MRIT Online Tool

  • Home
  • MRIT Online Tool

Please enter your full name and organisation email address to begin, remember to use the same email address going forward as your MRIT responses will be associated with it.

Once you have completed the entries below, your visual MRIT assessment will be generated; you can save a copy of your visual MRIT assessment and also download a PDF version and a spreadsheet of your results to track changes over time.

Users can also generate a summary report to track and organisational maturity development over a set time period.

Name

Required

Email

Required

Vision, role and strategy

Corporate plan and contribution

Corporate Plan
A corporate plan that articulates the organisations goals, objectives and future work activities. The plan expresses the strategies, milestones and desired outcomes of the organisation. The plan includes progress review practices and change management policies.
Contribution
This attribute describes the regulator’s ability to link its goals, objectives and activities with the government's agenda.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Corporate priorities are undocumented or a Corporate Plan is absent.
  • Corporate priorities are not aligned with government agenda.
  • Staff undertake projects and programs in an ad-hoc and reactive manner based on problems and issues and these are not tracked or reviewed in line with the organisations desired outcomes.
  • The need to develop a Corporate Plan has been identified but not yet implemented.
  • Some projects and programs align with the government agenda but the links are not clear or transparent.
  • A Corporate Plan is developed and implemented in some parts of the organisation.
  • Templates and reporting mechanisms to support the Corporate Plan are tested and continuously improved.
  • Staff understanding of the link between corporate priorities and the government’s agenda is measured by surveys and focus groups.
  • Corporate priorities, desired outcomes and performance are clearly stated and readily accessible internally and externally.
  • Staff and the regulated community have a clear understanding of the regulator's corporate priorities and contribution to the government’s agenda.
  • Corporate planning and contribution is valued, prioritised and resourced. The organisation invests in a dedicated team for planning, reporting and assessment and continuous improvement.
  • Priorities are clearly expressed at all levels of the organisation, linked to whole of government plans and priorities.
  • Corporate planning is subject to systematic assessment and review to drive continuous improvement.
  • The regulator’s corporate policies and contribution to the government’s agenda is well-received and respected across staff, community and environmental regulators generally.

Risk-based compliance planning

Risk-based compliance planning provides mechanisms to match regulatory resources to levels of risk. Regulatory effort and response is based on an assessment of things such as the regulator’s risk appetite, potential harms and characteristics of the regulated community. This may include tactical planning mechanisms, assessment frameworks or other systems to allocate and track effort.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Planning functions are ad hoc or absent with resource allocation largely based on external demands on the regulator e.g. complaints, notifications or public reports.
  • Limited forward planning or proactive compliance activities. Isolated to individual projects or functions but largely undocumented and driven by individuals.
  • Reactive work drives allocation with limited or inconsistent resource decisions made.
  • Compliance planning is ad hoc based on incomplete or low quality intelligence.
  • Isolated proactive compliance activity prioritised based on a single risk focus unrelated to harm e.g. media or public attention.
  • Limited or undocumented risk or harm prioritisation occurring across the organisation making resource allocation difficult.
  • Regulator aspires to a risk based regulatory model and is building systems to support assessment and prioritisation of risks and harms.
  • Corporate planning structures include mechanisms to track the allocation of resources to support compliance planning.
  • Operational leaders are discussing resource allocation to reactive versus proactive work.
  • Focus on expanding isolated proactive compliance activity across other activities.
  • A rudimentary system exists to capture and use data to identify and prioritise risks.
  • Compliance planning focuses on certain aspects of agency business that are high profile or subject to media attention.
  • Risks are prioritised using a highly intensive process driven by a number of people.
  • Risk assessment is identified as important and used to triage reactive work in some areas.
  • There is a level of unknown risk across all regulatory coverage.
  • Senior leaders have a vision for allocation of effort to proactive compliance activity.
  • Planning structures allow effort to be deliberately allocated to prioritised harms / risks.
  • Risk-based compliance planning is a core function with standard procedures, clear performance measures and a publically communicated annual plan.
  • Compliance plan addresses key regulatory activities and informs the public and regulated community about key focus areas.
  • Underpinning risk assessment process is adaptive, strategic and regularly reviewed.
  • Regulator seeks feedback on its inspection and monitoring regime. It undertakes follow up audits and checks to inform continuous improvement of its compliance and inspection strategies.
  • Intelligence function makes use of compliance data system to inform compliance planning approach and supporting systems are developed.
  • Good performance is recognised across the broader community and the community is aware of consequences for poor performance.
  • The public compliance plan is web–based, allowing interested business or community to focus on areas of interest.
  • An intelligence system is integrated with risk-based compliance planning and uses data from peer regulators and other government departments to determine likely compliance behaviour.
  • A high level of voluntary compliance is achieved by a promoted public plan, sought out by community and businesses and directs other government efforts.
  • The risk assessment method is agile, integrated with multiple data sources (including data from the public), enables comparisons of risk across multiple areas of focus and is actively used as the model by other regulators.
  • Resource management systems allow real time allocation of effort, agile re-prioritisation during the year based on new data and staff changes and automatically updates the online public plan.

