GASB’s Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting (SEA)

TitleGASB’s Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting (SEA) Lisa R. Parker, CPA, CGMA Senior Project Manager Governmental Accounting Standards Board
The views expressed in this presentation are those of Ms. Parker. Official positions of the GASB on accounting matters are reached only after extensive due process and deliberation.
A Little History on SEA 1985 – Call for experimentation 1987 – GASB Concepts Statement 1, Objectives of
Financial Reporting - Para 77.c. “Financial reporting should provide information to assist
users in assessing the service efforts, costs, and accomplishments of the governmental entity.”
1989-1992 – GASB research reports titled Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting: Its Time Has Come
1994 – GASB Concepts Statement 2, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting
1996 – GASB survey of 5,000 state and local governments regarding their use and reporting of performance measures
A Little More History on SEA 1997 – Alfred P. Sloan Foundation approves a grant to the GASB to
enhance the GASB’s SEA research and to expand and accelerate research on performance measures
1998 – GASB creates a website (www.sea.gov) to serve as a clearinghouse for information about performance measurement for government
1999 – GASB researchers visit 26 state and local governments to conduct case studies and the studies are published on the SEA web site
2000-2001 – GASB researchers visit 26 more state and local governments to conduct case studies and the studies are published on the SEA web site
2002 – GASB publishes a report on follow-up to the 1996 survey, finding that the use of performance measures by state and local governments was continuing its growth, and that the respondents planned to increase their use of performance measures
And Still… A Little More History on SEA
2002 – GASB presents a paper on the history of SEA reporting as part of financial accounting to the FAF
2003 – GASB publishes a special report, Reporting Performance Information: Suggested Criteria for Effective Communication, describing a set of 16 suggested criteria that state and local governments can use when preparing external reports on SEA performance information
2005 – GASB publishes a guide to help interested individuals become informed consumers of performance reports that are prepared using, to some degree, the GASB suggested criteria
2004-2009 – GASB staff monitors the use of the suggested criteria and conducted research on the value of the criteria with positive results on both
And Yes… A Little More Recent History on SEA
2008 – GASB Concepts Statement No. 5, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting, an amendment of GASB Concepts Statement No. 2
2008 – GASB Request for Response, Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting of SEA Performance Information
2009 – GASB Proposed Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting, SEA Performance Information
2010 – GASB Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting, SEA Performance Information
Is Your State or Local Government:
Effective? Efficient? Providing Good Value?
How do you know?
“Governments are fundamentally different from for-profit business enterprises in several important ways.”
Key Differences
governments and business enterprises differ. Public accountability is an essential factor.
9
Phase 1—Amendments to Concepts Statement No.
2, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting Phase 2—Request for Response, Suggested
Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting of SEA Performance Information
10
Concepts Statement No. 2, Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting
April 1994 Further develops the objective of service efforts and
accomplishments (SEA) reporting Provides background information on:
- the government environment - governmental decision making - accountability - the reporting of performance information as part of general
purpose external financial reporting (GPEFR) Calls for further extensive experimentation in measuring and reporting
SEA before the GASB considers establishing SEA reporting standards
SEA Information as Part of GPEFR
An objective of GPEFR is to provide users with information that will assist them in assessing the performance of the reporting entity
Because the primary purpose of governmental entities is to maintain or improve the well-being of their citizens, information that will assist users in assessing how efficiently and effectively governmental entities are using resources to maintain or improve the well-being of their citizens should play an important role in GPEFR
The assessment of a governmental entity’s performance requires information not only about the acquisition and use of resources, but also about the outputs and outcomes
Exposure Draft issued on April 4, 2008 Comment deadline was July 3, 2008 Public Hearing—July 29, 2008—9:00AM
Association of Government Accountants’ Professional Development Conference
Atlanta, Georgia AMENDMENTS INCLUDE—Elimination of one section and
the modification of four sections
14
Section on Developing Reporting Standards for SEA Information—deleted Sections on Limitations of SEA Performance
Information and Usefulness of SEA Performance Information—clarifying revisions only Section on Purpose and Scope—clarification that it is
beyond the scope of the GASB to establish (1) the goals and objectives of state and local governmental services, (2) specific nonfinancial measures or indicators of service performance, or (3) standards of, or benchmarks for, service performance.
