Individual government departments produce a statement called a Service Charter that highlights their unique information such as mandates, projected activities and what the general public can expect from that particular department. The charters also detail specific benchmarks for the purpose of assessing results. It is interesting to note that the Service Charters also outline how the general public can respond to the information contained in the charters in an effort to improve departmental services and increase accountability.

At the start of the fiscal year, each federal department must submit its budget and its Portfolio Budget Statement (PBS) projecting departmental expenses and revenue, timelines, performance indicators of efficiency and effectiveness, and assessment criteria for review by parliamentary committees. All projected expenses must be justified and have a corresponding description of expected results.

Accountability is high as government representatives are legally responsible for the efficient, effective and ethical use of resources. The details included in each PBS are supervised and negotiated by the Australian Department of Finance and Administration, and the effectiveness of internal evaluations are monitored by the Australian National Audit Office. An annual report is presented in the Australian Parliament by each department at the close of each fiscal year.

The Australian Department of Education, Science and Training is one example of best practice in performance-based management as it has also developed its own performance management framework, which identifies strategic priorities and short- and medium-term indicators and links individual performance expectations with its department’s business plan.

According to the Australian government’s Department of Finance, the Outcomes and Outputs Framework has allowed its managers to:

• have a clearer idea of what is expected of them, because government specifies its requirements in terms of clearly articulated outcomes;
• be able to identify what is to be delivered to meet those requirements in a performance management environment, in contrast to earlier inputs-focused arrangements;
• be assessed against agreed performance indicators derived directly from the specific outcomes and outputs for which they are accountable; and
• have greater flexibility in the mix and disposition of the resources (inputs) used to deliver the outputs agreed with government. ^{Endnote 8}

Performance indicators are becoming increasingly central to the process of government in Australia. ^{Endnote 9} Having readily available information on performance and effectiveness has enabled the identification of trends and weaknesses in the system. These trends and weaknesses would not be as easy to identify in a framework that looked solely at inputs and resources. As a result of the outcomes that are reported for each agency, Parliament is able to identify the results that Government is working towards and determine the appropriate allocation of funds to contribute to those results.