Problem-solving approach

Problem-solving is a way of resolving specific and/or complex problems by rearranging effort, skills and resources around the problem itself rather than through traditional functional structures. Both internal and external resources should be used to ensure the right knowledge and skills are allocated to a problem-solving project.
Problem-solving approaches use evidence and data to help to identify problems, analyse them, create tailored, targeted solutions and measure the effectiveness of the solution, with adjustments made where required. They rely on a concise problem definition, where the parameters are quantified and measured. When success is achieved, on-going monitoring should be in place to ensure that the problem doesn’t arise again. These achievements and learnings are communicated both internally and externally.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Problems are seen as intractable or impossible and have occurred over a long period with multiple people or parties involved.
  • Problems are tackled reactively using traditional functional approaches with little or no resolution.
  • No clear approach to the nomination of harms (problems) to be addressed by a problem-solving approach.
  • Identified need for problem solving approach.
  • Projects to tackle specific harms (problems) happen on an ad hoc basis in addition to officers normal duties.
  • Problem identification happens in the absence of a documented process.
  • Development of process/framework for a problem-solving approach underway.
  • Problem identification/solution draws mainly on information generated within the regulator.
  • Projects have been identified using a documented process, but may not have been completed.
  • Projects that are unsuccessful, show little chance of succeeding or that become a low priority have been closed and new projects started.
  • A process/framework for a problem solving approach has been developed is communicated internally and implemented.
  • A process/framework has been developed to support the gathering and analysis of data and other information to inform the problem solving approach.
  • Projects have performance measures that demonstrate that the projects have solved the identified problem.
  • Successful problem-solving projects form part of the performance account for the regulator and are communicated internally.
  • The problem-solving approach is standard procedure with clear performance measures based on a range of sources.
  • Problem identification/solution draws on information from a range of sources within and outside the regulator.
  • Several projects have been completed and closed, and more projects are waiting to be commenced.
  • On-going monitoring is in place to ensure that the harm (problem) doesn’t arise again.
  • Problem-solving projects form part of the performance account for the regulator and are communicated internally and externally
  • Problem-solving approach is subject to systematic assessment and review to drive continuous improvement.
  • Regulator has a portfolio of successfully completed problem solving projects that are communicated both internally and externally.
  • Problem identification/solution draws on participants and/or resources from outside the regulator.

Capability and improvement

Training & procedures

Training relates to workforce capability, what the regulator has in place to ensure it has the combination of skills (i.e. abilities, knowledge, and expertise) and competencies, at all levels of the organisation, that it needs to do its work now and into the future. Training includes both formal and informal approaches to learning.

‘Procedures’ refers to the procedures and policies used to reinforce expected behaviours and to support staff to achieve the organisation’s objectives. It includes delegations, standard operating procedures etc.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Reactive approach to training needs.
  • Procedures do not exist or are developed in a reactive fashion.
  • Ad-hoc approach to developing and delivering training and procedures (e.g. by discrete functional areas; no central resource to coordinate training or procedures).
  • Regulator has identified the need for a centralised/coordinated approach to training and procedures, and resources have been allocated to advance the function.
  • Central/coordinated approach to training and procedures for core regulatory functions.
  • Procedures exist for core regulatory functions.
  • Staff are invited to provide feedback to improve training and procedures.
  • Whole of agency training and procedures for core regulatory functions have been in place for many years.
  • Effectiveness of training and procedures is measured through systematic reporting.
  • Training and procedures are adapted to organisation activities, embedded in organisation practices and inform training benchmarks.
  • Clear and concise procedures and policies based on reliable and integrated systems exist for staff for all key areas, backed up by competency based training that is clearly linked to roles, responsibilities and organisational priorities.
  • Policies and procedures are well established, clear and concise, based on reliable and integrated systems (including IT) and ensure staff work effectively and efficiently across divisions/units within the organisation.
  • Policy and procedure culture embedded in the organisation, training is based on accredited documentation, staff are aware of policies and procedures, understand their importance, and consistently follow them.
  • Training and procedures are benchmarked or accredited
  • Training and procedures are subject to systematic assessment and review improvement (including through quality assurance sfunction and feedback loops via operational and peer experiences).
  • Clear learning and development strategies and dedicated training budgets are in place, supported by mentoring programs and opportunities for staff to identify and capture improvements.