15
Amendments
Section on Elements of SEA Performance Measures—proposes to separate the elements of SEA performance measurement from related factors as follows:
16
Amendments-
Measures of service efforts (costs), Measures of service accomplishments
(outputs/outcomes), Measures that relate service efforts to service
accomplishments (efficiency), Discussion of other factors (related information)—
expanded to include comparisons, unintended effects, narrative information, and the concept of demand for services. Focus shifted to factors that influenced results.
ELEMENTS OF SEA PERFORMANCE MEASURES
18
Measures of service efforts
Input measures Measure the amount of financial and nonfinancial resources that are applied to a service
Financial—cost of road maintenance
Nonfinancial—total lane-miles of roads
Measures of service accomplishments
Output measures
Measure the quantity of services provided; A quality requirement may be included
Number of lane-miles of road repaired or percentage of lane-miles of road repaired to a certain minimum satisfactory condition
Outcome measures
Measure the results of providing those outputs
Percentage of roads in good or excellent condition, or the residents’ rating of the smoothness of the roads
Measures that relate service efforts to service accomplishments
Efficiency measures
Measure the resources used or cost per unit of output
Cost per lane-mile of road maintained or more specifically, resurfaced or seal-coated
Cost–outcome measures
Measure the resources used or cost per unit of outcome or result
Cost per lane-mile of road maintained in good or excellent condition
Elements of SEA Performance Measures
Definition
Example
Input measures
Measure the amount of financial and nonfinancial resources that are applied to a service
Nonfinancial—total lane-miles of roads
Output measures
Number of lane-miles of road repaired or percentage of lane-miles of road repaired to a certain minimum satisfactory condition
Outcome measures
Measure the results of providing those outputs
Measures that relate service efforts to service accomplishments
Efficiency measures
Measure the resources used or cost per unit of output
Measure the resources used or cost per unit of outcome or result
Suggested Guidelines— Request for Response
Request for Response, Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting of SEA Performance Information was issued on July 31, 2008 Comment deadline was October 31, 2008 – 35 written
comments received User Forum was held in NYC on November 7, 2008 Public Hearing was held on November 14, 2008 in
Orlando, Florida in conjunction with the National League of Cities’ 2008 Congress of Cities and Exposition
Suggested Guidelines— Proposal
Proposed Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting, SEA Performance Information was issued on June 30, 2009 Comment deadline was October 30, 2009 23 written comments received and webinar conducted
with the Rutgers Public Performance Measurement & Reporting Network
SEA Reporting—Scope
What the project is: - Focus on voluntary reporting - Focus on suggested guidelines - Focus on clarifying GASB’s role
What the project is not:
- Establishing performance measures - Establishing performance benchmarks - Establishing reporting standards - Requiring SEA reporting
Sole Focus Of GASB Efforts
EXTERNAL
REPORTING
Internal
Reporting
( External Reporting Internal Reporting Evaluating Performance Manag ing Work Processes Performance- Based Budgeting Selecting Performance Measures Program or Activity Planning Strategic Planning Government Performance Management System )
2003 Special Report – GASB 16 Suggested Criteria 1. Purpose and scope 2. Statement of major goals and objectives 3. Involvement in establishing goals and objectives 4. Multiple levels of reporting 5. Analysis of results and challenges 6. Focus on key measures 7. Reliable information 8. Relevant measures of results 9. Resources used and efficiency 10. Citizen and customer perceptions 11. Comparisons for assessing performance 12. Factors affecting results 13. Aggregation and disaggregation of information 14. Consistency 15. Easy to find, access, and understand 16. Regular and timely reporting
16 Criteria – 3 Groups
The External Report on Performance Information (1-7) – Provides the basis for understanding the extent to which an organization has accomplished its mission, goals and objectives in the context of potential significant decision making or accountability implications.
What Performance Information to Report (8-14) – Provides the criteria to assure that the information reported assists in communicating the extent to which the organization and its programs, services and strategies have contributed to achieving the goals and objectives.
Communication of Performance Information (15-16) – Provides the criteria to assure that a reasonably informed, interested user can learn about the availability of reports on performance and should be able to access, understand and use the information.
