Case Study

Austin, Texas

2004 Budget: 1.9 billion

Employees: 10,944

Population: 678,000

PUBAFRS 7554

Managing for Results

Started a “Managing for Results” initiative in 1999

MFR Goal “Have effective Management system that is

accountable to citizens for achieving results.”

MFR – System integrates strategic planning, budgeting,

performance measurement and decision making.

1

Managing for Results

• City departments assess the past, present and

future for the upcoming fiscal year.

• Performance based budgets are based on goals

and results they expect to achieve in upcoming

year.

• Aligned department by their services, activities

and programs in business planning and

budgeting.

3

Austin’s Vision

“To make Austin the most livable community in the country.”

Department Vision

Service

Service

Department Goal Department Goal Department Goal

Program Program

Activity ActivityActivity Activity

Service

ServiceServiceService

ServiceService

SSPRsSSPRs SSPRs SSPRs

Each service within the department aligns to the city vision.4

Challenge 2003-2004

1. Give departments a sense of ownership to the process.

2. Focus on what the customer receives instead of what the provider

does.

How does the city of Austin make the MFR system work

better for the Departmental and citizen users?

MFR – Originally Performance Measures were given to the

department by City Budget office, causing lack of buy-in by

departments.

Problem - Too many measures and lack of ownership.

The second problem was an inward focus on “what do we do” vs.

outward focus on “what does the customer receive”.5

2003 - Departments decide performance measures.

MORE OWNERSHIP, LESS MEASURES

• Determine what was important to measure and what was not.

• One year process.

• Originally listed every activity and measured it. Changed the

process to measure what is important.

6

Steps taken to implement change in the MFR process:

Review Current Goals:

1. Compare current goals to identified internal and external

factors affecting performance.

2. Confirm that the goals reflect where the department wants to

be in 2 – 5 years. Do these goals adequately position the

department for the future?

3. Confirm that the issues addressed by the goals are still

relevant and still a priority.

7

Reviewing Current Goals:

4. Check each goal for time frames and targets - or performance

measures that can measure progress toward the goal.

5. Review the key indicators to confirm that the key indicators

effectively measure the department’s business.

6. Develop new goals as necessary.

7. Include in the business plan a brief statement of why and how

the goals will lead to the fulfillment of the department’s mission.

8

Does the goal reflect the department’s priorities and direction?

Will the achievement of the goal help the department respond to the

change?

Is the goal focused on the future (2-5 years)?

Is the goal results-oriented?

Is the goal measurable, either directly or through programs or activities?

Is it reasonably achievable?

Suggested questions to ask when reviewing current goals

or developing new goals:

9

Is the goal easy to understand and articulate?

Is the goal internally or externally focused?

Does the department have a balance of both?

Will the goal provide the opportunity for the department to

demonstrate accountability for results and help decision-makers

evaluate the performance of the department as a whole?

Can at least one goal be measured nationally with peer cities?

Suggested questions to ask when reviewing

current goals or developing new goals:

10

Example of a Non-Measurable Goal

from the FY 2001 Budget

Prevention Animal Services/No Kill

Millennium – Promoting responsible pet

ownership and minimizing the

euthanasia of adoptable animals.

11

Example of a Measurable Goal from

the FY 2004 Budget

Prevention/Provision/Protection Animal

Services/No Kill Millennium – Promote

responsible pet ownership and minimize the

euthanasia of adoptable animals.

Increase the percentage of sheltered adoptable

animals rescued, adopted or returned-to-owner

per year at the Town Lake Animal Center from

66% to 100% by year 2007

12

Example of Non-Measurable Goal from the

FY 2001 Library Budget:

Increase the percentage of customers who find the materials they need.

Increase the percentage of customers who find the reference information

they need.

Increase the use of the library by Austin’s youth as measured by program

attendance, number of youth library cards and circulation of youth

materials.

Improve overall favorable rating of library services.

Increase the percentage of customers that have used the Library in the

last year.

Improve the quality, delivery and awareness of library services to better

meet customer need:

13

Example of Measurable Goal from the FY

2004 Library Budget:

Deliver quality library services to meet customer needs.

78% of customers will find the materials they need through 2004.