Quality assurance & review functions

This attribute describes the independent systems, processes and functions that support operational consistency and effectiveness, fair and unbiased decision making and continuous improvement. When established and integrated across the organisation, quality assurance and review functions enable an organisation to proactively manage regulatory improvements in line with business risk. Key elements can include the initiatives defined below which can be applied both internally or outside the organisation:
- Quality review/checks and audits which assess compliance against set standards (e.g. policy, guidance, training requirements etc.) to review what is expected versus what occurs in practice
- Avenues for duty holders to review officer and regulatory decisions or lodge complaints.
- Proactively identifying key risks using the quality data/information to prioritise improvements required to reduce risks

  Maturity Meaning
  • Reactive approach to assessing operational decisions and approaches (e.g. as a result of a major incident/crisis).
  • Quality assurance function and/or review mechanisms do not exist or are used in a reactive fashion.
  • Ad-hoc approach to internal checks on decision making (e.g. isolated to enforcement decisions only).
  • The benefits of a quality assurance function and/or review mechanisms have been identified and resources have been allocated to develop a quality assurance and review function
  • Legislative review and complaint processes are the only mechanisms in place for duty holders to test decision-making.
  • Quality assurance function and review mechanisms are implemented and resourced.
  • Quality assurance and review outcomes are fed back to discrete operational areas.
  • Quality assurance and review mechanisms are readily used by staff.
  • Internal review and dispute management procedures exist in addition to legislative requirements and are readily accessible to external stakeholders.
  • multiple avenues exist for duty holders to review officer and regulatory decisions or lodge conduct complaints
  • Quality assurance and review outcomes are systematically reported.
  • Quality assurance and review mechanisms are embedded and fit for purpose.
  • Outcomes from quality assurance and reviews are used to feed into agency strategic planning.
  • Quality assurance and review mechanisms are benchmarked or accredited.
  • Outcomes from quality assurance and reviews are systematically assessed and reviewed across all areas of the organisation and with regulatory peers and improvements incorporated back into the business.

Learning with others

This relates to the regulator’s role in working collaboratively with other regulators to share learnings, information and experiences across the broader regulatory profession. Regulators who share common activities, skills, objectives and/or stakeholders will value-add to core organisational culture and capability through collaboration.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Reactive contact with other regulators and regulatory networks.
  • Not aware of established networks, communities or practice or other opportunities to exchange ideas.
  • Staff are aware of networks and regulatory partners but have limited engagement with them.
  • Exchange of ideas and information from other regulators happens in an ad hoc fashion through informal networks on an individual level.
  • Regulator often uses informal networks to exchange ideas.
  • Is a member of formal networks etc. within the regulator’s area of direct regulatory focus (e.g. environment) and uses them when needed to find information to support current initiatives of the regulator.
  • Staff are encouraged to explore available opportunities for shared learning forums and information exchange initiatives, including internally with other regulatory functions.
  • Organisation’s regulatory practice contributes to, and/or is integrated with professional standards, language, codes, initiatives etc.
  • Staff are actively encouraged to participate in networking, collaboration and exchange forums. They are challenged to stay up-to-date with developments in regulatory practice (within and beyond their organisation).
  • A dedicated contact point has been identified or resources established within the organisation to seek out and share learnings, data and information with regulatory peers and partners.
  • Staff, at all levels across the organisation, are key office-holders, contributors and focal points in networking, collaboration and exchange forums, and routinely disseminate information and connections throughout the organization.
  • Contributions to networking, collaboration and exchange forums are innovative, strategic and of broad benefit.
  • Participation in regulatory practice networks more broadly and/or networks that extend overseas.
  • Networking, collaboration and exchange are core organisational principles and a key part of organisational culture and regulatory capability, and are subject to continual review and improvement.
  • Accesses innovation across the broader regulatory profession to get results.