Suggested Guidelines for Voluntary Reporting, SEA Performance Information composed of three parts:
Four essential components of an effective SEA report Six qualitative characteristics that are appropriate for reporting
SEA performance information A discussion of how to effectively communicate SEA
performance information
Suggested guidelines, although voluntary, will assist governments in improving the quality of their reported SEA performance information
Traditional financial statements provide information about fiscal and operational accountability but not the degree to which the government was successful in helping to maintain or improve the well-being of its citizens by providing services
Suggested Guidelines
Provide guidance to assist preparers of SEA reports in effectively communicating SEA performance information to users
Purpose and Scope Major Goals and Objectives Key Measures of SEA Performance Discussion and Analysis of Results and Challenges
27
28
Essential Components User Needs
Purpose and Scope The knowledge of why the information is being reported and
what portion of a government the information relates to.
Major Goals and Objectives
A basis for determining whether the reported SEA performance measures are relevant measures of what a government intended to accomplish (that is, the measures are associated with the goals and objectives of the program or service).
Key Measures of SEA Performance
The ability to focus on the key measures of SEA performance that are most important to report users.
Discussion and Analysis of Results and Challenges
The ability to understand what has been achieved and what has affected the level of achievement.
Essential Components
User Needs
Purpose and Scope
The knowledge of why the information is being reported and what portion of a government the information relates to.
Major Goals and Objectives
A basis for determining whether the reported SEA performance measures are relevant measures of what a government intended to accomplish (that is, the measures are associated with the goals and objectives of the program or service).
Key Measures of SEA Performance
The ability to focus on the key measures of SEA performance that are most important to report users.
Discussion and Analysis of Results and Challenges
The ability to understand what has been achieved and what has affected the level of achievement.
29
PURPOSE AND SCOPE Purpose- Why a government is publishing the report Intended audience of the report What the SEA performance information is intended to communicate How the reported SEA performance information can assist users in assessing performance and making decisions – Are they operating efficiently and effectively? How SEA performance information may be used for assessing resource allocation decisions and whether these decisions are consistent with the goals and objectives
30
or services are included
Period covered by the report
Date the report was issued
Ways to contact the government to obtain more information Identifies the level of detail within the SEA report and the reasons why a government has decided to report at that level
* Overviewcity as a whole * More detailed levelby neighborhood What level of assurance, if any, was obtained on the SEA performance information
31
MAJOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
Major Goals and Objectives- State the major goals and objectives of the programs and services being reported or what those programs or services are intended to accomplish State the sources of the major goals and objectives Explain the link between the major goals and objectives and the measures being reported
32
MAJOR GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
*Also recognizes that depending on users needs, SEA performance information may be presented in other ways, such as by themes, which require a government to integrate results across the organizational structure.
33
KEY MEASURES OF SEA PERFORMANCE
Key Measures of SEA Performance- Limited number of measures to focus on information that is essential for assessing the level of performance of programs and services in comparison to what it had planned to achieve Provide users with enough information to develop their own conclusions without overwhelming them The number and type of key measures may vary depending on the level of reporting Key measures can be identified based on the following questions:
34
KEY MEASURES OF SEA PERFORMANCE Key Measures of SEA Performance- Key measures can be identified based on the following questions:
Does the measure report on results for a major goal or objective? Does the measure address an issue receiving considerable public discussion? Does the measure report information considered important by elected officials, citizens, or experts in the field? Does the measure report information about a program or service that accounts for a large proportion of a government’s use of resources? Does the measure report information about a program or service that affects a large proportion of the population or has potentially significant economic, social, or environmental effects?