85% of customers will find the reference information they need through 2004.

Austin’s youth will use the library as measured by program attendance of 95,625, issuance of 8,000 new youth library cards, and circulation of 1,152,000 youth materials through 2004.

78% of citizens will give the library an overall favorable rating of library services through 2004.

2,729,135 customers will use the Library through 2004.

821,000 Internet uses will access Library resources electronically and the number of web hits will reach 11,150,000 through 2004.

14

Reporting the Information: Improved Reporting Processes

• The following charts outlines how performance

information is now collected, stored and used for

performance reporting.

Step 2

15

City departments collect

performance and

operation information

Department sends Excel

spreadsheet to the

Budget Office to upload

into its citywide database

Department enters

performance information

into its citywide database

through a ColdFusion

intranet application.

OR

CARMA

(an Oracle database)

houses all of the city

departments’ performance

data

16

CARMA

(an Oracle database)

houses all of the city

departments’ performance

data

Budget

Document

CARMA

generates some

reports that are

part of the

published

Budget

Document

INTRANET

Performance

measures data

are extracted and

accessible to all

city employees

through another

ColdFusion

intranet

application called

ePerf.

INTERNET

The same data

available on

ePerf is copied

to a web server

where the

public can

access through

the Internet.

Performance

E Reports

Performance

data from

CARMA is

compiled into

quarterly

performance

reports

through a

manual

process.

Community

Scorecard

Data from

CARMA is also

used to prepare

the Community

Scorecard,

which provides

information o

how the city

delivers

services in

major areas.

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/default.htm , http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/02-03/downloads/scorecard_2002.pdf

17

Step 3

Classifying the Services: The Core Services Initiative

• The core services initiative is intended to provide management with a

way to classify the services the city provides into three categories.

• Core services are primarily services that are fundamental to carrying out

the responsibilities delegated to local governments from the State or the

Federal government. These include, for example, public safety and public

health.

• Semi-core services are primarily services that local governments may

provide to augment the level of services provided by other entities for

whom these services are cores services. For example, a local

government may provide education services or workforce development

services, although these are the core services of the school district and

the Texas Workforce Commission, respectively. 18

• Non-core services and service enhancements are services that

are considered neither core nor semi-core. In developing the core

services criteria staff understood and expected that there would be

disagreement about the criteria and ultimately about the

classification of city services.

Step 3: Classifying the Services: The Core Services Initiative

The core services initiative is intended to be an

administrative tool that management can use to provide

policy recommendations to council on how to allocate

scarce resources.

19

Step 4

Planning for the Future

• Information Technology Needs

• Develop Business Process Improvements

• Develop Action Plans to Achieve Goals

20

RESULTS

The core services initiative allow city management to educate and inform

elected officials that 98% of the dollars went to core and semi-core activities.

The defining of activities and services as non-core allowed city management to make

budget reduction decisions.

Prioritizing activities allowed the city to review administrative costs and make cuts in

the HR and IT areas = $10.9 million.

Business Process Improvements – The Employee Innovation initiative

created 2,975 new ideas.

- 286 innovations approved citywide.

- $8.8 million cost savings.

- $1.6 million revenue gains

Closed budget gap of $31 million FY 2003 and $38 million in FY 2004.

Managed through fiscal duress.

21

Results

Better informed - Management Teams- City Council- Citizens

Focused on measuring what is important.- 4,400 measures – 2001- 2,500 measures – 2004

Examples:

Library 110 measures to 75Solid Waste Services 187 measures to 108.Police 182 measure to 132.

22

Must have the support of the highest level executive

Limit the number of measures to the most important measures

relevant to the particular audience (e.g., citizens, city council, city

manager, department directors, division directors, work teams)

Change the corporate culture to get the departments’ acceptance

and ownership of measures

Provide good instructions through the process, instructions,

templates and examples

LESSONS LEARNED

Guidelines for the Performance Measure Process

23

Keep a basic framework with the ability to make Improvements each year

Have a process to verify the data

Report successes

Get employees to accept responsibility even though they do not have

complete control of the outcome

Make sure that the goals are measurable. Have a timeframe and intended

result for each goal.

LESSONS LEARNED:

Guidelines for the Performance Measure Process

24