LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 2 of 68
Contents
Executive Summary
2
Summary of Findings
3
Recommendations
5
Detailed Findings
6
Approach
11
Scope
11
Sample
11
Investigation
12
Recalculating the debt
12
Quality Assurance and Proficiency Process
13
Support
14
Reporting
14
Approvals
15
Appendix
16
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
1
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 3 of 68
Executive Summary
On 14 July 2023, the Secretary for the Department of Social Services (DSS) wrote to Services Australia
(the agency) requesting a sampling activity to be undertaken, to understand the extent in which
income apportionment was relied upon to calculate debts. The sampling activity was finalised on the
11 October 2023.
On 25 October 2023, the Commonwealth Ombudsman (the Ombudsman) wrote to the agency to
provide their draft report into income apportionment administration. This report sets out the findings
of the Ombudsman’s second investigation which focusses on the remediation of cases affected (or
potentially affected) by income apportionment and included 8 recommendations.
Recommendation 1 from the Ombudsman’s second report requested the agency to develop a strategy
for sampling potentially affected historic debts, underpayments, Administrative Appeals Tribunal
(AAT) decisions and Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions (CDPP) referred debts. The
Ombudsman requested that the sample be:
• statistically significant in size;
• provide a high rate of confidence, and
• include a range of payments across a range of years between 2003 to 2020.
The initial sampling activity that was finalised on 11 October 2023 did not meet the requirements of
the Ombudsman’s recommendation, therefore the agency accepted this recommendation and
commenced a second sampling activity from 15 November 2023.
This report includes all outcomes from the second sampling activity and outlines the preparation the
agency undertook to implement this activity. This included:
• defining the sampling methodology;
• refining the process to consistently and accurately capture sampling information, and
• recording the outcomes of sampling to facilitate analysis.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
2
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 4 of 68
Summary of Findings
• 2,150 cases were sourced in total:
o 1,000 determined debts between 2003 2020:
o 150 AAT decisions
o 1,000 arrears records
•
1,117 employment income updates that resulted in a determined debt, AAT Decision or an
arrears amount related to employment income, and 714 (64%) relied upon income
apportionment to calculate.
o Of the 714 employment income updates that were identified as having relied upon
income apportionment, 457 (64%) contained sufficient evidence on record to conduct a
recalculation.
• Overall, recalculations resulted in a 7% reduction to the total debt value, with the following
outcomes:
Determined Debts
AAT Decisions
Arrears
Related to employment income
970
109
38
Relied upon income
614
87
13
apportionment
% evidence available
410
42
5
Recalculations conducted
410
42
5
Downward Variations
264 (64%)
28 (67%)
3 (60%)
Average variation
$194.11
$608.14
$21.72
Median variation
$99.14
$351.99
$11.38
Average debt period
121 days
480 days
106 days
Upward Variations
119 (29%)
11(26%)
2 (40%)
Average variation
$179.80
$234.35
$27.48
Median variation
$66.88
$125.52
$27.48
Average debt period
207 days
442 days
111 days
Arrears
15 (4%)
0
0
Average arrears amount
$105.36
-
-
Maximum arrears
$372.72
-
-
Minimum arrears
$1.60
-
-
NIL Change
12 (3%)
3 (7%)
0
• Recalculations were conducted using either the daily or date paid methods for employment
income:
o
21 were completed using the daily method.
o
413 were completed using the date paid method.
o
23 were completed using a hybrid of daily and date paid methods.
*Note: NET income from bank statements was not considered sufficient evidence for this
sampling activity.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
3
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 5 of 68
• Staff timings were captured for both investigation and recalculation components and the
average timings confirmed:
Priority Formal Review
Determined Debts
Arrears
(AAT)
Investigation Time
1 hour and 18 minutes
35 minutes
1 hour and 1 minute
Recalculation Time
2 hours and 30 minutes 56 minutes
3 hours and 32 minutes
End-to-End Time
(Where a reca cu at on was
3 hours and 48 minutes 1 hour and 31 minutes
4 hours and 33 minutes
comp eted)
•
Quality Assurance (QA) was conducted on both triage and recalculation outcomes:
o 722 triage outcomes were quality checked with 70% accuracy.
o
506 recalculations were quality checked with 62% accuracy.
o
These outcomes demonstrate the complexities in conducting manual recalculations,
over long debt periods.
• MutliCal is a standalone debt calculation tool which allows for a manual retrospective
calculation of the customers entitlement to payment/s. As part of the sampling exercise, staff
completed recalculations using the MultiCal tool.
• MultiCal Troubleshooting Guide provides a summary of situations where the MultiCal tool is
limited in its capacity to correctly calculate entitlements and debts, indicating that either a
workaround or manual calculation is required.
o Where the guide indicated that a manual calculation was required, such as in pre June
2006 NSA/PGA taper issue, these cases were not recalculated.
• In certain instances, employment income pre-September 2003 (commencement of Working
Credit Balance) and pre-September 2009 (transitional rate for pension payments) needed to
be coded as assessment points, as the apportioned income that was coded on the Casual
Earnings Apportionment section (within MultiCal) was not being assessed correctly in the
entitlement calculations section.
• A bulk request of paper files was completed for 893 CRN’s with a determined debt that was
raised for a period prior to 2013. It took 12 weeks for these files to be received from the
Agency’s secure archives.
o
337 determined debts and AAT cases required the use of paper files to identify whether
sufficient evidence was available to recalculate the debt, as the evidence had not
previously been digitised to the customer’s electronic file.
o In 20 cases, no records were located in the Agency’s secure archives.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
4
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 6 of 68
Recommendations
The sampling activity has further demonstrated the data limitations the agency has in identifying
where income apportionment was relied upon to assess a customer’s entitlement or to confirm a debt
amount.
Triaging of customer records requires manual effort to determine whether income apportionment was
used to calculate an overpayment, as there is no system indicator that provides this detail.
1. Undertake additional data validation on the finalised sampling pool to assist in identifying
characteristics of employment income updates that would place customer records into the
following categories:
-
highly likely to be impacted by income apportionment.
-
somewhat likely to be impacted by income apportionment.
-
highly unlikely to be impacted by income apportionment.
2. Investigate the potential to utilise Rapid Automation (Debt Assist 1.1 variant) to document
records that require pre-CAM treatment (pending advice from DSS). This would include
specific information relating to the activity that generated the debt, supporting staff in the
investigation process.
3. Utilise ASFIX3 system trigger (as used for ICP remediation) to remove employment income
coded under specific AMR’s that are identified as being impacted by income apportionment.
The system trigger will leave a started activity on the customer record for staff to review and
update with new income details based on the General Instructions (pending advice from DSS).
4. Further work is required to determine staff effort to engage with employers and other third-
party organisations, to gain a full order magnitude cost of recalculation effort. High levels of
QA measures should be factored into these calculations.
5. Development of a new calculation tool and or enhancements to the existing MutliCal tool is
necessary to improve efficiency and reduce the need for manual calculations and
workarounds.
6. If manual recalculations are required to support implementation of the General Instructions, a
strategy should be developed taking into consideration the scarcity of staff with the required
expertise, along with the complexity that increases with the debts age.
7. Where further sampling may be required, instead of the requirement of manual effort to find
records with daily information alternatively explore other methods of identifying debts that
were raised using daily rates and then complete a recalculation using the income
apportionment method, to obtain a comparison.
8. A strategy for acquiring paper files should be developed, which includes a streamlined process
for requesting files and sufficient staffing resources to prevent delays, if deployed on a larger
scale. This strategy would need to be appropriately costed, to ensure the Agency is able to
capture the administrative and effort costs associated with the identification, retrieval, and
secure storage/management of customer paper files.
9. Recalculations were only performed if the record contained sufficient information that covered
the full period of the debt, however, recalculations using partial evidence may offer systemic
insights.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
5
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 12 of 68
Approach
Scope
1,000 historically raised and recovered employment income debt records, 150 AAT decisions relating
to employment income and 1,000 records that resulted in an arrears payment (paid or unpaid), were
randomly selected from the agency’s database.
Records in scope for this sampling activity included:
• Historically determined debts between 2003 2020.
• Arrears payments (paid or unpaid); and
• Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) decisions relating to employment income updates.
Records out of scope for this sampling activity included:
• ABSTUDY employment income debts as MultiCal does not assess ABSTUDY payments.
• determined debts relating to Family Tax Benefit and Child Care Subsidy; and
• determined debts relating to add-on payments such as Coronavirus Supplement.
