|
| |
State Performance Management Experience
Lessons from the states and what they tell us about GPRA prospects in the
Federal context.
 | A recent Public Budgeting and Finance, Volume 20, Number 1, Spring 2000 (click for information on how to get it) had two articles that shed
light on performance management in states, and I derived some implications for the Federal
experience. I recommend reading the articles; I am only summarizing limited aspects
that I believe are directly relevant to the current Federal experience with GPRA.
The two articles are:
 | Performance Measurement in State Budgeting: Advancement and Backsliding from 1990
to 1995, by Robert D. Lee, Jr. and Robert C. Burns (pages 38-54). |
| Implementing PBB: Conflicting Views of Success, by Katherine G. Willoughby and
Julia A. Melkers (pages 105-120). |
|
| The Lee and Burns article states that no conclusions can be drawn about performance
measures on the basis of state experience since there is much variation. This
article is based on surveys conducted every five years since 1970, with the next one due
this year - which results may lead to different conclusions after analysis. However,
they found decreased use of performance measures between 1990 and 1995 in sharp contrast
to increases between 1970 and 1990. The authors speculate about what may be the
reasons for this change, but reach no conclusions. One of the reasons may be that
there is a more realistic view of what it takes to revise and implement new budgeting
systems. |
| The Willoughby and Melkers article deals with performance based budgeting (PBB) at the
state level as viewed by budget practitioners. They conducted a survey of state
budget people who work with performance management and budget process matters. They
found that budget professionals in the legislative branch were less positive about the
results of PBB than were those in the executive branch of government. They also note
that 3 out of 4 states where budget people believe that PBB has been most effective have
biennial budgeting. They state that the two year budget cycle has a beneficial
effect on strategic planning, which benefits PBB. They also note that unrealistic
expectations for success, coupled with inadequate implementation, end these reform efforts
prematurely. |
| Taken together, the two articles convey an impression that the success of performance
based budgeting and management is still in question, and that it is not a sure fire
solution to whatever problems may be perceived with government programs. This is not
news to those who work in the field, but it is interesting to see that the literature
takes note of the problems. What could be the implications for GPRA implementation?
I will list a few questions that we can all think about:
| State use of performance measures peaked and started to decline at the time that GPRA
was adopted. A great amount of energy was expended by Federal budget professionals
to develop strategic and performance plans at the same time as state counterparts may have
decided to cut their losses and be more realistic as to what it takes to get the job done.
(This would not be the first time that state initiatives are adopted by the Federal
government at the same time that the states learn that there is need for change.)
Perhaps there needs to be a good look at how implementation has been proceeding and
what fixes need to be made. |
| There seems to be a relationship between biennial budgeting and better use of
performance based budgeting. With the recent defeat of biennial budgeting in
Congress and continued emphasis on performance plans and measures perhaps there needs to
be a careful assessment of the whole system for budgeting using the state experience - is
there a "package deal" that would tie performance budgeting to biennial
budgeting for the whole to be successful? (Texas was one of states found to have
effective PBB coupled with biennial budgeting - given the Presidential election coming up
this may have some relevance for Federal budgeteers.) |
|
| I will leave my speculations about these issues at this. I am sure that there are
many other Federal budgeting issues that could be examined from the perspective of the
state experience; after all, there are many more state governments, and they can be viewed
as laboratories for experimentation. If you have any thoughts on these matters,
please let me know at Laszlo@budgetanalyst.com. |
|
