This technical paper specifies the operational definitions and primary data sources for the key national indicators of children's health, development and wellbeing. It identifies the best currently available data sources for the key national indicators as identified by the AIHW, in conjunction with the National Child Information Advisory Group. It comments on data gaps and limitations, particularly inconsistencies between indicator (ideal) definitions and existing data definitions. Authored by AIHW.

The data used to craft neighborhood indicators often come from the records of administrative agencies. These are particularly useful for community indicators because they are timelier or can be applied to smaller areas than government surveys. This monograph describes 42 of these data sources. It begins with a brief section on recent developments in neighborhood indicators work, followed by a discussion of some of the challenges of using administrative records data for these purposes. The main body of the monograph is a catalog that describes the sources and gives examples of the types of indicators that can be constructed from each.

If the outcomes of the recent COAG meeting are implemented, Australia will have a new set of benchmarks for its health system within a few months. This is a non-trivial task. Choice of benchmarks will, explicitly or implicitly, reflect a framework about how the health system works, what is important or to be valued and how the benchmarks are to be used. In this article we argue that the health system is dynamic and so benchmarks need to measure flows and interfaces rather than simply cross-sectional or static performance. We also argue that benchmarks need to be developed taking into account three perspectives: patient, clinician and funder. Each of these perspectives is critical and good performance from one perspective or on one dimension doesn't imply good performance on either (or both) of the others. The three perspectives (we term the dimensions patient assessed value, performance on clinical interventions and efficiency) can each be decomposed into a number of elements. For example, patient assessed value is influenced by timeliness, cost to the patient, the extent to which their expectations are met, the way they are treated and the extent to which there is continuity of care. We also argue that the way information is presented is important: cross sectional, dated measures provide much less information and are much less useful than approaches based on statistical process control. The latter also focuses attention on improvement and trends, encouraging action rather than simply blame of poorer performers.

09/07/2006 Funders of international development programs are increasingly relying on quantitative indicators to determine which recipient countries are most likely to use aid well. In response to a request from the Millennium Challenge Corporation, CGD convened the Global Health Indicators Working Group to examine potential measures of a government's commitment to health. The working group report recommends eight indicators for consideration by the MCC and other donors as they assess recipient country readiness to make use of foreign assistance. The indicators are: 1) DTP3 immunization rate; 2) Government public health spending; 3) Under-five mortality rate; 4) Stunting; 5) Skilled birth attendants; 6) Contraceptive prevalence rate; 7) Unmet need for family planning; and 8) Access to water.