Note: the scope of any remediation activity may change into the future.
Records selected for sampling activity were representative of the payment types with historically
raised employment income debts.
A data capture template was designed to record information that met the requirements requested by
DSS, including:
• the extent in which income apportionment was relied upon to calculate an employment income
debt.
• the impact on the debt period and value when comparing income apportionment to the daily
rate or date paid method.
Sample
1,000 determined debt records consisting of 750 records with a start date between 2003 to 2010
(approx. 50 per year) and 250 with a start date between 2010 to 2020. This sampling process has also
included 150 AAT decisions relating to employment income updates and 1,000 arrears records.
The following payment types make up the majority of the sample.
• Age Pension
• Newstart Allowance
• Austudy
• Parenting Payment Low Income
• Carer Payment Age
• Parenting Payment Newstart
• Carer Payment Disability
• Parenting Payment Single
• Carer Payment Other
• Youth Allowance Jobseeker
• Disability Support Pension
• Youth Allowance Student
• Jobseeker Payment
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
11
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 13 of 68
Investigation
40 Payment Assurance Operations and 6 Payment Assurance Program and Appeals staff were
identified to sample the debt and arrears records and determine the extent and level of impact income
apportionment had on the calculation of debts.
To verify the integrity of the sample, staff were required to confirm both the start and end dates of the
debt and if it was calculated using employment income.
For those identified as generated via employment income, further investigation was required to
determine the characteristics of the employment income update that generated the determined debt
or arrears. The following information was captured by staff via the Data Capture template (Appendix):
• was the employment income update prompted by a review.
• what was the frequency of income (e.g. income one period, weekly, etc.).
• what was the employment status (e.g. part-time/casual, full-time).
• whether income was verified by sighting evidence; and
• whether sufficient evidence was available on record to recalculate the debt.
These characteristics were included to assist the agency in developing assumptions that may indicate
whether an employment income update was highly likely, or less likely, to have been impacted by
income apportionment.
The Data Capture template consisted of drop-down boxes with pre-determined fields, to limit the use
of free text, mitigating the risk of inconsistent information being captured.
As part of their investigations, staff were also required to capture the time taken to investigate the
debt.
Recalculating the debt
For the purposes of the sampling activity, a recalculation of the determined debt or arrears was
required where staff identified that sufficient evidence covering the full period of the debt was
available on record. For records pre-2010, paper files were requested.
No further information was to be requested from the customer or any third party, and no changes were
made to the customer record, or any debts raised.
To recalculate the determined debt, staff were required to use the best available information based on
the evidence attributed to the customer record, including pay records or other probative evidence of
the customers employment income, in line with the General Guidance as of 15 November 2023.
The two calculation methods were:
• daily earnings method which calculated the debt using the exact days and daily amounts paid
in the relevant Centrelink instalment period.
• date paid method which calculated the debt using the total income paid in the relevant
Centrelink instalment period.
Recalculations were completed using the MultiCal tool, to mitigate the risk of updates being applied to
the customer’s live record. As part of the recalculation process, staff were also required to capture the
time taken to recalculate the debt.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
12
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 14 of 68
To increase the efficiency of recalculations and support the QA process, staff were given permission
to save the calculations to FileNet.
Naming conventions were altered from BAU processes to mitigate any risk of these MultiCal
recalculations being accessed and implemented by staff not involved in the sampling process.
• Current BAU = CRN: 123456789A(1)
• Sampling Activity = Debt ID followed by staff logon, i.e. X123456 XXX111.
The outcomes of these recalculations were recorded in the data capture template. This enabled a
comparison between the original determined debt calculated using income apportionment, and the
determined debt amount calculated using daily earnings or the date paid method.
All completed recalculations were stored in a secure folder for QA and record keeping purposes.
Following the completion of QA processes, any MultiCal that was checked into FileNet were deleted by
Integrity Transformation Branch (ITB) staff.
Quality Assurance and Proficiency Process
The following processes were implemented to support staff to capture their findings consistently and
accurately, providing a higher level of confidence in outcomes.
Proficiency Process
For records where investigation did not require a MultiCal recalculation (triage), there were two
proficiency levels: “Learner” and “Proficient”.
Learner:
• 5 records allocated at a time until proficiency was reached.
• 100% of the first 5 records will be checked.
• Where no errors were identified, staff progressed too proficient.
• If errors were identified, an additional 5 records were allocated and 100% checked.
o The above process continued until no errors were identified.
Proficient:
• Maximum allocation at a time increased to 10.
• Minimum 2 records spot-checked per allocation.
Quality Assurance (QA)
For consistent QA of records, QA checklists were developed for both the triage and recalculation
components. Feedback was provided to the staff member via their local Quality Development Officer
(QDO), or Team Manager and corrective action completed by the QA checker.
The triage component of 722 records were quality checked with 217 identified as incorrect and
required corrective action.
All recalculations were quality assured with the QA Checker making any required changes to the
recalculations, except for when significant errors were found. A modified approach for quality
checking recalculations was deployed on 2 February, which reduced the effort in checking the MultiCal
recalculation.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
13
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 15 of 68
506 recalculations were quality checked and 194 were identified as recalculated inaccurately and
required corrective action. Of the 506 recalculations QA checks, 190 had the modified QA approach
applied.
All QA outcomes were recorded in a QA Tracker. Emerging errors trends were communicated to PAO
leadership via daily and subsequently bi-weekly stand-ups.
Support
Prior to commencing, a refresher training of income apportionment scenarios, was delivered to staff
over three days. This allowed for smaller groups and increased interactivity with each session.
The original taskcard was updated by ITB to include further detail on processes identified from the
first activity as having a high error rate.
Technical support was provided by QDO local to the participating staff. Additional technical support,
provided by ITB, was available virtually for QDOs through an MS Teams Channel and mailbox for case-
specific assistance.
Daily check-ins occurred within ITB to share common errors identified during the QA process. This,
along with queries and feedback gathered through the MS Teams Channel and mailbox were reviewed
and updates made to support material as required. Updates and trends were also disseminated via
daily stand-ups between ITB and PAO leadership.
Reporting
ITB collated sampling outcomes and conducted data validation exercises daily, to ensure the
robustness of the outcomes.
Only outcomes that had been QA checked or did not require QA due to the staff member’s proficiency
were included in the weekly formal report distributed to Services Australia and Department of Social
Services Senior Executives.
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
14
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 17 of 68
Appendix
Resource Description
Logbook, inclusive of decision register; lessons
learned; risk management
SA2_ITB_Inc
App_Decision Logbo
Staff task card developed to support staff
through the sampling process
Income
Apportionment - Sam
FAQ’s frequently asked questions throughout
the sampling activity and associated responses.
Frequently Asked
Questions V2.0.docx
Data Capture Template developed for staff to
capture consistent information throughout
Income
sampling exercise
Apportionment - Sam
Weekly Report example of the daily report
provided to senior executives of the agency,
Income
which supported the daily reports to DSS.
Apportionment Sam
Stakeholder Engagement and Communication
Plan details stakeholders the team
communicated/engage with during the
SA2 Stakeholder
sampling exercise.
Engagement and Co
INCOME APPORTIONMENT – SAMPLING ACTIVITY #2
16
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 19 of 68
PM Logbook
Insert programme or project name
Insert programme or project number as provided by Enterprise Project Office - e.g. PN2019.9001
This PM Logbook is designed to be used for both programmes and projects.
If your programme/project is registered with the Enterprise Project Office (EPO) (i.e. has a Project Number 'PN') you may have access to Sensei
IQ, where the PM Logbook can be maintained digitally. If you choose to use Sensei IQ for your PM Logbook functions then this Excel workbook
does not need to be maintained. If using Sensei IQ for your PM Logbook functions, you will find page tabs for Risks, Issues, Change, Decisions
and Lessons Learned. Interdependencies are captured as Key Dates and may also be recorded as tasks within the schedule. Resources to
support projects and programmes using Sensei IQ can be found in Sensei IQ Knowledge Centre on Project Hub.
The PM Logbook brings together a project's Risk Register, Issue Register, Change Register, Decision Register, Lessons Learned Register and
Interdependency Register to form a dashboard for day-to-day reference. For Programme/Project Management guidance, refer to Portfolio,
Programme and Enterprise P3 Framework on the Framework HSI page.
