Training Session Sponsored by the
Association of Government Accountants
A Systems Approach to Implementing
Performance-Based Management and
Budgeting
Audio Conference
March 21, 2012
1
Today’s Presenters
Stephen L. Morgan, President, EGAPP,
Inc., and former Austin City Auditor can
be reached at egappmorgan@yahoo.com
Sam McCall, City Auditor, Tallahassee,
Florida and former Deputy State Auditor
of Florida, can be reached at
Sam.McCall@talgov.com
2
A Systems Approach to Performance
Based Management and Budgeting
Introduction – Performance
Accountability System
II. Historical Overview – Where We Have
Been in Austin and Beyond
III. Performance Planning
IV. Performance Budgeting
V. Performance Measurement and Reporting
VI. Performance-Based Decision Making
VII. Conclusion – What We Have Learned
and Where We Are Going
I.
3
I. 1. Introduction: Government
Performance Accountability System
PLAN
Strategic & Annual
Planning
DO
ACT
Performance-Based
Decision Making
Performance
Budgeting
CHECK
Performance
Measurement & Reporting
4
I. 2. Managing for Results Framework
City of Austin
PERFORMANCE-BASED
DECISION-MAKING
BUSINESS
PLANNING
• Citizens
• Program/Activity Objectives
• Council
• Organizational and
Individual Performance
Measures
• Managers
• Employees
• Individual SSPR
Evaluations
• Structural Alignment
• Performance Targets
• Accounting System
• Organizational
Performance Assessment
• Performance and
Measurement Audits
PERFORMANCE
MEASUREMENT &
REPORTING
PERFORMANCE
BUDGETING
5
I. 3. Characteristics of a Successful
System
 Use existing data whenever possible
 Find a balance between too few and too
many measures
 Audit the data regularly
 Modify measures when necessary
 Centrally located staff to analyze data and
coordinate the system elements
 Technological infrastructure to support the
system
6
I. 3. Characteristics of a Successful
System (continued)
 Data forms should have space for
explanatory information and detail
 Tie measures to budgetary allocation and
reward system
 Support of top management
 Over the long run should affect bottom line
performance of the organization
 Citizens will be better informed and more
participative
7
II. 1. Where We’ve Been (in the
City of Austin) …
 1992 – Council Resolution on Performance
Measurement and Reporting
 1994 – First Performance Measurement &
Reporting System Audit
 1996 – Second Performance Measurement
and Reporting System Audit; Program
Budgeting implemented
 1998 – Third Performance Measurement
and Reporting System Audit
8
II. 2. Where We’ve Been…
 1998 Corporate Managing for Results Initiative
Defined
• Simplify our System
• Clarify the Information We Provide
• Develop Measures that are Meaningful to our
Employees
• Focus on Cost
 1999 Corporate Partnership Implements CMO
Initiative
•
•
•
•
Developed a Standard manual--The Resource Guide
Trained over 200 managers
Developed a Single Accounting System
Identified Key Performance Measures for Executive
SSPRs
• Corporate Review Team
9
II. 3. Where We’ve Been…
 2002 Fourth Audit of the Performance
Management System
•
•
•
•
Ongoing Integrated System
Information Used for Operational Management
Measures Are Relevant and Reliable
Budgets Are More Data and Results Driven
 2003-2008 Continuous Improvement
• Managers and Supervisors Fully Trained
• Performance Measures Supported by More Robust
Technology
• Improvements Made to City’s Website and
Stakeholder Access to Performance Information
• Citizen and Employee Surveys Provide Data for
Selected Performance Measures
10
II. 3. Where We Are Now…
 2008-Current
• Website Robust with Capacity to “Drill Down” and
Search” through Performance Measures Database
• “Managing for Results” Used as Business Planning
and Performance Monitoring Model for More than a
Decade--Now Part of City Culture
• Performance Report on Website tracks 115 Key
Departmental Measures, of these 21 are Designated
Citywide Key or “Dashboard” Measures
• Performance Comparisons Presented in Graphics
with Goal/Targets and Measures Tracked Over Five
Years
• Performance Report for 2009-2010 Received
“Certificate of Excellence” from ICMA in October 2010
• Annual Citizen Surveys Strengthened to Include
Focus Groups and Presentations to City Council
• “Best Practice Citizen Centric” External Performance
11
Accountability Report Is Needed
II. 4. Beyond Austin Federal Government
Performance Management Continues to Evolve
 Government Performance and Results Act of 1993
 Executive Order 13450-Improving Government Program
Performance, Nov 13, 2007
 OMB 10-24: Performance Improvement Guidance
under GPRA for 2011-2012
 Government Performance and Results Act
Modernization of 2010 (signed Jan. 4, 2011)
II. 4. Federal Agencies with Well Developed
Performance Management Systems





