Transparency Index: methodology and scoring criteria

Question. Was each response issued inside the period MCL 15.235(2) allows, measured from the documented date of receipt? Timing is measured in business days and reported as a median and as the share meeting the applicable deadline. Timing is measured in business days and reported as a median and as the share meeting the applicable deadline. Timing is measured in business days and reported as a median and as the share meeting the applicable deadline. Timing is measured in business days and reported as a median and as the share meeting the applicable deadline.

Score 80–100

Nearly every request answered inside the statutory period, with receipt and response dates both documented in the packet.

Score 40–59

Mixed record: some responses late or dates that cannot be reconciled from the packet.

Score 0–19

Most responses late, or no response to a request that was received.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(1); MCL 15.235(2)

Not penalized or credited

Speed alone. A fast response that omits required content is scored under A3 and Categories B and E; it earns nothing extra here.

Question. When the office took the single extension MCL 15.235(2) permits, was it used once, by written notice, with a stated reason and a response date?

Score 80–100

Extension used once, notice issued inside the original period, reason stated and a date given.

Score 40–59

Extension used but notice incomplete (reason or date missing or illegible).

Score 0–19

Extension used without notice, used more than once, or the stated date was missed.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 2 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(2)

Not penalized or credited

Requests answered without an extension are not evidence for this indicator; mark it not_applicable only with a documented rationale.

Question. Does each response contain what MCL 15.235(5) requires: the basis for any exemption, a certificate of nonexistence where applicable, a description of separated material, and notice of the right to appeal?

Score 80–100

Every element that applies is present and specific.

Score 40–59

Some elements present, others generic or blank.

Score 0–19

Required elements routinely absent.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(5)(a); MCL 15.235(5)(b); MCL 15.235(5)(c); MCL 15.235(5)(d)

Question. Where fees were quoted or a deposit demanded, was the itemization in the form MCL 15.234 requires, and were deposit rules observed? Itemization is also read for stated labor hours and rates, a per-task split, and the deposit percentage. Itemization is also read for stated labor hours and rates, a per-task split, and the deposit percentage. Itemization is also read for stated labor hours and rates, a per-task split, and the deposit percentage. Itemization is also read for stated labor hours and rates, a per-task split, and the deposit percentage.

Score 80–100

Itemization states hourly wage and hours, fees and any deposit are consistent with MCL 15.234, and the requester could check the arithmetic.

Score 40–59

Itemization present but incomplete, or the basis for part of the fee is unclear.

Score 0–19

No usable itemization, or a deposit or fee demanded without the statutory basis.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(2); MCL 15.234(4); MCL 15.234(8); MCL 15.234(13); MCL 15.234(14)

Not penalized or credited

A quoted fee is not itself a transparency failure. A fee is scored on how it was itemized and justified, and a $0 fee is not evidence of good practice if the response is otherwise deficient.

Question. How quickly after receipt was a fee estimate issued, and how long did the deposit-to-production stage take where it occurred?

Score 80–100

Estimates were issued promptly and within the statutory response window, and any deposit-to-production interval is documented and reasonable.

Score 40–59

Estimates were issued, but timing is inconsistent or the deposit-to-production stage is undocumented.

Score 0–19

No estimate was issued where one was required, or the timeline cannot be reconstructed from the record.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(1); MCL 15.234(8); MCL 15.234(14)

Not penalized or credited

A fast estimate is not by itself a transparency success; it is scored together with accuracy and itemization. An unknown deposit-to-production date is not scored as a delay.

Question. Did the response identify the request's disposition, state any outstanding action, request clarification where needed, and explain any revised estimate?

Score 80–100

Every response states the disposition, any outstanding action and the next step, and any clarification or revised estimate is explained.

Score 40–59

Dispositions are usually stated, but outstanding actions or revised estimates are sometimes left unexplained.

