Objective: This study aimed to explore and gain an understanding of Australian non-government mental health staff experiences of outcome measurement. The project sought to learn if non-clinical staff share key issues raised by clinical staff, what challenges are faced using outcome measurement in non-government settings, and how outcome measurement benefits practice. Method: Individuals were recruited between 2016 and 2017 from recovery-oriented non-government organisations using outcome measurement practices. Utilising a phenomenological perspective, semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 12 participants. Service characteristics, recovery, and experiences of outcome measurement processes, feasibility, and tool properties were explored. Results: Initial data provided context of employing organisations, the practicing philosophies, and outcome tools used by participants. Four thematic areas were identified from the analysis of participant transcripts, (i) the mixed views and beliefs about outcome measurement, (ii) the standing of tool validity, (iii) wide use of flexible practices and (iv) the value and importance of training and support. Discussion: This non-comparative study found that non-clinical mental health staff shared some feasibility issues with clinical staff, however, they also presented new issues and new ways of using outcome measurement tools. Future research should continue to document non-government organisation staff experiences of outcome measurement to improve practice and culture.