ELEMENTS OF SEA PERFORMANCE MEASURES
35
Input measures Measure the amount of financial and nonfinancial resources applied to a service
Nonfinancial—total lane-miles of roads used in providing a service
Output measures
Number of lane-miles of road repaired or the number of lane-miles of road repaired to a certain minimum satisfactory condition
Outcome measures
Measure the results associated with the provision of services; may include measures of public perceptions of results
Measures relating service efforts to service accomplishments
Efficiency measures
Measure the resources used per unit of output or the cost per unit of output
Measure the resources used per unit of outcome or result, or the cost per unit of outcome or result
Elements of SEA Performance Measures
Definition
Example
Input measures
Measure the amount of financial and nonfinancial resources applied to a service
Nonfinancial—total lane-miles of roads used in providing a service
Output measures
Number of lane-miles of road repaired or the number of lane-miles of road repaired to a certain minimum satisfactory condition
Outcome measures
Measure the results associated with the provision of services; may include measures of public perceptions of results
Measures relating service efforts to service accomplishments
Efficiency measures
Measure the resources used per unit of output or the cost per unit of output
Measure the resources used per unit of outcome or result, or the cost per unit of outcome or result
36
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND CHALLENGES
Discussion and Analysis of Results and Challenges- Provides an objective explanation of the results being reported Highlights the major and critical results being reportedboth positive and negative Includes managements understanding of the reasons why the actual results differ from the expected or intended results Addresses currently known facts and circumstances that could affect results in the future
37
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND CHALLENGES
Discussion and Analysis of Results and Challenges- Discusses the major challenges a government is facing in achieving its goals and objectives Discusses the consequences (both intended and unintended), and the results (positive or negative) of providing services
Provide further guidance in the application of the essential components—assist users in comprehending and assessing government programs and services
Relevance
38
39
Qualitative
Characteristics
User Needs
Relevance The ability to assess the level of accomplishment of a government’s goals and objectives with potentially significant accountability or decision-making implications.
Understandability SEA performance information that is readily comprehendible.
Comparability A clear frame of reference for assessing the SEA performance of a government and its agencies, departments, programs, and services.
Timeliness SEA performance information issued while it is still of value in assessing accountability and making decisions.
Consistency A basis for comparing similar SEA performance information over time.
Reliability SEA performance information that is verifiable, free from bias and a faithful representation of what it purports to represent.
Qualitative Characteristics
User Needs
Relevance
The ability to assess the level of accomplishment of a government’s goals and objectives with potentially significant accountability or decision-making implications.
Understandability
Comparability
A clear frame of reference for assessing the SEA performance of a government and its agencies, departments, programs, and services.
Timeliness
SEA performance information issued while it is still of value in assessing accountability and making decisions.
Consistency
A basis for comparing similar SEA performance information over time.
Reliability
SEA performance information that is verifiable, free from bias and a faithful representation of what it purports to represent.
40
RELEVANCE In order for information presented within an SEA report to be relevant, it needs to: include information that is capable of making a difference in a user’s assessment of performance (a problem, condition, or event) have a close logical relationship to the purpose for which it is intended to be used
The relevance of SEA performance information depends on the various user needs for assessing performance and making decisions For example- Consider the appropriate level of aggregation or disaggregation necessary to represent the performance of different geographical areas
41
RELEVANCE
Determining if information is relevant can be based on the following questions: Does the SEA performance information present the major goals and objectives of the programs and services being reported? Does the SEA performance information provide a basis for assessing the level of accomplishment of the major goals and objectives? Do the major goals and objectives relate to concerns that are important to users?
42
UNDERSTANDABILITY In order for information presented within an SEA report to be understandable, it needs to: be expressed simply and clearly include explanations and interpretations to help users comprehend the information be communicated in different forms and at different levels of detail so that the information can be understood by those who may not have a detailed knowledge of a government’s programs and services
Governments need to obtain feedback from users of an SEA report in order to enhance the understandability of the reported SEA performance information
43
COMPARABILITY In order for information presented within an SEA report to be comparable, it needs to: provide a basis and context for users to assess SEA performance provide users with the ability to make an assessment of whether the reported SEA performance information is improving, deteriorating, or remaining the same
The types of comparative information reported may depend on issues such as the availability of reliable and relevant information, the purpose of the report, and the needs of the users.
44
COMPARABILITY Comparable information may include: time series comparisonscompares results of 2 or more periods
No basis for assessing whether results are at an acceptable level
comparisons with established targetscompares to results anticipated
Targets can be too high or too low
comparisons to industry standards comparisons to other similar governments
Significant differences in measures or circumstances need to be noted and understood by users
45
TIMELINESS In order for information presented within an SEA report to be timely, it needs to: be provided to users before it loses its value for assessing accountability and affecting decisions
Timeliness alone does not make information useful, but the passage of time generally diminishes its usefulness.
46
CONSISTENCY
In order for information presented within an SEA report to be consistent, it needs to: include measures reported in the same way over time
can compare performance and monitor trends over several years
If SEA performance measures are modified or replaced or the manner of presentation is changed, then it is important to communicate to users that a change has taken place and the reasons for the change.
