Public Impact & Accountability Index
This is the public methodology for how NPIRS measures bills, actions, institutions, and lived outcomes. It is intentionally simple enough to explain, structured enough to audit, and disciplined enough to defend.
Master Question
Did this decision improve life for the public, or did it mainly serve narrow interests while public outcomes stayed flat or got worse?
We measure government and public institutions not by promises or rhetoric, but by the actions they take and whether people s lives are actually improving.
0-100
Scores major bills and policy proposals for public benefit, distribution, and long-term value.
0-100
Scores executive actions, agency decisions, enforcement, budgeting, and implementation quality.
0-100
Anchors the system in reality by measuring whether people affected by policy are actually doing better.
Bills, actions, and living standards remain separate score families, then combine into a public impact score for elected officials or an institution impact score for non-elected bodies.
Elected officials
[(Bill Score x 0.35) + (Action Score x 0.25) + (Living Standards Score x 0.40)] x Responsibility Factor
Non-elected institutions
[(Action Score x 0.50) + (Living Standards Score x 0.50)] x Responsibility Factor
Every score must show whether the evidence is high confidence, moderate confidence, or still preliminary. That protects the system from pretending weak inputs are settled fact.
Issues should be tied to districts and jurisdictions through an attribution layer, not forced into a single hard-coded district. Each issue gets one primary jurisdiction, related jurisdictions, responsible entities, and a responsibility factor.
Public input matters for detection, urgency, and pattern recognition, but it cannot dominate final scoring. Verified outcomes and policy analysis still carry most of the weight.