Social Security Administration
Department of Interior
Government Accountability Office
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Office of Personnel Management
13
Some Local, State, & Provincial Governments Have
Established Performance Management Mandates
State and Local Governments With Well
Developed Performance Management
 States of Florida, Washington, Texas, Missouri, and
Oregon (may have been recognized for individual State
departments who are mature and excel in developing
and applying performance management systems)
 Local governments include Austin, King County,
Phoenix, Bellevue, Charlotte, Portland, Palo Alto, and
Tallahassee
 Auditors have played key roles in many performance
measurement and management initiatives
III. Performance Planning
III. 1. Establishing programs, activities,
and potential performance
expectations
III. 2. Developing annual
business/performance plans with
performance expectations and
measures
III. 3. Reviewing business/performance
plans to support improvement
and accountability
16
III.1. Service Delivery System (Program
Model)
Input
Other Contributing
Factors
Process
Output
Intermediate
Outcome
Long-term
Outcome
Community
Impact
III. 1. Service Delivery System
Cause/Effect Relationships
Inputs
Processes
Outputs
Service
Accomplishments
Service Efforts
Financial Inputs/Outputs
Outputs/Physical Inputs
Inputs/Outcomes
Outcomes
=
=
=
Unit Cost
Productivity
Cost Benefit and Cost
Effectiveness
18
Government Performance Expectations
MISSION PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES/GOALS
INPUT
Economy &
Sufficiency
PROCESS
Efficiency
OUTPUT
Effectiveness
OUTCOM
E Effectiveness
• Financial:
Amount, timing
• Productivity
• Quantity
• Unit Costs
• Quality:
Products,
delivery
• Mission &
Outcome Goal
Achievement
• Physical:
Quantity,
quality, timing,
price
• Capacity
demand
vs.
• Operating
ratios
• Timeliness
• Price or cost
19
• Financial
Viability
• Cost-Benefit
• CostEffectiveness
III. 1. Service Delivery System:
Auditing Program
Audit Program or Activity
Inputs
•
•
•
•
Processes
Staff
• Audit ProcessFunding
(Survey,
Equipment
fieldwork, &
Facilities/Rent
reporting)
Outputs
• Reports
• Briefings
• Presentations
Outcomes
• Qualitative –
Policy/system/
management
improvements
• Quantitative –
Cost savings/
revenue
enhancement
• Preventive –
Deterrence/
detection 20
III. 1. Program/Activity Mapping Template
Inputs
21
Process
Outputs (Services
Delivered)
Outcomes
(Results)
III. 1. Austin’s Definition of
Programs
Activity = Input
Process
Output Outcome
Program = group of activities with a common
purpose
Example: Audit Program consists of four activities:
Performance Audits
Investigations
Consulting and Assistance
Quick Response
22
III. 2. Overview of the Development of Business Plans
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Common Purpose
= Activity A

Activity
Objective
Common Purpose
= Activity B

Activity
Objective
Common Purpose
= Activity C

Activity
Objective
Performance Measures
Result
Output
Efficiency
Demand
Key Result A
Performance
Measure
Environmental
Scan
Common Purpose
= Program
 Program
Performance Measures
Result
Output
Efficiency
Demand
Performance Measures
Result
Output
Efficiency
Demand
Key Result B
Performance
Measure
Objective
Results =
Accomplishment of
 Key Result A
 Key Result B
 Key Result C
Key Result C
Performance
Measure
Common Purpose
Service
Service
Service
Service
Common Purpose
Service
Service
Service
Service
Service
Common Purpose
= Activity D