Governance and delivery

Activity & visibility

Activity relates to the extent the regulator actively and effectively administers its legislation/regulatory scheme, including:
whether it proactively plans and undertakes work that is in line with the regulator’s purpose and vision, or whether it mostly reacts to incidents and complaints, and
whether it uses the full range of available regulatory and non-regulatory measures to appropriately identify and respond to risk, harms and problems.
Visibility covers the extent the regulated and wider community are:
aware of and respect/trust the regulator, its role and function and its achievements
aware of the regulator’s proactive and reactive activities and the degree to which general and specific deterrent exists to impact behavior change.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Regularly uses a small number of regulatory measures in response to identified non-compliance.
  • Public is unaware of the regulator’s role, and the regulated community is unsure of the regulator’s jurisdiction.
  • Inspections are chosen in an ad hoc manner and are reactive to complaints and notifications from the public or the regulated community.
  • Information about the regulator’s activities (including prosecutions) is not easily accessible by the regulated community or public.
  • The need to expand compliance monitoring (inspection/audit) regime to include proactive and reactive inspections has been identified, but not yet implemented.
  • The need to communicate successfully to the public and regulated community about the regulators role, function and achievements has been identified but not yet implemented.
  • Staff use a wider range of regulatory measures to respond to a variety of situations.
  • Regulated community understands the reach and limits of the agency’s jurisdiction, but is largely unaware of the nature and scope of its proactive activities.
  • Regulated community perceive the chance of detection of unlawful behaviour to be low.
  • Community is aware of the regulator’s role, but not aware of its effectiveness in carrying out that role.
  • Monitoring (including inspections) by the regulator identifies non-compliance, allowing interventions to occur before the regulator is notified via complaints or public notification.
  • Some information about the regulator’s activities is promoted via the website to the public and regulated community.
  • Staff across the regulator are confident in using a range of regulatory measures to respond to a variety of situations.
  • Public is aware of significant actions by the regulator.
  • Regulated community is aware that proactive work is undertaken, and is aware of regulatory actions taken against peers.
  • Regulated community perceive that there is a risk of detection of unlawful behavior.
  • Information about the regulator’s activities is promoted via the website and through a targeted approach to reach the regulated community.
  • Regular meetings, which include senior managers, to discuss changes in the operating environment that might require an organisational response.
  • Public understands the role of the regulator, and has confidence in the way in which it operates.
  • Regulated community views regulatory activities as effective, and some members modify their behaviour in response.
  • Regular and timely information about the regulator’s activities is available through a range of channels, and is regularly accessed and valued by the public and regulated community.
  • Regulator uses information gathered through inspections, complaints, notifications, surveillance, environmental monitoring, audits, citizen science and reports to gather intelligence and understand and measure compliance.
  • Regulator has an appropriate mix of planned and reactive activities, allowing it to be confident that risks and harms are being identified and responded to.
  • High ‘brand recognition’ amongst the public, who see the regulator as credible, effective and trustworthy.
  • Regulated community respects and values the contribution of the regulator. They are aware of regulatory activities relevant to them, perceive a high risk of detection of unlawful behaviour, and modify their behaviour accordingly.
  • Regulator anticipates change through contingency planning and agile systems that allow for rapid response to new challenges.
  • Use of real time electronic information regarding the operating conditions of regulatory focus and compliance reporting to enable informed and timely responses.
  • Uses the full range of regulatory measures with confidence, and uses creative, non-regulatory measures (including partnerships and collaborations with other agencies) to identify and respond to harms and problems.

Performance reporting

The collection and use of relevant information to determine whether the regulator is effective in its regulatory mission. Reporting will inform organisational decisions drive strategic improvement and be used as a tool to engage the public and stakeholders about the regulator’s effectiveness.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Data and performance information is not collected or is collected but is not easily reportable.
  • No information provided to the public about the regulator’s performance.
  • The need to provide data and information to the public and stakeholders has been identified, but not yet implemented.
  • Information about outputs (such as number of compliance inspections conducted) is collected by the regulator and used as an internal measure of performance.
  • The information is made available to the public and stakeholders through a limited range of channels (such as through annual reports).
  • Relevant information on results (operating, service, strategic and community‐level) is used to make organisational decisions.
  • Performance targets establish clear links between business area activity and departmental goals.
  • Performance information is collected about operational, customer service, strategic and environmental matters.
  • Performance reports include a range of output and outcome measures (such as number of sites in compliance).
  • Reports are used to inform a range of decisions, including resourcing, performance measurement and strategic direction and are easily available internally.
  • Performance information (including performance targets) is published regularly on departmental websites.
  • Performance indicator data are reviewed and updated regularly.
  • Performance reports enable conclusions to be drawn about whether actions of the regulator are contributing to environmental outcomes.
  • Performance data and analysis are readily available to all relevant parties including agency partners.
  • Regulator responds to underperformance against targets for resource allocation and future strategies.
  • Performance indicators are primarily outcome indicators.
  • Performance reports give a sophisticated picture of regulator performance that allows the regulator to create a compelling picture of its effectiveness in carrying out its regulatory mission.
  • Drives performance excellence through direct assessment of performance issues and trends at all levels. Assessments are used for organisational performance improvement.
  • Proactively engages with stakeholders and the community to discuss information and performance results.
  • Information, knowledge and intelligence are effectively used as evidence to drive policy development and delivery.
  • Use of performance indicators for decision-making at all levels of the organisation as evidenced by plans, minutes, presentations and reports.
  • Data and performance information is available in forms that are convenient to stakeholders, partners and the public (e.g. websites, public libraries, widely distributed reports).