Score 0–19

Responses do not state a disposition or next step, or the requester is left without notice of what remains outstanding.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(1); MCL 15.235(2); MCL 15.235(5)

Not penalized or credited

An unanswered request is not classified as a denial without evidence. A request that needed no clarification is not faulted for lacking one.

Question. Compared line by line with the request, how much of what was requested was actually produced? Production is classified as full, partial or none, and record types supplied and not supplied are counted. Production is classified as full, partial or none, and record types supplied and not supplied are counted. Production is classified as full, partial or none, and record types supplied and not supplied are counted. Production is classified as full, partial or none, and record types supplied and not supplied are counted.

Score 80–100

Everything requested that exists was produced, or each omission is identified and explained.

Score 40–59

A substantial part produced; remaining parts neither produced nor explained.

Score 0–19

Little or none of what was requested produced, without explanation.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

A denial is not automatically a failure here: where a record is exempt or does not exist, the question is whether the response said so.

Question. Are the produced records legible, complete pages, and in a form a member of the public can use? Usability includes machine-readable and searchable formats and original electronic files where appropriate. Usability includes machine-readable and searchable formats and original electronic files where appropriate. Usability includes machine-readable and searchable formats and original electronic files where appropriate. Usability includes machine-readable and searchable formats and original electronic files where appropriate.

Score 80–100

Legible, complete, and in the format requested or a usable equivalent.

Score 40–59

Usable with effort: poor scans, missing pages, or an unrequested format.

Score 0–19

Illegible, truncated, or unusable.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Question. Did the office separate exempt from nonexempt material and release the rest (MCL 15.244), and do the redactions match the exemption cited?

Score 80–100

Redactions are limited to material the exemption reaches, and the response says what was removed and why.

Score 40–59

Redactions broadly consistent with the exemption but some are unexplained or appear wider than the exemption.

Score 0–19

Whole records withheld where only parts were exempt, or redactions with no stated basis.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.243(1)(a); MCL 15.244

Not penalized or credited

Redaction of private identifiers under MCL 15.243(1)(a) is not penalized: that exemption is discretionary and often properly applied.

Question. Does the production hang together? Are there omissions, contradictions or unexplained differences between what was produced and what the office itself has said elsewhere?

Score 80–100

No unexplained gaps; the production is consistent with the response letter and with the office's own statements.

Score 40–59

One or more gaps or inconsistencies that the record neither explains nor rules out.

Score 0–19

Material omissions or contradictions that the record shows and the office never addressed.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

A gap is scored only where the record documents it. Suspicion that something is missing is an unresolved question, not a finding.

Question. Did the office explain the scope of its search and identify what, if anything, was withheld?

Score 80–100

The search scope, systems or categories searched, and any withheld material are identified clearly enough to assess the response.

Score 40–59

Some of the search scope or withheld material is identified; parts are asserted without detail.

Score 0–19

Neither the search nor the withheld material is described, so the response cannot be assessed.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.233(4); MCL 15.235(5)

Not penalized or credited

A lawful withholding is not penalized; only the explanation and identification are scored.

Question. When asked for statistics or counts, did the office provide data it already maintains or can already generate?

Score 80–100

Existing reports, exports or counts provided, or their absence clearly and specifically explained.

Score 40–59

Some existing data provided; the rest unexplained.

Score 0–19

Existing data refused or described as nonexistent with no verifiable basis.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.233(4); MCL 15.233(5)

Not penalized or credited

MCL 15.233(4) and (5) do not require the office to compile a summary or create a new record. A refusal to compile is not scored as a failure; the question is whether existing data was released and whether the office explained the limit it relied on.

Question. Where the office quoted a fee for data, was the cost proportionate to the work described and checkable by the requester? Cost is also read as a relative burden against comparable requests and, where counts exist, per record or page. Cost is also read as a relative burden against comparable requests and, where counts exist, per record or page. Cost is also read as a relative burden against comparable requests and, where counts exist, per record or page. Cost is also read as a relative burden against comparable requests and, where counts exist, per record or page.