Activity
Objective
= Activity E

Activity
Objective
= Program
Performance Measures
Result
Output
Efficiency
Demand
Key Result D
Performance
Measure
Performance Measures
Result
Output
Efficiency
Demand
Key Result E
Performance
Measure
Change
Dynamics

G
O
A
L
S
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
Program
Objective
Results =
Accomplishment of
 Key Result D
 Key Result E
Change
Dynamics
Environmental
Scan
23
III. 2. Business Plan Alignment Worksheet with
Definitions
ALIGNMENT WORKSHEET BY ACTIVITY
Business Plan Element
Results
City of Austin Vision:
We want Austin to be the most livable community in the country.
Vision: (optional)
Describes the desired future state or set of circumstances.
Mission:
Comprehensive statement of the Department’s purpose. Identifies Department’s primary
customers and identifies the products or services that are provided.
Goals:
A broad statement describing the desired outcome for an organization or its programs.
Defines the significant results to be achieved over the next 2 – 5 years.
Program:
Two or more activities grouped together to form a common purpose to define a program.
Program Objective:
Clear statement of the objective of the program.
Program Results Measure(s)
Key results this program is expected to achieve.
Activity:
A set of services with a common purpose that produce outputs and results for customers.
Activity Objective:
Clear statement of the purpose of the activity.
Services that comprise the
Activity:
A service is a set of actions that produce a product, output, or result directly with or for
customers.
Activity Performance
Measures:
Results:
Efficiency:
Demand:
Output:
Responsible Employee:
Department Executive/Manager responsible for Activity
The impact that an activity has on customers/citizens
Unit cost of an output
The amount of services requested or expected by customers of the activity
Units of services provided, products provided, or people served through
the activity
24
III. 2. Sample Business Plan Alignment Worksheet
Business Plan Element
Results
City of Austin Vision:
We want Austin to be the most livable community in the country.
Vision: (optional)
Our community will be the healthiest in the nation.
Mission:
The purpose of the Austin/Travis County HHSD is to work in partnership with the community to promote health,
safety, and well being.
Goals:
The over-all goal of the Austin/Travis County HHSD is to promote a healthy community which reflects social equity.
This over-all goal will be achieved through:
1) Minimizing the public’s exposure to health and environmental hazards.
Program:
Environmental Health Services
Program Objective:
The purpose of the Environmental Health Services is to provide protection and enforcement service to the public in
order to minimize environmental health hazards.
Program Results Measure(s)
Average response time to complaints/requests
Confirmed cases of food-borne illness
Percent of customers satisfied with complaint/request processing
Activity:
Health and Safety Code Compliance
Activity Objective:
The purpose of Health and Safety Code Compliance is to provide inspections, investigations, consultations, and
training for the public in order to minimize public exposure to food-borne illness and other environmental health
hazards.
Services that comprise the Activity:
Inspection services
Investigation services
Provide training to food operation employees
Activity Performance Measures:
Results:
Confirmed cases of food-borne illness
Efficiency:
Cost per food establishment permit
Average inspections/investigations per inspector
Cost per food manager trained
Output:
Number of complaints/requests completed
Number of food establishment, mobile food vendor inspections
Number of temporary food inspections
Responsible Employee:
Donald Smith
25
III. 3. Reviews: Corporate Improvement
and Accountability
 Review Team
• Budget Office, Organizational Development, City
Management
 Structure
• Does it provide for alignment of results?
• Does it permit illumination of results and cost information
in a manner useful to decision makers?
 Results
• Do objectives and measures match?
• Was template used for best impact?
 Measurability
• Are goals measurable?
• Are program and activity measures useful?
26
III. 3. Plans: Consistent Process &
Product
 Program and Activity Objectives: MFR Template
 Performance Measures: A Family of Measures
