Page 28 - U4SSC KPIs Verification Manual - A guide for verifiers

I. Socio-Economic conditions: The general socio-economic conditions of the county and
jurisdictional area (state or province) in which the city is located. Consider the inequity of
the city.
II. The city’s political structure and the hierarchy of the governing authority: If the forgoing is
not familiar to you, seek background information from credible sources. This information
will be useful in understanding the context of the data submitted.
III. Geographic orientation: A city may lie on a tectonic fault line or a flood plain; it may be
hemmed in by mountains, be adjacent to a seacoast or be landlocked. It may be subject
to any number of topographical constraints or advantages that have a direct bearing on its
approach to quantifying performance to the KPIs.

IV. Climatic conditions: As with geographic orientation above, prevailing climatic conditions
may present constraints or advantages that directly impact its approach to quantifying
performance to the KPIs. Such parameters as average temperatures, seasonal variations in
temperature, the amount and type of precipitation that falls, and wind patterns, may all have
a potential bearing on the data.

V. Economic foundations: A city where the economy is based on heavy industry may have a
different set of causal factors than one whose economy is based on tourism. This is also true
for a city with a diversified economic base versus a city whose economy is dependent on
one industry.

b. Consistency: Look for significant variations in denominators used. For example, it is natural for
some variation in the population number used as the denominator as different sources may
have been used or the time of collection may have varied by a couple of years. Variations of 10
per cent or more ought to be investigated. Another area of potential error is in the data related
to the area of the city. Full metropolitan areas may be comingled with city core areas.
c. Credibility of data source references: It is expected that data sources for all core KPIs, and
a random sample of advanced indicators, are reviewed for credibility. The first indicator of
credibility is that the data source is noted in the submission. It is incumbent on the Verifier to
review the authenticity of the data and the source. For examples:

I. Where subscriber data has been used for KPIs related to connectivity data, confirm that
the entity, or entities, referred to in the subscriber data exist and operate in the city being
evaluated.

II. If international bodies are used as reference sources, double-check these sources to ensure
that the data you see compares to the data presented by the city.
III. When data falls out of the range of statistical norms, where included in the KPI’s, ensure
there is a plausible reason for the data.

IV. Confirm that the methodology indicated within the KPIs for establishing the result has been
followed.

18 U4SSC KPIs Verification Manual-A guide for verifiers