PM Logbook Usability Information
Throughout the spreadsheet, information in text boxes provides guidance information for logbook entries. If a text box is obstructing information
from being entered into a cell simply click & hold the mouse (select) on the text box and drag it to a new position. When the spreadsheet is saved,
closed and reopened the text box may return to its original position.
The spreadsheet has specific functions and cells which cannot be edited by users. In particular if you need to add further rows to the Risk
For printing, we recommend not changing the print settings. These have been pre-set to ensure each worksheet prints on one page and an
appropriate paper type is chosen for the dimensions of the worksheet. Use a separate Excel file for each programme/project. Once the name of
the programme/project and PN# is entered, this information appears on page headers.
Risk
Once the Risk Management Plan (RMP) is approved, update and use these registers to monitor, review and report risks and their associated
treatments on a day-to-day basis. The RMP MUST be reviewed, updated and used for monthly reporting as it is the mandatory risk management
document. Do not delete closed risks. Risks MUST be managed in accordance with the agency's Enterprise Risk Management Policy.
Issue
The Issue Register is designed to assist in capturing, evaluating and managing issues identified in the programme/project. Remember: if an
issue may cause a programme/project to breach one of the tolerances, escalate immediately and submit an Exception Report with the escalation.
The first column of the Issue Register, 'Significance to Portfolio?' records issues that may be impacting the agency as a whole. These issues may
best be resolved at the Portfolio level.
Change
Project change control is part of dynamic Programme/Project Management and it is important to ensure that project changes are managed and
coordinated. The Change Register records and tracks changes for quick reference in a programme/project.
Decisions
The Decisions Register records decisions made over the life cycle of the programme/project.
Lessons Learned Register
The Lessons Learned Register is a repository for lessons identified during the management of the programme/project. Lessons captured and
reported are registered by the EPO to enable improvements in future programmes/projects. At the completion of the programme/project, provide
a copy of the Lessons Learned Register and Closure Report to the EPO, so the agency can learn from your experience.
Interdependency
The Interdependency Register records programmes and projects, activities, delays that impact or have interdependencies on delivery of your
Enterprise Project Office Assistance
For assistance with completing the PM Logbook - either this template or the digital version on your Project Server site, email the EPO -
s 47E(d)
@servicesaustralia.gov.au
EPO Last Update: version 5.3 June 2021
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 21 of 68
Risk Management
Please note - information in this Risk Management table should reflect the Risk Management Plan.
The Risk Management Plan (RMP) contains detailed information on the assessment, evaluation and proposed treatment options of each risk, and therefore any changes to any component of an
individual risk (i.e. risk statement, risk category, likelihood/consequence ratings or risk level) must be incorporated into the RMP. The RMP MUST be updated whenever there is a major to risks,
i.e. the closure of a risk or the addition of new risks, as the RMP is the mandatory risk management document. Please see the 'Risk Assessment Matrix' in the Risk Toolkit
s 47E(d)
for more information. The Risk Treatment Plan is a tool to support the day-to-day management of risk through tracking the
progress of agreed treatment activities enabling analysis of their effectiveness once complete. The RMP MUST be updated whenever there is a major to risks, i.e. the closure of a risk or the
addition of new risks, as the RMP is the mandatory risk management document.
Please remove the example in italics before you use this register.
Treatment
Current Risk Treatment
Residual
Treatment Treatment Due
Risk ID#
Risk Description
Risk Owner
Risk Status Date Identified
Treatment Activity
Treatment Owner
Progress
Date Resolved
Treatment Progress Commentary
Effectiveness
Level
ID#
Risk Level
Start Date
Date
(% Complete)
There is a risk of failure to clearly
Development of a stakeholder engagement and
Plan details cadence of reporting
communicate with staff undertaking the
ITB
Open
Medium
T1.1
comms plan to support delivery of Sampling
ITB
10/11/23
13/11/23
100%
and meetings with operational and
Fu ly Effective
sampling activity, resulting in inaccurate
Activity 2.
support staff.
outcomes.
6/11/2023
Limiting free text options ensures
Data capture spreadsheet has pre-filled options to
outcomes are being recorded
T1.2
prevent inconsistent outcomes from being
ITB
10/11/23
15/11/23
100%
consistently between staff situated
Fu ly Effective
recorded
in different geographical locations
with varying levels of experience.
R01
Low
QA and Proficiency process
Development of a Quality Assurance and
implemented and is capturing
T1.3
ITB
06/11/23
13/11/23
100%
Fu ly Effective
Proficiency process.
errors, providing a higher confidence
in outcomes.
FAQ's generated based on common enquiries
T1.4
ITB
15/11/23
Ongoing
from operational staff
Positive feedback received
Sampling task card has been enhanced based on
regarding the taskcard. Minimal
T1.5
ITB
06/11/23
15/11/23
100%
Fu ly Effective
findings from Sampling Activity 1 Final Report.
updates have been made since
publishing.
T1.6
There is a risk that Multicals checked into
Taskcard and staff comms advise PAO staff not
Taskcard and staff comms were
FileNet w ll be accessed by staff not
PAPAD
Closed
Medium
T2.1
to check-in multicals at the commencement of the
ITB
23/08/23
23/08/23
100%
circulated with DPC and SES prior
Fu ly Effective
participating in the sampling activity and
activity.
to implementation.
these outcomes will be implemented.
28/08/2023
•Current BAU = CRN:
R02
Multical naming conventions were altered for the
Low
123456789A(1)
purpose of the sampling activity to allow staff to
T2.2
ITB
28/08/23
28/08/23
100%
•Sampling Activity = Debt ID
Fu ly Effective
check-in their Multical if they were unable to
followed by staff logon, i.e. X123456
complete it on the same day.
– XXX111.
T2.3
T2.4
T2.5
T2.6
There is a risk that numerous updates to
Risk accepted. Sampling to
Not assessed;
the sample cohort will result in reduced
commence whilst awaiting final
PAPAD
Closed
High
T3.1
Treatment not
productivity and delays to finalising the
confirmation on full scope from
begun.
overall sampling activity.
DSS.
R03
6/11/2023
T3.2
T3.3
T3.4
T3.5
T3.6
There is a risk that due to the age of some
of the debts, paper files w ll need to be
Paper files were requested prior to
We are starting to receive paper
requested in order to accurately sample
ITB
Open
High
T4.1
commencement of sampling activity to allow ITB
11/11/23
15/11/23
33%
Partially Effective
f les.
the debt. This may lead to delays in
enough time for retrieval.
sampling.
11/11/2023
R04
Medium
Determined debts that raised more recently have
Additional paper files are being
T4.2
been assigned first, mitigating delays to
ITB
11/11/23
15/11/23
100%
requested, however these are
Mostly Effective
progression of the sampling activity.
minimal.
T4.3
T4.4
T4.5
T4.6
There is a risk Multical will not be able to
Multical issues guide covers multiple
Multical issues guide available for
support recalculations for debts prior to
ITB
Open
High
T5.1
PAB
06/11/23
06/11/23
100%
6/11/2023
Mostly Effective
issues/scenarios and provides workarounds
staff to access and refer to.
2010
6/11/2023
R05
T5.2
Medium
T5.3
T5.4
T5.5
T5.6
T6.1
T6.2
T6.3
R06
T6.4
T6.5
T6.6
R07
T7.1
T7.2
T7.3
T7.4
T7.5
T7.6
R08
T8.1
T8.2
T8.3
T8.4
T8.5
T8.6
R09
T9.1
T9.2
T9.3
T9.4
T9.5
T9.6
R10
T10.1
T10.2
T10.3
T10.4
T10.5
T10.6
R11
T11.1
T11.2
T11.3
T11.4
T11.5
T11.6
R12
T12.1
T12.2
T12.3
T12.4
T12.5
T12.6
R13
T13.1
T13.2
T13.3
T13.4
T13.5
T13.6
R14
T14.1
T14.2
T14.3
T14.4
T14.5
T14.6
R15
T15.1
T15.2
T15.3
T15.4
T15.5
T15.6
R16
T16.1
T16.2
T16.3
T16.4
T16.5
T16.6
R17
T16.1
T16.2
T16.3
T16.4
T16.5
T16.6
R18
T16.1
T16.2
T16.3
T16.4
T16.5
T16.6
A. Please Note - Where the 'current risk level' is rated 'High' or 'Very High', these risks MUST have a Treatment Plan. Treatment Start dates MUST be put in the project schedule and be reported in monthly Project Status Report with the risk/s. Where Treatment Plans have costs associated above the financial tolerance/s of the project, a Change
Request must be raised seeking additional resources with the Senior Responsible Official within 10 days of the SRO approving the 'High' and 'Very High' risks.
