Purpose
To provide a standardized, objective method for assessing the quality and impact of organisational performance initiatives and data-driven partnerships under SayPro’s accreditation process.
Rating Categories & Criteria
| Category | Criteria | Rating Scale (1–5) | Comments / Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data Quality | Accuracy, completeness, consistency, and validity of submitted data | 1 = Poor, 5 = Excellent | |
| Analytical Rigor | Use of appropriate methods, tools, and robustness of analysis | 1 = Weak, 5 = Highly rigorous | |
| Alignment with SayPro OPM Framework | Degree to which submission aligns with SayPro’s Organisational Performance Management domains | 1 = Minimal, 5 = Fully aligned | |
| Ethical Compliance | Adherence to SayPro data ethics, confidentiality, and governance standards | 1 = Non-compliant, 5 = Fully compliant | |
| Outcome Relevance | Significance and relevance of outcomes to organisational performance improvement | 1 = Negligible, 5 = Highly significant | |
| Impact Measurability | Clarity and robustness of impact measurement (quantitative & qualitative) | 1 = Poorly measured, 5 = Clearly demonstrated | |
| Innovation & Best Practice | Evidence of innovative approaches or alignment with industry best practices | 1 = None, 5 = Highly innovative | |
| Stakeholder Engagement | Level of involvement and satisfaction among key stakeholders | 1 = Low, 5 = High | |
| Scalability & Sustainability | Potential for the initiative to be scaled or sustained over time | 1 = Limited, 5 = High |
Scoring Guidelines
- Each category is rated from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest).
- Total Score = Sum of all category scores (max 45).
- Overall Rating:
- 40–45 = Excellent
- 30–39 = Good
- 20–29 = Fair
- Below 20 = Needs Improvement
Evaluator Details
- Evaluator Name:
- Position:
- Date of Evaluation:
Summary & Recommendations
- Strengths:
- Areas for Improvement:
- Overall Recommendation:
☐ Approve for Accreditation
☐ Require Revisions
☐ Reject
Sign-off
- Evaluator Signature:
- Date:
Leave a Reply