The purpose of ________________
is to provide___________________
to ___________________________
so they can __________________
Result Measure…then
•
Outputs: How many?
•
Efficiency: At what cost?
•
Anticipated Demand
27
III. 3. Activity Objective
Statement (example)
The purpose of the
Combat Operations
(program)
is to provide/produce emergency incident response
(service or product)
to
anyone in the service area
(customer)
in order to
save lives and minimize
property damage
(planned benefit)
28
III. 3. Performance Measures
(example)
Result:
Efficiency:
Output:
Demand:
Number of fire deaths per capita
Percent of fires confined to the
room or area of origin after arrival
of AFD (per census track)
Average cost per call
Number of calls (call volume)
Number of fire alarms (calls)
expected
29
IV. Performance Budgeting
IV. 1.
Link annual plans and budgets
IV. 2.
Establish targets
IV. 3.
Collect cost accounting
information
30
IV. 1. Link Annual Performance Plans
and Budgets
 Ensure clear linkage between the
plan’s programs and the budget’s
programs
 Ensure congruence between the
plan’s goals, objectives, and targets
and the budget’s goals, objectives,
and targets
31
IV. 1. The Budget – Linking
Results, $$$, and People
 In the Budget Document
• Business/Performance Plan
• Activity and Program Pages
• Performance Measures: definitions, etc.
 Using the Performance Budget to
“Tell Your Story”
• Changing the Conversation
• This Result…At This Cost
32
IV. 2. Establish Targets
Targets for each program and activity
measure
Sources of criteria for setting targets
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historical trends and baselines
Program requirements or intent
Customer expectations or demands
Industry or sector standards
Benchmarking within the organization
Benchmarking outside the organization
33
Sources of Performance Expectations
--The process for identifying expectations and
setting targets should be rigorous.
--All sources have pros and cons so all should
be considered when setting targets.
www.AuditorRoles.org
34
I.V. 2. Examples of Performance Targets and Measures
Model Component
Target (Expectation)
Measure (Actual)
Input Economy
In FY 2011, decrease the purchasing Number of purchasing office
office’s personnel allocation by five positions deleted in FY 2011.
positions.
Process Efficiency
In FY 2011, provide vehicle
preventive maintenance services at
the unit cost $500 or less per
vehicle serviced.
Average vehicle preventive
maintenance unit costs in FY
2011.
Output Quality
(accuracy)
In FY 2011, reduce the restaurant
critical inspection error rate by 10
percent.
Percentage reduction in the
restaurant critical inspection
error rate in FY 2011.
Output Quantity
In FY 2011, expand “green energy”
electrical services to 1000
additional homes and businesses.
Number of additional homes
and businesses in FY 2011
receiving “green energy.”
Output Timeliness
In FY 2011, all Level 1 emergency
calls will be responded to with a
unit on site within six minutes.
Response times (range) to
Level 1 emergency calls in
FY 2011.
Outcome
Effectiveness/
customer satisfaction
In FY 2011, increase convention
center customer satisfaction rate
from 4.5 to 4.7 on a 5.0 scale.
Change in convention center
customer satisfaction rate
during FY 2011..
35
IV. 3. Base program budgets on unit
costs that support desired program
outputs and outcomes as reflected in
targets
 Activity-Based
 Identify
Costing (ABC)
Direct and Indirect Costs
36
IV. 3. Performance Budgeting
Long-sought “ideal” of budgeting experts:
Performance-driven budgeting.
Best-case reality:
Performance-informed budgeting.
www.AuditorRoles.org
37
V. Performance Measurement and
Reporting
V. 1. Individual Performance Appraisal
V. 2. Organizational Performance
Assessment and Reporting
V. 3. Performance and Measurement
Certification Audits
38
V. 1. Establishing Accountability
Key Points of Business Plan Alignment/ SSPR
Integration

Every employee in the organization contributes to the City Vision

Every employee in the department contributes to the Mission of the
department.

Every employee in the department contributes to at least one Business Plan Goal.

The Alignment Worksheets show employees how the Services they provide
support specific Activities, Programs, and Goals in the Business Plan.

Performance Measures show citizens, City Council and employees how well we
are doing.

