BUDGETING AND PERFORMANCE:
Improving Reporting and Links to the Budget
Performance Budgeting
• Performance budgeting: Linking resources to
performance; using prior outcomes to inform future
resource allocation
• Budget organized according to priorities, services and
outcomes that matter most to citizens
• Allows policy makers to:
–
–
–
–
Assess the cost-effectiveness of programs
Identify wasteful spending
Justify budget decisions based on results
Prioritize funding to achieve critical performance goals
• Relies on good data focused on outcome, efficiency
and citizen satisfaction measures
2
CBC 2006 Report Found MMR Did Not Provide Solid
Basis For Managing or Budgeting for Performance
• The information available in the Mayor’s
Management Report was inadequate:
– Agencies focused heavily on reporting outputs rather
than outcomes;
– Few efficiency measures were provided, with only half
reporting any unit-cost or productivity indicators;
– With no benchmarks, citizens could not compare the
quality of services provided to other places;
– Citizen satisfaction was not adequately captured;
• The information was not used to guide spending
decisions; misalignment between MMR & budget
3
Improvements in Quality of Performance
Measurement Since 2006
• Citywide citizen satisfaction survey conducted
in 2008
• Budget Function Analysis provided for some
agencies
• Substantial overhaul of MMR in 2012-2013
• New online tools launched, including
interactive MMR website, Citywide
Performance Reporting Dashboard, OpenData
Initiative, Big Apps
4
MMR Overhaul Led to More Outcome Reporting
Agencies That Didn’t Have Outcomes, Do; Those That Did, Have More
FIRE DEPARTMENT
2006
2013
Protect the lives and property of
the public from fire hazards and Service 1: Protect lives and property from fire
other emergency conditions.
hazards and other emergency conditions.
Goal 1c: Minimize damage to persons and
property.
Serious fires per 1,000 structural fires
Serious fires reaching second alarm or higher (%)
Civilian fire fatalities
Civilian fire fatalities
Civilian fire fatalities per 100,000 people
Firefighter burns
Firefighter burns (in quarters)
Firefighter burns (sustained outside quarters)
Firefighter injuries
Fire Department reported 55 total indicators in 2013 compared to 26 in 2006,
including 9 outcome measures compared to 1 in 2006.
5
Efficiency Measures Were Rarely Reported;
Unit Cost Measurement Continues to Lag
• Efficiency indicators provide a means to examine costeffectiveness and productivity, and can provide
benchmarks for comparison
• In 2006, 20 agencies reported no efficiency measures;
of these, only CUNY reported any in 2013
• The Office of Operations reviewed agency procedures
for calculating and reporting unit costs and found no
standard unit cost calculation methods among or
within agencies
• 31 agencies reported no unit costs in 2013
• 10 agencies reported fewer unit costs in 2013 than in
2006
6
MMR Continues to Have Few Examples of
Performance Comparisons
• Lack of unit cost measures one reason New
Yorkers cannot compare the caliber of services
to other places
• Few comparisons of outcomes to other cities:
– Crime rate compared to other 10 largest US cities
– Air quality compared other 7 largest US cities
7
Agency Improvements in Measuring Citizen Satisfaction;
MMR Improvements in Citywide Focus
• New sections added to the MMR:
– Agencies Working Together - Section on special citywide initiatives
that cross agencies, ex. PlaNYC, Young Men’s Initiative, Poverty,
Resiliency following Hurricane Sandy, etc.
– How is New York City Government Doing? Executive summary that
highlights critical indicators
• One-time Citywide citizen satisfaction survey conducted in 2008
– More than 130,000 randomly selected to participate
– Surveyed citizen perceptions about quality of life, access to
government services, public safety, education, etc.
