with a focus on quality of care, health outcomes and clinical indicators. 7,8 From 1999 this focus shifted to integrating and rationalising these activities, resulting in the development of the Australian health performance measurement frameworkan adaptation of the Canadian health information roadmap initiative indicators framework.In this paper we review progress over the last decade in the development of a national Indigenous health performance measurement and management system. We compare our results with a review 9,10 undertaken before the transfer of responsibility for the national Aboriginal health program in 1995-96. 11 Our analysis is focussed on identifying priorities for future system development.

Who responds? An examination of response rates to a national postal survey of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, 2018-2019

“…Responses include: 1"We have a lot of savings", 2"We have some savings", 3"We have just enough to get us to the next payday", 4"We run out of money before payday", 5"We are spending more than we get", 6"Unsure". These were grouped as "Savings" [1,2], "Just enough" [3], "No savings" [4,5], Unsure [6]. First language was defined as: "Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander language", "English" or "other".…”

“…It is internationally recognised that improvements in data systems are needed to support action and progress in Indigenous peoples' health outcomes [1,2]. This includes the need for longitudinal data on wellbeing measures that are defined by Indigenous people.…”

Diving below the surface: A framework for arctic health research to support thriving communities

“…The endorsement of the United Nations’ 2007 Decla-ration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [1] by most circumpolar countries (with the exception of Russia), and current international discourses on the importance of health equity, have led to important debates in Indigenous communities. These conversations have centered on what indicators best capture the health of Indigenous peoples, and which investigate existing disparities [2–8]. This work has critiqued the quasi-exclusive use of classic epidemiological indicators (suicide rates, obesity rates, infant mortality rates, etc.…”

Who responds? An examination of response rates to a national postal survey of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, 2018-2019

“…It is internationally recognised that improvements in data systems are needed to support action and progress in Indigenous peoples' health outcomes. (1,2) This includes the need for longitudinal data on wellbeing measures that are defined by Indigenous people. These calls also recognise the importance of Indigenous peoples' role in determining data processes, including the sampling approaches applied.…”