APS Statement of Claims Example: How to Write a Strong Response

APS panels assess candidates through a merit-based process. This means every applicant is assessed against the same capability standard, using the evidence contained in their written response. Panels do not award marks based on career trajectory, interview performance potential, or the length of a resume. They assess what is written on the page.

A statement of claims is the primary document through which that assessment occurs. If your response does not contain specific, verifiable evidence of the relevant capability, the panel has nothing to score. Understanding what constitutes scorable evidence — and what does not — is the most practical step you can take before drafting.

This article provides a full statement of claims example in STAR format, explains the weak vs strong contrast, and covers the most common structural errors.

For guidance on how to approach each STAR element, see how to write APS selection criteria.

Generate Your APS Selection Criteria Responses

Paste the job ad and describe your experience.

APS Selection Helper will generate structured STAR responses aligned to APS selection criteria.

You can preview the draft before unlocking the full version.

Generate Selection Criteria Draft →

What Is an APS Statement of Claims?

A statement of claims (also called selection criteria) is a written response where you demonstrate evidence against each criterion listed in the job advertisement. APS panels use your responses to assess whether your skills and experience match the role requirements under a merit-based framework governed by the Public Service Act 1999.

Each response should:

Be specific and evidence-based
Use the STAR structure (Situation, Task, Action, Result)
Reflect the expected capability level for the APS classification (APS 5, APS 6, EL 1)
Stay within any word limit specified in the advertisement

Some applications require a response to each criterion individually. Others request a single combined statement with one total word limit. The position description will specify which format is required. Both formats use the same evidence standard.

Weak vs Strong: What Panels Actually Score

Understanding the contrast between a weak and a strong response is more useful than any general advice about "writing well."

Weak Response

I have extensive experience communicating complex information to diverse stakeholders across government and industry. I regularly present to senior executives and adapt my style to meet the needs of different audiences. I am known for clear, accessible writing.

Why this does not score: This is a self-assessment. There is no named situation, no specific task, no observable action, and no result. Panels cannot allocate marks against a capability indicator based on claims alone.

Strong Response

In my role as APS5 Policy Officer at the Department of Infrastructure, I was responsible for briefing both the Minister's office and industry representatives on proposed freight regulatory changes within the same week. I produced two distinct documents — a plain-English ministerial brief and a detailed industry analysis — and coordinated with legal and communications teams to verify consistency. The ministerial brief was described as "unusually clear and decision-ready." Industry representatives referenced the comparison tables in subsequent consultation sessions, reducing follow-up clarification calls by approximately 40%.

Why this scores: Named role, named department, specific task, individual coordination action, and two verifiable results. A panel member can assess this against "communicates complex information clearly" without inference.

Full Statement of Claims Example

Criterion: Demonstrated ability to communicate complex information clearly to a range of audiences.

As Policy Officer at the Department of Infrastructure, our team was tasked with briefing senior executives and external stakeholders on proposed changes to freight regulations following a ministerial review.

I was responsible for producing two separate briefings — one for the Minister's office requiring a non-technical plain-English summary, and another for industry representatives requiring detailed regulatory analysis — both due within the same week.

I drafted the Ministerial brief using plain language principles, stripping back regulatory jargon and focusing on three key outcomes. For the industry brief, I used structured headings, comparison tables, and a Q&A appendix to address anticipated concerns. I coordinated with legal and communications teams to verify technical accuracy and messaging consistency across both documents.

Both documents were delivered on time. The Minister's office provided positive feedback noting the brief was "unusually clear and decision-ready." Industry representatives referenced the comparison tables during subsequent consultation sessions, reducing the need for follow-up clarification calls by approximately 40%.

Why this example scores:

Named role and department
Distinct task with a dual audience and a genuine constraint (same-week deadline)
Individual actions clearly described — not attributed to the team
Two measurable results: positive named feedback, 40% reduction in follow-up calls
Evidence directly addresses the criterion rather than restating it

APS 5 vs APS 6: What Changes in a Statement of Claims

Applicants often ask how a statement of claims should differ between APS5 and APS6. The structure and evidence standard are the same. The expected complexity is different.

Element	APS 5	APS 6
Decision-making scope	Within established processes	Shapes the approach, identifies gaps
Stakeholder engagement	Coordinates with defined parties	Influences external parties or across agencies
Risk handling	Escalates issues appropriately	Identifies and mitigates risk proactively
Output complexity	Produces defined deliverables	Designs the framework or approach
Supervision	Works with direction	Operates with significant autonomy

When applying for an APS6 role, the action section of your response must reflect APS6 scope. An action that could have been taken by a well-performing APS4 will not score competitively at APS6.

For full examples at each level, read the APS selection criteria example guide.

Common Mistakes in Statements of Claims

Writing a resume in paragraph form. A statement of claims must contain evidence, not a chronology. Each response should describe one specific situation with one set of actions and one result.

Using "we" throughout the action section. Panels score the individual applicant, not the team. Clarify what you personally did, decided, or produced.

Omitting the result. A response without a result is structurally incomplete. Even a brief result is better than none. Named outcomes — a document endorsed, a decision approved, a deadline met — are credible results.

Exceeding or ignoring word limits. Word limits are compliance instructions, not suggestions. For detailed guidance on allocation, see APS selection criteria word limits.

If You're Struggling to Structure Your Response

Structuring APS responses clearly and concisely is often harder than it looks.

APS Selection Helper generates structured drafts aligned to your job ad and experience. You remain in control of editing before submission.

Generate Selection Criteria Draft →

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a Statement of Claims the same as selection criteria?

In most cases, yes. The two terms are used interchangeably across APS agencies. Some agencies use "Statement of Claims" as the title of the combined document, while others ask applicants to address "selection criteria" individually. Check the position description to determine whether you are expected to write one combined document or separate responses for each criterion.

Should I use headings in my statement?

Headings are not required and are generally not recommended for individual criterion responses. They can be useful in a combined statement of claims to signal which criterion you are addressing. In either case, the evidence within each section matters more than the formatting around it. Follow any formatting instructions in the position description.

Do panels read every word?

Panels read the full written response as part of the formal assessment process. However, responses that contain a high proportion of context and background with minimal action and result will score less efficiently — even if the panel reads every word. Evidence density matters as much as total length.

What if I don't have direct APS experience?

Private sector, academic, community sector, and voluntary experience are all acceptable. What matters is the quality and relevance of the evidence, not the sector. If your example is from outside the APS, briefly contextualise the environment — one sentence is usually sufficient — so the panel understands the setting. Then describe your action and result using the same STAR structure. The STAR method guide explains how to apply this regardless of sector.