NASO conducted a survey of 2,500 NASO members, 700 of which responded.  The intent of the survey was to obtain officials views concerning the various issues that surface in a discussion of accountability in officiating.

#1 Which of the following best describes your view?

43%- Officials owe a lot more the game than the game owes to officials

41%- Officials owe as much to the game as the game owes to official

12%-Officials owe a little more to the game than the game owes to officials

2%- The game owes a lot more to officials than the officials owe to the game

2%- The game owes a little more to officials than the officials owe to the game

#2 Should officials be expected to adhere to higher standards of ethical and moral conduct than the general public?

            85%- Yes

            15%- No

#3 Should officials associations implement a code of conduct for member officials?

            91%- Yes

            7%- Maybe

            2%- No

#4 Who should be primarily responsible for implementing some form of covenant with sports officials?

37%- State of regional governing organizations  (MSHSAA)

24%- Local officiating organizations

18%- National governing organizations              (NFHS, NCAA)

17%- Individual leagues or conferences

3%- National officiating organizations                (NASO)

1%- Covenants are not necessary

#5 Should organizations or individuals that assign, evaluate or require the use of officials have some form of a covenant in place?

            81%- Yes

            16%- Maybe

            3%- No

#6 Responsibilities the institutions governing officiating have to officials.

(Rate each action on a scale of 1 through 5 in terms of importance and priority for action 1 = high importance and a high priority, 5 = low importance and low priority.)

1.54- Supporting officials in controversial situations

1.62- Providing effective officiating training opportunities

1.63- Providing timely information concerning venue/time changes, cancellations, ect...

1.79- Giving performance evaluation feedback to officials

1.95- Establishing safe and private locker rooms for officials

1.95- Providing better game site management support

2.03- Establishing fair game fee structure

2.11- Ensuring adequate representation for officials in league/conference matters

2.41- Making sure that training and administrative requirements are not excessive

2.45- Making mandatory-meeting sites conveniently located

2.45- Recognizing officials for their achievements

2.65- Getting input from officials organizations on game assignments

2.83- Establishing affordable and consistent uniform requirements

2.84- Giving officials consistent access to amenities such as towels, beverages, etc. at game sites