Predetermined Objectives
Performance Target Revisions Tracker
In-year revisions to performance targets and the reasons recorded.
Why mid-year target changes matter
Performance targets in the Annual Performance Plan and SDBIP are an undertaking to citizens and the legislature, so quietly lowering a target mid-year can mask non-delivery. The AGSA tests in-year revisions closely because unauthorised changes undermine the reliability of reported information and breach the consistency principle expected under the National Treasury Framework for Managing Programme Performance Information. AuditPro Core gives the accounting officer and oversight bodies a single tracker of every revision, the reason captured and whether it was properly approved.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Targets Revised
23
7% of plan
Revised Downward
15
65% of revisions
Properly Approved
18
78%
Unsupported Changes
5
Revisions by Reason
Target Revision Register
| Indicator | Original | Revised | Approved |
|---|---|---|---|
| Roads resurfaced | 180 | 150 | Yes |
| Units delivered | 3000 | 2400 | Yes |
| Connections made | 7500 | 6500 | No |
| Clinics upgraded | 12 | 9 | Yes |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
In-year revision
An in-year revision is any change to a planned target, indicator definition or baseline after the APP or SDBIP has been tabled. Such changes are only permissible where the budget is adjusted and the council or executive authority approves them through the prescribed adjustment process.
Reason for change
Every revision must carry a documented, defensible reason such as a funding cut, a re-scoped project or a definitional correction. A reason that simply restates the new number, or that appears only after year-end, is a red flag for retrofitting performance to actuals.
Authorisation trail
Revisions gain legitimacy only when authorised at the correct level and within the correct window, typically the mid-year budget adjustment. The audit question is not whether a target changed but whether the change was sanctioned before performance was measured against it.
Consistency principle
Performance information must remain comparable across quarterly, mid-year and annual reports. Untracked drift in targets between cycles breaks the audit trail and is a common driver of qualified audit opinions on predetermined objectives.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- Versioned target ledger: AuditPro Core stores each target with its full revision history, so the originally tabled value, every change and the final reported figure are all preserved and comparable.
- Reason and approval capture: a revision cannot be saved without a recorded reason and a link to the authorising adjustment, making unapproved changes visible immediately.
- Exception flagging: revisions made outside the adjustment window or without approval are flagged for the accounting officer and internal audit to action.
- Audit-ready export: the complete revision register can be exported for the AGSA, MPAC or the audit committee with traceability back to the source council resolution.
Key Takeaways
- Only revise targets through the formal budget adjustment process and approval level.
- Capture a substantive reason for every change, not a restatement of the new number.
- Late or unapproved revisions are a leading cause of AOPO findings.
- Maintain a complete version history to preserve comparability across reporting cycles.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.