Non-Performance Indicator

Return to Terms and Definitions

Discussion

A Non-Performance Indicator identifies a governance gap between required governed work and available evidence. It supports review when the architecture expects fraud screening, anti-money-laundering review, sanctions checking, policy evaluation, persistence, provenance capture, authorized release, evidence retention, or another governed function, but the relevant evidence reference does not exist.

A Non-Performance Indicator helps distinguish lower-cost compliant processing from under-compliance. It does not conclude that misconduct occurred. It identifies missing, incomplete, or unavailable evidence for work that the applicable obligation required.

A Non-Performance Indicator supports exception handling, audit review, remediation, dispute resolution, provider comparison, and governance escalation in the Cost Recovery, Compensation, and Settlement Plane.

Definition

record that identifies missing evidence for the required governed work

Source

FX Demo Reference Architecture, Part 6: Cost Recovery, Compensation, and Settlement Plane

Note

A Non-Performance Indicator differs from evidence of failure. It records an evidence gap for required governed work. Review, remediation, audit, or governance processes determine the cause and significance of the gap.

A Non-Performance Indicator also differs from a control-plane failure event. A control-plane failure event records operational failure. A Non-Performance Indicator records the absence of evidence for required governed work.

Example

An FX transaction requires sanctions screening under the applicable policy obligation. No evidence reference exists for a sanctions screening result. The Cost Recovery, Compensation, and Settlement Plane records a Non-Performance Indicator for the missing sanctions screening evidence.