Archive
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
2. Common questions asked about measuring performance
3. Performance management overviews in select American cities
4. A snapshot of performance management initiatives
5. Resources containing more information on performance management
1. Introduction
Citizens care about efficiently provided services - lower property taxes, safe neighborhoods, employment opportunities, clean air, attractive transportation alternatives, and a broad range of recreational opportunities...They care about results.
- Milwaukee Mayor John O. Norquist
May 11, 1992
We cannot achieve the goals of...cutting red tape, putting customers first, empowering employees to get results, and cutting back to basics... without a new approach to intergovernmental partnership in delivering services to the public.
- From Strengthening the Partnership in Intergovernmental Service Delivery an accompanying report of the National Performance Review
____________________________
Performance measurement has become the center of a substantial movement that is rethinking the way government operates. This movement is rooted in the experience and work of many government managers. At the core of it is the belief that now, more then ever, governments must focus on the results we achieve. Why? For at least three reasons:
(1) It's good sense and good management. Performance measurement allows managers to focus organizational efforts, assess how they are doing, compare their performance to others, and identify opportunities for improvement.
(1) It facilitates the efficient and effective use of resources. Performance measurement helps managers do their jobs better - it helps them better identify priorities, better allocate resources, and better manage tight finances.
(3) It counters the growing tide of taxpayer skepticism. This skepticism can be best addressed by effectively communicating what government does. Systematically documenting and reporting performance in concrete terms allows governments to demonstrate how much they do, how well they do it, and when they are doing better.
The following pages provide brief descriptions of some performance measurement activities that are already going on in cities. It is the initial draft of what we expect will be a more comprehensive compilation. We hope the information provided is useful. If you are not already doing work in this area, we also hope it captures your imagination and helps generate new ideas.
How this document was compiled
This compilation is a work-in-progress and by no means all-inclusive. We welcome the contributions of any cities that are working with performance measurement. Cities included in this draft were referred to the National Performance Review by several sources, including leaders in the performance measurement field, Financial World Magazine, the Government Finance Officers Association, the International City/County Management Association, and the National League of Cities. Information was collected from cities primarily through phone interviews. All of the information provided is self-reported.
For further information, to contribute information, or to make corrections
This document is intended to be brief. For further information we encourage you to call the contacts listed or to refer to the attached summary of resources. If you would like to submit information on your city, please complete the questionnaire found at the end of this document and forward it to:
Trish Thomson
National Performance Review
750 17th Street, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20006
fax 202-632-0390
e-mail: Trish.Thomson@NPR.GSA.GOV
Finally, if you would like to update or correct information already provided, please send changes to the above fax number or e-mail address.
Special Thanks
We would like to thank the Government Finance Officers Association, the International City/County Management Association, the National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and all the cities who agreed to contribute to this compilation.
2. common questions asked about measuring performance
Q: What is "performance measurement?"
A: Performance measurement refers to a management process which involves (1) identifying important objectives consistent with your organization's mission, (2) measuring how you are doing against those objectives (in terms of outputs and outcomes), (3) using what you learn to inform decisions and improve performance, and (4) reporting how you are doing to your customers, the public.
Q: What kind of performance measures exist?
A: The following is a summary of performance measures. It is based on information provided by the Government Accounting Office:
|
Type of Measure |
Description |
Examples |
|
Input |
Resources used to carry out a program over a given period of time |
Number of full-time employees |
|
Output |
Amount of work accomplished or service provided over a given period of time |
Number of applicants processed |
|
Efficiency |
Cost per unit of output |
Cost per client served |
|
Outcome |
Impact or quality or work accomplished or services provided |
Percent reduction in teen |
Q: What is the difference between inputs, outputs, and outcomes?
A: Consider an example from industry: the inputs are the materials, labor, and equipment costs that go into producing a product, a widget for instance. The output is the number of widgets produced. The outcome is the profit realized from selling widgets.
Q: Elaborate on this distinction using a government sector example.
A: Think about building inspection efforts - the number of hours spent inspecting buildings for code violations is an input. Outputs include the number of buildings inspected or the number of citations written. An outcome would be a decrease in the number of accidents that occur because of building code violations.
