Indicators and evidence collection

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

Today we will learn to select an indicator with clear meaning and limits. Throughout the video, consider the difference between knowing a rule and applying it to a decision. We will work through an example, identify a possible failure and develop a response that can be used at work. Monitoring checks implementation and results. The reporting model is recommended unless a specific legal obligation is identified. A general prevention report rarely requires the entire identifiable case database. Conclusions must match the period, sample and work performed.

Indicators should answer an operational question. Report counts can reflect trust, awareness or underlying wrongdoing and are not unambiguous. Collection should be proportionate and aggregated where possible.

Apply the following rule: Section 10(3) prescribes three years and refers to feedback under section 11(4), while final-outcome feedback now appears in section 11(6). Do not conceal the cross-reference issue or automatically replace it with receipt. Document the legally confirmed starting event before automating deletion. Government Regulation 12 of 2 February 2026 covers the report, collected material and media, review of oral-report minutes and destruction under a procedure approved by the organisation’s head.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Define numerator, denominator and source. Explain meaning and limits. Check data quality and small-group identification. Use other evidence where one number is insufficient. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

Acknowledgement timeliness is calculated only from closed cases, excluding late open ones. Revised calculation includes the relevant population. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Why must the calculation method be visible? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

Identical labels may hide different populations. Defined calculations permit checking and prevent a misleading appearance of improvement.

One mistake to avoid is: presenting an unsuitable sample as the whole channel.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The system deletes every case five years after receipt. Is that correct for Estonia?

No. The three-year period in section 10(3) references feedback rather than automatically receipt. The current cross-reference issue needs a documented legal resolution. Apply Regulation 12 and privacy rules to related material and copies. Do not keep everything indefinitely without grounds.