B. Please Note: If no treatment progress has been made in a 10 day period from when the Treatment commenced (i.e. Treatment Start date), the risk level ownership must be escalated to the next level of accountability as per the Services Australia Risk Management Po icy - Escalation Table. It is expected that the Risk Management Plan be
reviewed, with any endorsed changes subsequently reflected in this register.
C. Please Note: Treatment Effectiveness should consider the following factors: 1) Sustainability over the long term; 2) Cost viability; and 3) Whether it is a primary source of control and effect on the risk level
Page 3 of 7 Printed on 11/04/2024
PPO Last updated s 47E(d)
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 22 of 68
Issue Management
The Issue Register should be monitored by the Project Manager on a regular basis - recommend weekly reviews - to keep things moving.
An issue is a risk (or relevant event) that has happened, was not planned and requires management action. It can be any concern, query, request for change, suggestion or off-specification raised during a programme/project. The
register is used to capture and maintain information on all of the issues that are being managed formally.
Please remove the example in italics before you use this register.
Risk ID# (if
Issue
Resolution Due Last Review Resolution Issue Status
Issue ID#
Date Identified
Issue Description and Impact
Plan for Resolution
Issue origin
applicable)
Owner
Date
Date
Progress %
1
2
5/12/2023
Multical was checked-in incorrectly using CRN Request sent for Multical to be deleted from customer's record. Checked-in multical to
PAO
ITB
6/12/2023
20/12/2023
50%
In Progress
format and automatically uploaded to the
also be deleted from Filenet.
customer's record.
2
4
19/12/2023
Slow system responses and Content Manager Seeking NM advice whether to the files received to date are sufficient to meet the
Scan on
IARB
21/12/2023
20/12/2023
50%
In Progress
issues have resulted in only 33% of paper files requirements of the sampling activity.
Demand
being received to date.
3
5
1/12/2023
Multical has an incorrect taper rate for
Workaround drafted and shared with Compliance Helpdesk and Compliance Systems.
PAO
ITB
4/12/2023
7/12/2023
100%
Closed
NSS/PGA cases prior to 01/07/2006.
Workaround not approved. Recalculations required for this period will not be undertaken.
Page 4 of 7 Printed on: 11/04/2024
s 47E(d)
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 23 of 68
Change Control
Use this register to document and keep track of all official changes affecting the programme/project, who authorised the change and include the original change and all iterations of the change. This register helps when discussing programme/project changes at
Board/Steering Committee meetings or with key stakeholders and is a mechanism to record and get official authorisation of the change(s).
Please remove the example in italics before you use this register.
Change Request ID#
Date Raised
Description and Reason for Change
Key Impact Resulting from Change
Rejected or Approved?
Change Authorised by
Specify Documents Updated to Reflect Change
Page 5 of 7 Printed on: 11/04/2024
s 47E(d)
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 24 of 68
Lessons Learned Register
This register shou d be used on an Ongoing Basis' from the Init ate phase through to the Closure phase. It is important to continuously share essons learned with other programmes/projects across the organ sation during phases of the
project/programme l fecycle. This lessons earned register provides accurate and timely intell gence for a l programmes/projects throughout their lifecyc e.
Please remove the example in talics before you use this register.
Lesson Learned D#
Description of Lesson Learned
Date Ident fied
Category
Point in Time Recommendation
1 Prepare ac ivity and engage with approp iate
24/08/2023 Change Management
Where poss b e commence planning with suff c ent ime to p epare activity and engage w th apporpriate business
SME s pr or to the activ ty being commenced
owners and SME s before commencing
2 Walk through p ocess and support materials w th
24/08/2023 Change Management
P oposed process should be:
onsite support sta f before commencing
1 Project team to den ify requi ements of sampling activity based on request;
opera ional activity
2 Project team uti ise and reuse ava lable resources to develop ask card specif c to activ ty;
3 Project team engage with operational techn cal and leadership support s aff to run th ough discuss issues and
de ermine accuracy of support materials
4 Onsite technical and leadersh p support staff run through ask card w th their opera ional staff and col a e
eedback/ques ions
5 Onsite technical and leadersh p support staff iaise with project team to discuss issues concerns and develop
collaborative solut ons;
6 Commence activity with operational s af ;
3 Operational s a f should u il se their ons te
24/08/2028 nowledge Management
Ons te technical support s aff shou d be the fi st point of call for any queries from opera ional staff They can then
technical and leadership support s a f for process
support sta f o make an app opriate decision and if unsure - esca ate the query to the project team v a the teams
queries Any issues or concerns can be escala ed
channel or mai box
to project team accordingly
4 If daily reports continue need to collate the
10/10/2023 Qual ty Management
Commence co lating individual spreadsheets into the master at 12noon Th s wi l al ow any anomalies to be denti ied
informa ion earlier in the day
and repor ed on and the report to be sent out the next morning This w ll a low for basic QA of outcomes and
anoma ies (signi icant change o debt period and or value) to be emoved from the eport for checking pr or to being
repor ed
5 Need to ock the spreadsheets allocated to staff
10/10/2023 Qual ty Management
Lock the entire spreadsheet other than the d op down and free-text fields Disable staff from being able to f l er or
to ensu e they a e unable to adjust them
copy/paste and move any of their cases around
6 Improve a locat on model
10/10/2023 Qual ty Management
As not all s a f are trained in Mult cal provide Mu tical staff a sma l al ocation to sta t and bulk a locate the remaining
cases to non-Mul ical t ained staff
Th s will ensu e we are able o move through our triaging in a more ef icient manner and our Mu tical trained s a f are
actioning recalculations wherever possib e
7 QA process
10/10/2023 Qual ty Management
Need a more robust process around identifying QA's updating indiv dual and master spreadsheets w th corrective
action required then how o update detai s fo lowing correc ive act on
8 Time prov ded for planning and comms was
6/11/2023 Scope and Change Control
Scope to be agreed upon by SES and DSS at least 1 week pr or to commencing Clear imeline for de ivery of plan
ext emely compact as scope and execu ion da e
(incl comms p an) imp ementat on and closure
was agreed upon three days pr or to execution
Comms plan to include ini ial mee ing w th QDOs to walkthrough reference material pr or to d sseminat on and da ly
date
check ins
9 Clearly define role of each stakeholder that has an
6/11/2023 Stakeholder Management
Deve op role sta emen s so stakeholde s are aware of their respons b l ties
interest in the samp ing exerc se
10 Teams Channel was open to all s aff under aking
6/11/2023 Resource Management
Support structure to mimic en erprise TPS model (i e Peer to QDO QDO to ITB) This will assist in reducing the inflow
exercise resu ting in numerous queries coming
of quer es that could have been resolved v a QDO
through o the project team that could be resolved
by QDOs
11 Analysis of outcomes identi ied staff d d not have
6/11/2023 Quality Management
Simp ify askcard to include how o dentify emp oyment income contribu ed to debt how to dentify income
a sol d grasp of whether employment income had
apportionment etc
contr buted o the debt and how to identify income
P ior to beginning work staff to obtain fac l ta ed refresher t aining on debt operat on tasks such as re a ed ac ivit es
appor ionment
12 Time was lost attemp ing o ocate records or
12/10/2023 Resource Management
Documents and o ders shou d be kept in a sing e centra ised ocation
documen s that were stored in mul ip e locat ons
13 Staff d d not o update some parts of the
12/10/2023 Qual ty Management
A tempt to dec ease our reliance on spreadsheets in areas whe e they may be inef ective
spreadsheet or they modified the ormat causing
rework or delaying the process
14 The layout and appearance of the QA feedback
12/10/2023 Quality Management
A single QA feedback emplate is deve oped and ut lised by every sta f member that per orms the QA checks
was inconsistent
15 Staff to carry out mult cal manual calcu at ons
12/10/2023 Qual ty Management
Begin rollout of t aining in mult cal and manual calcu at ons to staff who have been identify as being highly sk l ed debt
were lim ted due o ava lab lity or not trained
processing
16 Staff assigned to undertake samp ing were using
12/10/2023 Resource Management
Work s div ded into g oups based on sta fing exper ence evel whenever possible; for example a sing e cus omer debt
the exe c ses to consol date their earning
s given to a s aff w th a esser deg ee of expertise
(mult cals)
17 A set quan ity of cases were assigned o
12/10/2023 Resource Management
Work al ocation determined by s af ing equiremen s; for instance prior to mult cal calcu a ions accumulated mu tical
individuals however not all were trained in
trained s aff are first assigned a minimal amount of work
mu tical
18 Having a coup e of people conso idating and
12/10/2023 Resource Management
P an o ass gn the responsibil ty to a coup e of exper enced and data-savvy individuals
managing the repo ting aspect worked well
19 Daily epor ing was shared at the execu ive and
12/10/2023 Stakeholder Management
A streamlined version s shared or daily/weekly meetings w th relevant leads who may cascade the
SES levels
progress/outcomes are organ sed
20 MS eam chat worked effec ively with suppor ing
12/10/2023 Stakeholder Management
Con inue to use MS team chat for communica ion and suppo t
sta f ( eal ime) and served as a resource to refer
back to and/or rev ew for c a if cat on/gu dance
21 Some questions asked in the MS team chat could
12/10/2023 Resource Management
Cons der who may require MS chat access
have been answered w th pee -to-peer help or
onsite QDO
22 Informat on about an individual's sk l set or
12/10/2023 Resource Management
Regular mee ings w th leade ship (Director team eaders and QDO's) to identify the operational s a f sk l set identify
un/planned eave was not d sclosed in a timely
ssues/t ends and avai abi ity o ass st with a location of work
manner
23 The e were ongoing discuss ons over the
12/10/2023 Change Management
C arif cation of staff comprehension of the parameters and except ons identi ied early
parameters or purpose of the sampling work
24 Staff refe encing ou dated esources
12/10/2023
Promot on and on-going commun cation about when updates occur to document resources (FAQ s Task cards and
Know edge Management
SME advice)
25 Leads QA checks and support sta f w th a
12/10/2023
Con inue to ensure that suitable people are assigned to a specific in tiative
background of debt funct ons assigned to manage
the samp ing work was benef c al
Resource Management
Page 6 of 7 P nted on 11/04/2024
PPO Last updated Decembe 2014
s 47E(d)
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 25 of 68
Likel hood
Risk Category
Risk Type
rating
Consequence rating
Risk Level
Risk Status
Treatment Decision
Treatment Status
Effectiveness
Yes/No
Issue Category
Change Category
Risk Owner Escalation
Lesson Category
Risk Owner acknowledgement
Risk Owner's Nominal Classification
Not assessed;
Almost
Treatment not
Policy advice & design
Threat
certain
Minor
Very high
Open
Accept/Retain
Open
begun.
