Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performance Measures topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nevada ethics commission proposes tighter performance measures, prioritizes training reach
Summary
Executive Director Armstrong proposed changing the commission’s performance measures: measure training by individuals trained rather than classes, track advisory-opinion turnaround from receipt to issuance, count complaint cases resolved (not hearings), and shift judicial-case counts into workload metrics. Commissioners asked for percentages alongside absolute numbers.
The Nevada Commission on Ethics moved to revise how it measures agency performance, with the executive director proposing changes meant to better reflect service delivery and workload.
Executive Director Armstrong recommended four adjustments in the budget-facing performance measures: measure the total number of individuals completing ethics training rather than the number of classes offered; calculate advisory-opinion turnaround from the date the request is received to the date the requester is issued an opinion; replace ‘number of complaint hearings’ with ‘number of complaint cases resolved’; and move the count of judicial cases into the workload section rather than treating it as a performance metric.
Armstrong described internal metrics to monitor investigation length (authorization to review-panel determination), time to submit advisory opinions to the commission, abstracts published, and customer feedback for advisory opinions and training. Commissioners asked for both raw numbers and percentages to contextualize work: "percentages are really important," Commissioner Lowry said, and Commissioner Olson suggested providing both numbers and percentages in reporting to avoid misleading impressions from small sample sizes.
The commission voted to direct staff to draft the proposed changes and return with a formal proposal for final approval at the June meeting.
