High concentrations of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) and salts in drinking water, often exacerbated by drought conditions, have been reported to have a detrimental impact on cattle health and performance. This research investigated water quality parameters including TDS and salts (sodium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, aluminium, zinc, iron, manganese, carbonate, bicarbonate, sulphate, nitrate and nitrite). The project summarised the range of TDS and salts in feedlot drinking water across Australia, thus determining potential impacts on cattle health and production. Additionally, feedlots using surface water sources for drinking water had the cyanobacteria species present identified and quantified. Such a study has not previously occurred in Australia.

The study was split into four parts with this report including over 100 historical water samples taken prior to 2018; 68 feedlot managers/owners completed the survey regarding water use delivered in paper and online format; 82 water samples from April to June 2019 from 58 feedlots were analysed for a suite of parameters. Where multiple water sources were used, the source water was analysed, this occurred for 24 samples. Additionally, water samples that included surface water were analysed for cyanobacteria (27 samples). Feedlots participating in the project were equivalent to over 50% of the licenced cattle feedlots.

Of the 68 feedlots completing the paper based and online survey, the majority (64%) source their cattle drinking water from groundwater. On a per-head basis, the use of groundwater as a drinking water source became even more important, covering two thirds of surveyed feedlot cattle. Surface water from dams and rivers were also a common source of water, and less common sources included reverse osmosis treated water from coal seam gas operations, tank roof water, and irrigation water.

The majority of feedlots (75%) were not aware of any issues with their drinking water quality. Of those that indicated that they had concerns about their water quality, seven feedlots identified cyanobacteria (Blue green algae) and Escherichia coli as an issue; four identified turbidity and scale (likely from calcium build up) clogging floats; and four feedlots reported that they now treat water for use in their boiler, but do not treat for cattle, while one feedlot identified high iron as an issue for boiler water.

Among trough water samples analysed for TDS, the majority (86 %) were considered satisfactory for cattle consumption and would not be expected to limit animal performance (≤ 3,000 mg/L). There were, however, cases of poor water quality identified. The highest TDS reported was 11,600 mg/L in groundwater. This water was shandied with surface water and was the maximum in the mixed trough water (5,400 mg/L), which would be expected to limit cattle performance (NASEM, 2016). Chloride was present in the highest concentration of all anions analysed. Nitrate concentrations were highest in the groundwater samples with only one trough sample exceeding the nitrate concentration threshold of 20 mg/L (NASEM, 2016). Sulphate ranged from undetected (<0.3 mg/L sulphur as sulphate) to 575 mg/L, with the highest values in groundwater samples, all samples were below the 1,000 mg/L guideline (ANZEC, 2000). Only 3% of trough samples exceeded the ANZEC (2000) limit of 5 mg aluminium/L. Manganese concentration was highest in surface water samples with 57% to 90% of trough water samples sourced from surface water exceeding the 0.05 mg/L upper-limit guideline (NASEM, 2016). The biological significance of high manganese waters remains to be elucidated, although water concentrations are well below the Maximum tolerable limit reported for dietary Manganese of 1000 mg/kg dry matter (NASEM, 2016). Two surface water samples were in excess of the trigger value for Microcystis aeruginosa (11,500 cells/mL) and were reanalysed and tested for toxins. Only one sample was below a pH 5.1 and one sample above pH of 9.

Several water treatment scenarios were investigated with distributors and installers in Australia with reverse osmosis being the most suitable treatment option. As there are no Australian references for the effect of water quality on the performance of the cattle, Patterson et al. (2004), a publication from the USA, was used for the analysis of benefit and cost of water treatment with reverse osmosis. Treatment with reverse osmosis lead to increased, and more cost-effective, cattle productivity. However, the water used in the article by Patterson et al. (2004) had high sulphate concentrations, so the same responses are unlikely with Australian water. Future research testing water quality in the range of variation experienced by Australian feedlots, in a controlled manner, would allow the industry to determine the most relevant animal production gains and thus the benefits of reverse osmosis.

In conclusion, water quality was determined to be of suitable quality for the majority of feedlots surveyed. Isolated cases of poor water quality were identified. This project is beneficial to the industry as it has yielded a comprehensive understanding of the current sources and quality of feedlot drinking water for a single point in time. Overall, this project will improve feedlot decision-making regarding the conditions when water quality parameters may impact animal health and production in beef cattle feedlots.