Yes
Po icy advice & design
Policy advice & design
Very High: Escalated
Business case/ Investment Proposal
Risk Owner agrees to accept ownership of risk
Secretary
Risk Owner does not agree to accept ownership of
Product & payment processing
Opportunity Likely
Moderate
High
Closed
Treat
Closed
Fully Effective
No
Product & payment processing Product & payment processing Very High: Not Escalated
Project Governance
the risk
Deputy Secretary (Associate Secretary)
Payment comp iance
Poss ble
Major
Medium
Avoid
Mostly Effective
Payment compliance
Payment compliance
High: Escalated
Scope and Change Control
Not yet escalated to Risk Owner
General Manager or SRO
Security
Unlikely
Extreme
Low
Transfer
Partially Effective
Security
Security
High: Not Escalated
Interdependency Management
Escalated to Risk Owner response pending
National Manager or Project Manager
Programme integrity threats
Outstanding
Share
Not effective
Program integrity threats
Program integrity threats
Medium: Not Escalated
ICT Management
Community engagement
Community engagement
Community engagement
Low: Not Escalated
Resource Management
Customer experience
Customer experience
Customer experience
Legal Management
Government relations
Government relations
Government relations
Financial Management
Environmental sustainability
Environmental sustainability
Environmental sustainability
Programme/Project Documentation
Legal support
Legal support
Legal support
Programme/Project Planning day to day Management
Business continuity
Business continuity
Business continuity
Supporting Departmental Frameworks
Enterprise change
Enterprise change
Enterprise change
Risk Management
Governance
Governance
Governance
Issue Management
Finance
Finance
Finance
Schedule Management
People
People
People
Benefits Management
Privacy
Privacy
Privacy
Stakeholder Management
Facilities
Facilities
Fac lities
Knowledge Management
Technology
Technology
Technology
Change Management
Knowledge
Knowledge
Knowledge
Regulatory Requirements / Red Tape Reduction
Business reporting
Business reporting
Business reporting
Other Lessons / Observations
Procurement Management
Quality Management
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 26 of 68
Sampling pre-Cam (pre-7 December 2020) debts
What is income apportionment?
It’s a practice the agency used to evenly divide, or apportion, a customer’s employment income across two or more Centrelink
Entitlement periods.
We only divide a customer’s income evenly if:
•
Their employer pay period didn’t line up with the customer’s fortnightly Centrelink entitlement period, and;
•
the payslip or payroll report showed total earnings but did not show which days were worked or how much was earned in
each Centrelink fortnight, and;
•
We had no other information available.
What income apportionment is not
•
Where the pay period aligns with the Centrelink instalment period and was assessed accurately in the original update;
•
Customer has ongoing regular earnings, and the payslip information verifies the ongoing income;
•
Evidence that the daily rate from payslip was used to update and verify income.
Purpose of the Sampling exercise
Sampling is a
comparative exercise to determine the difference in a rate calculation when using income apportionment vs
daily
earnings and/or the date paid method. We will only recalculate
debts / underpayments where it is deemed that the original update relied upon income
apportionment, and there is sufficient information on the customers record to recalculate using either the daily or date
paid methods.
Recalculations are completed via Multical only. All other coding not related to earnings update will be included as it is coded on
the customers record.
We are not requesting further information from the customer or employer.
In addition,
under no circumstances will:
•
any changes be made to the customer’s record; or
•
debts be raised.
Debts/underpayments must be calculated using pay records or other probative evidence of the customer’s employment income,
whether this is self-reported income, employer reporting, bank statements or a combination of these.
Recalculation methods:
•
s 47E(d)
•
s 47E(d)
1 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 27 of 68
Operating Rhythm
To achieve efficient outcomes in the sampling exercise, an optimal operating rhythm has been created for
you to follow. Each time you receive an allocation follow the operating rhythm below:
s 47E(d)
Please Note:
•
Save your spreadsheet each time you have sampled a record. This will allow the QA team to QA
your work once its been sampled.
•
QMA guidelines will be followed for this activity. The QMO will make any required corrections to
your individual spreadsheet where errors in your data capture of recalculations are identified. This
feedback will be provided to your QDO, they will review the feedback for accuracy before
discussing with you.
2 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 28 of 68
Table of Contents
Determine if the debt or underpayment is related to a Pre-CAM (7 December 2020) employment
income update. ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Is the source s 47E(d)
(AMR) that generated the debt or arrears, available on customer record ... 4
Retrieve all archived s 47E(d)
located on the customers record ...................................................................... 5
Did employment income contribute to the debt or arrears (partially or solely)
? ....................................... 6
Is there a limiting date affecting the debt?........................................................................................................ 7
Is there an additional debt linked to the source AMR and if YES, what type of debt is it? ................... 7
Undertake a desk top assessment to determine if income apportionment was relied upon to
calculate the debt ..................................................................................................................................................... 8
Customer self-declarations .................................................................................................................................... 8
Is sufficient evidence available on record to recalculate the debt? ............................................................. 9
How to obtain debt information from a customer record ........................................................................... 10
Was an underpayment generated from an employment income update? .............................................. 11
Was there an appeal conducted on the debt? ................................................................................................. 11
Identifying if the debt/arrears start and end date differs to pre-populated dates in spreadsheet ... 13
Is the allocated debt a nil entitlement debt? ................................................................................................... 15
Is the debt linked to a review? ................................................................................................................................ 15
Compliance Reviews in s 47E(d)
............................................................................................................. 17
Were working credits/student income bank/work bonus affected by the debt? .................................. 19
Multical ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21
Recalculating the debt via Multical.................................................................................................................... 21
Suitable evidence available to recalculate using Multical ............................................................................ 22
Resources ...................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Included debt codes ............................................................................................................................................... 24
Other Qualification/pay ability Codes ............................................................................................................... 25
Other Auto codes (Cannot be entered manually) ........................................................................................... 25
Multical Worksheet link ........................................................................................................................................ 25
Review Type Codes located on s 47E(d) .................................................................................................................. 25
s 47E(d)
Earnings Verification codes ......................................................................................................... 26
s 47E(d)
& Historical Credits ............................................................................................................ 27
Debt Amalgamations ............................................................................................................................................. 28
3 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 33 of 68
Undertake a desk top assessment to determine if income apportionment was relied upon to
calculate the debt
Determine if daily information was used to assess the employment income update that generated the debt or arrears.
