Примеры использования Some indicators of achievement на Английском языке и их переводы на Русский язык
{-}
-
Official
-
Colloquial
At the same time, some indicators of achievement for the period 2009/10 are not measurable.
Views were also expressed that some expected accomplishments were too broad andgeneral and that the contents of some indicators of achievement required further refinement.
The view was expressed that some indicators of achievement needed to be redrafted in order to make them more relevant.
VI.32 The Advisory Committee finds that the results-based budgeting concept is reflected better in this budget section than in a number of others;the expected accomplishments are better drafted, and some indicators of achievement are measurable.
Clarification was sought on some indicators of achievement under subprogrammes 1, education, and 2, health.
Some indicators of achievement, particularly those related to political matters, were complex to validate, thereby rendering monitoring of the progress difficult para. 79 e.
The view was expressed that some indicators of achievement were too vague for measuring expected accomplishments.
For some indicators of achievement, the information/documentation provided by the results-based-budgeting focal points did not agree with actual indicators as presented in the performance report.
The view was also expressed that some indicators of achievement and performance measures did not seem to relate to the expected accomplishments.
However, some indicators of achievement and related performance measures have been updated to reflect the outcomes of key events that took place in 2012 and the first half of 2013, including developments related to the Istanbul Process and the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework.
The Advisory Committee notes that, as reflected in both the performance report andthe proposed budget, some indicators of achievement in the logical framework for the Mission are formulated in a manner that appears to place the burden of the political impasse on the Mission(see para. 6 above) in that they depend on external factors that are beyond the Mission's control.
At MINUSTAH, some indicators of achievement, particularly those related to political matters, were complex to validate, thereby rendering monitoring of the progress difficult;
It was noted that some indicators of achievement seemed appropriate and useful, while others needed to be refined.
It was also pointed out that some indicators of achievement had been formulated to measure the quantity of work and did not allow measuring the quality of the results achieved.
It was pointed out that some indicators of achievement were somewhat vague or imprecise in formulation, and that some established targets reflected only marginal improvement over the performance in prior bienniums.
At some missions, some indicators of achievement and outputs were not specific and measurable, and no standard processes or reviews were performed to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the portfolio of evidence.
It was also stressed that the content of some indicators of achievement required further refinement, in particular through the development of common benchmarks and standards for equal conference services, with a view to allowing for measuring the level of quality of the services.
It was also pointed out that some indicators of achievement were too generic to measure the expected accomplishments and that they should focus not only on client satisfaction or utilization of resources, but also on cost efficiency and effectiveness of services.
The Committee points out that while some indicators of achievement and outputs are measurable and reflect what the Mission intends to accomplish during the period 2005/06, the formulation of a number of indicators of achievement and outputs should be more precise and relevant to the mandated activities of the Mission.
Secondly, the logical framework set out for some indicators of achievement exceeds the role of the Secretariat in good offices, contrary to the commitments provided for in the United Nations Charter, particularly paragraph 7 of Article 2 prohibiting any intervention by the United Nations in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.
Some indicators of achievement of the logical framework that is proposed for review go beyond the role of the Secretariat in a manner that is contrary to the commitments set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly Article 2, paragraph 7, which prohibits any intervention by the Organization in matters that are within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.
The logical framework,proposed for review, for some indicators of achievement goes beyond the role of the Secretariat in that it is contrary to the commitments set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly Article 2, paragraph 7, which prohibits any intervention by the United Nations in matters which are within the domestic jurisdiction of any State.
However, some indicators of achievement and related performance measures have been updated to reflect the outcomes of key events that occurred in 2011 and during the first half of 2012, including the Istanbul"Heart of Asia" Conference and the Tokyo Conference on the development of new initiatives and programmes to support the overarching Kabul process.
For example, performance targets for some indicators of achievement that are expressed in number of courses per staff member or in average days required to process staff benefits, while quantifiable, do not appear to convey meaningful information since they provide data that are too general and aggregate to account for important details such as the duration of each training course or the time required to process each type of staff benefit.
Notes that some indicators of achievement reflected in the budgets and budget performance reports appear to measure the performance of Member States, and requests the Secretary-General to ensure that the purpose of the indicators of achievement is not to assess the performance of Member States but, where possible, to reflect the contributions by peacekeeping missions to the expected accomplishments and objectives in keeping with their respective mandates;
Some of the indicators of achievement and performance measures were not quantifiable and lacked transparency.
The view was expressed that some of the indicators of achievement needed to be quantified.
The view was also expressed that some of the indicators of achievement were difficult to quantify.
It is agreed that some of the indicators of achievement were not met during the 2007/08 performance period.
Regarding subprogramme 3, the view was expressed that some of the indicators of achievement were too vague for measuring accomplishments.