NCPP

This brief manual is designed to assist local government managers, elected officials and citizens in developing performance measurement systems. The manual explains:*The uses and values of performance measurement systems; *How such a system operates; and *A simple step-by-step process for developing a performance measurement system. This guidebook aims to introduce municipal managers, elected officials and citizens to basic tenets of Performance Measurement. Once in place, Performance Measurement Systems can be used for the appraisal of managers and employees, will help to elaborate and execute strategic plans, and will facilitate citizens' active engagement in visioning the future of their community. Every great endeavor begins with a first step, and very often building a solid Performance Measurement System is the crucial first step that should be taken in order to build a prospering community. Development of a sound Performance Measurement System will take …

Government Performance Results Act of 1993 ---Contents

Concepts Statement No. 2

It begins with a discussion of the governmental environment and the need for performance measurement reporting, explores the dimensions of governmental accountability, sets forth the elements of performance measurement reporting, elaborates the objectives and characteristics of performance information, and discusses the limitations of performance measurement information and how to enhance its usefulness. Finally, the Concepts Statement calls for experimentation with performance measurement and reporting and states that performance measurement reporting is considered an essential part of comprehensive financial reporting for state and local governments.

Concepts Statement No. 2 asserts that information provided by governments should be intended to assist in decision making and to facilitate the process of decision making in the context of the public administration system and budgetary cycle. Therefore, ideally a governmental entity should

Many analytic approaches have been employed over the years by the agencies and others to assess the operations and results of federal programs, policies, activities, and organizations. Periodically, individual audit and evaluation studies are designed to answer specific questions about how well a program is working, and thus such studies may take several forms. The Results Act explicitly recognizes and encourages a complementary role for these types of program assessment: annual performance reports are to include both performance measurement results and program evaluation findings. This document describes and explains the relationship between two common types of systematic program assessments: performance measures and program evaluations…

SERVING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC: BEST PRACTICES IN Performance Measurement (National Performance Review by Al Gore)

All high-performance organizations whether public or private are, and must be, interested in developing and deploying effective performance measurement and performance management systems, since it is only through such systems that they can remain high-performance organizations. When President Clinton signed the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) into law, this commitment to quality was institutionalized. Federal agencies were required to develop strategic plans for how they would deliver high-quality products and services to the American people. Under GPRA, strategic plans are the starting point for each federal agency to (1) establish top-level agency goals and objectives, as well as annual program goals; (2) define how it intends to achieve those goals; and (3) demonstrate how it will measure agency and program performance in achieving those goals. It was also in 1993 that President Clinton and Vice President Gore initiated the National Performance Review (NPR) to reinvent government. One of NPR's reinvention initiatives has been to foster collaborative, systematic benchmarking of best-in-class organizations, both public and private, to identify best practices in a wide range of subjects vital to the success of federal agencies in providing high-quality products and services to our principal customer the American people. ..

**Primer on Performance Measurement

This "primer" defines several performance measurement terms, outlines areas or functions where performance measurement may be difficult, and provides examples of different types of performance measures. In this primer, the definitions of output and outcome measures are those set out in GPRA. Input measures and impact measures are not defined in GPRA. As GPRA is directed at establishing performance goals and targets, the definitions are prospective in nature. Variations or divisions of these definitions can be found in other Federal programs as well as non-Federal measurement taxonomies. For example, a measurement effort which retrospectively reports on performance might define "input" as resources consumed, rather than resources available. The nomenclature of measures cannot be rigidly applied; one agency's output measure (e.g., products produced) could be another agency's input measure (e.g., products received).

REPORT TO THE PRESIDENT'S MANAGEMENT COUNCIL ON MANAGING PERFORMANCE IN THE GOVERNMENT

We are pleased to present this Report to the President's Management Council on Managing Performance in the Government. This is in response to your mandate for actions and recommendations to address the issue of employee performance management.Our work group of human resources management executives concluded that a report that could be shared with all Federal agencies would demonstrate top-level commitment to excellent performance. The inclusion of concrete recommendations and information on best practices provides practical assistance for achieving excellence throughout the Federal Government…. These premises and principles are reflected in three major themes. For each theme, this report identifies opportunities and challenges, offers substantiating evidence where appropriate, and makes recommendations for action. Appendices summarize the report's recommendations and offer examples of agency innovations and resources for immediate application to improving performance management in agencies throughout the Government

Give agencies that deliver measurable services a greater degree of autonomy from governmentwide rules in exchange for greater accountability for achieving results. Convert at least a dozen agencies to this new structure in the coming year.

Challenge all agencies to set service goals so everyone in America will see that government service is better. The heads of the 11 agencies with the greatest customer contact are making public commitments to improve selected services; they have created World Wide Web home pages as a means for receiving direct input. The U.S. Business Advisor and a redesign of the "blue pages" in phone directories will help people quickly find needed government services.

EPA and other agencies have successfully piloted a noncoercive partnership approach that focuses on meeting environmental goals rather than on complying with regulatory red tape. Expand existing pilots in EPA, OSHA, and other regulatory agencies so this partnership approach becomes the mainstream strategy for federal regulatory agencies.

Develop federal-state-local partnerships that are based on results rather than process. Develop goals and objectives for major programmatic areas, allow states and localities to be funded for these goals and objectives, and reduce existing federal red tape. Convert categorical grants to partnerships as they come up for reauthorization.

A major challenge for communities dealing with the federal government is untangling the complexity of its programs to determine who is responsible for what. Establish a single point of contact for the nation's larger communities.

The existing civil service system is based on the concept that "one size fits all"; it cannot respond quickly to change or to the varying needs of different organizations. Reform the civil service system, increase investment in the workforce to create "learning organizations," and give senior executives more tools and make them accountable for achieving results.

A Six-Volume Compilation of Tools and Techniques for Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993

All high-performance organizations, whether public or private, are, and must be, interested in developing and deploying effective performance measurement and performance management systems, since it is only through such systems that they can remain high-performance organizations. When President Clinton signed the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) into law, this commitment to quality was institutionalized. Federal agencies were required to develop strategic plans for how they would deliver high-quality products and services to the American people. Under GPRA, strategic plans are the starting point for each federal agency to (1) establish top-level agency goals and objectives, as well as annual program goals; (2) define how it intends to achieve those goals; and (3) demonstrate how it will measure agency and program performance in achieving those goals.It follows a logical progression of resources developed to assist in the effective and efficient implementation of GPRA. In chronological order, these resources are…

For every government manager or executive who has struggled with performance planning, here is the first-ever how-to manual to make the process smooth, logical, and easy-to-understand…

In Annual Performance Planning: A Manual for Public Agencies, you are guided through the steps necessary to create outstanding annual performance plans that will result in measurable performance improvement. Annual Performance Planning... Partnership for Reinventing Government consortium studies,

This digest provides senior transit managers with an easy-to-read summary of the contents of and toolsin TCRP Report 88: A Guidebook for Developing a Transit Performance-Measurement System.The guidebook provides a step-by-step process for developing a performance-measurement program that includes both traditional and nontraditional performance indicators that address customer-oriented and community issues.

*A Guide to Developing and Using Performance Measures in Results-based Budgeting

Will Rogers' cynicism about the performance of government still captures a common, if not always constructive, part of public life at the end of the 20th century. And as contract relationships blur the boundaries between the public and private sectors, confidence in private-sector programs has eroded as well, sometimes as guilt by association. The toll is arguably highest among programs that provide health, education, and social services for families and children. If the public is right, if the performance of these programs is not what it should be, then how can we do better? And before we answer that question, how do we know that we are doing badly? How do we know what "better" is? This paper is about answering these common-sense questions. It addresses the art of knowing whether our programs and agencies are succeeding or failing, and how to use performance accountability to improve performance. This paper is part of a series of papers published by The Finance Project on the subject of results accountability. A Strategy Map for Results-based Budgeting addresses what a results-based budgeting system might look like and how to begin to put it in place. This paper addresses the challenge, embedded in the first, of how to hold programs accountable for the best possible performance, while ensuring that their performance is aligned with, and supports, overall efforts to improve results-in other words, how to create performance accountability within a results framework…

The handbook provides in-depth information on the benefits of performance measurement, including the various methods and principles. And it forms a valuable first point of reference; essential before consulting expensive outside consultants. ..Written and research by an expert team of performance measurement specialists, the handbook provides a wealth of techniques that have been tested and applied in over 30 businesses. Our plain English approach makes the handbook ideal for the non-specialist, whether a management accountant, board director or functional head. ..The Handbook of Performance Measurement has been written for anyone who must design, implement or update a performance measurement system. It has everything you need to answer even the toughest questions...

Report on the GASB Citizen Discussion Groups on

Since 1985, the GASB has encouraged experimentation with the use and the reporting of SEA measures. This research report is part of the GASB’s continuing research on the use and reporting of performance measures. This research has included two surveys on the use of performance measures and more than a dozen case studies using information obtained during visits to twenty-six state and local governments in 1999. Our researchers interviewed government officials to determine the depth and breadth of actual use of performance measures by these governments for budgeting, management, and reporting; the effect of their use; and the extent to which governments are

ensuring the relevance and reliability of performance measures. The information gathered from both the citizen discussion groups and the case studies is being used to help develop a set of methods and suggested criteria on how to effectively communicate performance information. Citizen input is a critical building block for the overall success of this effort. The results of these discussion groups have improved our understanding of how state and local governments could develop performance reports that clearly communicate results.

Advice for State and Local Leaders on Implementing Results-Based Decision making

This guide was written with support from the National Governors’ Association. It gives targeted, strategic, and practical advice on implementing different approaches to results-based decision making. It draws on interviews and discussions from over 50 leaders in the field, and provides critical lessons learned for state and local leaders.. It aims to help state and local leaders answer questions such as “should we do this?” “can we do this?” “how do we do this?” “how long will it take?” and “what can we expect?” It discusses using results (and all variations thereof) to develop an agenda to improve the lives of children and families; to align resources to support that agenda; to align management practices and organizational cultures with that agenda; and to measure performance and hold organizations and individuals accountable for improvement. It also provides suggestions for eliciting the support of key stakeholders, such as executive and legislative branch officials, the media, and communities. It goes beyond descriptions of state and local experiences, to draw the political and strategic lessons that can help state and local leaders avoid pitfalls and move ahead…

What is the Government Balanced Scorecard (BSC)?…What’s in it for cities and counties?…What are the pros & cons of the BSC… What is the future of the BSC?… Building a Government Balanced Scorecard… Example of a Government Balanced Scorecard Implementation… Step by Step to Specific Plans

The concept of results-based budgeting is simple and literally business-like: Start with the results we want for children, families, and communities and work backward to the means to achieve those results. But how do we translate this simple concept into practice in the complex environment of public decision-making and budgeting? A growing number of states, counties, cities, and communities are engaged in the work of identifying the results they want for children and families. In some cases, these efforts focus on matters of family and child well-being; in other cases, they concentrate on a more broadly based articulation of the desired quality of life for all citizens. But the challenge in each case is the same: to get from talking about results actually to doing something about them. This paper (and its companions) attempts to answer this central "talk-to-action" question. …

A Guide to Selecting Results and Indicators: Implementing Results-based Budgeting

This paper draws on the experiences of several states, cities, and counties to help guide others through the tasks of identifying results and measurable indicators and tying them to an established planning, budgeting, and management system. It lays out key characteristics of an effective results and indicators list, the important steps in developing this list, and the potential problems that a jurisdiction may face in establishing results and indicators and collecting the data to measure them….

Balancing Measures: Best Practices in Performance Management (National Partnership for Reinventing Government)

In 1994, Vice President Al Gore gave a lecture as part of the Georgetown University Series on Governmental Reform in which he identified the characteristics of "The New Job of the Federal Executive." Among those characteristics were "creating a team environment, empowering employees, putting customers first, and communicating with employees." Those characteristics are embedded in the best practices of our partners-especially in this area of performance measurement. There is no generic set of balanced measures that can be applied as best practice to all functions of the public sector. Certain conditions, however, need to exist within an organization for a balanced approach to performance management to be successful….This study looks at how these efforts relate to, and are being replicated within, the public sector. It examines the ways and means by which government organizations are trying to include customers, stakeholders, and employees in their performance management efforts-to reach some balance among the needs and opinions of these groups along with the achievement of the organization’s stated mission. All of the organizations that served as partners in preparing this report have had some level of success in doing this…

The Logic Model is a framework for planning, managing, measuring and evaluating government programs. Using a goal-measure approach, it illustrates the cause-effect linkages between program activities and outcome results. A Logic Model is developed for each program within an agency, providing measures for use in employee evaluations, IT management, program evaluation, budget justification and contracting. Applying the Logic Model approach to developing performance measures in government is a scaleable process. Instead of implementing the approach agency-wide from the beginning, many agencies start out with a specific program, budget justification, or performance-based contracting challenge.

From this website , Learn step-by-step how to design and implement useful performance measures in government------the Government Performance Logic Model

Improve Public Sector Results with A Balanced Scorecard: Nine Steps to Success

http://www.balancedscorecard.org/files/Improve_Public_Sector_Perf_w_BSC_0203.swf

Describe a framework for building and implementing public-sector balanced scorecard performance systems…basic design for a balanced scorecard performance system … Understand how a scorecard system can help align organization effort with agency mission stratege…share best practices and lessons learned…

The Balanced Scorecard is a performance management system that could be used in any size organization to align vision andmission with customer requirements and day-to-day work, manage and evaluate business strategy, monitor operation efficiency improvements, build organization capacity, and communicate progress to all employees. The scorecard allows us to measure financial and customer results, operations, and organization capacity.