47
RELIABILITY In order for information presented within an SEA report to be reliable, it needs to: contain information that is verifiable to provide assurance that the information in an SEA report would be replicated by independent evaluators using the same measurement methods information needs to be derived from systems producing verifiable data independent verification is ideal system control reviews conducted internally program staff or director evaluations
contain information that is objective and has therefore not been modified by the government to either overstate or understate positive or negative results
48
RELIABILITY
contain information that is comprehensive in coverage or thorough in its presentation of the measures significant data is not omitted from the information that is necessary to faithfully represent major results nothing is included that would cause the information to be misleading
contain information that is a faithful representation of the results or represent what actually occurred
In order for information presented within an SEA report to be reliable, it needs to:
49
Provide further guidance on the effective communication of SEA performance information
Intended Audiences Forms of Communication Multiple Levels of Reporting
50
INTENDED AUDIENCES In order to effectively communicate SEA performance information to users, the intended audiences need to be considered
citizens elected officials appointed officials investors and creditors others
The types of decisions made by potential audiences influence the information that they need in an SEA report. Potential audiences need different types of information and understand and analyze SEA performance information in different ways.
51
INTENDED AUDIENCES
Involving users in the process of identifying: what SEA performance information is valuable and interesting to them how they prefer to receive the SEA performance information
may assist preparers in effectively communicating their results in an SEA report.
52
FORMS OF COMMUNICATION
The effective communication of SEA performance information is, in part, dependent on the forms used to communicate that information Forms of communication:
printed material mailed to households and businesses portable document format (PDF) files on the Internet extensible business reporting language (XBRL) enhanced files on the Internet presentations made in person articles in the print media news segments in the electronic media
53
MULTIPLE LEVELS OF REPORTING
An SEA report that communicates effectively contains different levels of detail so that users can find their appropriate and desired level of detail Levels of detail can be presented in many ways within one document several separate documents organized by service area
54
MULTIPLE LEVELS OF REPORTING
An SEA report needs to be organized in a hierarchical structure that proceeds through levels (layers) from overview to detail, and needs to have clearly identified links between the levels. overview introductory summary information about specific programs and services as a whole performance data that is broken down to provide measures of performance about specific strategies or activities within programs and services
55
APPENDIXES
Appendix A: Illustrations Appendix B: Background Information Appendix C: Board Considerations
A Real Life Example
NCCI Grant for citizen satisfaction survey – 2 years (2004 & 2005)
Grant requirements of report production – JUST DO IT!!!
GASB suggested criteria for report production – AGA award program
Strategic Planning Process support for effort
Creating the proper infrastructure will assure that the effort is sustained over time with changing politicians and management teams.
SACO’S STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS
Strategic Alignment Process
FEEDBACK
Alignment
July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct PROJECT PHASE/Tasks
Establish performance measures of goals for each department (Saco internal process). Review GASB performance reporting requirements, esp. 16 criteria for effective reporting. Research performance measurement movement to understand current context, past experience, and best practices. Establish research needs for citizen opinion survey, identify vendor options, issue RFP, and select vendor. Evaluate strategic objects by department in terms of survey inclusion and establish all information survey should obtain to devise survey draft for vendor final refinement.
PHASE TWO Review literature on performance measurement. Examine efforts of peer governmental units to identify good report examples. Attend AGA training for peer reviewers of performance measurement reports. Research for comparative data sources. Meet with each department to discuss scope of operations (workload info), status of efforts on data gathering of performance of goals, and propose add'l measures. Identify key resistors and other roadblocks, such as lack of data. Review survey results. Outline report structure.
PHASE THREE Draft prototype section for approval. Gather all background information. Draft remaining sections. Import data into draft and make revisions. Revise and publish report.
PHASE FOUR Review process and debrief. Seek feedback from departments and stakeholders. Begin planning for next performance report. Review peer assessment of first report. Review and critique research indicators in order to revise survey.
PHASE ONE
Developing Performance Measurement Reporting for the City of Saco, Maine
Project Tasks and Timeline
Developing Performance Measurement Reporting for the City of Saco, Maine
Project Tasks and Timeline
Establish performance measures of goals for each department (Saco internal process).
Review GASB performance reporting requirements, esp. 16 criteria for effective reporting.
Research performance measurement movement to understand current context, past
experience, and best practices.