Score 80–100

Existing data supplied at no or nominal cost, or any fee tied to documented work that is itemized.

Score 40–59

A fee that is itemized but whose scope is hard to reconcile with the data requested.

Score 0–19

A fee that operates as a barrier and is not tied to documented work.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(2)

Question. When the office certified that a record does not exist, was the basis explained, the search described, and the position consistent across similar requests?

Score 80–100

Certificate states what was searched and why nothing responsive exists; consistent with other responses.

Score 40–59

Certificate given with no description of the search.

Score 0–19

Certificate contradicted by records the office itself later produced, with no explanation.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(5)(b)

Not penalized or credited

A certificate of nonexistence is lawful where true. This indicator scores how it was supported and whether it held up, not the fact of the certificate.

Question. How clearly does the record explain what exists from before, during and after the June 2024 move to ProsecutorByKarpel, and how to find it?

Score 80–100

The office documents what historical records exist and where, whether and how records were migrated, what reports or exports can be run, and the search it performed, and it applies one consistent explanation across requests.

Score 40–59

Some of these are documented; others are asserted without support or explained inconsistently across requests.

Score 0–19

Records are described as unavailable or nonexistent with no explanation of the transition, the search or any alternative source.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

The exact implementation date is not established in the record and is never assumed. Requests whose subject period is before the June 2024 go-live are not faulted for lacking system-generated reports; they are split at that date. Records are not assumed destroyed, migrated or accessible, and software capabilities are not assumed. Each is credited only on verified evidence.

Question. Is verifiable documentation (contracts, manuals, vendor material) available showing what the case-management system can report?

Score 80–100

Capability documented in records the office released or in vendor documentation that was verified.

Score 40–59

Partial documentation; capability claimed on one side but not verified.

Score 0–19

No documentation; capability asserted by either side without support.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 1 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 1 distinct FOIA request(s). Only one system contract has been obtained, so this indicator is scored on that single reviewed document; the limit is recorded in the assessment note.

Not penalized or credited

Software capability is never assumed. Only documented or verified capability counts.

Question. Does the record show that existing reports, exports or structured data can be produced from the office's systems?

Score 80–100

The record documents existing reports or exports, structured data, and the search and retrieval capability to produce them.

Score 40–59

Capability is documented in a contract or system description, but not shown in a produced report or export.

Score 0–19

No documentation of reporting, export or structured-data capability exists in the record.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 1 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 1 distinct FOIA request(s). A contract proves capability was purchased, not that it was used. The distinction is recorded in the evidence note.

Not penalized or credited

A purchased capability is not treated as proof that a report was actually produced. Capability is never assumed from the vendor's marketing.

Question. Where records were unavailable, did the office explain whether they were not retained, not retrievable, or available elsewhere?

Score 80–100

The office distinguishes unavailable from not-retained records, explains technical limits, and identifies alternative sources.

Score 40–59

Some limitations or alternatives are explained; others are asserted without support.

Score 0–19

Records are described as unavailable with no explanation and no alternative source.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.233(4); MCL 15.233(5)

Not penalized or credited

A nonexistence certification is not itself a failure; the explanation and alternatives are what is scored.

Question. Does the office publish case statistics or annual reports where the public can find them?

Score 80–100

Regular, dated, findable statistics or reports.

Score 40–59

Occasional or hard-to-find publications.

Score 0–19

No published statistics located after a documented search.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 1 reviewed record(s). Based on a dated review of the prosecutor's public page, which is the office's own publication channel.

Not penalized or credited

Absence is scored only after a dated, documented search of the office's and the county's public sites. An unsearched site is unassessed, not zero.

Question. Are the FOIA procedures, request form and fee policy posted and current? Published procedures are also read for fee-waiver and indigency instructions. Published procedures are also read for fee-waiver and indigency instructions. Published procedures are also read for fee-waiver and indigency instructions. Published procedures are also read for fee-waiver and indigency instructions.