Governance & Oversight

Governance is how a regulator is set up, directed, controlled, resourced and held to account. This attribute relates to the systems and institutions (for both internal and external governance) for ensuring that the regulator is well-managed, accountable, ethical and transparent. When established and integrated across the organisation, governance and oversight enables a culture of accountability, fairness and good management practices. These ensure regulatory decisions are in the public interest to avoid corruption and regulatory capture.
Key systems and institutions can include:
- a culture of accepting internal and external audits
- board of management with appropriate skills and qualifications
- strong risk management
- systems to ensure strong decisions
- tracking of statutory decisions
- independent tracking and oversight of projects
- document management systems
- centralised reporting and tracking systems.

  Maturity Meaning
  • No processes to ensure that risks are managed, staff are accountable, decisions are lawful and that public service requirements are upheld.
  • The need for processes to support public service requirements has been identified, but they have not yet been implemented.
  • Staff are regularly made aware of core public service obligations (such as ethical behavior and adherence to the code of conduct) and the organisation’s role as a regulator.
  • Systems are in place to manage organisational risks, staff performance and good decision making, but adherence is not uniform across the organisation.
  • Leaders and senior managers scan the organisational environment for risks and respond to them when found.
  • Project Management Office developed and tools, training and guidance provided to staff.
  • Assurance framework developed and used to monitor for consistency across agency.
  • Governance arrangements and responsibilities are clearly and publicly available.
  • The regulator identifies, evaluates, manages and reports significant risks to a Board/management committee and/or audit and risk Committee.
  • Systems identified below are understood, valued and adhered to by staff across the organisation.
  • An internal audit function is embedded and acts as an independent, objective assurance and consulting activity that adds value and improves the regulator’s operations.
  • Regulator has a culture of accountability and ethical behaviour, and leaders model appropriate behaviours for staff.
  • Risk management system in place and implemented, including systems to produce early warnings of possible major systems failure. Mechanisms to assure that opportunities are taken advantage of.
  • Balance risk and opportunity by having alignment of agency divisions and budget allocations to agency-wide performance management, and agency targets and KPIs, with clear accountabilities for all employees.
  • Systems in place to devolve responsibilities and accountabilities throughout the organisation, providing greater flexibility and appropriate discretion linked to capabilities and informed by an assurance framework.

Leadership and culture

Culture & leadership focus

Culture - This attribute describes the regulator's expectations, experiences, philosophy, and values. Its culture is expressed in itsself-image, work conditions, interactions with its employees, regulated community and stakeholders. The culture guides employees to act according to the principles and values of the organisation, based on shared attitudes, beliefs and customs.
Leadership - This attribute describes the regulator’s ability to establish a clear vision that is innovative and restricted only by the limits of its creativity and imagination. The vision is shared by employees who implement it through their work.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Organisational culture and values are not discussed or actively demonstrated
  • Leaders are unable to clearly articulate the organisation’s vision.
  • Vision and values are undocumented and applied inconsistency across the organisation.
  • The need to establish and articulate a clear vision. Values have been identified but not yet implemented.
  • Values and behaviours are discussed by some but not all staff in the organisation.
  • Employee understanding of vision and strategy is measured by surveys and focus groups.
  • Vision and values are articulated in some elements of planning.
  • Leaders communicate their vision to the whole organisation through speeches, newsletters and other media.
  • The regulator’s vision and values are understood and clearly articulated. This is measured through staff surveys or focus groups.
  • The regulator has a well-established brand across its regulated community.
  • Leadership development is valued, prioritised and resourced and the regulator invests in developing leadership capabilities.
  • A mechanism or procedure exists to ensure the end-to-end decision making process is open and transparent.
  • A mechanism or process exists to allow staff to give feedback on performance and discuss career progression.
  • Leaders create a culture which fosters innovation and a shared vision.
  • The regulator has a well-established, respected brand across its regulated community and interstate.
  • Employees embrace and believe in the vision, want to achieve it, live the culture and seek to achieve ambitious targets.
  • Leaders behave strategically by analysing data, anticipating change, leveraging resources, driving policy debate, solving complex problems and implementing robust plans.
  • Decisions are made with employees and interagency collaboration and, where appropriate, are challenged and reviewed.