Inputs focus on the resources expended to do something. Outputs generally focus on the numbers of things done, on activities. Outcomes take it a step further and focus on either the impact or the quality of those activities.
Q: Aren t there case where a variety of outcomes exist?
A: Yes, in almost all cases a spectrum of results exists. For example, a youth program may mentor at-risk youth. This mentoring (we hope) leads to improved attitudes about school, which leads to increased attendance, which leads to increased academic performance, which leads to increased graduation rates.
In the above example, there are several possible outcomes - the number of kids who show improved attitudes toward school, the number who have improved attendance, the number who have improved grades, or the number who graduate.
Q: What process should be used to select the most important outcomes?
A: Ask your key stakeholders - the people who have an interest in the results you are trying to achieve. Stakeholders include such groups as the public, city council members, mayors, city managers, and department heads and staff. To get stakeholder feedback consider surveys, retreats, focus groups, special meetings, task forces, and public forums.
When identifying the outcomes you will focus on, also consider whether or not an outcome can be measured and how expensive measuring it will be. It may be prudent to focus on outcomes that can be more readily measured as long as the measures are still meaningful, reliable, and valid measures.
Q: How do you ensure that the performance measures collected are used?
A: Ensure they are useful. Methods to do this are included in Eleven Ways to Make Performance Measurements More Useful to Public Managers in the September 1994 edition of Public Management.
Q: What is "benchmarking?"
A: Richard J. Fischer in the September 1994 edition of Public Management defines benchmarks as standard performance measures. Benchmarking involves comparing the performance of similar organizations using these standard measures. The comparison is made to determine who is best, to find out why, and then to use the best practices identified as a means of improving your own organization. As Mr. Fischer points out, benchmarks are everywhere: golf course pars, company earnings ratios, baseball bating averages. Several initiatives are underway to develop benchmarks for cities, including an effort on the part of ICMA and a consortium of cities.
Q: What practices contribute to successful performance measurement systems?
A: According to Stuart Grifel in the September 1994 edition of Public Management, there are six key things to remember:
(1) Start with a few measures and don t be too concerned if initial targets are low. Targets can be tightened up once a system is in place and staff are comfortable with it.
(2) Use existing data whenever possible. The value of reporting on a particular measure should be weighed against the effort of data collection.
(3) Audit the data periodically.
(4) Allow program managers to provide explanatory information on data gathering and reporting forms so that they can explain why performance has deviated if necessary.
(5) Report measures that are meaningful at the various decision-making levels. Find a balance between reporting too few and too many measures.
(6) Ensure that the information is used at all levels, particularly, the operating mangers level.
3. City Descriptions
City: Atlanta, GA
Description: Atlanta is committed to developing performance measures that help identify opportunities for improvement and that are based on what is important to the citizens - its primary customers. With this in mind, the city has implemented a management plan that incorporates outcome measures in addition to the traditional output measures. It has also initiated an annual citizens survey.
In its management plan, the city has identified three priority areas for which outcome measures will be tracked - public safety, quality customer service, and neighborhood vitality/economic development. By focusing on these priorities and corresponding outcome measures, the city more effectively assesses the impact of its actions and allocates the city s budget. The city is also transitioning from a line-item budget to one with more of a programmatic focus. Additional information will come from the citizen survey which will determine (1) how citizens feel about the services the city provides and (2) identify services that need to be improved.
Applicable publications or source material: Atlanta publishes their performance measures in quarterly public reports released to the Finance Committee and the City Manager. Next year they hope to publish the results of a their citizens survey.
Contact: Melvin Waldrop Department/Office: Deputy Chief Operating Officer
Office of the Mayor
Address: 55 Trinity Ave.
