This posting spells out a simple measure of evaluating how well advocates performed at the legislature. It uses 2 indicators: one places a weight or importance factor to a bill and the other reflects whether or not the bill passed or failed. Give it a try.
I use the current status of HOA bills in Arizona as an example. Feel free to adjust the weights as you see fit.
ARIZONA HOA REFORM PERFORMANCE RATING
(as of March 21, 2107)
Performance rating: -0.19 (-3/16)
Rather than a simplistic ‘body count‘ of bills, I prefer an Performance Rating (PR) where weights – values – are assigned to a bill. Values from -2 to 2 are appropriate here, -2 being strongly opposed, 0 being neutral, and 2 strongly in favor. Example: take 4 bills.
Bill 1, value of 1
Bill2, value of 2
Bill3, value of 2
Bill4, value of -2
Total value 3. Divide by number of bills, 4, and PR becomes .75. If bill4 is revalued at -1, then EM becomes 1 (4/4). Take a lopsided case of -2, -2, 1, 0. This produces an PR of -.75, a real bad day at black rock. Interpretation: a number of opposed bills passed. Take another case where several bills are given a neutral value: 2,-1 0, 0 yields an PR of .25. Not good for advocacy efforts.
Weakness lies not in the PR calculation, but in getting a fair assessment of values and not assigning values to make you look good. Of course, values must be assigned beforehand or at time of an amendment.
An important aspect: Passed and failed. The value is result rated (PF) where Pass = 1 and Failed = -1. A For bill passing gets a PF of 1 and if it failed it gets a PF of -1. Similarly, an against bill gets 1 for passing and -1 for failing.
Using 2 factors allows you to assess the importance – value – of the bill and its legislative result, pass/fail. It is a much better measure of how well an advocacy campaign reached its goal of 2.
As you can well appreciate, there is a need for integrity in the rating process. If you overrate the value and the bill fails, you lose big.