Review the payslip/payroll information used to complete the original update and determine if they include:
• the exact days and exact amounts earned for each day in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement Period,
• amounts earned in employment pay periods; and
• whether the employment pay periods fall wholly within a Centrelink Entitlement Period
The following screens/information may also help determine how the debt was calculated:
• s 47E(d) (or s 47E(d)) to find the s 47E(d)
;
o For information on how to retrieve archived s 47E(d)
, refer to the OB here.
• reason for the request for Explanation of Decision/Formal Review
• s 47E(d)
for: payslips/payroll reports including information obtained via SU658 or Q146 scanned
Earnings Apportionment Tool (EAT) sheet/s or MultiCal/s
• Note: please check all linked records during the debt period including but not limited to
partner/nominee/carer etc.
If daily information was available, was it used to assess the employment income update for all employers updated
within the activity? (including where the employment period falls wholly within a Centrelink Entitlement Period)
•
YES – record findings in the sampling template, no further action is required;
•
NO – record findings in the sampling template. Go to next question.
Customer self-declarations
Customers were required to report income earned from employment verbally, online or through Integrated Voice
Response (IVR), to determine the customer’s entitlement for the relevant Centrelink Entitlement Period.
A debt or arrears may have been generated from customer declarations, where the:
•
customer was not on a stimulus reporting regime and reported late;
•
customer changed the amount they initially reported; or
•
the agency received evidence that the amounts reported were incorrect. This includes debts raised
automatically for periods less than a Centrelink Entitlement Period.
Where the customer has declared late or self-corrected previously declared earnings/employment income (via verbal
update, IVR or online) that results in a debt or arrears, consider whether:
s 47E(d)
•
Where there is no doubt as to accuracy of self-declared earnings, Update the template in column V as
“SELF”
•
Where there is doubt as to accuracy of self-declared earnings, or you are unsure please refer to your QDO.
8 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 34 of 68
Is sufficient evidence available on record to recalculate the debt?
The debt will need to be recalculated via Multical where you have identified that income apportionment was relied
upon to code the original employment income update. Consider whether:
• the employment income update was originally coded using payslip/payroll information and the gross income
for the full pay period was apportioned across two or more Centrelink Entitlement Periods; and
• the pay periods did not fall wholly within the customer’s Centrelink Entitlement Period
A recalculation can only occur where there is evidence located on the customers record/paper file, that covers the full
period of the employment income update that generated the debt or arrears.
Refer to section “Suitable evidence available to recalculate using Multical” of the task card
For the purposes of this exercise, requests for information are not permitted.
If you identify that a customer has been paid their employment income in advance, please seek further guidance on
how to reassess these cases via the s 47E(d)
mailbox.
If evidence is not available for the entire undetermined debt period, a recalculation cannot occur.
Record your findings in the sampling template (column Z).
9 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 36 of 68
Was an underpayment generated from an employment income update?
Updates that generated an arrears result
s 47E(d)
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Note: the AMR that has generated an arrears payment may not be the same AMR as the earnings update. Sometimes
an earnings activity is completed first and a staff member then later completes a s 47E(d)
to produce the
arrears.
If the AMR that completed the employment income update does not show the above result on the s 47E(d) , follow
the steps outlined on page 5 to retrieve activities that directly follow the employment income update AMR.
Was there an appeal conducted on the debt?
Navigate to the s 47E(d)
. Once in the s 47E(d)
If any appeals are
present on the record, they will appear on this screen.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Review appeal records with the same benefit type the debt or arrears was generated for, where the original decision
date matches the date the employment income update was completed.
11 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 37 of 68
Appeals relating to debts will have an “Orig Decn” of OVP.
Select the appeal and match your Debt ID to confirm it belongs to your allocated debt.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Appeals relating to unpaid arrears will have an “Orig Decn” of RAT.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Identify dates for the following:
• Date Client queried decn
• Date finalised
• Date ARO review request
Understanding these dates will assist in locating evidence that is available to recalculate the employment income.
12 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 43 of 68
If a PAYG Online Compliance Intervention (Online Compliance Intervention/Employment Income Confirmation) or
Online Income Confirmation (Check and Update Past Income) review has previously been loaded, click on the blue
hyperlink to proceed to the review screen.
The following screen should then appear.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Hint: Whilst on this page, hit F6 on your keyboard. This will open the review notes in a separate window, allowing
you to navigate away from this page whilst having the review notes at hand.
Click on the
Attachments tab. The following should now appear.
s 47E(d)
• s 47E(d)
• s 47E(d)
Note: If you cannot determine that the underdetermined debt is linked to a review vias 47E(d), further investigation
will be required. E.g. Checking s 47E(d)
18 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 46 of 68
Multical
If a Multical is required to calculate the debt or arrears for a period
prior to the ADEX:
s 47E(d)
Secure folder path:
s 47E(d)
Recalculating the debt via Multical
As part of this exercise, we would like to understand the time to undertake the recalculation
component of this work. Please capture the time you start and finish recalculating the debt/arrears
and completing the data capture, and record this time in your template at column AH.
Create a baseline multical/calibrate your multical based on what the customer was paid, prior to the original
employment income update being coded.
Once you have baselined/calibrated the multical, save a PDF of your multical in
s 47E(d)
s 47E(d)
CHECK IN ALL RECALCULATED MULTICALS USING THE FOLLOWING NAMING CONVENTION:
• s 47E(d)
•
Recalculate the debt using the relevant assessment options below and if required, escalate to your QDO for
further advice.
21 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 47 of 68
Suitable evidence available to recalculate using Multical
Use the following payslip examples to help determine the correct assessment as well as the calculations.
Note: If the payslip/payroll information does not show the Pay Date or Date Paid, use the pay period end date to
determine the Centrelink Entitlement Period the income will be attributed to.
Payslip/payroll information indicates that employment pay periods align exactly with the Centrelink
Entitlement Period
The payroll information provided can be attributed to the Centrelink Entitlement Period, as the exact alignment of
the periods will ensure the calculation matches the daily earnings method.
Payslip/payroll information from multiple employers showing both daily and date paid information
Calculate using a combination of the:
• s 47E(d)
•
Payslip/payroll evidence does not show daily rates of employment income
s 47E(d)
Payslip/payroll information shows date employment income was paid but does not show daily rates
s 47E(d)
Payslip/payroll information where part of the period contains daily income information and the remainder of
the period has weekly/fortnightly pay information with date paid information only
s 47E(d)
Individual payslips showing some daily income information
If a payslip shows any daily income information, this
must be used.
For example, a payslip shows the daily income information for weekends only and not every day worked in the pay
period. If the weekend dates and amounts are clearly shown on the payslip, they must be used.
Calculate using the:
s 47E(d)
Payslip/payroll information shows customer is paid weekly and has one payslip that falls entirely in the
customer’s Centrelink Entitlement Period
Where daily income information is not available, and the customer’s pay period falls entirely within a single Centrelink
Entitlement Period:
• s 47E(d)
22 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
• s 47E(d)
•
Multical earnings coding
• To reassess earnings using the
date paid method in Multical:
s 47E(d)
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Once you have recalculated the debt, save a PDF of your Multical in
s 47E(d)
s 47E(d)
by:
s 47E(d)
PLEASE REMEMBER CHECK IN YOUR MULTICAL
s 47E(d)
23 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 51 of 68
s 47E(d)
Earnings Verification codes
Current Codes
NVE – Not Verified
Earnings have not been verified in any form
BIR – Business Integrity Review
Used for all Business Integrity review as it allows recording of earnings without
updating the mandatory hours per fortnight field. For use by Business Integrity
or Compliance staff only.
PVP – Partial Verification by payslip for current
Verification in the form of payslips does not cover the full period of
fortnight
employment within the current entitlement periods
FVC – Full fortnight verification for current fortnight by Verification in the form of payslips covers the full period of employment within
payslip.
the current entitlement period.
FVP – Full fortnight verification for past fortnight by
Verification in the form of payslips covers the full period of employment within
payslip
a past entitlement period.