Suite 2400
Atlanta, GA 30335-0307
Phone: (404) 330-6413 Fax: (404) 658-7451
Date this summary was prepared: 8/17/95
City: Austin, TX
Description: In fiscal year 1993 Austin initiated performance based budgeting. As part of this initiative, the city manager and city council held a retreat where they identified ten city priorities. These priorities generally cut across department lines, so inter-department teams (lead by department heads) were formed to develop specific goals and corresponding performance measures. For instance one of the council s priorities was to improve opportunities for youth. Several goals were established around this priority, including reducing child abuse and neglect (as measured by the number of incidents in targeted areas) and reducing teen pregnancy (as measured by the pregnancy rate for 13-17 year olds in targeted areas).
Similarly, the Austin police department has turned to more meaningful performance measures than the number of arrests made or number of tickets given. They have started to focus on more outcome-oriented measures, like crime rates and customer satisfaction. They have also recently begun to review their performance-based pay system, so that it rewards officers when outcome measures show a positive change.
Applicable publications or source material: Austin publishes performance measures in quarterly performance reports and in its annual citizen survey report.
Awards received: B+ rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact 1: Charles Curry Department/Office: Budget Officer
Contact 2: Ken Williams Department/Office: Deputy Chief of Police
Address 1: Charles Curry Address 2: Ken Williams
124 W 8th Street Austin Police Department
#307 715 E. Eighth Street
Austin, TX 78701 Austin, TX 78701
Phone: (512) 480-5059 Fax: (512) 480-5279
Date this summary was prepared: 8/17/95
City: Boston, Massachusetts
Description: Eight years ago, Boston began to systematically collect performance measures. Two year ago, they took a step back and decided that they needed to focus on fewer, more important indicators. As part of this process they sponsored a two-day workshop for Department heads. The purposes of the workshop was two-fold: first, to train staff so that they were able to recognize and develop appropriate outcome measures; and second, to get staff to consider and then answer the question, what information about what we do is most important to the public? Fifteen departments now have solid performance measures and outcome-based reports. Moreover, performance measures are used to inform budget decisions, enhance accountability, flag potential problems, and track city priorities. Finally, as the focus on outcomes becomes more and more a part of the city s culture, the Office of Budget and Management is moving away from an enforcement role towards an advisory one - they no longer need to dictate key outcomes to departments. Instead, they work collaboratively with departments to define pertinent outcomes and measures.
Applicable publications or source material: Boston publishes performance measures as part of their budget and in an annual report.
Awards received: B+ rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact: Diane MacDonald Title/Office: Director, Office of Budget and
Management
Address: Room 813 City Hall
1 City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201
Phone: (617) 635-3870 Fax: (617) 635-3152
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Charlotte, North Carolina
Description: Twenty years ago Charlotte, with the help of a NASA engineer, instituted a system of management by objectives. Over time, however, the city realized that they were getting too caught up in the numbers and setting goals based only on what was readily measurable - they had lost the forest for the trees. So they decided to do two things: they decided to develop comprehensive business plans for each of their departments (the business plans include performance objectives) and they decided to set goals and performance measures based first and foremost on what was important to their customers.
In order to get public input, the city uses citizen satisfaction surveys, surveys of citizen priorities, and customer comment cards at department offices. Charlotte has also established a Customer Service Center: one-stop-shopping for citizens who have questions, who need to order work, or who have a problem to report - regardless of the city service or department involved. Information from these customer service mechanisms feeds back into the process in which performance measures are refined.
Applicable publications or source material: Charlotte publishes performance measures in their Balance Scorecard report, which is based on the balance scorecard model (this Harvard Business Review model reviews organizational performance along four dimensions - financial, customer service, internal management processes, and innovation and learning).
Awards received: National Human Resources award, public appearance and speaking invitations
Contact: Viola Alexander Title/Office: Budget Director
Address: Budget and Evaluation Department
600 East Fourth Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Phone: (704) 336-2306 Fax: (704) 336-6644
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Cincinnati, Ohio
Description: The city council of Cincinnati, with input from the public, council members, and department heads, has identified 10 service delivery priority areas. Corresponding performance measures have also been developed. While the priority areas cut across department lines (e.g., community relations, economic development), the corresponding performance goals are department specific. In addition to the performance measures mentioned above, each department also identifies measures that are incorporated into their budget submission. Every other year, a citizens survey is conducted and the information collected helps inform both the city council and the city administration about citizen priorities.
