Improving Performance Benchmarks Sample Clauses

Improving Performance Benchmarks. ‌ Existing performance benchmarks in the NPARIH provide only limited visibility of progress on property and tenancy management reforms, and do not enable effective assessment of performance where different service delivery arrangements are implemented across jurisdictions, i.e. direct delivery by government or delivery through a service provider network, such as the ACHPs in NSW. As a result, they do not drive performance effectively. To drive the reforms forward, it is essential to have an accurate understanding of trends, impacts and service standards of each key element of a property and tenancy management system over time. This will become more important over the remaining years of the NPARIH to ensure the 2015 benchmark is met. As the focus shifts from capital works targets to sustainability of the property and tenancy management system, protecting the massive investment of funding and maintaining the quality of the work done, it will be critical to understand what works well and where changes, further development or refinement of systems might be required. Equally, an understanding of the impact on tenants of the various strategies will be important. A small number of examples are emerging of family pride in moving from an overcrowded home in poor condition into a new home, buying new furniture and whitegoods and starting a garden, particularly in some locations where clusters or subdivisions of new houses have been built. It will be important to track how a rigorous and supportive tenancy management regime can influence and help tenants in remote communities retain and build on this pride. In discussions in Napranum near Weipa in Cape York, the review heard there was a noticeable link between the upgrades to residents’ houses and an increase in pride and care for the properties. Understanding this will also be important to assessment over time of any broader impacts of new housing on family wellbeing, particularly in relation to the Closing the Gap targets. In Galiwinku in Arnhem Land during the review visit, the emerging pride in the new houses in the new subdivision, built through the NPARIH, was evident in the number of gardens being cultivated by families who are now in those houses. Similarly, in Wadeye, growing gardens were visible around new houses and local people advised that gardening competitions had been held since residents moved into their new houses. It is also important to better understand the pressures jurisdictions are facing in m...
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Improving Performance Benchmarks

  • PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES 8 A. CONTRACTOR shall achieve performance objectives, tracking and reporting Performance 9 Outcome Objective statistics in monthly programmatic reports, as appropriate. ADMINISTRATOR 10 recognizes that alterations may be necessary to the following services to meet the objectives, and,

  • Ongoing Performance Measures The Department intends to use performance-reporting tools in order to measure the performance of Contractor(s). These tools will include the Contractor Performance Survey (Exhibit H), to be completed by Customers on a quarterly basis. Such measures will allow the Department to better track Vendor performance through the term of the Contract(s) and ensure that Contractor(s) consistently provide quality services to the State and its Customers. The Department reserves the right to modify the Contractor Performance Survey document and introduce additional performance-reporting tools as they are developed, including online tools (e.g. tools within MFMP or on the Department's website).

  • Key Performance Indicators 10.1 The Supplier shall at all times during the Framework Period comply with the Key Performance Indicators and achieve the KPI Targets set out in Part B of Framework Schedule 2 (Goods and/or Services and Key Performance Indicators).

  • Performance Expectations The Charter School’s performance in relation to the indicators, measures, metrics and targets set forth in the CPF shall provide the basis upon which the SCSC will decide whether to renew the Charter School’s Charter Contract at the end of the charter term. This section shall not preclude the SCSC from considering other relevant factors in making renewal decisions.

  • Performance Metrics In the event Grantee fails to timely achieve the following performance metrics (the “Performance Metrics”), then in accordance with Section 8.4 below Grantee shall upon written demand by Triumph repay to Triumph all portions of Grant theretofore funded to and received by Grantee:

  • Performance Levels (a) The Performance Levels which apply to the performance by the respective Parties of their obligations under this Agreement are set out in Part 1 of Schedule 5. A failure by either Party to achieve the relevant Performance Level will not constitute a breach of this Agreement and the only consequences of such failure as between the Parties shall be the consequences set out in this Clause 5.6.

  • Performance Expectation Provided the conditions are met under 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 proceeding, ALLTEL’s performance expectation is to provide 100% due dates met within reporting month. If service levels fall below 95% of the performance expectation within a reporting month, root cause analysis and joint problem resolution will be implemented within thirty (30) days.

  • Goal The goals of the Department’s grants are to:

  • Performance Measurement Satisfactory performance of this Contract will be measured by:

  • Performance Indicators The HSP’s delivery of the Services will be measured by the following Indicators, Targets and where applicable Performance Standards. In the following table: n/a meanç ‘not-appIicabIe’, that there iç no defined Performance Standard for the indicator for the applicable year. tbd means a Target, and a Performance Standard, if applicable, will be determined during the applicable year. INDICATOR CATEGORY INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD Organizational Health and Financial Indicators Debt Service Coverage Ratio (P) 1 c1 Total Margin (P) 0 cO Coordination and Access Indicators Percent Resident Days – Long Stay (E) n/a n/a Wait Time from LHIN Determination of Eligibility to LTC Home Response (M) n/a n/a Long-Term Care Home Refusal Rate (E) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2/3 INDICATOR CATEGORY Quality and Resident Safety Indicators INDICATOR P = Performance Indicator E = Explanatory Indicator M = Monitoring Indicator Percentage of Residents Who Fell in the Last 30 days (M) 2019/20 PERFORMANCE TARGET STANDARD n/a n/a Percentage of Residents Whose Pressure Ulcer Worsened (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents on Antipsychotics Without a Diagnosis of Psychosis (M) n/a n/a Percentage of Residents in Daily Physical Restraints (M) n/a n/a SCHEDULE D — PERFORMANCE 2.0 LHIN-Specific Performance Obligations 3/3

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.