Like many organisations, NATA leverages data-driven insights to strengthen the efficiency and effectiveness of its business operations. As accreditation is NATA’s core service, the organisation closely monitors key statistical indicators linked to accreditation performance and compliance trends.
Curious about the metrics that inform NATA’s decision-making?
Below is an overview of the primary quantitative measures from the volume and type of non-conformances identified during assessments, to average close-out times and comparative performance against ISO standards. Together, these metrics illustrate how NATA maintains rigorous standards, supports transparency, and continually refines its operational processes.
Accreditation Longevity
Several laboratories have maintained NATA accreditation for decades including ChemCentre (1950), Ausgrid (1952), and CSIRO (1957) among the longest. Their enduring accreditation demonstrates the longstanding partnership between Australia’s scientific infrastructure and its national quality framework.
Forty years after NATA’s establishment in 1947, medical laboratories began accreditation as a Medicare requirement. The first facility accredited under this model was Sydney Adventist Hospital commonly known as the’ ‘San’ which continues to be accredited today.
Five Sectors. Six Standards.
NATA’s accreditation activities span five sectors:
- Life Sciences
- Legal and Clinical Services
- Inspection
- Calibration
- Materials, Assets & Products
Assessment activities within these sectors align with one of six ISO standards: ISO/IEC 17025, ISO 15189, ISO/IEC 20387, ISO/IEC 17020, ISO/IEC 17034, and ISO/IEC 17043.
These standards fall under the Conformity Assessment class of ISO standards, which ensures competency, impartiality, and consistency in testing, inspection, and certification. They also underpin the Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA), enabling international acceptance of accredited results without the need for retesting.
Accredited Facilities and Standards
NATA accredits more than 4,400 facilities nationwide, including annexes and satellite laboratories operating under the primary accreditation of a parent facility.
- 41% of accredited facilities are located in New South Wales
- 23% in Victoria
- 20% in Queensland
- 13% in Western Australia, reflecting its strong mining and resources profile
Across all facilities:
- 65% are accredited to ISO/IEC 17025
- 20% to ISO 15189
- The remaining 15% are accredited to other standards in NATA’s portfolio
NATA Scopes
NATA’s accreditation system reflects significant service diversity, comprising:
- 1,159 unique service codes
- 3,465 products, including biological, environmental, and industrial materials
- 15,000+ determinations (tests or measurements)
- 6,300+ distinct techniques, from routine diagnostics to advanced specialised procedures
This breadth underscores the value of NATA’s accreditation database as a public resource. Its searchable scopes provide transparency and clarity for industry, government, and the broader community.
Assessment Volume
In 2024, NATA conducted 3,400 assessment activities equivalent to:
- 66 assessments per week
- More than 13 per day
This workload is managed by approximately 80 operations staff and represents a 7% year-on-year increase.
In 2024
- 61% of assessments were against ISO/IEC 17025
- 19% were against ISO 15189
Technical Assessors
- 27% of surveillance visits are conducted by NATA staff
- 41% of Technical Assessors participated in at least one assessment activity, with many contributing to multiple assessments
- 52% of assessors have more than 10 years of experience
- 24% have more than 20 years
NATA currently maintains a pool of 3,000 active volunteer Technical Assessors, whose expertise is vital to the accreditation process. Recruitment of new assessors remains a priority to ensure the continuity of technical capability.
Findings Per Assessment
- 5% of assessment activities result in more than 20 non-conformances. These cases are monitored closely, particularly where high-risk findings are involved.
- Assessments with numerous findings or any critical issues are typically escalated for management review, additional oversight, or intervention.
Submissions Required for Close Out Findings
- 11% of assessments close out without requiring any submission an outcome NATA aims to increase.
- 40% close out after a single submission.
- 80% close out after two submissions.
- The remaining 20% vary considerably, with some requiring up to eight submissions in 2024.
Repeated submissions delay accreditation outcomes and may indicate systemic issues within a facility’s quality management system. In the Legal and Clinical Services sector, NATA engages early, usually by the second or third submission, to identify barriers to timely close-out. These timelines are also reported to the Department of Health, adding further importance to prompt resolution.
Time to Close Out
NATA measures the period from the assessment visit to the release of the notification letter, accounting for both NATA and facility responsibilities.
- 52% of findings close out within three months
- 76% close out within five months
Despite strong overall performance, a long tail of extended close-outs remains. A significant factor influencing these timelines is whether submissions are received before or after the due date.
- 40% of submissions are received before the due date
- 5% are submitted more than two weeks late, posing notable concern for timely accreditation outcomes
Key Metrics for Monitoring Risk
Operational metrics provide critical insights into accreditation risk and system integrity
Number of Findings Per Assessment
High numbers may indicate systemic weaknesses, while very few findings may suggest strong compliance—or highlight potential gaps in assessment rigour.
Number of Submissions to Close Out
Multiple submissions may indicate misunderstandings of requirements, ineffective corrective actions, or deeper quality issues. More submissions translate to greater resource demands for both facilities and NATA.
Time to Close Out
Extended close-out periods can signal procedural constraints, lack of engagement, or resourcing challenges. Once a finding is raised, it becomes a known risk and unresolved risks increase exposure for both NATA and the facility.
Timely close-out is essential to maintaining confidence in the accreditation system and is supported by escalation processes where necessary.
About the Author
Gillian Treloar is the Deputy Sector Manager for Legal and Clinical Services at the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA). She plays a key role in developing data-informed strategies that strengthen NATA’s operational performance and stakeholder relationships. A committed advocate for evidence-based management, Gillian is dedicated to making data accessible and meaningful for accreditation professionals, facility representatives, and others across the quality assurance landscape.