Table of contents

• Previous Page
• Next Page

• Executive summary
• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1 Purpose of the Evaluation
  • 1.2 Evaluation Scope
• 2. Overview of legislative services
  • 2.1 Background
  • 2.2 Nature of Work
  • 2.3 Overview of the Legislative Process
  • 2.4 Human and Financial Resources
• 3. Evaluation Methodology
  • 3.1 Process Mapping
  • 3.2 Document Review
  • 3.3 Administrative Data Review
  • 3.4 Key Informant Interviews
  • 3.5 Electronic Surveys
  • 3.6 Consideration of GBA Plus and Diversity and Inclusion
  • 3.7 Constraints, Limitations and Mitigation
• 4. Findings
  • 4.1 Relevance
  • 4.2 Design and Delivery of Services
  • 4.3 Effectiveness
  • 4.4 Efficiency
• 5. Conclusions and recommendations
  • 5.1 Conclusions
  • 5.2 Recommendations
• Appendix A: Evaluation Issues and Questions
• Appendix B: Details on Key Informant Interviews

List of Figures

• Figure 1: Legislative Services Branch Structure
• Figure 2: Key Legislative Services Activities
• Figure 3: Number of LSB FTEs, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 4: Number of Finance LSU FTEs, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 5: Number of Recorded Hours, by LSB Groups, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 6: Number of Recorded Hours for Legislative Drafting Work, by the Finance LSU, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 7: Distribution of Recorded Hours, by Level of Risk and Complexity, FY 2021-22
• Figure 8: Percentage of LSB Survey Respondents who Reported an Increase in the Complexity of Demands in which They Have Been Involved Over the Past Five FYs
• Figure 9: Percentage of LSB Survey Respondents who Reported that the Timeframe Allocated to Complete the Drafting Process has Decreased Over the Past Five FYs
• Figure 10: Level of Satisfaction with the Processes in Place at the LSB
• Figure 11: Total Level of FTEs in the LSB, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 12: Satisfaction with the Overall Quality of Legislative and Regulatory Drafting Services (2006 to 2022)
• Figure 13: Satisfaction Ratings for Legislative Drafting Services (2006 to 2022)
• Figure 14: Satisfaction Ratings for Regulatory Drafting Services (2006 to 2022)
• Figure 15: Extent to which LSB Members Consider Themselves to be in a Position to Deliver High-Quality Work
• Figure 16: Total Recorded Hours of Training Received per FTE in LSB, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Figure 17: Statistics on the Justice Laws Website, FY 2021-22

List of Tables

• Table 1: Total LSB and Finance LSU Expenditures, FY 2017-18 to FY 2021-22
• Table 2: Summary of Limitations, Challenges and Mitigations Strategies
• Table 3: Distribution of Key Informants Interviewed

• Previous Page
• Next Page