Because performance measurement has become an important part of the city s management strategy, training on developing appropriate outcome measures has been given to over 150 of the city s managers. As this training increases capacity, the city is upgrading the measures it uses so that they are fewer in number, but more meaningful in nature.
Applicable publications or source material: Cincinnati publishes performance measures in their biennial budget. They also publish several key measures as part of their annual Measures of Success report for the city council and the public. Finally, every other year, they publish the results of their citizen survey.
Contact: William Moller Department/Office: Acting Director
Address: Office of Research, Evaluation and Budget
801 Plum Street, Room 142
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: (513) 352-6275 Fax: (513) 352-2458
Date this summary was prepared: 8/17/95
City: Cleveland, Ohio
Description: Cleveland has initiated a process of public self-examination called Rating the Region. It is an area-wide, civic equivalent of the benchmarking process that corporations are using to gauge critical elements of the productivity and effectiveness. The Citizens League of Greater Cleveland selected the Cleveland and Gund Foundations to assist in launching the effort. British Petroleum America provided $80,000 in funds and provided expertise on how it uses benchmarking. BP America s counsel suggested the Citizen League set-up a steering committee, hold public conferences, survey residents by phone, and consider over 300 performance factors. Ultimately 89 indicators were selected. Comparable data was collected from 13 other cities. The Rating the Region process goes beyond providing comparisons of performance. It also lets the region plan and manage smarter.
Contact: City Hall Title/Office:
Address: City of Cleveland
601 Lakeside Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44114
Phone: (216) 664-2000 Fax:
Date this summary was prepared: 8/94
Note: information for this summary was obtained from the National League of Cities database. It is based largely on Taking the Measure of Cleveland, by Neal R. Peirce, as published in the Plain Dealer August 7, 1994.
City: Dallas, Texas
Description: Dallas employs an interactive and integrated approach to performance measurement with the predominate goal of making local government more customer-driven. Performance-based budgeting, strategic planing and a performance-based compensation system are all linked together and all focus on results.
During the annual budget process, departments identify primary services and detail appropriate input, output, efficiency, and outcome measures. Goals and objectives from the strategic plan are incorporated into the performance-based budgeting process where appropriate. This procedure allows for an informed assessment of budget impacts on service levels and facilitates the evaluation of city services. Major features from both the budget and strategic plan are linked to employee performance plans.
As part of a 1994 reengineering effort, the city created six Service Coordination Teams, covering different sections of the city. Each team is lead by an assistant city manager and is comprised of representatives from ten primary service delivery departments. The teams use biennial citizen surveys and neighborhood focus sessions to identify important citizen concerns and find permanent solutions to problems that fall outside those of day-to-day service delivery. The Teams are also empowered to develop service delivery partnerships with other government entities, non-profits, and the private sector, so that resources can be leveraged and service delivery strategies improved.
Applicable publications or source material: Dallas publishes performance measures as part of their budget.
Awards received: A- rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact: Mary Suhm Title/Office: Assistant City Manager
Address: 1500 Marilla Street
#4-EN
Dallas, TX 75201
Phone: (214) 670-5306 Fax: (214) 670-3946
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Kansas City, MO
Description: Kansas City is focusing primarily on outcome measures in the areas of code enforcement, fire services, police/corrections, and neighborhood services, but other departments are also attempting to develop outcomes for their services. In order to most effectively use resources, the City Council is also working on setting priorities and goals. The criteria is based on those areas that show the greatest potential for progress. Focus groups were conducted and several task forces were created to develop key performance goals. Additionally, the city has looked at the outcome measures of other communities to compare their performance and to identify effective practices.
Applicable publications or source material: Kansas City publishes performance measures in annual and quarterly reports that go to the city council. Quarterly reviews of program impacts will begin soon. They will also be available to the public.
Contact: Larry Brown Department/Office: City Manager
Address: 414 East 12th St.
Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone: (816) 274-2474 Fax: (816) 274-1245
Date this summary was prepared: 8/17/95
City: Long Beach, California
Description: While the city of Long Beach collects performance measures for many of its city services, they have targeted police services as a particular priority. Several years ago the city (facing rapid increases in violent crime and drug activities, coupled with low officer morale) was considering contracting out police functions to the county sheriff s office. Instead of going this route, the city and Police Department decided to try another approach. They developed and implemented a strategic plan incorporating goals and performance measures.
Through a series of customer surveys, the city obtained feedback on the things that were important to its citizens. Armed with this feedback, they created three visions for the city: people in Long Beach will feel safer, work together to solve community problems, and have a high level of respect, trust, and confidence in their Police Department. Strategies and performance measures for addressing these goals were then identified with the help of focus groups and department wide working groups.
Some of the performance measures Long Beach uses include: incidence of violent crime, incidence of gang-related violent crime, police response times, percent of citizens who feel safe in their community, and percent of citizens who rate the Police Department s performance as excellent or good. Long Beach is seeing improvement - violent crime went down 13% between 1993 and 1994. Gang related violent crime went down 26%. Response times are improving, citizens are feeling safer, and 61% of the public rate the quality of service good or better, versus 54% in 1993. (Note: information provided by Scott Bryant, Long Beach s Director of Strategic Management).
Applicable publications or source material: Long Beach publishes performance measures in an annual progress report for the Police Department. It includes sections covering the Department s vision, goals, measures of success, and next steps.
Awards received: Recognition by the local press.
Contact: Scott Bryant Title/Office: Director of Strategic Management
Address: 333 W. Ocean Blvd.
Long Beach, CA 90802
Phone: (310) 570-6888 Fax: (310) 570-7498
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Milwaukee
Description: In 1993, Milwaukee initiated an integrated strategic planning and budgeting system called System 94: Mission, Management, Service Delivery. The objectives of the system are to focus attention on longer time horizons, to shift the emphasis from departmental issues and needs to the needs of the city s residents, to give departmental mangers more flexibility in devising strategies to reach their objectives, and to shift the performance emphasis from inputs to outcomes.
Each department has developed a strategic plan that follows from the citywide strategic plan. These plans include outcome indicators, and are reviewed by the mayor before department budgets requests are prepared. System 94 guidelines limit the number of objectives and related outcomes to five per department so that only the most important outcomes are identified.
The established department outcomes are also incorporated into the city budget. During the annual budget review process, budget analysts assess whether department plans and objectives are consistent with the city plan and whether the links between activities, objectives, and spending are clear. Sixty-eight outcome-oriented objectives and indicators now replace 600 old performance measures and thousands of line items as principle units of analysis for the budget. (Note: information for this summary was taken from Mission, Management, and Service Delivery: Integrating Strategic Planning and Budgeting in Milwaukee, an article by Anne Spray Kinney to be published in the October edition of Government Finance Review.)
Applicable publications or source material: Milwaukee publishes performance measures in the annual Plan and Budget Summary.
Awards received: A- rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact: Anne Spray Kinney Title/Office: Director, Department of Administration
Address: City Hall
200 East Wells Street
Room 606
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202
Phone: 414-286-3828 Fax: 414-286-5058 Email: Akinne@CI.MIL.WI.US
Date this summary was prepared: 8/23/95
City: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Description: Oklahoma City s Budget Department began to investigate performance measures several years ago. Through literature reviews, discussions with other cities, and the ICMA, they developed sets of performance measures for a variety of their city services. About a year-and-a-half ago, Oklahoma City created a reinventing government task force that was tasked, in part, to review and assess those performance measures. The task force has been using neighborhood meetings to get both public input and support.
Performance measures are used to develop city priorities and as guideposts for resource allocation. They are also used for internal department improvement. For instance, the Police Department was able to justify the need for additional officers and their performance measures are providing early indications that a new focus on prevention is working. The city plans to do a yearly performance report as part of their State of the City report and hopes eventually to participate in some inter-city performance comparisons.
Applicable publications or source material: Oklahoma City has published a public safety performance report.
