APS 5 selection criteria examples, pitched at the right level
APS 5 is where the APS expects you to decide, not just do. This page sets out what the APSC’s work level standards and leadership guide expect at APS 5, how the same skill reads at APS 4 and APS 5, and three full responses written for the level.
Updated October 2026. Sources are listed at the end.
What APS 5 means in practice
The APSC’s work level standards describe APS 5 work as moderately complex to complex, done under limited direction. Compared with APS 4, you make independent decisions in your area of responsibility, give policy or professional advice within a specialisation, and may supervise lower-level staff, including allocating work, managing their performance and spotting on-the-job training needs.
Cracking the code groups APS 5 and 6 as senior administrative, technical, project, policy and service positions, which may have supervisory responsibilities. The standard says complex or difficult issues are discussed with team leaders or experts, so an APS 5 is trusted to make the call on most things and knows which ones to take upstairs.
- Decisions that may affect the outcomes for your work area and its stakeholders, and can set new precedents within approved parameters.
- Objective, systematic research and analysis that reaches accurate conclusions based on evidence.
- Plans and objectives for short-term tasks, and a contribution to longer-term planning for the section.
- Liaising with internal and external stakeholders on policy, project or operational issues, and supporting them through change.
What panels look for at APS 5
The APSC says panel members are generally at the level of the vacancy or one above, so an APS 5 panel usually includes someone who has done or supervised the job. They are looking for signs that you can be handed a piece of work and trusted with it.
- Independence: you made the decision rather than referring it up, and you can say what you based it on.
- Analysis that changed something: evidence you gathered led to advice someone acted on.
- Stakeholders with their own interests, where you prepared, listened and reached an agreed outcome.
- Some responsibility for other people’s work: allocating tasks, checking quality or giving feedback.
APS 4 versus APS 5: the same skill, one level apart
The ILS guide for APS 1–6 shows which behaviours are new at each level. New at APS 5: giving impartial and forthright advice and justifying your position when challenged, approaching negotiations with a clear understanding of the key issues, delegating tasks effectively, agreeing clear performance standards, and recognising and noting under-performance. In an application, the difference looks like this:
- Advice. APS 4: “I gave accurate advice on the guidelines.” APS 5: “I recommended a change to the guidelines, set out the evidence, and held my position when the director questioned it.”
- Stakeholders. APS 4: “I resolved enquiries from external clients.” APS 5: “I negotiated what data each of three state agencies would share, knowing what each one needed.”
- Other people’s work. APS 4: “I helped train a new starter.” APS 5: “I allocated the backlog across three officers by experience and checked one in five of their decisions.”
- Planning. APS 4: “I set up a simple plan with milestones.” APS 5: “I set the plan and timeframes for the project and saw it through to completion.”
Format notes for APS 5 applications
The information pack sets the format and the word or page limit for each job. The APSC notes that long, separate selection criteria are becoming less common and that many agencies now ask for a CV and a one or two page statement on how you fit the job; others still list criteria or set questions. If the pack is unclear, the contact officer named in the ad can tell you what the panel wants.
If one pitch has to cover several capabilities, one tight example for each usually reads better than one long story, and it stops the panel seeing the same project five times. The APSC suggests one or two of your strongest examples per criterion.
If you’re found suitable but not chosen
Agencies can create a merit pool or ranked merit list from a selection process and use it to fill the same or similar vacancies for 18 months from when the job was advertised in the Public Service Gazette. From 1 February 2026, APS agencies must share a merit list with another APS agency that asks for it, once the list is more than six months old and the vacancies are similar. A strong APS 5 application can lead to an offer later, or from another agency.
Criteria you’ll see
- Works independently with limited direction and exercises sound judgement in decision making. Decisions you made yourself, and what you based them on.
- Undertakes research and analysis to provide evidence-based advice within a specialist area. Advice built on data or evidence that a decision maker acted on.
- Liaises and negotiates with internal and external stakeholders to achieve agreed outcomes. Understanding other parties’ interests and reaching an outcome both sides accept.
- Plans and coordinates projects or tasks, including setting timeframes and monitoring progress. A piece of work you planned and saw through to completion.
- Supervises and supports less experienced staff, including allocating work and quality assurance. Responsibility for the quality of other people’s work, not just your own.
- Drafts clear, accurate written material, including briefs, correspondence and reports. Writing for a purpose and an audience, often a brief or report for a decision maker.
- Provides impartial and forthright advice and justifies own position when challenged. Taken from the ILS APS 5 column: advice you stood behind.
3 selection criteria examples
Made-up applicants, employers and numbers, to show the shape of a strong response. Yours should use your own experience.
Undertakes research and analysis to provide impartial, evidence-based advice within a specialist area
As a program officer in the Remote Infrastructure Grants section of the Department of Inland Transport, I advise on how our grant guidelines work in practice, and I base that advice on evidence rather than impressions.
In 2025 my director noticed that very remote councils had won only 4 of the previous 60 heavy vehicle rest area grants, and asked me to find out why before the guidelines were reviewed. I pulled three rounds of application and assessment data, matched it against each council’s remoteness category, and interviewed six unsuccessful council officers by phone. The pattern was clear: remote councils scored poorly on co-funding, because the guidelines required a 50 per cent cash contribution that small councils couldn’t raise in a single budget year. I drafted a four-page brief with the data, three options and the cost of each, and recommended allowing in-kind contributions for very remote councils. When the director questioned whether this would unfairly favour remote councils, I showed that the change left the merit criteria untouched and only altered eligibility, and suggested we test it for one round before making it permanent.