Score 80–100

Procedures, forms and fee policy posted, current and easy to find.

Score 40–59

Posted but incomplete or out of date.

Score 0–19

Not posted after a documented search.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), from a dated search of public sources. At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Question. Are categories of records that are requested repeatedly released without a request?

Score 80–100

Frequently requested categories are published.

Score 40–59

Some are published.

Score 0–19

None are published although the same records are repeatedly requested and released.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Question. Does the office publish what systems it uses, how long records are kept, and what data fields exist?

Score 80–100

System, retention schedule and data fields are publicly described.

Score 40–59

Partial description.

Score 0–19

Nothing published.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), from a dated search of public sources. At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Question. Does the office publish machine-readable datasets, historical reports or an organized, dated public document archive?

Score 80–100

Machine-readable datasets, historical reports and a dated, described, downloadable archive are published and reachable.

Score 40–59

Some reports or documents are published, but they are not machine-readable or not organized as an archive.

Score 0–19

No machine-readable dataset, historical report or organized archive is published.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 1 reviewed record(s). Based on a dated review of the public site.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(5)

Not penalized or credited

A document is not counted as published merely because it exists; it must be reachable and described.

Question. Where a request sought information already public, did the published material actually answer it?

Score 80–100

Requests for already-public information were answered by pointing to published material that fully answered them.

Score 40–59

Some requests overlapped published material, but the published material only partly answered them.

Score 0–19

Requests for already-public information were treated as new work without checking the published material.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). Requires verifying that the published material answered the request, not merely that it existed.

Not penalized or credited

A request is not assumed unnecessary because related information appeared on a website.

Question. Does each denial or partial denial name the specific statutory exemption relied on?

Score 80–100

Each denial cites a specific provision.

Score 40–59

Some cite a provision; others give a general reason only.

Score 0–19

Denials give no statutory basis.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(5)(a); MCL 15.243(1)(a)

Question. Does the office explain why the exemption fits the record withheld, and does the explanation fit what was released?

Score 80–100

Explanation is specific to the material and consistent with the release.

Score 40–59

Explanation is generic or fits only part of what was withheld.

Score 0–19

No explanation, or an explanation contradicted by the office's own release.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

Whether the withholding was lawful is a legal question the index does not decide. The score reflects whether the justification is stated and coherent.

Question. Is the Notice of Denial complete: reason box, statutory subsection, description of separated material, and boxes that agree with the letter?

Score 80–100

Every field that applies is completed and agrees with the letter.

Score 40–59

Some fields blank or inconsistent with the letter.

Score 0–19

Form blank, contradictory, or absent where a denial was issued.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.235(5)

Question. Was the right of appeal explained, and when an appeal was decided, was it handled as MCL 15.240 contemplates?

Score 80–100

Appeal rights explained accurately; any appeal decided with reasons and within the periods MCL 15.240 sets, allowing for the rule that a board is not deemed to receive an appeal until its next regular meeting.

Score 40–59

Appeal rights explained but an appeal decision gave limited reasons or its timing is unclear.

Score 0–19

Appeal rights omitted, or an appeal decided without reasons or outside the statutory periods.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 1 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.240(1)(a); MCL 15.240(2); MCL 15.240(3); MCL 15.240a

Not penalized or credited

Where an appeal was filed but its record has not been located, the status is N/A. Absence of an appeal record is not evidence that no appeal exists and is not scored as a failure.

Question. Are similar requests treated alike, or is the same kind of record certified nonexistent in one response and produced in another? Consistency includes whether nonexistence claims agree with other evidence in the record. Consistency includes whether nonexistence claims agree with other evidence in the record. Consistency includes whether nonexistence claims agree with other evidence in the record. Consistency includes whether nonexistence claims agree with other evidence in the record.

Score 80–100

Similar requests receive consistent answers, or differences are explained.

Score 40–59

Occasional unexplained differences.

