Scoring Criteria

SCORE 6 - An evaluation of excellent will apply to performance which is a model of its type. The process and outcomes  of community engagement will be of a very high quality. An evaluation of excellent will represent an outstanding standard of performance, which will exemplify very best practice and is worth disseminating. It will imply these very high levels of performance are sustainable and will be maintained.

SCORE 5 - An evaluation of very good will apply to performance characterised by major strengths. There will be very few areas for improvement. While an evaluation of very good will represent a high standard of performance, it is a standard that should be achievable by all. It will imply that it is fully appropriate to continue to conduct engagement in this manner though opportunities to raise performance to excellent should nonetheless be taken.

SCORE 4 - An evaluation of good will apply to performance characterised by important strengths which, taken together, clearly outweigh any areas for improvement. An evaluation of good will represent a standard of performance in which the strengths have a significant positive impact. However, the quality of process and outcomes of the community engagement is diminished in some way by aspects where improvement is required. It will imply that the agencies conducting the engagement should seek to improve further the areas of important strength, but take action to address the areas for improvement.

SCORE 3 - An evaluation of satisfactory will apply to performance characterised by strengths, which just outweigh weaknesses. An evaluation of adequate will indicate that the engagement has been satisfactory but basic. It represents a standard where the strengths have a positive impact, however, while the weaknesses will not be important enough to have a substantially adverse impact, they will constrain the overall quality of process and outcomes and experiences. It will imply that action should be taken to address areas of weakness while building on strengths.

SCORE 2 - An evaluation of weak will apply to performance which has some strengths but where there will be important weaknesses. In general, an evaluation of weak may be arrived at in a number of circumstances. While there may be some strengths, the important weaknesses, either individually or collectively, are sufficient to diminish the experience of the process an outcomes of community engagement in substantial ways. It may imply that some stakeholders may not have their needs met or may not have been effectively represented. It will imply the need for structured and planned action on the part of the agency or agencies promoting engagement.

SCORE 1 - An evaluation of unsatisfactory will apply when there are major weaknesses in performance in critical aspects requiring immediate remedial action. The process and outcomes for stakeholders will be unsatisfactory in significant respects. In almost all cases, agencies and or the responsible staff will require support in planning and carrying out the necessary actions to effect improvement. Urgent action will be required to ensure improvement in the quality of community engagement and potentially to rectify the impact of poor practice.

The criteria have been adapted from the HMIE 'How Good is Our......' framework

Download 'Scoring Criteria'