I guess it depends on what you mean by "new" and by "assessing performance". Bioindicators are often used for ecosystem biomonitoring and they generally provide qualitative binomial (presence/absence ~ good/bad) information about the long-term function of a system.
If the question is a laboratory procedure or very short term information on the performance perhaps a bioassay would be more advantageous. A particular type of bioassesment tool interesting in this case might be the use of biomarkers. There are many biomarkers and new are pointed every day for diverse kind of contaminants (see review attached).
Another promising approach (especially when the nature of potential toxics is unknown) is the Adverse Outcome Pathway approach. It is being highlighted as a scientifically sound way to monitor effects of complex and variable contaminant mixtures.
I worked with Vibrio fischeri bioluminiscent bacteria. They are a good marker when you research a general toxicity of waters. Check the paper in the attchment to get an insight into the topic.
I would agree with the person who suggested it depends on what you mean by new. It really depends on the nature of the waste you are processing and what you seek as the end of life cycle disposal. Are you dumping the final.product t into a water body such as a river where down stream users will extract the same water as a drinking water supply or perhaps you b are dumping it into a lagoon for further treatment. It's a complex.question without more.information.cvg