Targets not measurable
SMART Criteria Breakdown of Targets
A target that cannot be measured cannot be audited, and an unmeasurable target is the single most common reason performance information is found unreliable.
Why SMART Targets Matter
The SMART test - Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound - is the practical filter National Treasury and the AGSA apply to tabled targets. Targets failing the measurability test cannot generate a verifiable result, exposing the institution to AOPO findings on the predetermined objectives. AuditPro Core scores each target against the five SMART dimensions so weak targets are reworked before council approves them.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Targets reviewed
204
Fully SMART
131
64%
Not measurable
38
Not time-bound
29
SMART failures by dimension
Worst-scoring targets
| Target | Failed dimensions | Score /5 |
|---|---|---|
| Improve road network | M, T | 3 |
| Promote tourism | S, M, T | 2 |
| Support local economy | S, M, R, T | 1 |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
Measurability
A measurable target states a number, percentage or clear yes/no outcome. Vague phrasing like 'improve service delivery' gives the auditor nothing to recompute and almost always draws a finding.
Specificity
A specific target names the exact deliverable and the population it applies to. Ambiguity here lets actual performance be reinterpreted after the fact, which undermines reliability.
Time-bound framing
Targets must be anchored to a reporting period so progress can be assessed at the right cut-off. Without a date, quarterly and year-end reporting drift apart.
Achievability and relevance
An achievable, relevant target ties back to the institution's mandate and budget. Targets that are impossibly high or disconnected from the mandate distort both planning and the eventual performance narrative.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- SMART scoring: each tabled target is graded across the five dimensions, surfacing exactly which test it fails.
- Exception workflow: targets that fail measurability route back to programme owners for rewording before the APP is finalised.
- Continuous monitoring: draft targets are re-tested at each planning revision so weaknesses do not creep back in.
- Audit-ready export: the SMART assessment exports as documented evidence that targets were quality-assured pre-approval.
Key Takeaways
- Measurability is the dimension auditors weight most heavily; an unmeasurable target is effectively unauditable.
- Scoring targets before approval is far cheaper than restating performance after an AOPO finding.
- Specific, time-bound wording prevents after-the-fact reinterpretation of actual achievement.
- SMART scoring converts a subjective planning review into a structured, defensible record.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.