Contact: Joe Van Bullard Title/Office: Assistant City Manager
Address: 200 North Walker, Suite 302
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Phone: (405) 297-2345 Fax: (405) 297-2570
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Description: About two years ago Philadelphia began a city-wide initiative to develop performance measures. While the system created is still quite new, much progress has been made. Initially, the city budget office, which is taking the lead on the initiative, received primarily output measures from the departments, so it began talking to other cities and researching the literature to see what outcome measures existed. They took what they learned back to the department heads and began a deliberative process that focused on developing outcome-oriented measures that made sense to department staffs and were consistent with department missions.
Performance measures are now reported quarterly to City Council, the Financial Oversight Board, and the press. Additionally, they are included in the budget testimony of department heads. Three to four key measures per department are also incorporated into the city s five year plan. The city uses performance measures to document improvements for city council and the public, to help allocate resources, and as part of quarterly budget meetings with departments.
Applicable publications or source material: Philadelphia publishes performance measures in quarterly service reports, their five year plan, and in the budget testimony of Department heads. The city is also working on an annual Mayors s Service Report to the public, which they hope to distribute in October.
Contact: Rob Dubow Title/Office: Assistant Budget Director
Address: 1401 John F. Kennedy Blvd
Suite 1400 MSB
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone: (215) 686-6151 Fax: (215) 686-2625
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Phoenix, Arizona
Description: With an eye toward learning and improvement, Phoenix began working with results-oriented performance measures five years ago. Results are currently expressed in terms of 1) customer satisfaction, 2) responsiveness, 3) unit cost, and 4) mission. Phoenix places a high priority on customer input, and citizen focus groups have been created to get public feedback. A customer satisfaction survey is also conducted every two years. Finally, on a five-year rotating schedule, each department s mission and programs are given a top-to-bottom review by the budget office.
Presently, Phoenix is observing impacts in five departments that have incorporated results-oriented performance measures into their budget process. Other departments are using them for internal management and decision-making. They key to success, according to Phoenix managers, is developing a system that is flexible, allows for experimentation, and uses customer input when defining key outcomes.
Applicable publications or source material: Phoenix publish performance information in their annual budget. They are also working to incorporate them into monthly reports and the City s popular annual report.
Awards received: A rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact: Bob Wingenroth Title/Office: Deputy Chief Auditor
Address: 17 South 2nd Avenue, Suite 200
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Phone: (602) 262-6642 Fax: (602) 534-1533
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Portland, Oregon
Description: Portland has put in place a comprehensive performance measurement system. Important outcomes and corresponding measures are based on established missions and goals adopted by the city council in concert with the public. Public input is solicited through community forums, advisory committees, and a variety of citizen surveys conducted by the Office of the City Auditor, the Mayor s office, and several city departments.
The city publishes a Service Efforts and Accomplishments report which is used by city council to identify successes and potential problems. They also use it during the budget process. Departments use performance information for internal management purposes. Performance information is audited by the Office of the City Auditor and is widely distributed to the public.
In 1993 the city also embarked on a community benchmarks initiative when it joined forces with Multnomah County and formed the Portland-Multnomah Progress Board. This community-wide board is responsible for maintaining benchmarks that measure progress toward key goals. These goals and corresponding outcome measures cut across public, private, and jurisdictional lines of responsibility. The benchmarks initiative has become a magnet for collaboration as groups join forces to make changes in their community.
Applicable publications or source material: Portland publishes performance information through their annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments report. This year they have also developed a Report to Citizens containing high level financial statements, key financial trends, and select performance measures. Finally, the Portland-Multnomah Progress Board publishes an annual Community Benchmarks report.
Awards received: A rating on Performance Measurement and Evaluation from Financial World magazine, March 14, 1995.
Contact: Dick Tracy Title/Office: Director of Audits
Address: 1220 SW 5th Avenue
Room 120
Portland, OR 97204
Phone: (503) 823-4005 Fax: (503) 823-4459
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Savannah, Georgia
Description: Savannah first began measuring performance in 1973. Their Responsive Public Service Program (RPSP) measures and compares city service levels in various neighborhoods in the city so that improvement can be made. More specifically, the RPSP is used as a tool to determine city wide goals and objectives in the budgeting process, prepare capital improvement plans, identify strategies for improving levels of services, develop programs and plans for neighborhood improvements, facilitate multi-departmental responses, and evaluate improvements as objective are met.
