auto_stories Corporate Plan 2025-29

Rationale: Indicator of the agency's ability to meet governance requirements by operating within Australian Government administrative, legal and policy boundaries.

Methodology: Assessed through instances/cases of non-compliance recorded as part of annual compliance statements and any findings from internal and external audits on agency operations and compliance.

Rationale: The CER must build on data quality and accessibility to promote and enhance a well-functioning, vibrant and liquid carbon market.

Methodology: We will take an evaluative approach to understand how effectively we have improved the way we use and share data using the following case studies: Our use of data to improve our efficiency as a regulator and Data accessibility supports the integrity of well-functioning markets.

Rationale: Providing quality, relevant and timely information increases transparency and confidence in the operation of markets and underpins our role as a trusted, relevant and expert institution.

Methodology: Analysis on the key market information distributed by the agency and how the quality and timeliness of the information supports our stakeholders. This could involve the use of a case study if appropriate to demonstrate our achievement against this KPI.

Rationale: Efficient processing of applications supports effective scheme administration and delivers value to participants by streamlining their experience and meeting their expectations.

Methodology: Across schemes - the number of applications processed within statutory or agreed timeframes against the total number of applications processed. Where statutory timeframes do not exist, we apply internal processing timeframes. The processing time is suspended when an application is returned to the applicant to provide further details.

Rationale: Effective administration of the Nature Repair Market and Guarantee of Origin is supported by the efficient processing of applications, delivers value to participants by streamlining their experience and meeting their expectations.

Methodology: Across both schemes - the number of applications processed within statutory or agreed timeframes against the total number of applications processed. Where statutory timeframes do not exist, we apply internal processing timeframes. The processing time is suspended when an application is returned to the applicant to provide further details.

Rationale: Timely completion of investigations helps resolve and correct non-compliance.

Methodology: The number of investigations completed within the required timeframes against the total number of investigations completed. We aim to complete complex investigations within 365 days and routine investigations within 180 days.

Rationale: An indicator of the effectiveness of our administration of the ACCU and RET schemes.

Methodology: The estimated tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO_2-e) emissions abated from the creation of ACCUs and growth in small-scale and large-scale solar under the RET within the reporting period.

Rationale: An indicator of the effectiveness of our administration of the Safeguard Mechanism.

Methodology: Number of Safeguard facilities with a net emissions number for the 2024-25 reporting year, at or below their determined baseline figure as at 1 April 2026.

Rationale: Compliance with scheme regulations is an indicator that participants are active and engaged and supports the integrity of the schemes and the agency as a regulator.

Methodology: Across relevant schemes, the total number of reports submitted within the required reporting timeframe against the total number of reports required to be submitted. RET - total number of certificates required to be surrendered against the total number of certificates surrendered. Some entities surrender more STCs than is required to avoid shortfall.

Rationale: Providing accurate, timely and relevant guidance and engagement informs and educates our participants to understand their obligations or entitlements to successfully participate in the schemes we administer.

Methodology: Results from the annual stakeholder survey indicating satisfaction with engagement and guidance activities delivered by the agency.

Rationale: Providing targeted and timely guidance and outreach activities enables our participants to successfully participate in the schemes we administer.

Methodology: Analysis on the details of key activities undertaken by the agency to actively engage with our participants and the quantified results of these activities. Our performance against this KPI would be demonstrated through a case study where appropriate.

Rationale: Efficient and effective processes and systems enable our participants to interact with us easily and supports successful participation in the schemes we administer.

Methodology: Results from the agency's annual stakeholder survey indicating satisfaction with agency processes and systems (averaged). The result is derived from a set of questions in the survey related to agency processes and systems.

Rationale: Maintaining secure systems with ongoing access enables scheme participants to meet their obligations, stakeholders to access scheme and market information and agency obligations to be met.

Methodology: Availability of our online systems, excluding planned maintenance and no significant security breaches. The Protective Security Policy Framework defines a significant security incident as a deliberate, negligent or reckless action that leads, or could lead, to the loss, damage, compromise, corruption or disclosure of official resources.

Rationale: Investment in our people and ongoing development of our workforce ensures we have the right mix of capabilities and behaviours to meet current and future requirements.

Methodology: Analysis of the agency's workforce planning to meet current and future requirements. Our performance against this KPI would be demonstrated using the following case studies: Embedding the SES performance and leadership framework and Building towards AI maturity.

Rationale: The market, registry and data support services we provide are integral in enabling our stakeholders to successfully achieve environmental based outcomes.

Methodology: Analysis of the progressive implementation of a new carbon unit/certificate register with improved user functionality and interoperability with other digital trading platforms/exchange and Data Services functionality progressively delivered with increasing levels of data available to be consumed and analysed by users. Our performance against this KPI would be demonstrated using the following case studies: Building a future-ready carbon unit and certificate registry to support deep, liquid and transparent carbon markets, including through interoperability with third-party platforms and Making it simpler for our stakeholders to consume and analyse our data.

Rationale: This new performance measure demonstrates our commitment to ensuring that the systems, processes and guidance are in place for the Guarantee of Origin scheme launch date and participants can successfully apply to participate in the scheme.

Methodology: Evidence of the implementation of the Guarantee of Origin Scheme including the preparation of systems and forms, internal processes and participant educational information and communications to be ready at the scheme commencement date of 1 October 2025. Our performance against this KPI would be demonstrated through the use of a case study that demonstrates: Online Services and CRM functionality have been built and tested, Process maps and work instructions have been developed and tested and Guidance materials prepared and rolled out.