Every Business Plan Measure must be written into at least one employee’s SSPR.

Every employee, including department executives, will have at least one Business
Plan Measure in their SSPR.
39
V. 1. Individual Performance Appraisal
Alignment Worksheet
Employee SSPR
Mission
Goals
Program –
Activity –
Services that comprise Activity


Program Objective
Activity Performance Measures
Activity Results Measure
Activity Objective
Results:
Efficiency:
Description of Services
Demand:
Output:
Individual Performance Measure
• Same as the Activity Performance Measure
• Part of the Activity Performance Measure or,
• Contributes to the Activity Performance
Measure
40
V. 2. What is a Performance
Monitoring System?
Management
Performance
Goals
Program
and Levels
Performance
Indicators
Intended
Uses
Data Component
Data Collection
Data Processing
Analysis Component
Measurement of Current
Performance Levels
Comparison of Current Performance
with Criteria (performance goals)
Action Component
Decisions
Decisions Concerning
Concerning Goals Programs and Levels
Decisions Concerning
Monitoring & Evaluation
41
V. 2. Ensure Performance Measure
Definitions/Formulas are Established
Design monitoring system to track and
analyze the selected measures
(efficiency, outputs, and outcomes are
essential).
42
V. 2. Ensure the Results of
Performance Measures are Available
for Analysis and Decision Making
Design a reporting system that is easy
to use, accessible to all interested
parties, and enables management
decisions.
43
V. 2. Establish Performance
Reporting “Best Practices”
Design reporting formats and decide
frequency of reporting. Austin reports
include:
 Quarterly Performance Reports
 Annual Performance Reports
 Community Scorecard
44
V. 2. Use Performance Reports to
Improve Performance
 Use performance reports to identify
and direct analysis of program
performance
 Use analysis to identify the causes of
inadequate program performance and
focus improvements on causes
 Use performance reports to identify
high performance programs
45
V. 2.1. City of Austin
Performance Report
 Departmental Performance Measures
• Total of 115 Measures Grouped into
Public Safety, Community Services,
Infrastructure, and Utilities/Enterprise
Departments
• Each performance graphic includes:
Measure Description, Calculation Method,
Results, Assessment of Results, Next
Steps, and Contact for More Information
46
V. 2.1. City of Austin
Performance Report
 Decisions influenced by:
• Stakeholder/citizen priority or demand
• Stakeholder/citizen satisfaction
• Results shown
• City Council and Management priorities
47
V. 2.2. Why the City of Tallahassee Supports
Citizen Centric Reporting
Government officials have a responsibility to be
good stewards, to spend monies provided wisely, and
to report financial and performance information
back to citizens on accomplishments and challenges.
Citizen reporting has its history in Efficient
Citizenship Theory
Citizens are not the customers of government, they are
the owners of the government
Democratic government is best shaped by the choices
of well informed citizens
48
V. 2.2. Why is the City of Tallahassee
Issuing a Citizen Centric Report?
We have a responsibility to inform our citizens about:
What we are responsible for doing
Where the money comes from that runs the City and
where it goes
What we have accomplished with monies received and
expended , and
What challenges face the City moving forward
We believe informed citizens make for better
government
49
V. 2.2. Issuance of Citizen Centric
Reports and Media Coverage
Four Citizen Centric Reports have been issued
Received front page newspaper coverage
Received television coverage
Report page 3 data verified by City Auditor
Citizen groups have received reports and have
been requested to provide audit topic
suggestions
Reports are available in hard copy and online
54
V. 2.2. Distribution of Citizen Centric
Reports
City Neighborhood Associations
City Advisory Committees
Tallahassee Regional Airport
Community and Senior Centers
Other governments to include the County, FSU,
FAMU, TCC
League of Women Voters
Leon County District Schools
Middle School Civics Program
55
V. 2.2. Purpose of the Citizen Centric
Report
• To Demonstrate:
– Transparency
– Accountability
• To Promote
– Dialog
