Reviews per Offer
By Reviewer jirvin on January 31, 2019 at 2:42 PM
|5: Exemplary||5: Exemplary||5: Exemplary||5: Exemplary||5: Exemplary|
Official HPG Team Feedback:
Thank you for the well-written offer. Please see our questions and comments below.
I don’t understand how the metrics proposed change of 1% and 2% translate to the targets. Please clarify.
Some of the details in the measures are confusing – some of these FY’20 goals will be accomplished in the current fiscal year, and there are mismatches on the targets vs. language in the measure.
Confused on measure #1- FY20 target- shouldn’t it be an increased number?
Section 2 Summary mentions maintaining 90-95% accuracy in our court records–Metric 3 outlines a 99% accuracy goal while this mission is for 90-95% accuracy. Should it say 99% or should the metric align with this?
For performance measures assistance, please contact Tim Moreland at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Pertaining to Outcome 3. This is a great “outcome if funded” and I hope it continues. I would love to see how this program has helped us realize typically unrealized payments/income. How many citizens are eligible for this program vs how many utilize it?
Problem Solved feedback-3. Support for Citizens that minimizes disruption of their ability to continue to work and other
essential life activities.
This is fantastic and a program that should continue. It would be great to track how many people are eligible for this program vs how many actually utilize it. Also, how much income is lost by people that could be using the program, but not using it and not paying their fines?
Regarding TCM and TOP, Is this new? – Upon full implementation of these features… Is there a cost or increase associated with this program or did you use it last year? If so, what is preventing use of all features today?