This report to the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) presents the findings and recommendations of the review of AITSL Assessor Training Program (ATP) undertaken by the SiMERR National Research Centre. The ATP is used to train assessors of applications for certification at the Highly Accomplished and Lead career stages of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST).

The purpose of this Guide is to provide GPs and other health professionals with up-to-date, evidence-informed guidance on how to manage and minimise harm for people who are contemplating, currently using or wanting to stop non-prescribed anabolic-androgenic steroids (AAS) and other performance and image enhancing drugs (PIEDs).

The Guide is based on the best available evidence and draws upon an extensive literature review and the experience and knowledge of health professionals, researchers, and people who use non-prescribed AAS and other PIEDs.

The Drug Policy Modelling Program (DPMP) at the University of New South Wales has released a report on 'The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the non-government alcohol and other drug sector: future implications'. NADA commissioned DPMP to undertake the study to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on it's members and provide advice on the immediate, medium and long-term actions that need to follow.

COVID-19 has demanded significant changes to funding arrangements, leadership and strategic planning, the types of care provided, and workforce requirements and support. It provides the opportunity to review all aspects of non government AOD treatment services, including the ways in which services are commissioned and funded by governments, and how services are supported, led, and delivered.

The actions resulting from the study are directed at treatment providers, NADA, and non government AOD funders. Whilst many of these actions have commenced, some are longstanding issues impacting on the sector, such as the underfunding of AOD treatment, and recruitment and retention of staff. NADA is committed to working with sector to implement the actions.

This report provides advice to the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL), through Variation to AITSL 20-278: ATP New Modules, on ways of conducting certification moderation sessions within jurisdictions, using a national evidence set.

Preparing this advice enabled SiMERR to draw upon its earlier advice to AITSL - Quality Assurance Methods for the Certification of Highly Accomplished and Lead Teachers in Australia (Pegg, Hardy, & Vine, 2017) - as well as other AITSL-commissioned reports (AITSL, 2018; Kavanagh, Womersley, & Kerin, 2016) and research literature (Beutel, Adie, & Lloyd, 2017; Bloxham, Hughes, & Adie, 2016; Gillis, 2010, 2020).

This report provides updated evidence-based advice on the selection of evidence sets to include in National Evidence for use in Stage 1 jurisdictional/sectoral moderation processes. The updated advice follows input from the ACT Teacher Quality Institute on the results of the Certification Pilot (Pegg, McPhan, & Hardy, 2013). This report should be read in conjunction with Moderation Advice, which outlines a proposed moderation process than can be implemented within jurisdictions/sectors. The advice on moderation and National Evidence have been provided within a broader project (20-278).

This report identifies evidence sets that would be appropriate for jurisdictions/sectors to utilise in assessing assessor accuracy at the beginning of the Stage 1 moderation process proposed in Moderation Advice. The evidence sets that have been reviewed have been sourced from both successful and unsuccessful Certification applications. Therefore, the range includes evidence sets that clearly meet Descriptors/Standards, are borderline or clearly do not meet Descriptors/Standards.

This document presents the final scope and sequence program outline proposed for Professional Learning Program (PLP) 1, as well as advice and suggestions concerning participant eligibility, exit certificates, overarching learning design features, learning design at the module level, conceptual framework for adult learners' needs in online and blended learning (OBL), writing style, stakeholder engagement and piloting the program. The final scoping document incorporates revisions based on workshop discussions with, and written feedback from, the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL).

This scoping document for the Teaching Effectiveness Professional Learning Program 4 - Data in the Classroom (PLP 4) incorporates and responds to the Workshop feedback discussions provided during its development. This document represents an import refinement in the focus and direction articulated in the initial presentation in Workshop 1. This version charts the potential scope for PLP 4 that is consistent, much tighter and more pragmatic in terms of school and classroom emphasis.

Two major occurrences have occurred following our meeting both centred about an aspect of driving change. The first was discussed explicitly in our meeting and documentation, and was related to the audience for the Modules. The second was about the purpose of the program and the related conceptual framework underpinning the program, which was discussed in our presentation, but the full implications were not explored.