– Two way communication
• To Build Trust
– Over time
– One citizen at a time
56
V. 2.2. Building on to the Citizen Centric
Report
• Performance Measurement Report
– Issued August 2011
– 83 pages
– Includes all major departments
– Report contents for each department
•
•
•
•
•
Mission statement, organization and services provided
Goals and objectives
Key performance measures
Accomplishments and challenges
Expenditures by program and line item
– Report includes tables, graphs, charts, and photos
57
V. 2.2. Website and Contact Information
• Citizen Centric Report
http://www.talgov.com/auditing/pdf/citizenreport2010.pdf
• Performance Measurement Report
http://www.talgov.com/auditing/
• sam.mccall@talgov.com
(850) 891-8397
59
V. 3. Conduct Performance and
Measurement Audits
 Audit departmental and program
performance
 Audit relevance and reliability of
performance measures
60
V.3.1. Auditing Government
Performance
Measure or assess performance during an audit or other study
based on authoritative auditing standards. (See Austin, Florida
OPPAGA, Kansas City, Phoenix on www.AuditorRoles.org)
— Identify the program’s inputs, processes, outputs, and outcomes
— Develop and implement “ad hoc” performance measurement system
— Using performance expectations as “criteria” and measures as
“condition,” analyze program performance
— Identify causes of variances and develop audit recommendations
www.AuditorRoles.org
61
Available at:
www.theiia.org/bookstor
V.3.2. Self Assess or Audit
Performance Measures Using
Asserted Criteria
Relevance—Measures should be aligned,
complete, and useful
Reliability—Each measure and its data
should be accurate, valid, and consistent
www.AuditorRoles.org
63
V.3.2. Test relevance or reliability.
Assessing the Relevance of Performance
Measures: Sample Criteria
Measures should be:
Aligned
Linked to mission, goals, objectives
Complete
Includes essential aspects of
performance
Useful
Timely
Understandable
Comparable
Responsive to change
Meets broad needs of users
www.AuditorRoles.org
64
V.3.2. Test relevance or reliability.
Assessing the Reliability of Performance
Measures & Data: Sample Criteria
Each measure and its data should be:
Accurate
Computed correctly
Neither overstated nor understated
Appropriately precise
Valid
Corresponds to the phenomena reported
Correctly defined
Data & calculation comply with definition
Unbiased
Consistent
Consistent with previous periods
Controlled by adequate systems
www.AuditorRoles.org
65
VI. Performance-Based Decision
Making – Includes Stakeholders, Elected
Officials, Managers, and Employees
VI. 1. Using performance information
to support decision making
VI. 2. Examples of decision making
66
VI. 1. Performance Information Used
for Different Decisions
Budgetary
Decision making
Manage & Improve
Operations
Accountability
Reporting
67
VI. 1. Performance Information
Supports Decisions to:
 Assess and adjust program performance
service levels, and resources,
 improve existing programs and services,
 improve internal management systems,
 revise performance plans and reports,
 initiate new programs and services, and
 bottom-line—use performance information
to support continuous improvement and
68
public accountability.
V. 1. Strategic Performance Budget Decision
Model
Strategic Importance
HIGH
Target for
Increased Funding
Strategic Success
in Achieving
Community or
Program Outcomes
Target for
Funding Cuts
Useful Contributor to
Government Success
LOW
POOR
Performance Results
GOOD
Use of Strategic Goals and Performance Results in
Prince William County Budget Decisions
www.AuditorRoles.org
69
VI. 1. Strategic Performance Budget Decision
Model:
In Reality: Varies with Fiscal Environment
Target for
Increased Funding
Strategic Importance
HIGH
Strategic Success
in Achieving
Community or Program
Outcomes
Less funding available
Target for
Funding Cuts
Useful
Contributor to
Government
Success
More funding available
LOW
POOR
Performance Results
GOOD
Use of Strategic Goals and Performance Results in
Prince William County Budget Decisions
www.AuditorRoles.org
70
VI. 2. Output Effectiveness
(Quantity) Recreation Centers
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
10PM
Northwest
Rosewood
Givens
South Austin
9PM
8PM
7PM
6PM
4PM
5PM
HOURS
3PM
2PM
1PM
NOON
11AM
10AM
0.00
9AM