• Ten agencies now conduct surveys and report citizen satisfaction
indicators in the MMR
8
Next Steps for Additional Improvements
in Performance Measurement
• More can be done to improve outcome reporting;
9 agencies still do not report outcomes
• Standardize methodology for calculating unit
costs; Comptroller should have a role
• Benchmark performance; Join ICMA Center for
Performance Measurement or develop cohort of
comparable cities for select services
• Conduct Citywide Citizen Survey biennially;
agencies should collect additional satisfaction
measures
9
Budget Presentation Has Not Evolved
in Tandem with MMR
• Big improvements to quality of data in MMR have
created momentum and provide opportunity for
changes to how NYC presents its budget
• MMR performance data and budget
responsibilities are divided between two distinct
offices – OMB and Operations
• The MMR has evolved separately with a greater
focus on organizing performance indicators
around agency goals and programs
• The budget has undergone few changes in
presentation or form
10
The Budget Does Not Align With Program Performance;
Units of Appropriation Are Broad and Vague
• Budget organized by agency and units of
appropriation, approved by the City Council
• The City Charter intended units of appropriation
to relate to the main programmatic activities and
goals of each agency
• In many cases, units of appropriation are broad
and vague; preserves executive authority to
transfer funds, but too large to assess spending
• Misalignment with MMR goals and targets; not
accompanied with agency performance metrics
11
BFA Represents an Important Step Forward to
Align Budget With Performance
• Budget Function Analysis (BFA) produced since
2008 for some agencies
– Presents agency resources, including spending and
headcount, according to the key programs or services
provided by each agency
– Began with Administration for Children’s Services and
Small Business Services; expanded to include 15
agencies (36% of agency spending in fiscal year 2014)
– Provides a five-year retrospective, rather than a
forward look at resources allocations projected for the
financial plan
12
Administration for Children’s Services:
Budgetary U of A’s
Units of Appropriation
001 Personal Services
002 Other than Personal Services
003 Head Start/Day Care - PS
004 Head Start/Day Care - OTPS
005 Administrative - PS
006 Child Welfare - OTPS
007 Juvenile Justice - PS
008 Juvenile Justice - OTPS
Total
FY2014 % of Agency
($ millions)
Spending Headcount
$282
$72
$19
$971
$71
$1,180
$39
$149
10%
3%
1%
35%
3%
42%
1%
5%
4,495
0
324
0
1,066
0
681
0
$2,783
100%
6,566
13
Administration for Children’s Services:
Budget Function Analysis
Budget Function
Adoption Services
Alternatives To Detention
Child Care Services
Child Welfare Support
Dept. of Ed. Residential Care
Foster Care Services
Foster Care Support
General Administration
Head Start
Juvenile Justice Support
Non-Secure Detention
Placements
Preventive Homemaking Services
Preventive Services
Protective Services
Secure Detention
Total (millions)
FY2014
$321
$1
$821
$47
$96
$509
$46
$133
$169
$12
$18
$127
$18
$215
$225
$26
$2,783
%
12%
0.04%
30%
2%
3%
18%
2%
5%
6%
0.4%
1%
5%
1%
8%
8%
1%
100%
Headcount
26
0
324
680
0
0
625
917
0
69
55
0
0
161
3,208
501
6,566
14
While NYC Does not Report Performance
Measures in its Budget, Most Large US cities Do
City
Austin
Baltimore
Boston
Charlotte
Chicago
Columbus
Dallas
Denver
Detroit
El Paso
Fort Worth
Houston
Indianapolis
Jacksonville
Las Vegas
Performance
Measures in Budget
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
City
Louisville
Memphis
Milwaukee
Nashville-Davidson
New York City
Oklahoma City
Philadelphia
Phoenix
Portland
San Antonio
San Diego
San Francisco
San Jose
Seattle
Washington, DC
Performance
Measures in Budget
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Source: Ho and Ni, “Have Cities Shifted to Outcome-Oriented Reporting?,” Public Budgeting & Finance, Summer 2005; CBC. 15
Baltimore’s Budget is Citizen Friendly;
Spending is Reported Based on Priority Outcomes
Source: City of Baltimore, Bureau of the
Budget and Management Research,
http://bbmr.baltimorecity.gov/
16
Baltimore: Priorities Accompanied by
Specific Goals
17
Baltimore: Performance Indicators Reported
Directly In Budget by Service Area
18
Recommendations
• Adopt a citizen-friendly presentation that
focuses on key priorities and citywide
objectives; build on Budget Function Analysis
• Revise units of appropriation to more closely
match agency service areas
• Include agency performance metrics directly
in budget presentation
• Requires cooperation between Mayor, OMB,
Council
19
For More Information
• This presentation was given by Maria Doulis, CBC’s Director of
New York City Studies, at “The Measured City: Using Data to
Improve New York City Government” Conference, Oct. 30, 2013
• For more information on performance measurement and
budgeting in New York City, please refer to these resources:
– NYC Office of Management & Budget, http://www.nyc.gov/html/omb
– NYC Mayor’s Office of Operations, http://www.nyc.gov/html/ops
– Citizens Budget Commission, “Giving Taxpayers More Bang for the Buck:
Managing for Results in New York City Government,” November 30, 2006,
http://www.cbcny.org/sites/default/files/report_management_11302006.
pdf
– Citizens Budget Commission, Testimony Before the New York City Council
Government Operations and Finance Committees, November 14, 2011,
http://www.cbcny.org/sites/default/files/TESTIMONY_11142011.pdf
20