[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Performance Measurement Quality Reviews
--- Received from FINANCE.BERNSD 240-777-8886 00-01-11 14.28
-> APMG@RAW.RUTGERS.EDU
TO: GASB "About Performance Measurement" Group List
FROM: David J. Bernstein, Evaluation Manager,
Montgomery County, Maryland Department of Finance
and GASB Research Consultant
SUBJECT: Performance Measurement Quality Reviews
Greetings. In my role as Evaluation Manager for the Montgomery
County, Maryland Department of Finance, I would like to ask for
information, examples, and referrals for an aspect of performance
measurement use that is very necessary, but sometimes neglected.
The County's Executive Branch (not including schools and some
other major functions, but comprising most of the other major
functions of government) began its current iteration of
performance measurement about three years ago, titled Montgomery
Measures Up! The initiative involves two separate but related
aspects: 1) community outcome focused, multi-departmental
stakeholder involved performance measurement projects, and 2) a
Family of Measures project that focuses on departmental program
outcomes and results. Last year, 17 departments prepared program
measures pages covering 46 programs or program elements. These
pages were published in the County Executive's Recommended Budget,
and are being revised for this year's Executive Recommended
Budget. I am pleased to say that 20 percent of the programs
included in the Family of Measures process last year were in the
Department of Finance (9 program).
The growth of the County's performance measurement initiative is
likely to continue for the foreseeable future. The literature
indicates that verification of performance measures, including
audits or reviews of data collection systems, benchmarking
comparisons, or limited but focused development of additional
performance measures can increase the credibility of performance
measurement efforts. The literature indicates that the following
qualities enhance the credibility, quality, and use of performance
measures:
1. Accessible
2. Appropriate
3. Clear/Comprehensible/Understandable
4. Comparable
5. Compatible
6. Comprehensive/Complete
7. Consistent/Reliable
8. Controllability
9. Cost-Effective/Affordable
10. Nonredundant
11. Resistant to Perverse Behavior
12. Results Oriented
13. Relevant
14. Responsive
15. Timely
16. Useful
17. Validity
[Sources: Ammons (1996), ASPA Center for Accountability and
Performance (1998), GASB (1994), Hatry et al. (1987), and Tuck &
Zeleski (1996).]
The literature also indicates that it takes three to five years to
fully develop credible performance measurement systems. Audits
and evaluations of performance measurement systems during
development could improve the quality, accuracy, utility, and
efficiency of those systems as they are being developed, and help
ensure appropriate use of appropriate information for decision
making, program management, and reporting.
The Finance Department's FY00 budget included funding to hire
consultants to conduct performance quality reviews of County
performance measurement systems and reported data.
I am looking for the following:
1) sample RFPs to be used as a model for procuring the kinds of
consulting services described above;
2) references to local governments or other best practice entities
who do a particularly effective job of either conducting
performance measurement audits/review, or that incorporate such
reviews as a component of performance audits or program/process
evaluations; from my work with GASB, I am familiar with the
efforts of Portland and Multnomah County, OR; Prince William
County and Richmond, VA; Greensboro and Winston-Salem, NC; and
Tucson and Phoenix, AZ.
3) vendors who have experience performing the type of work
described above.
If you may be interested in responding to an RFP for these
services, send me an e-mail to me with your name, address, and
phone number (DO NOT RESPOND TO THE LIST). If you respond to me by
e-mail, I will include your name on a list to the County Office of
Procurement. When the RFP is issued (March 2000?), you will be
notified by mail by the Office of Procurement that the RFP is
available, and on request, they will provide a copy for $5. Please
note that providing sample RFPs or referrals to best practice
entities will not be considered as a factor in making an award,
but would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks. If you have comments of general interest, please respond
to the list (apmg@raw.rutgers.edu). If you wish to be notified
when the RFP is available, or have other comments that would not
be of general interest, please respond to me directly
(david.bernstein@co.mo.md.us).
Thanks.
David
_____
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to majordomo@raw.rutgers.edu and include the following command in the body of the message:
unsubscribe apmg your-email-address
Or use the form at http://raw.rutgers.edu/cgi-bin/lwgate/apmg/unsubscribe.html