Establish research needs for citizen opinion survey, identify vendor options, issue RFP,
and select vendor.
Evaluate strategic objects by department in terms of survey inclusion and establish all
information survey should obtain to devise survey draft for vendor final refinement.
PHASE TWO
Review literature on performance measurement.
Examine efforts of peer governmental units to identify good report examples.
Attend AGA training for peer reviewers of performance measurement reports.
Research for comparative data sources.
Meet with each department to discuss scope of operations (workload info), status of
efforts on data gathering of performance of goals, and propose add'l measures.
Identify key resistors and other roadblocks, such as lack of data.
Review survey results.
Outline report structure.
Gather all background information.
Revise and publish report.
Review and critique research indicators in order to revise survey.
Sheet2
Sheet3
2. Organizational Support
4. Lack of Good Comparative Data
5. Usefulness of Report to Citizens
Costs Funding for research - citizen input on key issues
Performance citizens want to see measured
Evaluation by citizens of the city’s strategic objectives
Development of a citizen vision for the City
Consideration of Citizen Focus Groups (utilization of monetary incentive had been ruled out)
Getting repeat attendance has proven to be a challenge
Other Project costs not covered by our grant
Staff time to establish, gather data on, and document performance measures
Staff time to assemble all the information and to produce report
Printing and distribution
Audit to verify performance data – no internal staff
Organizational Support Organizational resistance encountered in the development of this report was typical Some departments were unaccustomed to accessing and evaluating information on their own performance, no less having it documented and published
To get full cooperation every method imaginable was used:
Educating and providing guidance and information (Ammons book on “Municipal Benchmarking”, and ideas on how to establish processes and setting up systems
Persuasion, cajoling and bullying
Key leaders were fully supportive – gave the process legitimacy and forced action to complete the process
Key departments were well ahead in terms of measuring their performance, especially where performance standards were readily available and where outside agencies already exert significant monitoring influences
Lack of Good Comparative Data As a first time reporting entity, the City of Saco had the advantage of using the report to establish benchmarks for current performance
Whenever possible, Saco compared its performance to regional municipalities with similar demographics, in order to at least provide context for its performance.
Several comparative measures of performance were sourced through Ammons’ book
Future reports, however, should push the city to: -refine its current measures -create some historical performance data comparing last year to this year.
Making the Report Useful to Citizens, City Councils and Staff
If very few stakeholders read a city’s performance measurement report, then there is little value to having produced it.
City of Saco used the performance measurement process to help guide funding choices during its annual budget process.
Report has user-friendly format (type size, use of graphics, icons and color, voice, ordered development etc., all noted as excellent by the AGA reviewers) – but it is still too large of a document – 100+ Pages!!
To publish it widely in its full color format is cost prohibitive. Second year, issued a 4 page newspaper circular type document as well in order to access all stakeholders affordably also began the e-mail network of citizens with a monthly newsletter that gives the data in bytes – a different department every month. In 2006 began with the AGA Citizen Centric Prototype model.
Whats happening on the international front?
66
67 Page 1 | Proprietary and Copyrighted Information
International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board (IPSASB)
• International board, meets four times per year
• 18 board members: Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia - Pacific (e.g. Brazil, Panama, New Zealand….)
• Develops accounting standards, “International Public Sector Accounting Standards” (IPSASs), for…..
• ….. public sector organizations
International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board: Who uses IPSASs?
New Zealand
International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board
• IPSASB mission: To serve the public interest by developing high - quality accounting standards and other publications for use by public sector entities around the world in the preparation of general purpose financial reports
• IPSASs for public sector organizations: – Central and provincial governments, city councils…
– Government ministries, departments, hospitals, prisons, the military, museums, libraries…..
– International organizations: United Nations system, etc.
IPSASB Strategy
OUTPUTS
High - quality financial reporting standards and other publications (RPG 3) Presentations , speeches and other outreach activities
OUTCOMES
Strengthening public financial management and knowledge globally through increasing adoption
of accrual - based IPSASs
RPG 3 Reporting Service Performance: What and why?
• “Recommended practice guideline” (RPG) – Voluntary application – Organization can claim compliance (if claiming compliance,
then must comply with all “requirements”) – RPG includes options and allows flexibility – Not an accounting standard
• RPGs for information outside of the financial statements (e.g. RPG 1 on fiscal sustainability, RPG 2 on financial discussion and analysis)
RPG 3 Reporting Service Performance: What and why ?