Score 0–19

Repeated unexplained reversals on the same kind of record.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

Different outcomes can be lawful where facts differ. The score reflects whether the difference is explained.

Question. What share of requests were denied or partly denied, and did the office show that nonexempt portions were considered for release?

Score 80–100

Denial rates are documented and each denial shows that nonexempt portions were considered and released where possible.

Score 40–59

Denial rates can be computed, but nonexempt-portion consideration is not documented.

Score 0–19

Denials are recorded without any indication that nonexempt portions were considered.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.244; MCL 15.243(1)

Not penalized or credited

A high denial rate is not itself misconduct; it is a descriptive measure.

Question. Were fee challenges documented separately from access appeals, and did any appeal change the fee or the disclosure outcome?

Score 80–100

Fee challenges and access appeals are documented separately, with outcomes and any resulting change explained.

Score 40–59

Appeals are documented, but fee challenges are not separated from access appeals or outcomes are incomplete.

Score 0–19

No appeal or fee-challenge outcome is documented where one was filed.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 1 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 1 distinct FOIA request(s). An upheld denial is not proof of misconduct and a reversal is not proof of wrongdoing.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.240; MCL 15.240a

Not penalized or credited

The absence of a fee challenge is not scored as a failure; only documented outcomes are scored.

Question. Are response letters clear, internally consistent and accurate about what they enclose?

Score 80–100

Letters are clear and accurate; enclosures match what the letter says.

Score 40–59

Occasional errors or ambiguities.

Score 0–19

Letters are contradictory or misdescribe what was enclosed.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

Typographical errors alone are not scored.

Question. Is a named contact given and does the office engage when a request needs clarification?

Score 80–100

Named contact, working channel, and documented clarification where needed.

Score 40–59

Contact given but no documented engagement.

Score 0–19

No contact and no engagement.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 2 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Question. Do the office's statements to the press and public square with what its own records and responses show?

Score 80–100

Public statements are consistent with the records.

Score 40–59

Some statements cannot be reconciled with the records.

Score 0–19

Public statements are contradicted by the office's own records.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 2 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

A press statement is an official statement, not a documented fact. It is weighed against the record, not assumed true or false.

Question. When an error or inconsistency is identified, does the office correct or explain it?

Score 80–100

Errors are corrected or explained in writing.

Score 40–59

Errors acknowledged informally or partially.

Score 0–19

Documented errors are neither corrected nor explained.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 1 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement; analysis, inference and unresolved questions cannot establish sufficiency alone.

Not penalized or credited

Unassessed unless an identified error and the office's response to it are both documented.

Question. Did the office explain its costs, waiver and appeal options, less-costly alternatives, and ways to narrow the request?

Score 80–100

Costs are explained clearly, waiver and appeal options are stated, and less-costly alternatives or narrowing options are offered.

Score 40–59

Some cost explanation is given, but waiver, appeal, alternatives or narrowing options are missing.

Score 0–19

Costs are stated without explanation and no waiver, appeal, alternative or narrowing option is communicated.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 3 reviewed record(s), drawn from at least 3 distinct FOIA request(s). At least one cited record must be a documented fact or an official statement.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(2); MCL 15.234(4); MCL 15.240

Not penalized or credited

A waiver that was not requested is not scored as a failure to offer one.

Question. Are clear public FOIA instructions, contacts and fee procedures published and easy to find?

Score 80–100

Clear instructions, contacts, forms and fee procedures are published together and are easy to find.

Score 40–59

Instructions and contacts exist, but fee procedures or forms are hard to find or incomplete.

Score 0–19

No usable public FOIA instructions are published.

Between anchors

Scores between the anchors (20-39 and 60-79) are interpolated by the reviewer and the reasoning is written into the evidence record.

Evidence needed

At least 2 reviewed record(s). Based on a dated review of the public site.

Statutory reference

MCL 15.234(4); MCL 15.234(5)

Not penalized or credited

A published procedure is credited only if it is reachable and current enough to use.