This article discusses how to develop a Balanced Scorecard performance system, explores issues that organizations face in building and implementing scorecard systems, and shares lessons learned from organizations that have taken the Balanced Scorecard journey. Originally developed as a framework to measure private industry non-financial performance, Balanced Scorecard systems are equally applicable to public sector organizations, but only after changes are made to account for the government mission and mandates, not profitability, that are unique to almost all public sector entities… .

This handbook offers three such disciplined, systematic approaches,The first approach, the Performance Measurement Process, was developed by the DOE Nevada Family Quality Forum. This approach is quite detailed and outlines an 11-step process for measuring performance. Appendix B contains a case study that employs this approach. ..The second approach, Developing Performance Indicators . . . A Systematic Approach, was used at Sandia National Laboratories. It is less detail-oriented than the first, and uses a fictitious company, the Hackenstack Firewood Company, for anecdotal purposes. ..The third approach, Developing Performance Metrics-the University of California Approach, was developed by the University of California. This method is broadest in scope. Different organizations have different needs. Providing multiple approaches allows an organization to pick and choose which approach, or combination of approaches, is right for

Achieving Performance Management in Government Agencies---Framework for Devising Performance Measures in City/County Government

The Performance Institute has released the Government Performance Logic Model slide presentation. This step-by-step presentation outlines the Logic Model and how it can be applied to government performance. The 45 slides show how government managers can think strategically and apply performance measures to a specific program, all the way to a 5 or 10 year strategic plan.

This chapter presents sixteen suggested criteria for reporting performance information. These criteria are designed to provide guidance to preparers who want to prepare SEA (or performance) reports that effectively communicate relevant and reliable information to elected officials, citizens, and other users about the results of government programs and services.The sixteen criteria are arranged in three broad categories: (a) the external report on performance information, (b) what performance information to report, and (c) communication of performance information. We recognize that in some cases a criterion could fit in more than one category. The criteria are presented in logical sequence, not in order of importance. A list of the criteria is presented first and then each criterion is separately discussed. This discussion includes:A statement of the criterion ;The purpose of the criterion ;A description of the criterion ;The rationale behind the criterion ;How the criterion can be applied .

Measuring Performance and Demonstrating Results of Information Technology Investments

Increasingly, federal policymakers are insisting that government executives provide hard facts on mission and program results. Program authorizations, resource decisions, and oversight requirements increasingly hinge on how well agencies perform against expectations and improve performance over time. As such, a new standard for management expertise is evolving: setting performance targets, designing efficiency and effectiveness measures, systematically and accurately measuring outcomes, and then using the results for informed decisionmaking. Information technology (IT) products, services, and delivery processes are important resources for results-driven government programs and operations. For purposes of this guide, IT also includes the organizational units and contractors primarily responsible for delivering IT. Line managers—the operational customers2 relying on IT products and services--and IT managers themselves, want to know "How are information technology products and services, including the information infrastructure, supporting the delivery and effectiveness of the enterprise's (agency) programs?" As we pointed out in an earlier report, successful organizations rely heavily on performance measures to operationalize mission goals and objectives, quantify problems, evaluate alternatives, allocate resources, track progress, and learn from mistakes. Operational customers and IT managers in these organizations form partnerships to design, manage, and evaluate IT systems that are critical to achieving improved mission success.

The measurement of performance for crosscutting programs, therefore, falls outside of the GPRA provisions. The problem of illicit drug use is an example The development of a system to manage these programs and monitor performance would require a considerable investment in terms of time and staff resources. In 1996, the ONDCP began its collaborative process to develop a performance measurement system. This ambitious undertaking would require coordinating with the more than 50 agencies and departments involved in drug control efforts. In the end, the process would utilize the input of over 250 people representing numerous government agencies and other organizations. To organize the effort, the ONDCP constructed a complex set of steering committees and working groups designed to address the specific tasks of developing a performance measurement system. From that process would emerge the ONDCP Performance

states occur at the level of the central budget office or on the legislative side.

areas may use them more than others. The purpose of this research is to study performance measurement in state agencies in order to find out which performance measurement techniques are used at the agency level and what social, political and organization (capacity and culture) is related to performance measurement use. Rather than making inter-state or large institution comparisons such as legislative use, the focus of our examination was looking at performance management activities at the agency or department level within each state. Our decision is consistent with Joyce and Sieg (2000) who argued that researchers should consider studying performance-based budgeting by focusing more attention on analysis of agencies or policy areas, and less attention exclusively on centralized institutions.

This handbook is designed for Federal supervisors and employees and presents an eight-step process for developing employee performance plans that are aligned with and support organizational goals. It also provides guidelines for writing performance elements and standards that not only meet regulatory requirements, but also maximize the capability that performance plans have for focusing employee efforts on achieving organizational and group goals. The methods presented here are designed to develop elements and standards that measure employee and work unit accomplishments rather than to develop other measures that are often used in appraising performance, such as measuring behaviors or competencies. Although this handbook includes a discussion of the importance of balancing measures, the main focus presented here is to measure accomplishments. Consequently, much of the information presented in the first five steps of this eightstep process applies when supervisors and employees want to measure results. However, the material presented in Steps 6 through 8 about developing standards, monitoring performance, and checking the performance plan apply to all measurement approaches…

Helpful Practices in Implementing Government Performance
AN OVERVIEW OF HELPFUL PRACTICES

Helpful practices also have the following characteristics: they deal with important and current issues, reflect realistic expectations, provide assistance in the near term, prepare the way for meeting requirements in the longer term, and consider perspectives within and between branches of government.

The papers identify helpful practices for agency leaders in four issue areas selected by Consortium members.

Strategic planning:	include a strategic planning dimension to all aspects of planning and management all the time.
Crossprogram measurement:	begin by developing measures for related programs within agencies before proceeding to other related programs; focus first on goals.
Budget alignment:	take the initiative and make it happen at the civil service level; it should be done, it can be done, and it is being done in a number of agencies.
Administrative support:	take the initiative in developing linkages to strategic planning and management at the organizational, functional, and program levels

Designing a Performance-based Competitive Sourcing Process for the Federal Government

This report presents 37 of the most feasible and often-suggested ideas generated throughout the project. The 37 recommendations require some form of action by federal agencies, the Administration and/or Congress. The 37 recommendations provide for substantial change to the existing competitive sourcing process.

Clearly, the recommendations will not be embraced in full by every stakeholder. However, the package advanced by the project attempts to provide common-ground ideas that on the whole can benefit all stakeholders. Among the recommendations made are…

One of the five government-wide initiatives in the President’s Management Agenda (PMA), Citizen-Centered Electronic Government, focuses on the “use of the Internet to empower citizens, allowing them to request customized information from their government when they need it, not just when the government wants to give it to them.” The PMA calls on agencies to focus their application of information technology on improving agency mission performance, enhancing information security, maintaining information privacy, reducing duplication, and coordinating efforts with other agencies in an integrated manner. Despite the rush to embrace technology in government, significant confusion exists over what precisely defines e-government, let alone how to measure its impact on improving the quality of services to the taxpayer. In selecting performance measures, agencies should focus on the definition of what constitutes a bona fide citizen-centered e-government initiative: “ Citizen-centered e-government initiatives strategically employ information technology to provide government products or services to intended users resulting in enhanced value.” At their most basic level, mission-aligned performance measures are intended to clearly define “enhanced value” by tracking cost efficiencies and improved program mission achievement. The research presented in this report yields insight on the progress being made by federal agencies as they struggle to define and measure their e-government initiatives.

A comprehensive report cataloguing various recruitment initiatives being managed by federal agencies and assessing their relative success in attracting quality employees to federal government service. The project will survey all federal agencies to identify the most innovative recruitment initiatives, examine common lessons learned, review measures of performance, and evaluate overall recruitment success.

The purpose of the Mercatus Center’s assessment of federal agencies’ annual performance reports is to ascertain how well the agency reports inform the public about the results they produced. It is not intended to evaluate the quality of the actual results that federal agencies produced or to determine if the reports adhere to reporting guidelines issued by the Office of Management and Budget. Our focus is entirely on the document’s usefulness to the public and to decision-makers who are not familiar with (and not necessarily interested in) details of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) or agency procedures. The scorecard evaluates agencies’ annual performance reports according to how well they demonstrate: (a) transparency (b) benefits to the community and (c) forward-looking leadership...

GPRA Strategic and Performance Plans for Federal Departments and Agencies in compliance with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 -- as of May 31, 2000.

All links lead directly to the plans. Contact names and numbers are for ordering print versions of the plans unless otherwise noted. Listings with a

next to them are in .pdf or Adobe Acrobat format only.

Department of Commerce

Office of Human Resources Management

…is designed to assist you in effectively managing your employees and your organization. The purpose is not only to outline Departmental policy but also to provide you with a wide array of guidance and information on performance appraisals and awards. As a Department, we are composed of a number of operating units with different missions and goals. The handbook will provide you with the flexibility to develop programs that are appropriate for your unique organizational culture. Performance management is a systematic process by which an agency involves its employees in improving organizational effectiveness in the accomplishment of the Agency's mission and strategic goals. Performance management identifies what should be accomplished as well as how these goals will be accomplished. It reflects a partnership in which managers share responsibility for developing their employees in such a way that employees make a contribution to the organization. It is a clearly defined process for managing people that will result in success for both the individual and the organization. It consists of three major components: Appraisal, Feedback and Recognition…

HANDBOOK FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY’S MIXED ANALYTE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM

The Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) currently operates its environmental programs under the jurisdiction of various regulatory agencies. Compliance and quality assurance issues associated with these regulatory authorities typically require analytical services under contract with DOE to participate in a variety of performance evaluation programs (PEPs). The primary objective of the PEPs is to foster reliability and credibility for the analytical results used in the decision making process, particularly as it relates to the environment and public health and safety. Each PEP checks for specific analytical proficiencies in radiological, stable inorganic, or organic analyses.

Regulatory requirements, however, frequently include analyses for radiological and nonradiological constituents of the same sample. A PEP for quantifying these mixed analytes was not previously available. The Analytical Services Division of EM established the MAPEP to address this deficiency and to help assure the quality of analytical services across the DOE Complex…

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT 2000

Performance Improvement 2000: Evaluation Activities of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is the sixth annual report to Congress summarizing previous fiscal year evaluation efforts. The purpose of this report is to provide Congress with evaluative information on the Department’s programs, policies, activities, and strategies. It contains brief summaries of evaluation results and provides a federal agency contact name for obtaining more detailed information. The report is useful to health and human service researchers, stakeholders and practitioners who use the information to assist their work.

In the era of results-oriented management, evaluations are playing an increasingly important role in program improvement. To this end, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is committed to ensuring its evaluations yield valuable knowledge, and that knowledge is used to improve program performance. This is a consistent theme of our annual reports. Evaluations summarized in this report contribute to program improvement in four ways.

This website offered insight into DOD’s implementation of the PMA. Dr. Chu, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, discussed the DOD’s risks in transformation, as its size and scope is so vast, especially in this time of conflict. In the variety of risks discussed, Dr. Chu spoke about Force Management Risk, which relates to the PMA initiative of Human Capital, and the importance of maintaining a quality military workforce; maintaining workforce satisfaction; and maintaining workforce costs.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

The Urban RC/EZ/EC office created an electronic performance measurement system (PERMS) for Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities to document development activity and funding associated with the projects and programs they are undertaking. Each project and program is represented by an implementation plan in PERMS. RC/EZ/ECs report their progress in a report submitted annually

NASA's performance in developing and delivering products and services are executed and evaluated at multiple levels: Agency, Strategic Enterprise, Functional/Staff Office, program/project, Center, Crosscutting Process, and individual. Each level is responsible for performing the necessary steps of executing requirements, measuring them, evaluating them, and reporting the results. NASA senior managers use Agency measures to evaluate performance in meeting the goals identified in the NASA Strategic Plan. Strategic Enterprise measures must be aligned with Agency measures. The goals and objectives established in the Enterprise Strategic Plans and the Enterprise Associate Administrator Performance Plans must be aligned with the Administrator's Performance Agreement with the President. Similarly, program/project measures must be aligned with program plans, functional measures must be aligned with functional leadership strategies, Functional/Staff Office Associate Administrator Performance Plans must be aligned with that of the Administrator, and on throughout the Agency…

Improvements Needed in Performance Measures to Provide a More Accurate Picture of WIA's Effectiveness

The Congress passed the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) in 1998 to begin unifying a fragmented employment and training system and to better serve job seekers and employers. To create a more comprehensive workforce investment system, WIA requires states and localities to bring together most federally funded employment and training services into a single system, called the one-stop center system. ….1Three of these programs, whose funding is authorized by WIA under Title I to provide services to adults, dislocated workers, and youth, replace those previously funded under the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA).These three new WIA programs, authorized at about $3.7 billion in fiscal year 2001, have performance measures established under WIA that states and localities must track in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the programs. These performance measures gauge program results in …In an effort to assess the effectiveness of WIA’s performance measures and whether they will yield useful information that can clearly demonstrate performance under WIA, we assessed (1) the progress states and localities have made and the issues they have faced in implementing performance measures for the three WIA-funded programs; (2) how useful the WIA performance measures are in accurately gauging the performance of the three WIA-funded programs; and (3) beyond gauging the performance of the three WIA-funded programs, how well the performance of the one-stop system is being measured…