The option was adopted for the 2026 round. Applications from very remote councils rose from 5 to 17, and four were funded.
- It shows the “objective and systematic research and analysis” in the APS 5 standard, with real methods: data matching and interviews.
- Defending the recommendation when challenged is a behaviour the ILS introduces at APS 5.
- Three costed options leave the decision with the director, which is right for the level.
Liaises and negotiates with internal and external stakeholders to achieve agreed outcomes
I have negotiated with stakeholders who wanted different things as a project officer at the National Skills Data Office, most recently to set up a data-sharing agreement with three state training departments.
Our office needed quarterly enrolment data from each state to publish a national report, but each state collected it differently and two were worried about privacy. My manager made me responsible for reaching agreement on what would be shared. Before the first meeting I spoke to each state contact separately to understand their limits: one could not share student-level records at all, another needed legal sign-off for any new field, and the third mainly wanted the national figures back sooner. I drafted a list of 14 data fields, marked which ones each state already held, and proposed sharing totals by course and region instead of individual records, which met the privacy concern. I ran three short meetings and sent a summary within a day of each. When one state’s lawyers raised a late objection, I arranged a call between them and our privacy officer rather than letting it stall.
All three states signed within 11 weeks, against a 16-week target, and the first national report was published on schedule. Two more states have since asked to join on the same terms.
- Talking to each party first shows the ILS APS 5 behaviour of approaching negotiations with a clear understanding of the key issues.
- The compromise (totals rather than individual records) solved the real concern, rather than just holding meetings.
- Bringing in the privacy officer shows the applicant knows when to use other people’s expertise.
Supervises and supports less experienced staff, including allocating work and providing quality assurance
I coordinate the daily work of three APS 4 officers as a senior complaints officer at the Office of the Digital Services Complaints Commissioner, and I am responsible for the quality of what our small team sends out.
In March 2025 a system outage left us with 260 unresolved complaints, and my assistant director asked me to clear the backlog without delaying new complaints. I sorted the backlog by complexity and allocated it to match each officer’s experience: the newest officer took simple refund cases, and the two more experienced officers took the disputes. I set a weekly target for each of us, kept the 20 most sensitive cases myself, and held a 10-minute stand-up each morning to move cases around when someone got stuck. I checked one in five of each officer’s closure letters. When one officer’s letters kept leaving out the review rights paragraph, I raised it with her the same day, walked her through the template, and checked all her letters for the next fortnight. As agreed with our assistant director, I also noted it for her next performance conversation.
We cleared the backlog in nine weeks, three ahead of plan, while new complaints stayed within our 30-day standard. The team’s quality check pass rate rose from 82 to 96 per cent.
- It matches the supervisory span in the APS 5 standard: coordinating a small team, allocating work and checking quality.
- Allocating by experience and keeping the hardest cases shows judgement about people as well as tasks.
- Acting on the error quickly and noting it reflects the ILS APS 5 behaviour of recognising and noting under-performance.
Mistakes to avoid
- Examples where your manager made every decision. At APS 5 the panel wants to see what you decided.
- Research with no result: describing the spreadsheet you built but not the advice it led to or what changed.
- Calling every contact a “stakeholder relationship”. Show a case where interests differed and you reached an outcome.
- Claiming supervision you didn’t do. If you haven’t supervised, show allocating, checking or guiding others’ work honestly.
- A pitch that lists capabilities (“strong communicator, analytical, collaborative”) without a single example of using them.
- Using the same project for every criterion, so the panel sees one piece of work from five angles.
Check or draft your own response
Paste your response to see which parts of the criterion it proves, or paste rough notes for a draft built only from your own facts. Free, no account.
Questions
What’s the difference between APS 4 and APS 5?
The work level standards describe APS 4 work as moderately complex under general direction, with decisions within defined parameters. APS 5 work is moderately complex to complex under limited direction, with independent decisions, specialist advice and, in some roles, supervising staff. In an application, the shift is from doing the work well to being trusted to decide and advise.
Do APS 5 roles involve managing people?
Some do. The standard says APS 5 work may include supervising lower-level employees, allocating work and managing their performance, but many APS 5 roles are specialist or project roles without direct reports. If supervision is in the job description, give at least one example of coordinating or checking others’ work.
What is a merit pool in APS recruitment?
When several applicants are found suitable, an agency can place them in a merit pool or ranked merit list and offer them the same or similar jobs for 18 months from when the vacancy was advertised in the Public Service Gazette. Since 1 February 2026, agencies must share these lists with other APS agencies that ask, once the list is more than six months old and the vacancies are similar.
Can I apply for APS 5 jobs from outside the public service?
Yes. The APSC says the vast majority of APS jobs are open to the Australian community, and suggests the APS 5–6 level may suit people with a degree and work experience. Examples from private sector, community or state government roles count if they show the same independence and judgement.
How many examples should an APS 5 pitch include?
The APSC suggests using only one or two of your strongest examples for each criterion. In a short pitch covering several capabilities, that usually means one tight example each, chosen so they don’t all come from the same project.
Sources
- Australian Public Service Commission: Work level standards, APS Level and Executive Level classifications
- Australian Public Service Commission: ILS, a guide to the Integrated Leadership System for APS 1–6 employees
- Australian Public Service Commission: Cracking the code, 2. About jobs in the APS
- Australian Public Service Commission: Cracking the code, 3. Applying for an APS job
- Australian Public Service Commission: Cracking the code, 8. Frequently asked questions
- Australian Public Service Commission: Factsheet, roles and responsibilities on selection panels
- Australian Public Service Commission: Creating and sharing merit lists or pools
General guidance. Always follow what the job ad or information pack asks for.