Performance measures are developed through extensive studies, citizen survey, and citizen forums.
Contact: Henry Moore Title/Office: Assistant City Manager
Address: City of Savannah
PO Box 1027
Savannah, GA 31402
Phone: (912) 651-6520
Date this summary was prepared: 6/94
Note: information for this summary was obtained from the National League of Cities document entitled, Performance Measurement, A Tool for Policymakers.
City: Sunnyvale, California
Description: Sunnyvale has been doing this for a while. They first started instituting performance measures as part of city management in 1978. Over the years they have refined both their measures and how they use them. This review process now centers around three questions: are the identified outcomes appropriate, are the quality standards developed suitable, and are the measurement and tracking systems used the best ones?
Currently all eleven city departments measure outcome indicators. These indicators are an integral part the city s pay for performance system, through which managers receive bonuses and sanctions based on the outcomes their department achieve. The system is about incentives as reflected by the fact that about 50% of the city s managers receive annual bonuses and only 2-3% are sanctioned. Outcome measures are also an essential element of the city s planning process. The city council develops work plans consistent with the city s 20 year plan. The work plans identify priorities and relevant performance measures. During budget review these performance measures and others department measures are reviewed and assessed. In order to ensure that the system has integrity and is credible, Sunnyvale performs random performance measure audits on all their departments. The success of Sunnyvale s performance-based management strategy is apparent - the city has increased productivity more than 30% in the last six years, maintained low fees, and delivered excellent service with fewer staff than other comparable cities. According to Sunnyvale, the mechanics of identifying and collecting outcome measures gets much easier over time.
Applicable publications or source material: Sunnyvale publishes an annual performance report to the city council and an annual report card to the public.
Awards received: Presidential visit, GFOA awards, California Society of Finance
Officers award, public appearance and speaking invitations
Contact: Amy Chan Title/Office: Assistant City Manager
Address: PO Box 3707
Sunnyvale, CA 94088-3707
Phone: (408) 730-7481 Fax: (408) 730-7699
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Description: Virginia Beach develops its performance measures through two streams. In the first, the City Council holds a two-day retreat every year during which they develop several city-wide goals - big picture goals that they call destination points. Department heads then form teams that turns these into more concrete outcomes and action plans. In the second complimentary stream, Department heads, middle managers, and staff (who are trained to think in terms of outcomes) have been tasked with establishing two key objectives for the department and several corresponding measures. Virginia Beach has incorporated objectives and performance indicators into its budget and hopes in the future to report regularly on the progress they are making.
Applicable publications or source material: Virginia Beach publishes performance measures as part of their annual budget.
Contact: Dean Block Title/Office: Director, Management Services
Address: City Hall Building
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, VA 23450
Phone: (804) 427-8234 Fax: (804) 426-5875
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
City: Wichita, Kansas
Description: Through an agreement with Wichita State University, Wichita tapped into the expertise of a professor in residence, who was located in the City Managers office full-time for a year. During that year department staffs received training on performance measurement and began to flush out key performance indicators. The departments had already been measuring performance to some extent, but they needed to focus their efforts and develop more tailored measures and system for collecting them. Departments are now refining their measures and doing a review to ensure they are useful. Community input is being solicited through Neighborhood Council meetings and documentation of frequently asked public questions.
Outcomes have become an integral part of city management. The city manager sets goals with his department heads, who in turn set goals with their staff. Within departments, performance measures are used to improve performance from year to year as well as to foster friendly competition between department teams. For instance the crew that does the best job sweeping streets, is rewarded and given special recognition. Similarly, police from various districts compete to see who provides the best response times.
Applicable publications or source material: Wichita publishes some performance measures as part of their annual budget. They hope to develop an annual performance report to the public in the near future.
Contact: Chris Cherches Title/Office: City Manager
Address: 455 N. Main Street
13th Floor, City Hall
Wichita, KS 67202
Phone: (316) 268-4351 Fax: (316) 268-4519
Date this summary was prepared: 8/18/95
4. A Snapshot of Performance Management Initiatives
5. Resources
Barrett and Greene, Capitol of Bad Management in Financial World Magazine, March 14, 1995.