Assisting Performance Measurement Initiatives in Health and Human Services Programs

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has embarked on a process to establish performance measures for all of its health and human service programs. Performance measurement is needed as a management tool to clarify goals, document the contribution toward achieving those goals, and document the benefits received from the investment in each program. The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (OASPE), State and Local Initiatives Division, is working with several agencies within the Department to help them develop performance measurement approaches which embrace the following core principles…

EPA Faces Challengesin Developing Results-Oriented Performance Goals and Measures

For over a decade, internal and external studies have called for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to .manage for environmental results. as a way to improve and better account for its performance. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (the Results Act) requires EPA and other federal agencies to prepare performance plans containing annual performance goals and measures to help move them toward managing for results. These performance goals and measures are used to assess an agency.s progress toward achieving the results expected from its major functions. Under the act, a performance goal is a target level of performance expressed as a tangible, measurable objective against which actual achievement can be compared. Performance measures are the yardsticks to assess an agency.s success in meeting its performance goal. EPA.s fiscal year 2000 performance plan contains 187 performance goals and 364 performance measures. Concerned about EPA.s progress in developing goals and measures that focus on environmental results rather EPA.s fiscal year 2000 performance plan contains 187 performance goals and 364 performance measures. Concerned about EPA.s progress in developing goals and measures that focus on environmental results ratherthan on program activities, you asked us to (1) determine the extent to which EPA.s fiscal year 2000 performance goals and measures focus on end outcomes, intermediate outcomes, or outputs; (2) identify any challenges the agency faces in developing additional performance goals and measures that focus on end outcomes; and (3) describe the initiatives the agency is taking to address any identified challenges

It is indeed a pleasure to present GAO’s performance and accountability report for fiscal 2002. In the spirit of the Government Performance and Results Act, thisannual report informs the Congress and the American people about what we have achieved on their behalf.Importantly, we received a clean opinion from independent auditors on our financial statements for the16th consecutive year. I am confident that thefinancial information and the data measuring GAO’s performance contained in this report are complete and reliable....We use seven annual measures to help assess GAO’s performance in meeting our strategic goals and objectives for serving the Congress. They showthe degree to which our work is benefiting the Congressand the American people and whether GAO is laying a foundation for future benefits by providing the Congress with the most imminent and high-profile information it requests, developing ways to improve government, and tracking whether those improvements are made. In fiscal 2002, GAO exceeded the performance targets for six of these seven annual measures. We also use an eighth, biennial, indicator that tracks our progress on work we laid out under performance goals in our strategic plan. This indicator shows we are on track for meeting 95 percent of our performance goals by the end of fiscal 2003...

The Air Traffic Control Specialist (ATCS) Performance Measurement Database provides a compilation of techniques that have been proven effective for use in human factor research related to air traffic control. The FAA has established strategic goals of improved ATC system safety and capacity. Performance measures are necessary to determine which elements of the system need to be changed in order to attain these goals, and to determine when progress has been achieved. The primary goal is to develop a comprehensive set of ATCS performance measures that relate to ATC system safety and capacity. The development of this database is one of several objectives required to achieve this goal.This database represents an important tool for selecting appropriate performance measures that can be used for evaluation of NAS operations concepts, procedures, and new equipment. This database is intended to facilitate measurement of the impact of new concepts on controller performance. Using standard database techniques, a researcher can search the database to select measures appropriate to the experimental questions under study...

goals. For example, several agencies run programs with the purpose of preventing or

measuring the efficiency of these programs in protecting life and property. Such

measures are not determinative of whether a program is effective nor does such a

comparison automatically mean one program is necessarily better or worse than another.

However, such measures help raise important questions and can help managers improve

certain aspects of their programs. This information can then be used to inform decisions

about how to direct funding and how to improve performance in specific programs.

for some crosscutting, government-wide functions: low-income housing assistance, job

insurance and so on. Each of the theses areas is described in more detail below. The number of common measures will grow over time. Only five areas have been selected at this time to keep the effort focused and manageable. Suggestions for additional common measures should be directed to OMB. You may want to coordinate with other relevant federal agencies before recommending such measures.

The central objective of the Government Effectiveness Index (GEI) is to assess how

Massachusetts is doing in comparison to other states. It seeks to provide measures of effectiveness based on the efficient use of resources (inputs as a function of quantity or output) and on performance outcomes (quality of output). It does so in regard to eight “core” functions of state government (functions common to most states): K-12 education, higher education, highways, transit, state police, the judiciary, corrections, and financial administration. This first edition tests the GEI model on a sample set of six states: Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Virginia. We chose the first four comparison states on the basis of their similarities to Massachusetts: climate, presence of industry, political culture with a commitment to organized labor, and, to some extent, geography. Virginia was included in part because of its specific differences from the other five states, but mainly because of its reputation for being a well-managed state. The restriction to six states is not a matter of principle or conception…

California State

Citizens’ Budget provides comprehensive strategies for restructuring the state government, maintaining the public’s commitment to increasing funding for education, improving performance of key state health and social service programs, and revitalizing the state’s economy by creating an environment where businesses can once again create jobs in California. Instead of seeing the budget as an “either-or” proposition, the Citizens’ Budget takes the view that California can close the deficit and still offer the same (or better) vital services currently being relied on by the citizens. The Citizens’ Budget offers line-by-line suggestions on how to achieve a balanced budget—as well as detailed implementation recommendations on how to enact spending reductions without sacrificing vital services…. the Citizens' Budget -- a non-partisan, 150-page plan that details a set of 10 reforms that, if implemented, would close California's $30 billion gap and actually produce a $6.5 billion surplus. The reforms recommended within the Citizens' Budget can be applied to state and local budgets nationwide.

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation) needs a freeway performance measurement system that extracts information from real time and historical data. PeMS (Performance Measurement System) is such a system. It presents information in various forms to assist managers, traffic engineers, planners, freeway users, researchers, and traveler information service providers (value added resellers or VARs). The purpose of this paper is to present the use of the PeMS as a tool to perform operations studies. The PeMS database and built-in applications offer several advantages in understanding the system performance and analyzing options compared to traditional approaches that are based on limited data due to the high effort and cost involved in field data collection. The use of PeMS maximizes the utility of data from loop detector surveillance systems that often are archived off-line without any processing and analysis...

The State's perfomrance measurement system is an integral part of agency and statewide planning and budgeting structures, evalutation and decision-making processes, and accountability systems. As such, it requires close, consistent, and coordinated attention in order to maintain its integrity and usefulness over time. This guide has been developed primarily to help agencies ("agency" is defined as a state agency, a university, or a health-related institution with statewide jurisdiction in the executive branch of government unless otherwise noted) gain an overall understanding of the State's performance measurement system as a part of the Texas Strategic Planning and Performance Budgeting System. This edition also includes new sections on performance rewards and penalties, management's use of performance measures and information on the SAO’s new Performance Measurement Self-Assessment Tool. Executive management should take special note of Section 2, Oversight of Performance Measurement Systems.

TX State Auditor

The State's performance measurement system is an integral part of agency and statewide planning and budgeting structures, evaluation and decision-making processes, and accountability systems. As such, it requires close, consistent, and coordinated attention in order to maintain its integrity and usefulness over time.This guide has been developed primarily to help agencies ("agency" is defined as a state agency, a university, or a health-related institution with statewide jurisdiction in the executive branch of government unless otherwise noted) gain an overall understanding of the State's Management Performance Measurement: Overview. To obtain a general description of what is contained in each module ...

http://www.lbb.state.tx.us/Performance/Reporting/Budget_Performance_Assessments_FY2002_0203.pdf

Budget and Performance Assessments of State Agencies and Institutions, 1998–2002, is designed to address the Legislature’s need for useful and timely Texas government budget and performance information.

This report is organized by government function. Each chapter includes a Fiscal Year 2002 Performance Summary, which details the percentage of each state agency’s fiscal year 2002 performance measures (i.e., Outcome/Results/Impact, Output/Volume and Efficiency) in which 95 percent of the targeted level was attained or exceeded.

Each chapter also contains a two-page budget and performance summary, or “snapshot,” for state agencies and institutions, the appellate courts, and four higher education institutional categories (General Academics, Health-Related, Public Community/Junior Colleges, and Texas State Technical College). Each snapshot contains eight elements:

This is a primer to help Rhode Island state agencies develop and improve the performance measures that are required by Rhode Island State Law. The development of performance measures are part of a state strategic planning process which assesses where agencies are, what they have to work with, what their goals are and how they will attain those goals. Agencies are required to include performance measures for each of their budget programs with their annual budget proposals which they submit to the State Budget Office.

Performance measures offer the taxpayer an opportunity to see not only what programs they pay for but also the impact of those programs. They can also can provide an evaluative tool for program managers and public-policy makers and can help improve program services and service delivery. The performance measures are also useful in the budget process as they can measure the programmatic impact of budget adjustments.

Rhode Island state agencies develop and improve the performance measures that are required by Rhode Island State Law. The development of performance measures are part of a state strategic planning process which assesses where agencies are, what they have to work with, what their goals are and how they will attain those goals. Agencies are required to include performance measures for each of their budget programs with their annual budget proposals which they submit to the State Budget Office. Performance measures offer the taxpayer an opportunity to see not only what programs they pay for but also the impact of those programs. They can also can provide an evaluative tool for program managers and public-policy makers and can help improve program services and service delivery. The performance measures are also useful in the budget process as they can measure the programmatic impact of budget adjustments. Performance measures indicate the quantity and quality of those resources (input measures), how well goods and services are delivered (process measures), the quantity and quality of goods and services (output measures) and the societal effect of these goods and services (outcome measures).

Minnesota Milestones began in 1991 in the belief that a shared vision, clear goals and

measurement of results would lead to a better future for Minnesota. As a first step,

Minnesota Planning asked people from every region to describe what they wanted their

state to be like in 30 years. The resulting vision, found below, describes the hoped-for

qualities of Minnesota’s people, communities, governments, economy and environment.

Nineteen goals distill the vision. Progress toward each goal is measured by a package of

The purpose of Minnesota Milestones is to help citizens, communities and public officials

track progress toward these 19 goals. Achieving the goals requires the collective efforts of

government, private businesses, nonprofit organizations and the citizens of Minnesota.

Oregon was the first state in the nation to articulate its hopes and expectations in measurable terms. It does so with its decade long tradition of monitoring and reporting quantitative measures called Oregon Benchmarks. These 90 benchmarks span key, interlocking economic, social and environmental issues. Examples include per capita

income, high school dropouts, child abuse, air quality and the health of native species.Benchmarks reflect what Oregonians care about. Since its inception, thousands have participated in the shaping of Oregon’s strategic vision, called Oregon Shines. The benchmarks were then designed, with the help of experts, to measure progress toward three Oregon Shines goals:

TEN IDEAS FOR IMPROVING OREGON STATE GOVERNMENT

For over a decade, Oregon has enjoyed an international reputation as a leader in public sector strategic planning. Many experts consider the state’s strategic vision, Oregon Shines, and the Oregon Benchmarks one of the best high-level visioning and benchmarking systems in the world today. To improve government performance and accountability, Oregon is linking state agencies’ efforts and planning to the benchmarks.

In the meantime, many other states, cities, and national governments have experimented with other ways to improve accountability and public sector performance. This report, requested by State Senator Steve Harper, provides Oregon decision-makers with information on promising practices used elsewhere to improve public sector performance and accountability. The report focuses on three general areas: 1) enhanced information on performance, 2) resultsbased agreements and 3) employee incentives. Each idea represents an incremental step toward improving performance and accountability. Each could be implemented separately or in conjunction with others. Each would complement the existing programs and policies currently in place…

The guidelines focus exclusively on externally reported performance measures, those measures that are reported by the agency to the legislature, DAS or the general public. External measures should reflect the highest and most results-oriented measures possible, capturing the essence of the agency’s scope of work and providing an overview of agency performance. In contrast, internal measures cascade down from these higher, externally reported measures. They are more numerous, more detailed, and more “output” oriented.

Section 2 contains specific recommendations on performance measure criteria and reporting for state agencies. Part A provides a conceptual overview of performance measurement, including a discussion of the logic required to link agency performance measures to applicable Oregon Benchmarks. Part B details both “basic” and “advanced” criteria for agency performance measures. Part C provides a schedule for incorporating performance measures into the budget process. Part D provides templates for three inter-related performance measure reporting forms: a) Links to Benchmarks, b) Performance Measure Data Summary, and c) Annual Performance Report.

Act 1465 of 1997 (the Louisiana Government Performance and Accountability Act) requires that each agency (budget unit) receiving an appropriation in the general appropriation act or the ancillary appropriation act produce a series of performance progress reports. The purpose of these reports is to provide the legislature with information on the agency's actual progress toward achievement of performance standards for performance indicators contained within the general appropriation act, the

ancillary appropriation act, and the executive budget supporting document. The Office of Planning and Budget (OPB) in the Division of Administration, as the official record keeper and repository of performance data, maintains an electronic performance database, the Louisiana Performance Accountability System (LaPAS), which tracks performance standards and actual performance. To ensure the integrity of the performance database, the OPB also designates the medium for transmission and storage and establishes the rules for electronic transmission of progress reports and database access. Quarterly performance progress reports are submitted by state departments and agencies via LaPAS. The Louisiana Performance Accountability System, or LaPAS, is an electronic database that tracks performance standards and actual performance information for Louisiana's state departments and agencies. The departments and agencies submit their quarterly performance progress reports into LaPAS via the Internet. The Office of Planning and Budget (OPB) in the Division of Administration is the official record keeper and repository of performance data and maintains LaPAS.