• “Recommended practice guideline” (RPG) – Guideline for best practice – Sets framework and establishes parameters (e.g. report
against objectives, report annually….) – Establishes a common language e.g. definitions for key
terms (e.g. inputs, outputs and outcomes)
RPG 3 Reporting Service Performance: What and why ?
• External reporting on service performance – “General Purpose Financial Report” – Information for external users ( not for internal
management, not for business units) – Users : Resource providers (e.g. tax payers) and service
recipients; citizens and legislature – Information for accountability and decision making
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance: what and Why ?
• Do accountants have the expertise to develop “best practice” for information on service performance? – Controversial question – Different views around the board table
• Yes, jurisdictions where accountants have significant experience of service performance reporting, e.g. Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, United States…
Service Performance Reporting: What and Why ?
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance: What and why ?
• Public sector: Service provision is critical for performance ( not profit)
• IPSASB’s Conceptual Framework set scope: “In addition to the financial statements, GPFRs provide information relevant to, for example, assessments of an entity’s service performance and the sustainability of its finances .”
Project approved
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance Information: Cope with diversity
• World - wide: Huge diversity of services and contexts • Different:
– Legislative requirements – Reporting frameworks – Extent of experience with service performance reporting
• Therefore, principles based framework and less prescriptive
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance Information: “Requirements ”
• Report information annually for whole reporting entity • Report against service performance objectives • Information to display:
– Service performance objectives – Performance indicators (planned, actual and previous year) – Total costs
• Information to disclose: – Concise overview (discussion and analysis) – Basis for displayed information
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance Information: “ Flexibility”
• Each entity focuses on own situation: – What service performance objectives? – What performance indicators? – What was planned performance? (Report actual against planned)
• Flexibility to allow for different: – Services – Focus (focus on inputs? outputs? efficiency? outcomes?) – Different jurisdictions
RPG 3, Reporting Service Performance Information
• Performance indicators defined: – Inputs: Resources used to provide outputs – Outputs: Services provided – Outcomes: The impacts on society as a result of entity’s outputs – Efficiency: Relationship between (a) Inputs and outputs, or (b)
inputs and outcomes – Effectiveness: Relationship between actual results and service
performance objectives
• Inputs : Nurses (staff) time • Outputs : Vaccinations
against measles • Outcome : Reduced
incidence of measles • Efficiency : 100 vacs/$$ • Effectiveness : Organization has achieved 95% of its
planned results (Last year it achieved 85% of its planned results)
RPG 3: Location and Organization of Information
• Location: – Either with the financial statements or in a separate report – RPG 3 identifies factors to consider
• Organization: – Jurisdiction or entity decides (e.g. statements, boxes, mix of
narrative and tables…) – Should support understandability
Service performance: Next Steps and Challenges
• Jurisdictions adopt RPG 3 • Better information about service
performance for accountability and decision making: – Evaluate service performance – Decisions, e.g. funding of services
• Better services.
GASB web sites – www.gasb.org, www.seagov.org Lisa R. Parker, CPA, CGMA Senior Project Manager Governmental Accounting Standards Board 401 Merritt 7, P.O. Box 5116 Norwalk, Connecticut 06856-5116 (203)956-5351 [email protected]
A Little History on SEA
A Little More History on SEA
And Still… A Little More History on SEA
And Yes… A Little More Recent History on SEA
Is Your State or Local Government:
Why Governmental Accountingand Financial ReportingIs—And Should Be—Different
Key Differences
Slide Number 14
Slide Number 15
Slide Number 16
Slide Number 18
Suggested Guidelines—Proposal
SEA Reporting—Scope
16 Criteria – 3 Groups
Slide Number 67
Slide Number 68
Slide Number 69
Slide Number 70
Slide Number 71
Slide Number 72
Slide Number 73
Slide Number 74
Slide Number 75
Slide Number 76
Slide Number 77
Slide Number 78
Slide Number 79
Slide Number 80
Slide Number 81
Slide Number 82
Slide Number 83
Slide Number 84
Slide Number 85

GASB’s Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting (SEA)

Documents

Transcript of GASB’s Service Efforts and Accomplishments Reporting (SEA)