|
| |
Project Evaluation Tool: Performance Criteria
|
Extraordinary Performance |
Highly motivated staff
Good report from clients
Community still interested with the services
|
|
Outstanding Performance |
No staff turnover
No complaints about service
Encouraging feedback from clients
Good feedback from the community
|
|
Very Good Performance |
Reasonable strength with the community
Continuing clients satisfaction
Staff interested in developing more programmes
|
|
Good Performance |
Average services
Staff changes but not aversely
Clients interested in new services
|
|
Fair Performance |
Below average services
Clients concerned about the services
Community is questioning the existence of services
|
|
Weak Performance |
Staff turnover
Difficult to fill in the positions
Growth of complaints by the clients/community
Drop in the number of clients in some services
|
|
Crises Performance |
Constant clients complainants
Sharp drop in number of clients
Community’s dissatisfaction with the centre’s performance |
Adapted from
Goodstein, Leonard, Nolan, Timothy, and Pfeiffer, J. William, [1993]. Applied
Strategic Planning; How to develop a plan that really works, Sydney:
McGraw-Hill, Inc, p. 318.
|