Washington State

The Illinois Office of the Comptroller (IOC) continues its priority to expand governmental accountability and financial reporting beyond financial data into the area of performance measurement. This ongoing and expanding effort will improve the accountability of state governmental agencies to the public they serve by making sure that state resources are used efficiently and effectively to accomplish the purposes for which they were earmarked. This report contains data from state agencies that summarize the accomplishments achieved by the programs they administer.

In cooperation with the Governor's Office of Strategic Planning, the Comptroller's Office has instituted a process by which state agencies annually report on their performance in carrying out their statutory missions.

The Public Accountability Report presents the results and outcomes of the programs and services offered by the state's top agencies. By assembling this account of what results the state's fiscal year 2000 $44 billion budget has yielded, the people of Illinois will be better able to judge how their state government performs for them.

Wisconsin State

USE AND THE EFFECTS OF USING PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR BUDGETING, MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING

The state of Wisconsin is a useful example of a state that has adopted performance measures in a piloted capacity. Overall, performance measures have been used for some time in Wisconsin in a decentralized fashion and appear to have taken firm root in some parts of the state government. The 1999-2001 pilot process, which formalized the adoption of performance measures in the budget process by selected agencies, illustrates the commitment of Wisconsin legislators to take the process seriously and attempt to integrate it in an effective fashion in budget and policy decision making. Great strides have also been made in the state in terms of the integration of information technology in the performance measurement process. Over the years, under different administrations, the Wisconsin state government and its agencies have made a variety of attempts to implement aspects of performance-based management, including, for example, strategic planning by agencies and attempts to consider “return on investment” in budgeting. Over the past decade, the state of Wisconsin has cooperatively worked across the branches, through executive staff offices, including the Division of Executive Budget and Finance, and legislative staff offices, with legislative appropriations committee members and agency staff, in developing performance measures that effectively communicate the performance of programs and departments. In addition, private consultants were hired to perform benchmarks on centralized mainframe operations. The statewide Information Technology (IT) standards that have been established also bode well for further performance measure development, as the technology will facilitate information tracking within and across state agencies.

USE AND THE EFFECTS OF USING PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR BUDGETING, MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING

The state of Maine legislated performance budgeting in 1997, with required implementation by 2001. This legislation has been the driving force behind the performance measurement movement in the state. The timing of this study provides a unique opportunity to view the implementation of a performance measurement system within a state government. The experiences of the state of Maine provide insight into the organizational requirements necessary to support performance measurement. The need for leadership and training are the two recurring themes throughout this study. Leadership is needed to sustain and reinforce the importance of the initiative. Initial and continuous training are needed to provide the expertise within the agencies and across the government in order to identify key objectives and develop meaningful measures that document the performance of the government. In the state of Maine, both the leadership and the training are functions of the executive branch. The performance measurement initiative is relatively young, with the first performance measures being used in the 2002-2003 biennium budget process. At the time of this study, the executive branch was developing agency and some crosscutting output measures of performance.

The state of Maine is pursuing an aggressive implementation timeline established in the enabling performance budgeting legislation. While this timeframe is aggressive, it appears that the executive branch will be successful in meeting the requirements of the law by implementing performance budgeting by 2001.

d. Identify ways to leverage scarce resources and improve interagency coordination; and

Accountability Requirements and Implementation in Florida State Government… Florida Statutes, the Government Performance and Accountability Act, requires submission by state agencies of performance-based budget requests, programs, and performance meas ..How to prepare a diagram depicting the outcomes and outputs of a programures… DEVELOPING PERFORMANCE MEASURES… MEASUREMENT PITFALLS TO AVOID…

…The FDEP began to focus and manage for results by building a performance measurement system that identifies emerging problems and supplies the contextual information needed to target resources and build collaborative partnerships with outside stakeholders to fix them. The measurement system is embodied in the "Secretary’s Quarterly Performance Report" (SQPR) which the FDEP distributes to all stakeholders via hard copy and the Internet. The FDEP’s measurement system is different than traditional "balanced scorecard" measurement systems in that customer and employee satisfaction are not included in the measurement system.The goal of the FDEP’s measurement/management system is to identify environmental problems and the impacts that appear to be causing the greatest environmental harm as soon as possible so that roles for each stakeholder can be identified and implemented. Roles for regulatory agencies include such activities as addressing ….

To increase productivity and agency performance by rewarding productive employees and providing managers with incentives in the budget process to implement change To ensure that the benefits of productive savings are shared among the three major affected segments: employee/manager, taxpayer and a more productive future work environment. Accordingly, taxpayer savings and "dividends" will not only help create a "corporate culture" to economize (reversing the current culture) but will also provide the seed corn to ensure needed capital is re-deployed for continuous productivity enhancements. The Productivity Enhancement Program is designed to increase employee productivity through the elimination of vacant positions, reallocation of workload and shared savings with employees and the State. The program would be voluntary, in that management and all employees in the participating section would agree to the terms of the program. It is imperative that all employees be fully informed on the benefits of the program and how it would be implemented.

Virginia's current managing for results system has been operational since 1995. It is comprised of four, linked processes: strategic planning, performance measurement, program evaluation, and performance budgeting. The figure below presents one way to show the linkages between these processes. Because the processes are designed to work together to manage the performance of state government, this system is referred to as the Virginia's "performance management" system…Virginia's Planning and Performance Handbook…Performance Management Advisory Committee Reports…Performance Management Annual Report: Fiscal Year 2001…Recent Performance Management Presentations and Articles

Missouri has utilized performance measurement for at least 25 years; however, during the past six years efforts have intensified. This recent focus emerged from a comprehensive review of the state to evaluate its strengths and weaknesses, and prescribe reform. In 1993, the Governor established the Missouri Commission on Management and Productivity (COMAP) by Executive Order with the goals of improving government efficiency and productivity and making service to the public, rather than bureaucratic activity, the measure of program success.The Missouri Commission on Management and Productivity was based on the experiences of other states that conducted successful management and productivity reviews. The Commission, composed of private sector executives, elected officials, and state senior-level managers, was established to ensure a partnership in reviewing state operations and developing recommendations for improvement. A steering committee was established to ensure a partnership in reviewing state operations, developing recommendations for improvement, and implementing …

http://www.maine.gov/spo/sp/stratplan/docs/origpdf/Performance%20Measurement/MaineGuide02.pdf

Maine law requires that state agencies develop performance measures for each of the State’s budget programs to which the Legislature appropriates or allocates funds. The measures appear as part of the Governor’s biennial budget proposal and, ultimately, the Legislature will act on them as part of the state budget process. The purpose of this manual is to assist agencies with developing and maintaining their performance measures. It provides guidance on establishing a comprehensive measurement system that will allow agencies and departments to produce and maintain meaningful performance information for use by decision-makers. It is important to understand that performance measurement is part of the larger policymaking venue. Performance measurement does not supplant traditional decision-making, rather it organizes information so that policymakers can use it. Performance measures are designed to inform…

The North Carolina Benchmarking Project (NCBP) was initiated in September 1995, providing a comparative basis for local governments to assess service delivery and costs. It allows municipalities to compare themselves with other participating units and with their own internal operations over time. The benchmarking process includes compiling service and cost information, cleaning the data for accuracy, calculating the selected performance measures, and comparing the results. The NCBPt has achieved some overall goals and produced some valuable lessons regarding performance measurement, benchmarking, and cost accounting, in addition to specific results for the participating cities...

The South Carolina Municipal Benchmarking Project provides a forum for South Carolina’s cities of varying sizes to share performance information on four service areas: police, fire, solid waste services and parks and recreation. By benchmarking their performance and meeting with counterparts across the state, participants are able to better monitor their performance and learn more efficient and customer-friendly ways of doing business.

Creating and implementing a regional collaborative benchmarking effort can be a daunting and time consuming task. The South Carolina Municipal Benchmarking Project can be replicated by using the project's process model. Listed below are the process steps one would need to follow. Contained within each of the steps is a historical account and detailed explanation of how the participants and Project staff have implemented each critical step.

The DC Scorecard is a community-driven performance measurement process for determining priorities and evaluating government services.

is a vehicle for communicating information to citizens, customers, and stakeholders inside and outside of government about the City government’s performance.

focuses on the top priorities of citizens and hence, the top service priorities of the government as a whole.

is designed to collect and disseminate information in a simple, understandable form.

provides the vehicle for District Government to regularly collect feedback and data on key indicators and subsequently report these results to the public

The DC Scorecard is a mechanism to assess District Government’s progress on issues important to DC residents and other consumers of city services. Many other cities in the country produce similar annual scorecards on local government performance.

Priority areas for the Scorecard were selected through extensive consultation with City officials, residents and other consumers of city services, and experts. In June of 1997, a large representative sample of District residents was surveyed to gauge their level of satisfaction on a number of basic services. As a follow-up to the residents’ survey, a small representative sample of residents from each ward participated in one-on-one interviews in the Spring of 1999 to help guide the development of the DC Scorecard. The citizen-defined priority areas derived from these two efforts are:

In issuing Concepts Statement No. 2 on service efforts and accomplishments reporting in 1994, the Board called for a five-year period of experimentation with the use of performance measures before they considered whether to proceed with the establishment of reporting requirements as part of general purpose external financial reporting. In the fall of 1996, the GASB staff, working in conjunction with the National Academy of Public Administration and the GASB's service efforts and accomplishments task force, developed the first of two questionnaires to collect information about the current use and reporting of performance measures by state and local governments. This report includes the analysis of that survey's results, which sought information about whether those responding have developed performance measures, whether they are using them for decision-making purposes, what types of performance measures they are using, what aspects of management these measures are being used for, to whom they are being reported, whether measures are being verified, specific programs for which performance measures are being used, whether the use of performance measures is required, and whether entities are planning to continue or begin using them in the future. The second survey, which will seek additional information about the use and effect of using performance measures, is being prepared and will be sent to those entities that indicated that they have developed or use such measures.

***Performance Measurement at the State and Local Levels:----A Summary of Survey Results

This report is part of a multiyear effort by the GASB to extend the Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) research that is funded in part by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. The Performance Measurement Research Team consists of GASB researchers, faculty from the Andrew Young School of Policy Studies at Georgia State University, a government agency consultant, and two graduate students. This report is based on a large and extensive mail survey that was sent to state budget offices, state agency staff, and city and county budget and department staff across the country. The results of this survey provide us with an overview of performance measurement use in management and budgetary decision making at both the state and local levels.

USE AND THE EFFECTS OF USING PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR BUDGETING, MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING

the city of SanJose, California, has developed a results-driven performance management system. Over several years, the city has made steady progress in building its “Investing in Results” (IiR) approach to measuring and managing performance, starting with two pilot departments and recently adding all other city departments. In the most recent city budget process, all departments made budget submissions to the mayor and City Council using the new IiR structure, in which each department identified its “core services” (its key lines of business) and related performance measures, and showed how its core services and measures are aligned with the department’s mission. Since then, the city government has been developing cross-functional “City Service Areas” and related performance measures, as well as citywide strategic initiatives, to focus all departments’ efforts on achieving the City Council’s policy priorities reflected in the Council’s “Vision for Quality of Life.” San Jose officials interviewed for this case study offer a variety of perspectives. Their views represent different elected, policy, management, and audit perspectives, as well as departments at different stages in developing their performance management systems. So this case offers interesting examples and lessons learned from people with different roles, working at different stages in the implementation process.

Thank you for your interest about our Performance Measure Certification (PMC) Review

adoption of a countywide performance management system called “Managing For Results” (MfR). MfR focuses employees and our organizational culture on achieving results for the customer/citizen. Under MfR, departments quantify results, outputs, demand, efficiency and progress toward their outcome goals in specific terms (e.g., what’s the true benefit to the public?). The County has revamped its strategic planning, budgeting, and accounting systems to facilitate MfR. When our Board of Supervisors adopted the MfR management system, they directed Internal Audit to verify MfR results.

At the time of our report, Maricopa County had 621 Key Performance Measures.We reviewed 34 of these key measures in fiscal year 2002 and found that 93% of them, as reported, were reliable.

Investing for Results---- Five Strategic Priorities Focus All City Services

http://results.muni.org/
The Wuerch Administration has established five strategic priorities
that make Anchorage an All-America City. Each priority has specific
measures of success that report to citizens how well a program is
meeting its intended goals. Public Safety,Economic Growth,Spirit of Community and so on.
It's a program that provides citizens with information on Anchorage's citywide priorities and measures of success. It helps answer the question of whether government spending has produced results or provided citizens with the value they expect. Departmental services and success measures are listed by program on the "Results by Department" page for those with an interest in a particular agency. This is the Municipality's report of the "return on investment" for citizen dollars - the Municipality's "bottom line."

Albuquerque, New Mexico's Mayor and City Council have established five-year goals "to direct city programs in ways that make them more responsive to community needs and conditions, thereby improving the efficacy and performance of government services."

