Assessment criteria

How we assess your 6-month reports

Overview of the report assessment process

1. Organisations submit their 6-month reports
2. CNZ checks for completion and cleans data
3. Assessment
4. Peer review/moderation
5. Approval of assessment
6. Communication of results

Assessment criteria

6-month reports are assessed for four* aspects:

• Quality
• Alignment to Creative New Zealand's strategies
• Financial health
• Organisational health

*Organisations that are part of TEOs, CCOs, or receive <$75k p/a from us are exempt from Financial and Organisational health aspects

Quality

Quality is assessed against the following indicators:

• Funded activities were delivered as proposed.
• The organisation has defined its own quality measures for the activities.
• The organisation has evaluation methods in place to assess the quality of the activities.
• Evaluation results met or exceed the organisation's quality measures.
• Activity statistics (#events, #participants, #attendees etc) met or exceeded projections.

Alignment to Creative New Zealand's strategies

Alignment to Creative New Zealand’s strategies are assessed against the following indicators: 

• The organisation’s delivery to its contracted Investment Feature Outcomes 
• The organisation’s support of the role of Māori as tangata whenua (Māori-led organisations are exempt from this) 
• The organisation’s delivery to CNZ's commitment to diversity as defined in our Diversity in the Arts Policy 
• The organisation’s delivery to the principles of Te Hā 
• The organisation’s delivery to the principles of Pacific Arts Strategy 
• The organisation’s contribution to arts sector capability & development (this is only a requirement for organisations funded through the Toi Tōtara Haemata programme).

Financial health

Financial health is assessed against the following indicators: 

• Financial performance results meet or exceed projections.
• Financial performance is stable or trending upwards.
• The organisation has a working capital ratio of 1.1 or higher.
• The organisation's working capital equates to at least 3 months of projected operational costs.
• The organisation has a positive net equity.
• Net equity is stable or trending upwards.
• There is evidence of sound financial management.
• Reserves held are in line with the organisation’s policy.

TEOs and their subsidiaries, council-controlled organisations, and organisations receiving less than $75,000 per annum are exempt from this requirement.

Organisational health

Organisational health is assessed against the following indicators:

• The organisation is stable and able to deliver its programme of activities.
• Staff have the skills, experience, and capacity to deliver their roles well.
• The organisation is making progress against its business and strategic plans.
• There is evidence of strong governance (clear accountabilities, analysis of financial reporting, risk management, strategic direction)

TEOs and their subsidiaries, council-controlled organisations, and organisations receiving less than $75,000 per annum are exempt from this requirement.

Summary performance rating

We allocate a score for each of the relevant areas (see below). Your organisation will receive a summary performance rating (Did not meet expectations, Met expectations or Exceeded expectations) based on the sum of these scores.

For organisations who are assessed against all four aspects:

0 - 12 Did not meet expectations
13 - 19 Met expectations
20 - 28 Exceeded expectations

For organisations who are assessed against the first two aspects (e.g. TEOs, CCOs and those who receive <$75k p/a from us):

0 - 4 Did not meet expectations
5 - 9 Met expectations
10 - 14 Exceeded expectations

Assessment scale

7 Excellent - Exceeds all indicators
6 Very good - Satisfies all indicators and exceeds in more than one
5 Good - Satisfies all indicators and exceeds in one
4 Met expectations - Satisfies all indicators
3 Minor reservations - Satisfies most indicators however there are minor reservations
2 Major reservations - Satisfies some indicators however there are major reservations
1 Unacceptable - Does not meet the indicators
0 There is no evidence provided

This is a standard CNZ assessment scale. When it comes to investment programme indicators, you cannot exceed some indicators. For example, the only indicator that can be exceeded in financial health is ‘evidence of strong financial management’ - therefore the top score for this aspect is 5.

Meeting expectations is entirely acceptable - it means that our investment is doing what it was intended to, that we are being responsible caretakers of public money and that we’re meeting our expectations under our Act. To us, an organisation that meets the criteria above is a good investment. Meeting expectations also represents a fair exchange between our organisations.