Method for target end-point assessments

The method will continue to be reviewed and refined over time.

Overview of key steps and statistical techniques

The method will continue to be reviewed and refined over time.

When ‘end-point’ data (box 1) for a target indicator is available, an end-point assessment will be made. The method has three key steps, with step 2 currently relevant at the national level only. The outcome of step 1 determines whether the national assessment proceeds to step 2 or proceeds directly to step 3. 

  • Step 1: Assess the end-point data represents a ‘no change’, an ‘improvement’ or a ‘worsening’ from the baseline
  • Step 2: If the change is an improvement at the national level, assess if the improvement is sufficient to ensure the target has been ‘met’ or ‘not met’ 
  • Step 3: Assess the confidence in the end-point assessment.
Box 1 Defining a target end-point

The end-point for a target is the data available for the target year (as defined in the National Agreement). For example: the target for socio-economic outcome 5 is:

  • Target 5: By 2031, increase the proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (age 20-24) attaining Year 12 or equivalent qualification to 96%.

For Target 5, the ‘target year’ is 2031 and the ‘end-point’ is the target indicator data for the 2031 year.

Step 1: Assess if the end-point data reflects an ‘improvement’, a ‘worsening’ or ‘no change’ from the baseline.


For states and territories and nationally, an assessment of improvement, worsened or no change is made using the conditions in table 1.

Table 1 End-point conditions for improvement, worsening or no change, state and territory and national
National assessmentState and territory assessmentCondition 
The difference between the end-point and the baseline is: 
(proceed to Step 2) Improved 
  • Positive (for indicators that are expected to increase over time, such as life expectancy)  
  • Negative (for indicators that should decrease over time such as incarceration rates) 
Worsened and target not metWorsened 
  • Negative (for indicators that are expected to increase over time, such as life expectancy)  
  • Positive (for indicators that should decrease over time such as incarceration rates) 
No change from baseline and target not met No change from baseline 
  • Estimated as equal. 
Step 2: If the change is assessed as improved at the national level, assess if the improvement is sufficient to ensure the target is ‘met’ or ‘not met’  

The assessment of whether the national target has been ‘met’ or ‘not met’ is made using the conditions in table 2.

Table 2 National end-point target assessments
National assessmentCondition 
The end-point is: 
Improved and target met
  • Equal to or higher than the target (for indicators that are expected to increase over time, such as life expectancy)
  • Equal to or lower than the target (for indicators that should decrease over time such as incarceration rates). 
Improved but target not met 
  • An improvement (table 1), but below the target (for indicators that are expected to increase over time, such as life expectancy).  
  • An improvement (table 1), but above the target (for indicators that should decrease over time such as incarceration rates). 
Step 3: Assess the confidence in the end-point assessments

Data may demonstrate volatility and natural variation (random fluctuations) over time. The dashboard uses regression analysis to:

  • assess if there are statistically significant changes in the data over time
  • calculate the trend in the target indicator data
  • determine an assessment based on the trend point in the target year
  • provide the level of confidence in the trend assessment. 

See Method for estimating the assessments of progress and their reliability for a description of these methods. Using regression analysis, the dashboard calculates the level of confidence of the end-point assessment based on the conditions in table 3.  

  • An assessment with a high level of confidence indicates that the end-point is consistent with the time series trend of the data and that any natural variation in the end-point data is unlikely to have changed the assessment.
  • An assessment with a low level of confidence indicates that the assessment at the end-point might have been different due to natural variation in the data.
Table 3 Conditions for assigning confidence of the end-point assessment
ConditionConfidence level of end-point assessment
Target indicator has fewer than 5 data points in time seriesNo confidence level provided: Assessments should be used with caution due to limited data points 
End-point assessment is different to the assessment based on the trend  Low
End-point assessment is consistent with the trend assessment and trend assessment is provided with …
  a low level of confidence
Low 
  a high level of confidenceHigh