The City has developed a set of quantitative measures for assessing its progress toward achieving these eight categories of goals:

What is CitiStat? CitiStat is an accountability tool based on the ComStat program pioneered in the New York City Police Department by Jack Maple. CompStat, utilizing computer pin mapping and weekly accountability sessions, helped the NYPD dramatically reduce crime and is employed today by several police departments around the world. Mayor O'Malley is convinced that this same process can be used, not only for crime, but for every City agency from Public Works to Health. In short, CitiStat is how the Mayor runs the City. Strategies are developed and employed, managers held accountable, and results measured --not yearly, quarterly, or monthly, but week to week. How does CitiStat work? Every day, Baltimore's departments gather data about city workers, housing, playgrounds, streets, railroad crossings, potholes, graffiti, utilities, snow plows and other vehicles, emergency fire calls, leaf collections, parking permits. Departments enter data into a simple computer program and every two weeks produce a 10- to 15-page report for the mayor's staff. The staff briefs the mayor on important trends, trouble spots, and continuing challenges. Department heads take turns on the "hot seat," as they answer questions about the maps, charts, and graphs prepared using the CitiStat software program. By taking a hard look at the data, public managers can focus on improving service delivery in areas where their departments fall short

Welcome to the Fairfax County Performance Measurement Initiative. We are constantly seeking to improve our operations and services. Performance Measurement is one of the tools we use to do this. Fairfax County's performance measures are integrated into our annual budget to ensure accountability and establish the link between resources and results. The following are some of the materials we found useful and hope you do too.... Manuals. Basic Manual for Performance Measurement - 2003 edition. Data Collection for Performance Measurement Manual - 2003 edition. ...

Throughout the 1990s, Prince William County, Virginia incrementally implemented processes to convert traditional budget and reporting to a managing for results program. Development activities included identifying program missions, goals, and objectives; establishment of a Commission on the Future, which resulted in implementation of a strategic planning process with regular revisions and updates, with an emphasis on making the government more effective and accountable; developing a citizen survey and a Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) Report; and implementing performance based budgeting, with a shift from a line-item orientation to a focus on achieving outcomes and program results, with resources allocated toward achievement of strategic objectives... The County now has a comprehensive

performance measurement model, which one interviewee referred to as “a grand scheme.” The overall intent was to establish a system of accountability focused on developing community and program results, tying resources to accomplishing results, and reporting to government officials, elected officials, and the public on the extent to which results are accomplished. Performance measures in the County were developed program by program as ....

Service Quality Measurements (SQMs) are calculated to illustrate BellSouth’s Operational SupportSystem performance. The Louisiana Public Service Commission mandates that BellSouth publishmonthly performance measurement reports of SQM values for the Competitive Local Exchange Carriers(CLECs) engaged in business activity with BellSouth in the State of Louisiana. BellSouth providesCLEC Aggregate processed data1 (Performance Measurement AnalysisPlatform (PMAP) raw data2) asneeded to BearingPoint...

USE AND THE EFFECTS OF USING PERFORMANCE MEASURES FORBUDGETING, MANAGEMENT, AND REPORTING

Performance goals and indicators are intended to be used for assessing and ensuring that

DeKalb’s programs and services are delivered efficiently and effectively. The county has

implemented the performance measurement system with the intent to better manage operations, to allocate resources, and for service planning and general budgeting. Early in the effort, DeKalb County included department heads and senior staff to develop and collect measures of input, output, and outcome as well as those that assess client demand and efficiency of operation. This effort has produced a large set of indicators that department heads and others can use to better manage, monitor, and evaluate their functions and activities. The process for implementing this system in DeKalb County was marked by the sustained leadership of then-CEO Liane Levetan and others throughout the government with a commitment to provide better service on the part of individual departments. Further, implementation of this system is characterized by significant planning, inclusiveness of department directors and staff in determining and “auditing” measures, and adherence to a reasonable timeframe for institutionalization of the system. The greatest lack of the system as implemented concerns the inadequacy of communication regarding individual, team, and department performance, both internally within the county government structure and externally to program clients and citizens in general.

Eleven cities in the Kansas City metropolitan area, along with the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC), the region’s council of governments, developed the Kansas City Performance Measurement Pilot Project. By approaching performance measurements in a cooperative manner the participating cities were able to reduce the costs of expert assistance to their individual governments, were able to learn about performance measures, were able to share information among staff, and were able to compare results to those of other communities going through the same process Local governments in the Kansas City metropolitan area are interested in performance measurements and a number of them have tried to use performance measures on individual projects or in individual departments. . By approaching performance measurement in a cooperative manner the participating cities were able to reduce the costs of expert assistance to their individual governments, were able to learn more about performance measures and how to develop and use them, were able to share information among staff, and were able to compare results to those of other communities going through the same process

The NCBPt has achieved some overall goals and produced some valuable lessons regarding performance measurement, benchmarking, and cost accounting, in addition to specific results for the participating cities…

Three types of performance measures are used and reported: workload, efficiency, and effectiveness. A city's performance is compared to the performance average, noting that the average is comprised of services with numerous variations and should be viewed with caution. The measures used in this report do not assess total service performance. They gauge certain service dimensions and should be approached with an understanding of the service being provided.

recently used performance measurements to justify a financial decision during a tight budget season. According to Layton, a budget request for an additional police officer was declined when performance data showed that crime rates, case clearance rates, and citizen survey data did not justify additional staffing. As a participant in ICMA's Center for Performance Measurement, Urbandale was able to compare its performance on crime rates and clearance rates to more than 125 other cities in North America. "Throughout the entire budget process, financial constraints forced us to make difficult decisions and considerable compromises on priorities. Having good performance measures makes it easier to defend our resource allocation decisions," Gloo said.

In addition, Urbandale has made some data available on its Web site so that the public can review it. According to Gloo, "The councilmembers place a high value on performance measurement data. The graphs allow them to get a good visual representation of how well we are doing compared to similar cities."

The City of Charlotte began developing and implementing their balanced scorecard measurement system approximately three years ago. Charlotte’s interest in the balanced scorecard approach resulted from their interest in using a more strategic, forward-looking framework to organize and implement performance measures. Prior to using the balanced scorecard, they had been measuring performance for decades in a more traditional management-by-objectives context.In 1990, Charlotte City Council chose five areas (community safety, transportation, economic development, neighborhoods, and restructuring government) on which to focus its strategic plan. These priorities formed the basic categories in their "corporate" level scorecard. In the mid-1990s, several Councilmembers advocated for more outcome- or results-oriented measures. At about the same time, the City Manager became interested in the balanced scorecard approach, having read ..

Austin has a reputation for progressive and customer-focused management. The City of Austin uses a family of indicators which measure results, outputs, efficiencies and demands. The City takes great care to ensure that the measurements reflect both their strategic priorities and the "hot topics" which occupy their citizens’ interest. Started about ten years ago, the process was initiated to improve government accountability.The City’s Annual Budget includes over 1,000 measures of results, outputs, efficiency, and demands. Because those 1,000 measures are too cumbersome to create an effective communication tool, the City also produces a "Community Scorecard" of the several dozen most critical performance measurements.

The City of Phoenix began developing and implementing performance measures in 1990. The effort was, and still is, coordinated through the City Auditor’s office. Phoenix’s interest in performance measurement at the time was in part fueled by their interest in total quality management practices and the Government Accounting Standards Board’s (GASB) Service Efforts and Accomplishment (SEA) program. In 1990 five departments began the process of defining and reporting on a set of performance measures. Each subsequent year an additional five departments followed suite, until by 1995 all 25 city departments were in some way implementing performance measurement. Despite having been engaged at some level in performance measurement for almost ten years, one official described their efforts as still essentially in the "toddler" phase. Many of the outcome measures are still focused on activities, and there is much to learn and improve upon to make their measurement effort a more systematic, useful component of their decision making and resource allocations. ..

Performance measures have always been a part of life, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly. Sunday school teachers award gold stars to children who attend class. Report cards and merit badges are given to show completion of various tasks. Track coaches use a stopwatch to measure progress. Performance measures show us how we are doing-where we are strong and where we need improvement.American government today faces a crisis in consumer confidence. Government's customers-- taxpaying citizens--are expressing their concern about the quality and cost of public services. The recent trends in "downsizing," "right-sizing," and "devolution" all point toward a demand for more accountability for government units, where those government units are being required more and more to do more with less. However, one question must be asked: "Can anything be done to improve government's performance?" Governments today are beginning to use the same management tools that have been used in the private sector, including strategic planning, benchmarking, performance measurement, and results-oriented management. These tools can help elected officials and public managers make better-informed policy decisions, determine the best uses of limited resources, enhance service quality, and improve communications with citizens

Measuring the Measurers: A Nonprofit Assessment of the Government Performance and Results

This report evaluates GPRA's implementation from the perspective of the nonprofit community. Specifically, it asks how important GPRA is to nonprofit stakeholders, how productive increased involvement by nonprofit stakeholders in GPRA would be, and to what extent nonprofit stakeholders or nonprofit performance measurement experts have influenced GPRA's implementation thus far.

These questions were addressed in a series of case studies of GPRA implementation in four federal agencies (The Administration on Children and Families, the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Federal Communications Commission), a survey of cabinet-level GPRA coordinators, a survey of nonprofit organizations, and a mini-survey of nonprofit performance measurement experts…

Taking the Performance Test: Implementing Administrative Measures in Higher Education

This draft document, entitled: "Taking the Performance Test: Implementing Administrative Measures in Higher Education," is the product of a four author team collaborating during the first phase of the UC Partnership for Performance initiative. The "measurement handbook" is produced for University business and administrative units invested in performance measurement and improvement efforts. A draft work in progress, this document captures some of the lessons learned throughout the UC Partnership for Performance initiative to date. It also discusses a broad range of measurement related topics, some conceptual in nature, others applied…

BALANCED SCORECARD - (UC ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT UNITS)-Acdemic Organization

The balanced scorecard tracks key elements of an organization's strategy -- from serving its constituencies to developing partnerships, ensuring financial stewardship, building skills, fostering teamwork and continuously improving the effectiveness of internal work processes. No single measure can provide insight into an organization’s performance into relation to specific goals. The balanced scorecard allows the organization to view its performance through multiple lenses. The following table contains goals, arranged in the balanced scorecard format, for UC business administration and operations, which were developed by senior UC administrative leadership in 1995. These University-wide goals provide the foundation for the development of administrative business area goals and performance measures.

Important assumptions in the delivery of education are, on the one hand, that quality performance in educational institutions is desirable and necessary, and that the quality of educational services can be measured/assessed; on the other hand are firmly grounded beliefs that educational institutions are publicly accountable in terms of value for money, and that public funding levels should be determined to some extent by performance monitoring procedures - see for example Sherman Dorn's overview of The Political Legacy of School Accountability Systems . Performance monitoring commmonly consists of interrelated systems of institutional self-assessment and external evaluation/acccreditation; most external monitoring entities are government-based, though media surveys sometimes undertake similar exercises for commercial purposes. Our concern is look at performance monitoring practices and their effectiveness in enhancing the delivery of quality education…

The Use of Performance Models in Higher Education:A Comparative International Review

· Higher education (HE) administrators worldwide are responding to performance-based state agendas for public institutions. Largely ideologically-driven, this international fixation on performance is also advanced by the operation of isomorphic forces within HE's institutional field. Despite broad agreements on the validity of performance goals, there is no "one best" model or predictable set of consequences. Context matters. Responses are conditioned by each nation's historical and cultural institutional legacy. To derive a generalized set of consequences, issues, and impacts, we used a comparative international format to examine the way performance models are applied in the United States, England, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Our theoretical framework draws on understandings of performance measures as normalizing instruments of governmentality in the "evaluative state," supplemented by field theory of organizations

Monitoring the Performance of Educational Programmes in Developing Countries

The overall purpose of this monograph is to lay the groundwork for developing a series of indicators for education that can be used to monitor progress in education projects, in country specific education systems, in developmental spin-offs from investment in education and in terms of poverty reduction. In the current policy climate, the focus is on basic education…The overall message of the report is that whilst anyone can develop performance indicators, the problem is to identify the social forces which have led to the generation of data, and therefore to take into account the misuses to which they can be put by arbitrary authority.

Monica Brinkley presents the EQUINOX Project, which is further developing the area of performance measurement and quality management in libraries. This is being achieved by expanding current international standards for library performance indicators to include performance indicators for electronic library services. The EQUINOX project will also propose and test an integrated performance measurement and quality management system for libraries, which will facilitate the implementation of these practices in libraries... The EQUINOX Project aims to facilitate the further implementation of performance measurement and quality management in European libraries. By developing an internationally agreed set of performance indicators for electronic library services, the project is addressing a significant gap in the current international standard ISO 11620. The project is proposing and testing a model for a quality management and performance measurement system for libraries. This system will greatly facilitate the library manager wishing to implement quality management practices and should make data collection, collation and review more manageable. To ensure that all aspects of the project are embedded in the reality of current library practice throughout Europe,…

...The purpose of this paper is to show that there are small differences in the methods used in a public or special library, when they want to carry out a performance measurement. To me it seems as almost every indicator is applicable in all types of libraries. My background is from different work in the public library sector, but for the last three years I have been working in a special government library for the ministries. In 1991/92 I was involved in a project using Nick Moore's draft manual on performance measurement in a public library in Norway...