AVERAGE NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS PER
HOUR
120.00
71
VI. 2. Health Clinics (efficiency)
Health Clinics - Adjusted total cost comparison among
clinics for billable and non billable encounters combined.
External Costs:
City/County
corporate overhead
(payroll, human
resources, treasury,
controller’s office,
etc.) along with
capital
improvement
projects, rent,
depreciation, etc.
$275
Anticipated Reimbu rs emen t
Ext ern al cos t
In ternal co st
$250
$225
$200
$175
$150
$125
$100
$75
$50
$25
72
Jonestown
Manor
Del Valle
Pflugerville
Oak Hill
Rosewood
FY 09
FY96 Avg
Average
East Austin
South Austin
Northeast
Far Sout h
Montopolis
FY10
Salvation
$0
Target
FY99
Target
Internal Costs:
Physicians, nurses,
medical supplies,
pharmacy, etc.
VI. 2. Examples of Performance-Based
Decision Making (Inputs & Mission)
140
3
100
2
80
1.5
60
1
40
0.5
20
Index Crime Per 1,000 Population
Tucson
Portland
Phoenix
Nashville
Seattle
Oklahoma City
City
Sacramento
Charlotte
Dallas
Fort Worth
Austin
San Antonio
Houston
Las Vegas
0
El Paso
0
Officers Per 1,000 Population
2.5
San Diego
Index Crime Per 1,000 Population
120
Officers Per 1,000 Population
Index Crime and Number of Officers in Selected Cities
73
VII. Conclusion: Creating a
Managing for Results Culture
 Supporting our Vision ...
 Creating A Results Orientation:
Services, Activities and Programs
 Creating Accountability: Measures and
Indicators
 Creating Integration: Making it Happen
at the Operational Level
74
VII. Lessons Learned
 “Bottom-Up” approach neglected broad
performance areas and alignment
• Department key indicators
 Accounting structure is a major hurdle
 Definition of “services” not clear
 Results orientation difficult when
template not used effectively
 Poor use of template = poor measures
 The “not something I control” syndrome
75
VII. Where we are going…
 Assessing and Improving the Reliability of
Reported Measures
• Data Collection Infrastructure
• Certification Program
 Providing Further Training
• Using Information in Management
• Using Information in Operations
 Re-enforce Cultural Shift at the Operational
Level
 Passing and Implementing a “Best Practice”
Performance Accountability Ordinance
76
VII. Performance Measurement and
Accountability: Best Practices Checklist
 Obtain active participation by top-level managers and decision makers
 Create a clear vision of why and how performance measures will be
used internally and externally
 Understand the limits of performance measures what they can and
cannot do
 Sustain organizational commitment over a long period despite barriers
and the potential for bad news.
 Integrate the performance measurement and reporting system with
organizational planning, service delivery, and decision making systems
 Through planning align mission, goals, objectives/targets, and measures
 Design goals and objectives/targets that specify a single aspect of
performance
 Design aggressive yet realistic goals and objectives/targets that
encourage progress beyond past performance levels
 Involve employees, customers, and stakeholders in developing goals,
objectives/targets, and measures
77
VII. Performance Measurement and
Accountability: Best Practices Checklist
(Continued)
 Identify all programs which will be measured and define them
through an input
process/activity
output
outcome
model
 Design a “family of measures” for each program which provides
key information to support decisions
 Periodically evaluate current performance measure; change when
needed but try for comparability over time
 Define each measure and identify data sources and data collection
procedures
 Produce performance information (including explanatory
information) which is clear and useful to management, employees,
customers, and stakeholders
 Educate, encourage, and reward managers for using performance
information to make decisions which improve program
management and service delivery
78
Training/Assistance to Get There
EGAPP, Inc. provides training in all
aspects of performance management and
auditing. (Brochure Available)
Auditor Roles Project provides training
in assessing/auditing performance
management systems and measures.
Assistance can also be arranged.
Email to: egappmorgan@yahoo.com
79
Thank You.
More questions.
More comments.
Thank you, again.
80