Regulatory philosophy & approach

This attribute describes the regulator’s ability to clearly articulate and apply the principles that underpin the way it regulates. This includes how it will approach its role as a regulator and use its powers to regulate. It also includes the factors that the regulator takes into consideration when responding to any identified non-compliance or harm.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Regulatory philosophy and approach is undocumented or absent.
  • Staff are unable to accurately and consistently articulate the regulatory philosophy and/or apply the regulatory approach to their regulatory decisions.
  • The need to clearly articulate and apply the regulatory philosophy and approach has been identified but not yet implemented across the organisation.
  • Regulatory philosophy and approaches are discussed by some regulatory staff but not all in the organisation.
  • A compliance and enforcement policy (or equivalent) is developed and elements of risk-based and outcome focused regulation are applied in parts of the organisation.
  • Staff and the regulated community’s understanding of the regulator’s philosophy and approach is measured by surveys and focus groups.
  • Regulatory philosophy and approach is articulated and applied consistently in some but not all elements of the organisation’s business.
  • The regulator’s compliance and enforcement policy (or equivalent) clearly describes how it will regulate using a harms and risk-based responsive approach
  • Staff understand the regulatory philosophy and approach and apply it in their regulatory decision making.
  • A process or mechanism is used to document and review regulatory decision making to ensure the organisation is making decisions in line with its regulatory approach.
  • Regulatory philosophy and practice is valued, prioritised and resourced and organisation invests in developing capability in this area.
  • Has a published compliance and enforcement policy (or equivalent) that is regularly showcased and recognised as best practice in the sector.
  • The regulated and wider community has a clear understanding of the regulator’s regulatory philosophy and approach.
  • A process or mechanism exists to scan for emerging regulatory theory and practice for continuous review and improvement of the philosophy and approach.

Stakeholder and Community Engagement

This attribute describes the regulator’s ability to engage stakeholders and communities to find out what issues matter most to them and provide them a voice in decisions that affect or interest them. This can involve different levels of engagement depending on the goals, timeframes, resources and levels of concern in the decision to be made. The types of engagement can include: inform, consult, involve, collaborate and empower.

  Maturity Meaning
  • Stakeholder and community engagement is undocumented or absent.
  • Engagement with stakeholders and the community is ad-hoc and reactive based on problems and issues.
  • The need to understand and effectively engage with stakeholders and the community has been identified but not yet implemented across the organisation.
  • Engagement with stakeholders and the community is undertaken by some staff but not all in the organisation.
  • An engagement policy (or equivalent) is developed and elements of inclusive, early, flexible and genuine engagement are applied in parts of the organisation.
  • Staff and the regulated community’s understanding of the organisation’s key stakeholders and community members is measured by surveys and focus groups.
  • Regulator has a clear understanding of why it is engaging with stakeholders and the community and this is communicated clearly.
  • Regulator has a clear understanding of what stakeholders and community groups it needs to engage with.
  • Stakeholder and community engagement is valued, prioritised and resourced and organisation invests in a dedicated team for proactive engagement.
  • Regulator provides timely, easy-to-understand and transparent information to communicate its expectations and explain its decisions.
  • Seeks a full range of interested and affected stakeholders and community members to have input when new policies, guidelines and standards are developed.
  • Examples or case studies of successful engagement are regularly showcased and recognised as best practice in the sector.
  • Engages on development and implementation of policy and continuously reviews the impact and efficiency of desired policy outcomes.
  • Information used to inform regulatory decisions and is proactively made publically available.
  • Multiple pathways for stakeholders and the community exist for participation in the development of new policies, guidelines and standards.

View your past surveys

To view your past surveys enter your email address below and you will be emailed a link to allow you to access them:

Email