A Guide to Using Performance Measurement Systems for Continuous Improvement1

The Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO)requires that accredited organizations use a Performance Measurement System that meets JCAHO inclusion requirements to satisfy performance outcome and measurement expectations. The system is used for both internal performance control and external performance comparisons and is known as the ORYZ initiative. This article outlines a three-step approach to using a Performance Measurement System based on the philosophy of continuous improvement and the methods of statistical process control (SPC). SPC, the methodology recommended by JCAHO, can be applied to the analysis of many quality measures and can be implemented with MS-Excel....

This document will explain the procedures the Hospital Performance Measurements Staff must follow to review feedback reports for COMPdata Performance Measurements - Data Collection on the internet.Enclosed are step-by-step procedures for accessing COMPdata's performance measurements data collection feedback reports, as well as how to download and import your matched data to your Cart Tool...

Main goal: To improve the capability to deal with floods, storms and tempests...Rewrite the Operations Manual. Currently in draft. Page 5. performance measurement page 24 STRATEGY TARGET ACHIEVEMENT Introduce a single telephone point of ...

The Workers' Compensation Health Initiative, a national program of The Rober Wood Johnson Foundation was begun in October of 1995. Six million dollars was made available to support demonstration and evaluation projects testing innovations in the delivery and financing of the medical care portion of workers' compensation (WC). The goal of these innovations was to improve the quality of care provided to injured workers while containing costs.

To compile a standardized set of performance measures for managed care organizations providing care for workers' compensation cases and demonstrate the use of the measurement tool in up to five managed care organizations.This is the first publicly available standardized protocol for the collection of performance and quality measurement indicators in workers' compensation health care. Using a consensus approach, methods and tools were developed to measure worker access to medical care; coordination of care; communication with injured workers; return to work; health and physical functioning; patient satisfaction; prevention counseling; appropriate clinical care; medical costs; and utilization... as MCO structure or worker characteristics affect measurement. ... Compensation Managed Care Organizations: Technical Manual of Performance Measures." Washington ...

Balancing the Scales: Measuring the Roles and Contributions of Nonprofit Organizations and Religious Congregations

Balancing the Scales: Measuring the Roles and Contributions of Nonprofit Organizations and Religious Congregations details the record-keeping, evaluation and accountability practices of nonprofit organizations in the arts, education, environment, health, human services, public benefit and religious congregation subsectors.The report is part of INDEPENDENT SECTOR’s Measures Project, an initiative launched in 1996 to address the lack of information about the contributions of the nonprofit sector. More than 900 organizations and religious congregations participated in this groundbreaking survey.

Accountability has long been a priority of nonprofits, but several factors, such as the growing presence of nonprofits in the economy, increased examination of nonprofit funding and the practice of nonprofits adopting business-like practices, have led to an increased focus.

Both nonprofits and religious congregations illustrate their effectiveness and accountability to various stakeholders by collecting data on the costs of services provided, demographics of clients served, quality of services provided and external inspections of programs. Yet the rates of data collection among these types of organizations vary significantly:

SINCE MOST KEY BUSINESS PERFORMANCE MEASURES don’t work for not-for-profit organizations, these groups need to develop specialized measures to help them achieve their goal-driven strategic plans. One approach NPOs use is to measure the amount of resources they spend on providing program services vs. management and general expenses. This article reports on one organization’s experience in developing better performance measures. The Christian Children’s Fund (CCF) (see sidebar below) put together what it calls its annual impact monitoring and evaluation system (AIMES). For organizations of this type, accountability is extremely important. CPAs can use outcome measures to help similar organizations achieve their goal-driven strategic plans.

Governments all over the world are introducing new systems for measuring the performance of public organisations, and of contractors or Non-Governmental Organisations providing services paid for by public funds.

There have been many new developments in performance measurement, reporting and management in recent years. These range from new conceptual frameworks of performance to new technologies for managing performance information.

The UK has been one of the leading countries in developing performance systems: virtually every part of the UK's public services - employing some five million people - now have to report on their performance.

The roots of Britain’s measurement effort go back to the 1980s. The Government, under then Prime Minister Margaret Thacher, put great faith in the ability of the private sector to provide government services. They enacted Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT), a mandatory competitive bidding policy for local services. CCT was designed to root out inefficiencies in local government services by privatizing them. Next, Prime Minister John Major desired to improve local public services in addition to making them more efficient. This led to the 1992 requirement that local governments collect and publish annual data —largely focusing on cost and efficiency —on 178 indicators covering all their services.

Britain’s Labour Party was critical of this focus on costs. Following their election, the new Labour Government repealed CCT and replaced it with Best Value, effective April 1, 2000. Best Value requires local authorities to make continuous improvement not only in the economy and efficiency of services but also in their effectiveness. The focus on effectiveness (outcomes) is a significant addition to UK’s overall measurement system

The introduction of the Best Value regime for local government gave rise to a surge of interest from local authorities in the EFQM Excellence Model (the Excellence Model). The Excellence Model was cited with approval in the 1998 White Paper ‘Modern Local Government: In touch with the people’. It had already been promoted by the Cabinet Office for use by central government departments, and latterly for wider use across the public sector.

For local authorities the Excellence Model seemed to offer a number of benefits. It offered the opportunity to adopt a whole-organisation approach and a formula for consistent performance assessment, planning and review and continuous improvement, with a focus on outcomes. The self-assessment approach offered an opportunity to engage staff in the process of review and designing improvements. Usage of the Excellence Model across public and private sectors would also enable authorities to use comparators beyond local government.

This publication is not a ‘how to’ or a detailed explanation of the model. Instead this publication is aimed at disseminating the experiences of some authorities in using the Excellence Model to tackle Best Value. It includes the results of a survey of those councils which had informed the IDeA that they were using the Excellence Model in 2000, some detailed case studies from individual authorities and the experiences of a range of public and private sector practitioners. The publication’s objective is to give an honest assessment of the benefits and dangers of using the Excellence Model in local authorities as part of the Best Value process….

Best Value has a vital role to play in helping authorities to improve public services. This paper identifies the essentials that will help authorities get the most out of Best Value, so that they deliver consistently high quality services that meet the needs of local people.

Introduced in 1999, Best Value has quickly entered the parlance of every local government officer and member up and down the country. The mantra of the 4Cs – the development and refinement of the process – the joining up – the scramble to complete reviews – the industry of benchmarking and consultation – the joy and pain of inspection, all adding up to a vast amount of work, an equal measure of change and, for some, not only the prospects for improvement but real delivery too. But the context for Best Value is changing. Research has shown that despite real improvement, Best Value for many authorities has failed to reach its potential.

This paper is a think piece written to stimulate ideas and help authorities think through how they can get the best out of Best Value, as an improvement tool, in the context of Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA). CPA is a key component of the Government’s new regulatory performance management framework. It provides a basis on which additional freedoms and flexibilities can be offered, audit and inspection co-ordinated and a trigger for intervention. CPA is also aimed at helping authorities identify their own strengths and weaknesses so that they can focus their improvement action accordingly. In addition to this

broader change to the overall regulatory context, their post–CPA performance improvement frameworks?

The Government has also been developing new guidance on the mechanics of Best Value and performance improvement. In confirming the revocation of the requirement for authorities to review all their functions over a five-year cycle, the

guidance, among other things, is also likely to stress the importance…This paper is written with the CPA regime and emerging revised guidance in mind

The review of an individual local authority begins by attempting to place it in a context using the benchmark of an ‘ideal’ authority, which has all the desirable attributes of a modern and effective council. The basis for developing the benchmark was the Local Government Acts 1999 and 2000, the Strong Local Leadership: Quality Public Services White Paper and the CPA Framework. General theories and practical experience of continuous improvement and

1. The twelve features of a local authority which is fully effective in leading its community, working successfully in widespread partnerships, delivering Best Value and achieving continuous improvement in all aspects of its work.

2. Three organisational themes or areas in which a fully effective local authority will need to perform strongly, together with general indicators of achievement.

4. Definitions of the core competencies with evidence-based indicators of levels of achievement.

This report has been prepared for the National Audit Office (UK). It is a preparatory report that will be summarized for inclusion as an appendix for the forthcoming NAO report on the use of performance measurement by UK central government departments. The NAO report will be presented to Parliament, specifically the Committee of Public Accounts. The report has been compiled by desk research on performance measurement developments in eight countries: Australia; Canada; Denmark; Finland; Netherlands; New Zealand; Sweden; and the USA. These countries were chosen because they had relatively known high levels of activity and experience on performance measurement. It was hoped they would also provide a diversity of experiences. The analysis is restricted to national or federal level, which does not mean this is the only or even the most important place where performance measurement is occurring. Nor is the federal level necessarily driving change – in Australia, for example, it obviously has led the way whereas in the USA local and state-level governments were developing systems independently, and sometimes in advance of, federal government. This level has been selected mainly for ease of comparability, both between jurisdictions and with the UK study.

Measuring the Performance of Government Departments

Good Practice in Performance:Reporting in Executive Agencies and Non-Departmental Public Bodies

referred to as “agencies” in this report). Its purpose is to assist agencies to improve further their performance reporting by setting out guidance based on their own good practice in collecting and reporting performance information. This report has been prepared in consultation with the Cabinet Office, the Treasury, and the agencies concerned. The facts so far as they relate to these two departments and the agencies have been agreed with them. The opinions are those of the National Audit Office. The report draws on the results of our work on agency performance, including validations of reported performance, and presents case study material alongside some more general statements about good practice. Having regard to Cabinet Office and Treasury guidance, the report sets out our recommendations to agencies which cover the quality of performance data and presenting results, against the background of relating reported performance to key activities.This is a general report on performance measurement and reporting in central government and it is designed to contribute to the debate in this developing area.

National Assembly for Wales Performance Indicators for 2001/2002

http://www.wales.gov.uk/subilocalgov/content/consultation/pi%27s%202001-02.rtf
The exercise to review the number and utility of the best value performance indicators in Wales is an attempt to remove confusion, reduce the burden and aid the production of meaningful performance information. The fundamental aim of best value performance indicators is to support the key best value principle of continuous improvement in the delivery of local authority services. The set of indicators the National Assembly is consulting on will aim to establish a consistent set of performance data which will allow an annual assessment of performance in all service areas to ascertain whether continuous improvement is being achieved.

Best value also places an obligation on authorities to compare their performance, and consistency in the information to be compared will be essential.

It is the National Assembly’s intention that the set of performance indicators put in place after this consultation will remain stable for a number of years, although it will be prepared to receive evidence which suggests over time that indicators should be added, deleted or modified.

The set of performance indicators <http://www.wales.gov.uk/subilocalgov/content/consultation/pi%27s%202001-02.rtf> on which we are consulting would reduce the numbers from 172 indicators for 2000-2001, to 83 for 2001-2002.

Performance Measurement of U.K. University Libraries

This is a ground-breaking three-year project, which has been underway in Lancashire since May 2002. Lancashire staff are working with researchers from the Library and Information Statistics Unit (LISU) at Loughborough University, to develop new ways of evaluating the performance of the library service. The project seeks to develop management 'tools', which will enable library staff across the County to contribute to improvements in service delivery. The project is funded by Resource and Lancashire County Library and Information Service until mid-2005, although by then, it is envisaged that evidence based management will be firmly embedded in the working 'culture' of Lancashire County Library Service, and hence, the initiative will continue to evolve.

Better Regulation: Making Good Use of Regulatory Impact Assessments

affect the daily lives of citizens and the costs borne by business, charities and

effectsTothis end, policy makers in departments and agencies are required to undertake

a regulatory impact assessment (RIA) before taking action which has a regulatory

acting, so as to help deliver better regulation. RIAs go through several stages as

the proposal is developed (paragraph 1.23), resulting in an initial RIA when the

proposal is being formulated, a partial RIA which forms part of the consultation

This paper is written at the request of General Expenditure Policy, HMT, as a contribution to the current review of departmental PSAs. It draws on the learning and experience gained over the last decade within the Audit Commission, through devising systems of performance measurement and review for local government - including setting performance indicators for local authorities under the Citizen.s Charter initiative, and more recently, in the development of the best value regime..

Section One goes back to first principles, asking why do it: what are the aims of performance measurement? Section Two examines the principles of performance measurement, setting out seven key considerations to bear in mind in developing a system of performance measurement. Section Three asks what makes a good performance measure, setting out three over-arching considerations in setting the measures themselves. Section Four looks at how to measure performance. How can raw data on the basic .inputs. and outputs. of a service be translated into measures of economy, efficiency and effectiveness? How can we measure quality? What makes a good target? The concluding section briefly considers the pressures on government departments to deliver continued improvements in productivity, making the importance of instituting effective systems of performance review more critical than ever.

Australia

There has been a transformation of the Australian Public Service in the last generation. Management reforms have placed a much greater emphasis on results. The last decade has seen much stronger focus placed on value-for-money in service provision; explicit reporting on outputs and outcomes rather than input and process; the adoption of new information technology; improved client focus; and the introduction of systemic measurement and evaluation of corporate and individual performance. The changes, I firmly believe, have led to a more productive APS. They have markedly improved the efficiency with which we manage public resources and the effectiveness with which we apply them to achieve outcomes in the public good.