Epstein, Paul D. Using Performance Measurement in Local Government: A Guide to Improving Decisions, Performance and Accountability. New York, NY: National Civic League Press, 1988.
Gay, William G. Benchmarking: Achieving Superior Performance in Fire and Emergency Medical Services. MIS Reports 25 (2): 1-23 Feb 1993.
Gore, Al. From Red Tape to Results: Creating a Government that Works Better & Costs Less. Washington, DC: National Performance Review, USGPO. September 7, 1993.
Stewart, Leslie S., et. al. Where Do We Stand? The Use of Performance Measurement and Other Management Tools in North Carolina Local Government. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina League of Municipalities, 1990.
Tigue, Patricia and Strachota, Dennis. The Use of Performance Measures in City and County Budgets. Chicago, Illinois: Government Finance Officers Association, 1994.
Articles in Government Finance Review, the magazine of the Government Finance Officers Association:
Operating and Capital Budget Reform in Minnesota: Managing Public Finances Like the Future Matters, by Laura M. King. February 1995.
Measuring Government Performance: Experimenting with Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting in Portland, Oregon, by Richard C. Tracy and Ellen p. Jean. December 1993.
Managing a Government Like a Business: The Sunnyvale System, by Amy Chan. April 1994.
GFOA s Financial Indicators Database: Benchmarking and Other Uses, in the COMPUTER CORNER section. December 1994.
Use of Performance Measures by GFOA Members, in the STATE OF THE ART section. December 1994.
Performance Auditing: Catalyst for Change in Portland, Oregon, by Richard Tracy. February 1988.
Improving Management and Services in Cities and Towns: Implementing Goals and Standards. Pittsburgh, PA: Coalition to Improve Management in State and Local Government, 1992.
Performance Measurement, A Tool for Policymakers. Washington DC: National League of Cities, May 1994.
Performance Measurement Guide. Washington, DC: US Department of the Treasury, Financial Management Service, 1993.
Public Management Magazine, Special Section on Benchmarks of Performance, September 1994.
Service Efforts and Accountability Information: Its Time Has Come. Government Accounting Standards Board, 1990.
Performance Measurement Information Exchange
City_______________________ State____________
Contact_______________________________Title/Office________________________________
Street Address_____________________________________________________Zip code______
Phone____________________Fax_______________________E-mail______________________
1. Does your city systematically collect output and/or outcome information?
___Yes. Please continue.
___No. Thank you, you need not complete this survey
2. Please check each of the areas for which your city is measuring outputs (e.g., number of arrests, number of building permits issued):
___airport management ___code enforcement ___economic development ___education ___employment training ___environment service ___fire services ___fleet/facility maintenance ___general management___health services ___recreation/parks ___police/corrections ___sanitation ___social services ___streets/highways
___tax collection ___redevelopment/housing ___other (list_____________________________________)
3. Please check each of the areas for which your city is measuring outcomes (e.g., decreases in the crime rate, satisfaction rate of building permit recipients):
___airport management ___code enforcement ___economic development ___education ___employment training ___environment service ___fire services ___fleet/facility maintenance ___general management___health services ___recreation/parks ___police/corrections ___sanitation ___social services ___streets/highways
___tax collection ___redevelopment/housing ___other (list_____________________________________)
4. Please describe the process your city used to identify what performance measures (i.e., outputs and outcomes) were important to collect. For instance, were focus groups held, was a task force created, etc?
5. How are the performance measures you collect used? (examples include: to inform city-wide management decisions, as part of the budget process, for internal department use).
6. Do you publish information on your performance in terms of the outcomes or level of outputs you achieve?
___No
___Yes. How do you publish them (i.e., annual report to citizens, etc.)?
7. Have you received any awards or recognition for the work you have done in the performance measurement arena?
8. Is there anything else we should know about? Please feel free to attach another page if you would like. Also, we welcome copies of any relevant documents.