PVE – Partial verification by Employer contact for any Verification in the form of employer report, phone call or fax employer covers a
fortnight
period of employment less than an entitlement period
FVE – Full Fortnight verification by Employer contact Verification in the form of employer report, phone call or fax from employer
for any fortnight
covers the full period of employment within an entitlement period
JKP – Job keeper Payment
Allows recording of earnings without updating the mandatory hours per
fortnight field.
STV – STP Employer Verified
Will indicate that STP Employer has been verified and the income being
reported is not a Jobkeeper payment
STJ – STP Employer Verified (JobKeeper)
Will indicate that STP Employer has been verified and the income being
reported is a Jobkeeper payment
REF – Electronic Employer Report Verified
Auto update only
Obsolete Codes (Pre December 2007)
CNV - Conversion
ESF – Employer has stamped/signed form
OTH – Phone Call to employer
PCE – Phone call to Employer
PSP – Payslip Provided
505 – SU505 (Income Record Form)
26 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 53 of 68
Debt Amalgamations
When you are investigating the Adex you must take into account any other debts within the same period and ensure
your Adex has assessed these correctly within the overlapping periods.
To do this you will need to open any other activities that would show up under the
Related Explanations section of
the Adex.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
This will show
any other related activities that are relevant to the period you are assessing.
Occasionally not all related activities will show up under this section so you will still need to investigate the s 47E(d)
s 47E(d)or any overlapping debts.
Once you have determined if there are any activities that overlap you will need to open the Adex explanation for
these cases and make note of the AMR.
You may be required to combine these debts to be able to determine the TOTAL estimated debt. This is what we all
amalgamating.
Note: You may find it easier using an Adex Scheduler for this process as you will need to combine multiple Adex’s
together.
To do this you need to ensure all Adex’s are open. Make note of the AMR number as the earlier AMR will mean this
activity happened first. You can also confirm this by checking the date the activity was registered.
Note: An easier way to think of this is old AMR means we use Old Fn Rate and a newer AMR means we use the
New Fn Rate.
Once you have determined the timeline of the Adex activities, you will need to take the
Old Fn Rate from the earlier
AMR as this should reflect the amount paid to the customer.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
28 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 54 of 68
The next step is taking the
New Fn Rate of the newer AMR as this should reflect the most up to date rate based on
the updates made to the record.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Once you have gathered this information you bring all the information together. The purpose of this is to determine
what the customer’s overpayment is based on the rate they were paid and the rate they were entitled to with the
latest information on the record.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
In the above example we are seeing that we are taking the Amount Paid/Old Fn Rate from the earlier AMR and the
Amount Entitled/New Fn Rate from the later AMR.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Once combined, this will now become your TOTAL determined debt.
Note: You will also need to ensure you are adjusting any debt dates required as the overlapping debts may go for a
longer period or start earlier.
29 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 55 of 68
Taking other debts into account on MultiCal
You may be required to adjust the amount paid on your MultiCal calculation as there is a debt that was raised for
another reason that overlaps into our period. The MultiCal will download the customers paid amounts from the
s 47E(d
s 47E(d) which means it won’t read the s 47E(d)
.
You will be required to manually adjust the amount paid in the MultiCal so that we are not doubling up on debt if the
customer does in fact have another debt within our period.
To do this you will need to have the relevant Adex open, making note that you will be using the
New Fn Rate for this
exercise.
s 47E(d), s 47F(1)
Next step is opening the Calculation Wizard and selecting the customer payments.
s 47E(d)
Here you will select the relevant EPED and start updating the amounts paid to the customer based on the
New Fn
Rate from the ADEX. Once you have adjusted all the relevant periods don’t forget to hit Calculate Debt so that the
Multical updates the changes made.
This will now mean that you have taken into account the relevant debt for the periods required.
30 | P a g e
Back to Table of Contents
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 61 of 68
Code
Explanation
Y
Yes
N
No
Debt Benefit Code
Debt Benefit Literal
NSA
Newstart Allowance
JSK
Jobseeker Payment
AGE
Age Pension
PPS
Parenting Payment Single
PPP
Parenting Payment Partnered
YAL
Youth Allowance
ABS
Abstudy
AUS
Austudy
DSP
Disability Support Pension
CP
Carer Payment
SpB
Special Benefit
PA
Partner Allowance
WDA
Widow Allowance
Verification Code
Explanation
BIR
Business Integrity Reviews
FVC
Full fortnight/period verification via payslip
FVE
Full fortnight/period verification via contact (i.e. phone/fax)
FVP
Full fortnight/period verification for past period via payslip
JKP
Jobkeeper payment
NVE
Not verified
PVE
Partial verification via contact (e.g. phone/fax)
PVP
Partial verification via payslip
REF
Employer's report (auto only)
STJ
STP Employer verified (Jobkeeper)
STV
STP Employer verified
CNV
Conversion
ESF
Employer has stamped/signed form
OTH
Other means (e.g. tax assessment notice)
PCE
Phone call to employer
PSP
Payslip provided
505
SU505 income record form
Employment Status Code
Explanation
PTC
Part time or casual
FTO
Full time ongoing employment
FTN
Full time non‐ongoing employment
Frequency of payment code
Explanation
ANN
Annual
DAY
Daily
1WE
Weekly
2WE
Fortnightly
MTE
Monthly
8WE
8 Weekly
IOP
Income for one period
HOP
Hours for one period
LOP
Income for long/set period
Evidence used
Explanation
DLY
Daily Payslips
RECD
Date paid as per payslips/current CAM rules
HYBRID
Gross amounts from payslips with date paid from bank statements
Review Type Code
Review Type Literal
DMP
Data Matching Program
DPI
Debt Prevention Interventions
DPR
Debt Prevention
EDM
Electronic Data Match
EII
Earned Income Intervention
EMR
Employment Reviews
ERI
Earnings Risk Intervention
EUD
Earnings Under Declared
PYG
Pay As You Go
RSS
Random Sample Survey
SEM
Service Update Employment
TAC
Trust and Company
TIP
Tip Off
TDF
Tax Declaration Form
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 62 of 68
N/A
Not Applicable
Change to debt amount
Decrease
Increase
Arrears
No Change
Codes for Additional Debts
FTB
Family Tax Benefit
CVS
Coronavirus Supplement
SSL
Student Start‐Up Loan
TAL
Telephone Allowance
ISB
Income Support Bonus
OTH
Other
N/A
Not Applicable
Calculated via apportionment
Y
Yes
N
No
SELF
Self‐Declared
Sampling QA Completed
Y
Yes
N
No
P
Proficient
Evidence used to generate debt
Payslips/Payroll Report
Bank Statements
Letter
Verbal
Self
Other (complete comments)
Location of evidence
/Notes
s 47E(d
s 47E(d)
Customer Paper File
Select this if you were provided a link to a PDF of the Customer's Paper File.
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 63 of 68
From:
Ka lus Jason
To:
McMahon Matt; Clar e Rachae ; Blac S san; Blac more Dan
Cc:
; Doverty Nerissa; Dal on Ben; H nds Larissa;
Alyssa
Bu cher Gavin
Shaun
Terry;
Dar en
Gi l an; Holcombe Sam; Harrison She ee
s 47E(ds 47Es 47E(d)
s 47F(1)
s 47F
s 47E(d)
s 47F(1)
s 47F(1
s 47F
s 47F(1)
s 47F
Subject:
I co e ppo t o e t Sa pl g ct v ty 2 Outcomes w/e 19 January 2024 (Cumulative) [SEC=OFFICIAL]
Date:
Tuesday 23 January 2024 9:05:50 AM
Attachments:
mage001.jpg
Good Morning A l
Please find below this weeks Income Apportionment Samp ing Report for week ending 19 January 2024.
Income Apportionment Sampling Report for week ending 19 January 2024
POST QA CUMULATIVE TRIAGE OUTCOMES
POST QA CUMULATIVE RECALCULATION OUTCOMES
Related to
Impacted by
Sufficient
AVG
Total records
AVG
Cohort
employment
income
evidence for
Investigation
Recalculations Downward
Upward
reviewed
Arrears
NIL Change
Recalculation
income
apportionment
recalculation
Time (h:mm)
completed
Variations Variations
Time (h:mm)
Determined
944
876 (93%)
463 (53%)
298 (64%)
01:10
235
153 (65%)
64 (27%)
8 (3%)
10 (4%)
03:38
Debts/AAT
Arrears
945
45 (5%)
13 (29%)
6 (46%)
00:35
2
1 (50%)
1 (50%)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
00:30
Staffing
Of the 35 ident fied staff an average of 16 participated in sampling each day
As inflow of files slows there are ongoing discussions with PAO Appeals and ITB regarding staff continuance/transition back to other priority work.