But it is worth remembering that many of the reforms now identified as ‘new managerialism’ were not driven initially by the quest to turn the APS into a ‘high performance organisation’. Early reforms were prompted by a desire to ensure that public servants had less power and influence to run their ‘own’ agendas. In large part organisational changes were pursued by politicians wanting to rein in all powerful public service ‘mandarins’. There was a strong view in the Parliament that Canberra bureaucrats wielded excessive control over the political process, too often becoming the masters of the government they were meant to serve. Since the 1970s, when the Royal Commission on Australian Government Administration focussed on this perception of inadequate bureaucratic responsiveness to government, the Service has been made more accountable.

Local Government is now delivering a broader range of services than ever before. Management improvement is necessary to meet the ever-increasing requirements of local communities. Local Government should be demonstrating leadership in the community, making informed decisions, effectively responding to the needs of their community, working to a strategic plan, valuing their employees, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of management and operational processes, and achieving measurable improvements in service quality.

This website is for National Awards for Local Government - Categories .The Award recognises innovative or excellent organisational or business practices aimed at the continuous improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of Local Government.

Progress in performance indicators for local government

The Local Government Joint Officers’ Group (LOGJOG), on behalf of the Local Government Ministers’ Conference (LGMC), is implementing a strategy aimed at improving the performance of local government services so as to give the community better value for money. As part of that strategy LGMC agreed that national performance indicators should be developed with the object of providing councils with information, from beyond State boundaries, to compare their own performance, identify areas where their performance might be improved and identify appropriate benchmarking partners. In addition, national performance indicators would provide the Commonwealth Minister for Local Government with the information needed to fulfil the reporting requirements of the Commonwealth Local Government (Financial Assistance) Act 1995...Additional comparative indicators, covering financial operations and parks and gardens, have been developed, in consultation with local government, for inclusion in the second edition of the report. This edition will also include year-on-year data comparisons to provide a more comprehensive picture of how local government performance has improved over time.

Performance benchmarking undertaken in 1999 compared the cost efficiency of the management functions of various asset categories (local roads, arterial roads, bridges, traffic lights, signs, line marking, community paths, streetlights and stormwater assets) by establishing over 50 performance indicators. The benchmarking partners included two State road authorities and two Local Government Authorities that are of comparable Australian Classification of Local Government category.

Additional analysis was also undertaken on the more significant cost items, such as arterial and local road maintenance. Unit rates for arterial roads were compared with five regions of a comparable State road agency. Similarly, unit rates for local road maintenance were compared with 23 Local Government Authorities.

In 2000, the performance indicators were aggregated to concentrate on fewer indicators in order to illustrate the cost efficiencies of asset creation and asset maintenance activities. This project included one State Government partner and two comparable Local Government Authorities. The results confirmed the previous findings with a recommendation to undertake further detailed analysis on asset maintenance funding levels.

Process benchmarking analysis was undertaken with the same partners in order to identify continuous improvement opportunities for specific areas. The key areas considered for the analysis were Capital Works Procurement and Contract Management...

For the purpose of the 2001–02 National Report, State Local Government Ministers and Presidents of Local Government Associations were asked to provide a report to the Federal Government on measures taken in 2001–02 to improve efficiency and effectiveness of Local Government to deliver services. They were also asked to report on measures taken in 2001–02 to develop comparable performance indicators for Local Government

Performance measurement has been introduced in the local government environment in the UK through the use of performance indicators. The introduction of these measures has often been associated with the movement towards improvement in the quality of services provided by local government to the citizens. The State Government of Victoria, Australia recently enacted legislation which requires the 78 local councils in the State to report on their performance through the Office of Local Government in the Department of Infrastructure. The method of reporting is through the supply of values for a set of

performance indicators which have been laid down in the legislation. This paper presents the results of a survey of local government officers in Victoria Australia who are responsible to the councils for the preparation of the performance indicator reports to the State Government. The paper reports on the state of preparedness of the councils to produce the performance indicators. It also reports on the perceptions of the local government officers of the relationship between the performance indicators and the quality of services provided by Victorian local councils to their citizens.

Corporate planning is now a well-established and integral part of the management system of Victorian councils wherein councils desirably set their own objectives and performance targets to sustain and grow their organisation’s capability to serve and meet the aspirations of their communities. In recent years there had been a growing awareness within the State and local government sector of the need for a system or mechanism to measure performance, identify best practice and enable trend analysis across local government. within the sector, enables trend analysis and facilitates The Victorian Department of Infrastructure has developed a Community Satisfaction Measurement Program for local government...

Comparative Performance Measurement and Benchmarking of Planning and Development Assessment Systems

This project was intended to scope how, in the context of its charter, the Development Assessment Forum (DAF) could best assist in promoting benchmarking at a national level. Elements of the project

• Reviewing and documenting the objectives of state/territory planning systems to identify

• Documenting current benchmarking and performance measurement initiatives, together with relevant recent research, data collection and publications

• Identifying areas within DAF’s Principles of Leading Practice in which an Australia-wide focus on benchmarking would add most value in helping to improve systems

• Developing a framework for performance measurement and range of performance indicators (bothquantitative and qualitative) focussed on common objectives of state/territory planning systems.

Comparative performance measurement and benchmarking, with its potential to bring greater levels of accountability and ideas for better ways, can provide one of the most effective drivers for improvement in areas of governance where the forces of competition are difficult to apply...

City of Whittlesea’s Food Smart: Food Safety Plans Online project saw the development an online compliance software package for meeting Victorian legislation requirements.This particular project demonstrates how local government as leading innovators can develop solutions that have far wider application than their immediate sphere of influence. In developing FoodSmart Whittlesea consulted widely and engaged relevant stakeholders from a number of organisations.The project achieved its objectives of delivering a solution that simplifies the legislative requirements for food businesses and assisting Local Government in assessing food safety plans.It delivers efficiency gains and lowers costs,benefiting local food businesses as well as Local Government.The benefits of the project have already been shared across the State of Victoria and these benefits have the potential to spill into other states.

The Development Assessment Forum (DAF) acknowledges that there is no one absolute development assessment system that delivers the best outcomes all the time. It also acknowledges that no one system can be applicable in every jurisdiction.

However, in working to achieve leading practice in development assessment, DAF recognises there is the potential to encourage sustainable development, fairness and equity and transparency and consistency in decision making. There is also the potential to make those responsible for making decisions more accountable for those decisions. In assessing the elements that constitute leading practice, effectiveness and efficiency are also important measures.

This Paper sets out currently agreed definitions and principles. The DAF recommends that these principles be considered by jurisdictions for adoption and/or adaptation when reviewing existing planning and development assessment systems.

DAF recognises that the definition of what constitutes leading practice will vary over time as new ways of working and new examples of continuous and substantial improvement in practice are identified.

Local Government Performance----2000-2001 Report on the Operation of the Local Government
http://www.nolg.gov.au/publications/national_report/00_01/chapter4/index.htm

Local government effectiveness and efficiency is affected by its structure and method of measuring performance. The first section of this chapter is about progress in 2000-01 towards structural reform in local government, followed by a discussion about the development of local government performance indicators. The chapter concludes with information on Federal Government programmes aimed at capacity building in local government.

Good practice and benchmarking in Local Government community development and community services

From our perspective, benchmarking is not about competitiveness, but rather relates to our concept of networking, deliberately continuing our long held practice of communication with each other about our work and sharing our methodology.

Rather than be caught up in today's language of competition, we have opted for the evolving concept of good practice in recognition of building a shared direction for our social environment. This is consistent with our commitment at a local, state and national level to constant improvement in performance.

The document moves from the conceptual to the practical, and provides the first attempt at national definitions of community development, community services, local governance and social capital from the perspective of Local Government community development staff. It also provides a value base and a framework for measurement so that the outcomes of our community work can be clearly understood and communicated.

We considered that it was important in this project not to rush toward development of a performance indicator checklist as a panacea for every community. Rather, in upholding the maxim that 'each community is distinct and different', we have provided a context and a list of resources in order that each community can understand what it wants to achieve and how efficiency and effectiveness can be locally measured...

In recent years Commonwealth, State and Local governments have adopted accrual financial management, which for the first time shows the full cost of goods and services. But this was only the first step. The next involved answering questions such as what value are we getting for our money. The need to be able to answer such a question pushed all tiers of government to develop robust performance measures to record quantitative and qualitative elements of goods and services. Today, cost is only one element used to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of public goods and services.

When well defined, performance measures encourage improved performance. They provide key tools for assessing whether the public sector has delivered the goods and services they are funded to deliver. Performance measurement is now an inherent part of business operations for public sector agencies both as an internal management tool and external reporting tool to the community. This toolbox contains six modules on Performance Management.

Excellence in Local Government

Excellence in Local Government is specifically designed for Councils to drive continuous and sustainable improvement in service provision, operational efficiency and stakeholder relations. The holistic program provides a practical solution for Councils who wish to drive continuous performance improvement and create a leading organisation that delivers on its mission and goals. Business Excellence Australia has worked extensively with Councils in applying the principles and practices of the Australian Business Excellence Framework to drive sustained improvement in performance and results.

Improved councillor, rate payer, community, government and key partners relations

This paper details the three main elements of online government: improving organizational performance, improving service delivery, and improving citizen engagement. It provides examples of Web-based solutions in the tasks and function of government that reduce costs, increase productivity, and improve quality and access.

While the paper is grounded in experience from Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific region, it features developments, insights, and ideas from around the world. It also sets out some thoughts on the direction and potential of the next phase of online government, drawing on global examples to improve relationships between government and the individuals, families, and communities they work for in an effort to achieve the key goal of creating a common strategy and a single architecture to guide the evolution of digital government solutions. The white paper also discusses at length why a Cisco Systems® operating model, Networked Virtual Organizations, is central to securing the potential benefits of electronic government

practice within the Australian federal public sector....In 1997 the Australian Government decided to replace the mandatory requirements of

the evaluation strategy, consistent with changes in other areas which replaced unduly

prescriptive requirements with measures which give more emphasis to performance and

As part of the new approach, it was decided that agency management of performance

information, performance measurement, evaluation and performance reporting should

be guided by a set of good practice principles issued and updated from time to time by

the Minister for Finance and Administration. The 1997 principles were recently refined

in a process that involved consultation with other Ministers and with agency staff. The

The State Services Commission is sponsor or leader of a wide range of initiatives to improve public management, and consequently to get better results for citizens, Ministers and staff. These initiatives aim to help us in the Public Service and State sector to:

Managing for Outcomes in the Public Service is an outcome-based approach to departments' planning, management and reporting. Its aim is to improve the performance of the Public Service and requires departments to adopt a strategic and outcome-focused approach to planning, management and reporting while focusing on delivering outputs.

The changes were approved by Cabinet in December 2001 and the initiative is now in its second year.

A Steering Group led by the State Services Commission, Treasury, Ministry of Maori Development and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet is overseeing the implementation of the initiative across the Public Service.

This website contains a range of resources helpful to implementing Managing for Outcomes…

The Pathfinder Project is leading the development of management for enhanced outcomes. The Project is developing a suite of basic techniques, together with practical guidance on developing outcome-based management systems. These management systems go beyond only measuring performance or outcome results. Instead, they put outcomes at the heart of business decisions on strategy, the best output mix, capability development, and resource allocation decisions.

The Pathfinder Project has a time horizon of 2-3 years, in which participating agencies will implement 3 or more “short-term wins”. “Short-term wins” are simply building blocks for an outcome-focussed organisation. Steps are not sequential - for instance many agencies will first include outcomes in strategic plans and benchmarking processes before they assess the impacts of, and prioritise, their major interventions. Agencies will, however, want to update plans and processes as their capabilities improve…

Pathfinder seeks to build departmental capability in managing for outcomes. The project actively supports other central agency outcome initiatives, in particular, the Managing for Outcomes (MfO/SoI) project.

The Review of the Centre One Year On - Getting Better Results for Citizens, Ministers and Staff

A summary of progress on the Review of the Centre and related initiatives in the year to December 2002 , where the Review fits into the bigger picture, and next steps. We are moving into a new phase of public management, starting to do some of the "harder yards". In a more demanding, rapidly changing world, the Public Service needs to get closer to citizens and the community, to understand their needs more, and to focus more on achieving results. This has some very specific implications for the Public Service and the wider State sector .This report canvasses the history and progress of the Review process, places it in the wider context of improving public management and getting better results for citizens and communities, and looks briefly at "where from here". It also includes a report from the Chair of the Change Implementation Advisory Group, and closing comments from the Public Service Association.

The Managing for Outcomes initiative is intended to focus departments on achieving results for citizens. Advising on the best mix of outputs and measuring their achievement in relation to outcomes is an essential part of planning and managing for outcomes. In engaging with Ministers it is important to show how the mix of outputs is intended to contribute to the achievement of outcomes.

The covering letter to the chief executive, together with this attachment, comprises the Output Plans Guidance for Departments, and should be read in conjunction with the Managing for Outcomes Guidance for Departments. This guidance is sponsored by the Managing for Outcomes Steering Group of officials from the State Services Commission, the Treasury, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, and Te Puni Kokiri.

The report is mainly about progress on Review of the Centre initiatives, but also gives an overview of other major improvement initiatives, in particular Managing for Outcomes and Ethics, Values and Standards. Between this report and the monthly E-Government and Machinery of Government status reports, you should get a comprehensive picture of the major public management improvement initiatives the Commission is involved with.