Insights
All sampling records have been allocated
We have received 802 of the paper f les
91 paper files remain
1 889 records have been sampled including the Quality Assurance component
107 AAT decisions have been sampled
837 determined debts have been sampled
945 arrears records have been sampled
502 triage records have been selected for QA checking
463 records have been QA checked with 65% accuracy
377 recalculated records have been selected for QA checking
252 records have been QA checked with 55% accuracy
161 arrears records have been selected for QA checking
119 records have been QA checked with 90% accuracy
21 staff from the 35 who are undertaking IA sampling have achieved triage proficiency.
Note: number has not varied from last week number now excludes staff who returned back to nominal areas.
Determined Debt Outcomes (post QA checks)
837 debts have been reviewed in total
The average time for the investigation component: 1:12 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
The average time for the recalculation component: 3:39 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
796 (95%) of the 837 determined debts reviewed so far are related to employment income
Of the 796 determined debts related to employment income:
399 (50%) were income apportioned
263 (66%) have sufficient evidence available on the record to conduct a recalculation
209 recalculations have been completed:
135 (64%) resulted in a downward variation:
Average $185.48 (or 35% of the debt value)
Median $88.79
Average duration of debt period is 141 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period.
Highest reduction was $1816.59
Lowest reduction was $0.01
58 (28%) resulted in an upward variation:
Average $114.92 (or 49% of the debt value)
Median $28.82
Average duration of debt period is 213 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period.
Highest increase was $1220.06
Lowest increase was $0.01
8 (4%) resulted in arrears:
Average $488.65
Median $165.22
Highest arrears were $3643.42
Lowest arrears were $269.17
8 (4%) resulted in a NIL change.
The longest calculation took 7:12 (h:mm).
The high-level basis for the calculations is as follows:
5 (2%) - Daily rate – daily earnings method which calculates the debt using the exact days and daily amounts paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
192 (92%) - Received method – date paid method which calculates the debt using the total income paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
12 (6%) - Hybrid – a mixture of daily earnings and date paid methods; could also include the use of bank statements to confirm date paid
Note: a recalculation is only conducted where there is evidence available for the full debt period. Where any information is missing it is deemed insufficient evidence is
available.
AAT Decisions (post QA checks)
107 debts have been reviewed in total
The average time for the investigation component: 0:55 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
The average time for the recalculation component: 3:27 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
80 (75%) of the 107 determined debts reviewed so far are related to employment income
Of the 80 determined debts related to employment income
64 (80%) were income apportioned
35 (55%) have sufficient evidence ava lable on the record to conduct a recalculation
26 recalculations have been completed:
8 (69%) resulted in a downward variation:
Average $787.32 (or 26% of the debt value)
Median $456.06
Average duration of debt period is 476.375 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period
Highest reduction was $3014.72
Lowest reduction was $10.33
6 (23%) resulted in an upward variation:
Average $135.70 (or 6% of the debt value)
Median $151.68
Average duration of debt period is 226 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period
Highest increase was $212.39
Lowest increase was $22.16
2 (8%) resulted in a NIL change.
The longest calculation took 10:00 (h:mm).
The high-level basis for the calculations is as follows:
2 (8%) - Daily rate – daily earnings method which calculates the debt using the exact days and daily amounts paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
20 (77%) - Received method – date paid method which calculates the debt using the total income paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
4 (15%) - Hybrid – a mixture of daily earnings and date paid methods; could also include the use of bank statements to confirm date paid
Note: a recalculation is only conducted where there is evidence available for the full debt period. Where any information is missing it is deemed insufficient evidence is
available.
Arrears Outcomes (post QA checks)
945 arrears have been reviewed in total
The average time for the investigation component: 0:35 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
The average time for the recalculation component: 0:30 (h:mm - staff declared timings)
45 (5%) of the 945 determined debts reviewed so far are related to employment income
Of the 45 determined debts related to employment income 29% were impacted by income apportionment:
13 (29%) were income apportioned
6 (46%) have sufficient evidence ava lable on the record to conduct a recalculation
2 recalculations have been completed:
1 (50%) resulted in a downward variation:
Average $10.42 (or 4% of the debt value)
Median $10.42
Average duration of debt period is 27 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period
Highest reduction was $10.42
Lowest reduction was $10.42
1 (50%) resulted in an upward variation:
Average $20.37 (or 25% of the debt value)
Median $20.37
Average duration of debt period is 41 days. Note: debts occurred within this period but not necessarily across the whole period
Highest increase was $20.37
Lowest increase was $20.37
The longest calculation took 0:30 (h:mm).
The high-level basis for the calculations is as follows:
0 (0%) - Daily rate – daily earnings method which calculates the debt using the exact days and daily amounts paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
2 ( 00%) - Received method – date paid method which calculates the debt using the total income paid in the relevant Centrelink Entitlement period
0 (0%) - Hybrid – a mixture of daily earnings and date paid methods; could also include the use of bank statements to confirm date paid
Note: a recalculation is only conducted where there is evidence available for the full debt period. Where any information is missing it is deemed insufficient evidence is
available.
Jason Kallus
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 65 of 68
1. Income Apportionment – Sampling Activity 2
Prior to the implementation of the Change of Assessment Model (CAM) on 7 December 2020, where a
person’s employment period and their social security period did not align, and there was limited
information to indicate employment income was earned in a particular instalment period, earned income
would be apportioned across social security instalment periods.
s 42
On 25 October 2023, the Commonwealth Ombudsman wrote to Services Australia (the agency) to provide
their draft report into income apportionment administration. This report sets out the findings of the
Ombudsman’s second investigation which focusses on the remediation of cases affected (or potentially
affected) by income apportionment and included 10 recommendations.
Recommendation 1 requested the Agency to develop a strategy for sampling potentially affected historic
debts, underpayments, AAT decisions and CDPP referred debts. The Ombudsman requested that the
sample be:
• Statistically significant in size;
• Provide a high rate of confidence; and
• Include a range of payments across a range of years between 2003 to 2020.
The sampling activity that was finalised on 11 October 2023 did not meet the requirements of the
Ombudsman recommendations, therefore the Agency accepted this recommendation and commenced a
second sampling activity from 15 November 2023.
2. Key Messages
What is income apportionment?
It’s a practice the agency used to evenly divide, or apportion, a customer’s employment income across two
or more Centrelink Entitlement periods.
We only divide a customer’s income evenly if:
•
Their employer pay period didn’t line up with the customer’s fortnightly Centrelink reporting
period, and;
•
the payslip or income report showed total earnings but did not show which days were worked or
how much was earned in each Centrelink fortnight, and;
•
We had no other information available.
What income apportionment is not
• Customer self-declared earnings where (including but not limited to):
There is no evidence the customer’s payslips used to report the income;
There was no staff intervention in completing update;
Payslip period declared aligns with customer Centrelink Entitlement period.
• Customer has ongoing regular earnings, and the payslip information verifies income.
• Evidence that the daily rate from payslip was used to update and verify income.
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 66 of 68
To help us further understand how income apportionment has impacted debt/underpayment calculations,
we have been requested to undertake a second sampling activity. This is again, a comparative exercise
between income apportionment and Daily earnings and/or Date paid method.
Staff will only be recalculating the debts/underpayments based on earnings information already available
on the customer’s record and recalculations will be undertaken via Multical only. All other coding not
related to earnings update will remain unaltered and included as is, in the recalculation.
The fol owing support structure and materials have been developed to assist staff when undertaking this
exercise:
• Support Structure:
o QDOs – For staff to escalate technical queries
o Integrity Process Design mailbox and Teams Channel – For operational leadership to
escalate queries that they are unable to resolve.
• a taskcard detailing the steps required and relevant examples; and
• a data capture template with drop-down boxes to support accurate and consistent recording of
findings.
An FAQs will also be developed as trends arise.
SE and C Plan v0.1 Sampling Activity 2
PAGE 2 of 4
Services Australia
Stakeholder Engagement and Communications template Version 5.5
LEX 78943 - Documents
Page 68 of 68
SE and C Plan <insert version # - insert project name>
PAGE 4 of 4
Services Australia
Stakeholder Engagement and Communications template Version 5.5