Coaching - Guidance for managers and their staff on using coaching for development and performance

The Career Progression and Development Survey 2000 Report, and the Review of the Centre Report (January 2002), identified a need to improve coaching skills of managers in the Public Service. Designed for both managers and staff, this guidance has been prepared by a cross-departmental team, and includes "good practice", vignettes and case studies based on common situations found in the workplace. . Coaching is a means for enhancing good performance on the job and career progression. This publication aims to guide public servants, and others, in the understanding and practice of coaching.The guidance is for managers at all levels. Managing operational performance ('getting the job done') and actively supporting the professional and career development of their staff is an important part of any manager's job. People at different levels in an organisation will have different coaching needs, ranging from technical to strategic/ political

“The Government of Canada aims to provide the highest quality of service to the public.”

Vision: Both Results for Canadians and the most recent Managing for Results commit the Government of Canada to becoming more citizen-focused, values-driven, resultsoriented, and dedicated to responsible spending.

understanding of the extent to which the government is meeting its objectives. This approach also facilitates learning from past experiences, thereby increasing the benefits to Canadians from government activities. A more comprehensive reporting approach includes information on individual departmental programs and services, government-wide priorities, intergovernmental and interdepartmental initiatives, and societal trends.

History: In 1995, Government of Canada established three steps for results-based management:

number of pilot departments for two years before being applied across the federal government. The first annual report of the President of the Treasury Board on performance and accountability was tabled in 1995. It provided a progress report on the Government of Canada’s long-term agenda for implementing results-based management and improving reporting to Parliament. In April 1997, the House of Commons adopted a motion to split Part III of the Estimates into Departmental Performance Reports and Reports on Plans and Priorities. In June 2000, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs tabled the report, Improved Reporting to Parliament – Phase 2: Moving Forward.

Canada's Performance 2001

Government of Canada programs and services make a critical contribution to the day-to-day quality of life across this country. Therefore the government has a profound responsibility to ensure that these programs and services are well-administered and focused on citizens' needs, and that they produce concrete and measurable results. Canadians have a right to expect excellence.This document is the President of the Treasury Board's seventh annual report to Parliament on government performance. This year's report represents a new approach. Previous publications have provided an overview of progress in public performance reporting. Canada's Performance 2001 is the first document to provide information on the broader quality of life of Canadians, as it can be measured by certain societal indicators. In so doing, it sets a context for assessing the performance of federal government programs. It also provides basic information to support dialogue among Canadians about future directions in public policy.

Measuring Up
Report of the Auditor General
Performance Summary---The Government of Alberta 2002-03 Annual Report

Performance measurement is a valuable tool for government. And, for that matter, businesses and communities too. It is a tool that not only measures results, but can also be used to improve them.

In government, we use it as a yardstick to measure our progress and to see how close we are to achieving the goals we set out in the Government Business Plan <javascript:popUp('../publications/budget/budget2003/govbp.html')>. It helps us track trends and plan for the future.

Alberta was the first provincial government in the country to adopt publicly reported results based performance measurement and our leadership has encouraged others to follow, using our system as a model to develop their own.

This is the ninth annual Measuring Up report to Albertans. The purpose of Measuring Up is to report on progress made towards achieving goals that are important to Albertans. Measuring Up meets the government's commitment to be open and accountable as required under section 10 of the Government Accountability Act.

The results reported in this year's Measuring Up relate to the 2002-05 Government of Alberta Business Plan published as part of Budget 2002 - The Right Decisions for Challenging Times. The government's business plan is an ongoing three-year plan that focuses the government's efforts on three core businesses - People, Prosperity and Preservation. Goals are established for each of the core businesses. To track progress in meeting goals, "core" measures are determined and targets set. Each year in Measuring Up, the government reports to Albertans on progress made towards achieving the goals.

The Performance Measurement and Evaluation Coaching Project http://www.healthcharities.ca/en/Perf_Measurement_Evaluation_Summary_Rep_Eng.pdf

This document is designed to address the purpose that Health Canada increase the awareness of best practices and lessons learned concerning implementing performance measurement and evaluation in National Voluntary Health Organizations (NVHOs)- to increase awareness of best practices and lessons learned - in the hope that increased awareness will lead other voluntary organizations working in health to undertake similar evaluative exercises....

Governments are striving to become more citizen-focused and more accountable, to provide better services at reduced costs, and to build public confidence in their institutions. To meet these challenges, many jurisdictions are increasing their focus on results, which is leading to better performance information for internal management and external reports. For example, they are now implementing specific performance measurement strategies that track their progress in meeting stated commitments. The following paper provides a brief overview of some of these performance measurement initiatives. The goal is to encourage further discussions with provincial, territorial and international officials, academics, other knowledge partners and interested citizen…

In an effort to understand and improve our performance against our stated objectives and targets, we have initiated the development of a performance measurement framework (PMF). The information collected will help HRDC assess progress over this SDS-II (2001-2003) period and identify areas where improvement is required in the next round of SDSs. Our approach is consistent with ISO 14031, which was cited in the May 2000 Report of the CESD. However, some refinement of this initial PMF is required to capture all our SDS-related activities in an appropriate and consistent manner.

To establish the PMF, we have committed to undertake a number of tasks. Each task is outlined below.

The basis of performance measurement at DND is the departmental Planning, Reporting and Accountability Structure (PRAS). The PRAS describes an outcomes-based performance measurement and reporting framework along business lines or Defence Missions...This chapter describes a management approach that is results-oriented (as opposed to a focus on the process or activities carried out by program administrators) and that has monitoring mechanisms in place to report on performance. The focus on results and the ability to measure performance using indicators and standards are two basic requirements in the development of the departmental PRAS... Introduction. 5.0.1 The basis of ... Performance Measurement. 5.0.2 Performance measurement within...

The indicators used to evaluate the results of research and development (R&D).

The purpose of this report is to provide to Committee and Council the City of Ottawa’s Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) results for the year 2001 (unaudited). The Province requires this information to be reported in the 2001 Financial Information Return (FIR) and published for the taxpayers of the City of Ottawa. While the City of Ottawa recognizes the intentions behind the program, many of the limitations first identified last year continue to persist.

One of MPMP’s main goals is to create a forum for municipalities to share and compare results. The premise is that municipalities can learn from each-other, and use the data to help improve local services.

The objective of the program is to provide a tool to assess how well municipal services are delivered, improve performance by measuring the efficiency (cost) and effectiveness (quality) of local services, strengthen local accountability to taxpayers and promote greater understanding of municipal responsibilities by the taxpayers, and to provide a systematic resource that allows municipalities to share performance data with each other. The program’s main objective is to increase local government accountability. The program goals are higher-quality services, better value for tax dollars and greater accountability to taxpayers.

Municipalities are also required to publish for the taxpayers of the city the results of each of the performance indicators. The publication must at a minimum include the name of the measure, the year to which it relates, and the result. A number of publication methods are available to municipalities including direct mailing, property tax bill insert, notices in newspapers, and posting on the Internet. Last year the report was posted to the City’s website and staff in keeping with last year’s practice will again post this report in its entirety on the City’s internet site.

Local Government in the new millenium is faced with a far greater mandate for delivery and performance than ever before. As the form of Government “closest to the people” it has been rightly recognised as the sphere of Government that has an enormous capacity to deliver real outcomes at a local level – to pursue objectives that can make a distinct difference to the quality of life for its citizens. However, in order to do this, Local Government must have some way of measuring the successes, failures and progress achieved in the pursuit of those objectives. Increasingly, Performance Measurement and Management has been recognised as a vital tool to ensure that Local Government is capable of measuring its activities and feeding the results of that measurement back into a planning process to help improve future performance.

Over the last decades, many countries around the world have been utilising some kind of

performance measurement and management for their public sector agencies and in particular for their Local Government bodies. The particular aim of this study is to examine and compare various models of performance measurement used in Asian-Pacific Local Government, and draw out lessons for the design of more effective systems…

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/papers/benchmrk/nprbook.html#summarybest

http://www.worldbank.org/urban/symposium2002/docs/pres-paper/pres-pdf/brillantes.pdf

Performance Measure Websites - http://www.itpolicy.gsa.gov/mkm/pathways/pp03link.htm

States’ pages on the internet - http://www.statesnews.org/other_resources/statelinks.html

Strategic Plan Instructions from the State of Arizona - http://www.state.az.us/ospb/Instruct.html

Alliance for Redesigning Government - http://www.alliance.napawash.org/alliance/index.html

National Academy of Public Administration - http://www.napawash.org/napa/index.html

Links to Performance Measure Websites - http://www.itpolicy.gsa.gov/mkm/pathways/pp03link.htm

Federal Management Reform/GPRA - http://www.whitehouse.gov/OMB/mgmt-gpra/index.html

This is a selected list of MRSC Library holdings on performance measurement, including benchmarking, as it relates to local government. These publications are available to Washington State city/town/county employees and officials to borrow at no charge by contacting the MRSC Library at (206) 625-1300 or via E-mail mrsc@mrsc.org <mailto:mrsc@mrsc.org>. If you are not a Washington city/town/county official or employee, we suggest you contact your local public library or law library for information or research direction

Leadership Counts: Lessons for Public Managers from the Massachusetts Welfare, Training, and

Employment Program, Robert D. Behn, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1991.

How to Measure Human Resources Management, Jac Fitz-enz, McGraw-Hill, Inc. New York, 1995

The New Economics, W. Edwards Deming, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1994

The Effective Public Manager: Achieving Success in Government, Steven Cohen, Jossey-Bass Publishers,

Improving Government Performance: An Owners Manual, John J. DiIulio, Jr., Gerald Garvey, and Donald

Reinventing Government: How the Entrepreneurial Spirit is Transforming the Public Sector, David

The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning, Henry Mintzberg, The Free Press, New York, 1994.

Performance Measurement Bibliography

This bibliography contains general material on local government performance measurement. It is NOTcomprehensive.

The drive for reform in the public sector worldwide has focussed attention on the measurement of public sector organisations' performance. This is particularly true in local government. Local government has traditionally been concerned with measuring the delivery of primary objectives, or results, at the expense of secondary objectives, or the determinants of organisational performance. Current strategic management literature suggests that there should be a strong linkage between strategic plans and performance measures. Kaplan and Norton's (1992) balanced scorecard and Fitzgerald et al's (1991) results and determinants framework can provide this linkage. This paper reports on research into performance management systems in local government using the four dimensions of the balanced scorecard: financial, community, internal business processes and innovation and learning. It shows how the focus in this system of local government has been on the results of council work - financial performance and to a lesser extent on how the community views performance. Local government performance measurement pays much less attention to the determinants, or means of achieving long-term, sustained organisational improvement - internal business processes, and innovation and learning. Whilst these issues are recognised as important, there are few measurement processes in place to manage performance in these areas. Strategic performance management demands an approach that recognises the importance of a focus on both results and the means to achieve these results. The paper highlights a suggested framework for strategic and balanced local government performance measurement.

The heart of the Government’s strategy for public services reform is that services must be increasingly responsive to the needs and aspirations of their customers. This requires a better understanding of what makes customers satisfied, and how this can be measured.

This report presents the findings from a review of approaches to measuring and understanding customer satisfaction with public services, carried out by the MORI Social Research Institute for the Office for Public Services Reform (OPSR) at the Cabinet Office.

The main aims are to summarise existing research and literature, and to inform the growing interest in measuring satisfaction with public services. We have also incorporated conclusions and lessons from our own experience of measuring service quality and satisfaction for a large number of public and private organisations. The importance of improving the way we gather perceptions through surveys and our interpretation of the results should not be under-estimated: as Dinsdale notes in a review of approaches to customer satisfaction research in Canada “if the importance … is not immediately apparent, consider how survey results can have a dramatic impact on governments’ agendas for action, the public’s perception of government and public servants’ perceptions of themselves”.

***local government improvement programme

Peer review reports

Following a peer review, a report is compiled which indicates the authorities strengths and issues it should consider against the 12 benchmark competencies. It also includes recommendations for improvements. In response each local authority draws up an improvement plan.

Local authorities
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z (Many local government organizations here)

State Reform has become the main topic on the world's political agenda. This process dates

from the late seventies, with the onset of the crisis in the State model, which had been created by

developed countries during the postwar and set off an unprecedented era of capitalist prosperity.

The first response to the crisis was a neo-liberal-conservative reaction. Given the pressing need to

reform the State, reestablish fiscal balance and the balance of payment of countries in crisis, it

was felt advisable to simply propose State downsizing and total market predominance. The

proposal, however, made little sense from the economic and political point of view. In fact, after

some time, it was determined that rather than dismantling the State structure, the solution would

The object is to build a State that will be able to face the challenges of the post-industrial

age. A State for the XXIst century, which will guarantee the performance of economic contracts,

while also having the strength to guarantee social rights and competitiveness of each country on

the international scene. Thus, a third way is being sought between neo-liberal laissez-faire and

Building a new type of State is also the major consideration in Latin America. However, in

addition to the global reform context, substantial Latin American idiosyncrasies exist. First, the

situation in which these countries found themselves upon the outbreak of the crisis was much

more serious than in the developed world. Not only did these countries face a serious fiscal crisis,

but their previous economic development model (import-substitution) had also proved itself

ineffective. Moreover, external indebtedness became chronic in practically the entire continent. A

failure to solve these structural problems led, in most Latin American nations, to stagnation and

· An Approach to Productivity Improvement in the Public Sector: A Procedural Manual, Multi-Municipal Productivity Project, The United States Department of Labor, July 1975. Contents Appendix

· A Productivity Primer for Government, the Council of State Governments and The National Association of State Personnel Executives, Spring 1981.