Performance Measurement and Budget Balancing: State Government Perspective

This research assesses the perspectives of budget officers and agency personnel in state governments about performance measurement applicability for budgeting purposes. Results show that both perspectives consider performance measurement use effective for improving communication, increasing awareness about results, improving service quality, and changing strategies to reach certain results. Then again, the use of performance information is not found as effective, often not at all, for cost or program cutting, or for changing spending levels. This suggests that while today's governors might need to temper their expectations regarding the usefulness of performance initiatives to support budget balancing in the short run, they should remain steadfast in promoting performance measurement applicability for the long-term benefits recognized by both budgeters and agency staff.     

Performance Budgeting: The Perspective of State Agencies

Although performance‐based budgeting requirements are pervasive, what remains a challenge is how to gain the support from all stakeholders in the budget process that are essential to the integration of performance information with budgeting. This study examines the perspective and role of state agencies on performance budgeting. The finding indicates that for agencies to conduct performance‐informed budgeting, the focus needs to be on elevating managerial capacity to use performance information, and improving measurement quality. Moreover, it is crucial to recognize that performance budgeting is a collaborative process in which each participant plays a valuable role.     

Using Performance Measures for Federal Budgeting: Proposals and Prospects

The political system, the popular press, and the public have recently been concerned about measuring government performance. This concern for measuring performance should imply a concern for measuring it correctly. With this in mind, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently conducted an analysis of the use of performance measures in the budget process. The study attempts to review the issues raised by performance budgeting in the context of past and current efforts to link performance measures and budgeting. This article focuses on two portions of that study: The status of the current federal performance measurement efforts and specific observations designed to inject a note of caution into the current debate about performance measurement and budgeting.     

PBB in American Local Governments: It's More than a Management Tool

Despite academic findings that performance information seldom is used in appropriations decisions, many professional organizations and governments continue to press for integrating performance information into local public management, planning, and budgeting processes. Is it possible to reconcile such inconsistencies? Looking beyond the executive–legislative relationship and departmental appropriations, the author examines the budget implications of applying performance information at the subdepartmental program level. Case analysis of Indianapolis’s IndyStat initiative underscores that performance measurement application is positively related to intradepartmental program budget changes. Hence, performance‐based budgeting (PBB) can improve local budgeting despite severe political constraints. Still, successful use of PBB requires strong executive leadership, and its effects remain less visible at the departmental level or within the wider political arena of legislative bargaining. The author concludes by recommending some rethinking of the current analytical focus of PBB both in future research as well as recommended practice.     

Program Budgeting and Accountability in Local Government

Much has been written about program budgeting and its relevance to improved efficiency and effectiveness. However, there is little discussion about the relationship between the use of program budgeting and accountability. While, organisations using program budgeting focus on the issues of performance, the accountability of management to an elected body, such as a local council has been given little attention. In this article three questions are posed: (1) Is the performance information available to enable councillors to form a judgment about management's performance?; (2) Is management involved in determining issues of policy, such as objectives, programs and performance measurement?; and (3) Are councillors confronted by a greater volume of budgetary documentation but with no increase in time to consider it? The results show that program budgeting does not always enhance accountability in local government.     

From Performance Budgeting to Performance Budget Management: Theory and Practice

This article examines the decades‐long practices of performance budgeting in different countries and their associated challenges from a multilayered institutional framework. Based on theory and lessons learned, the article recommends an array of strategies to address institutional and organizational barriers. It also proposes to reconceptualize performance budgeting as a performance budget management system and suggests how multiyear budget planning, financial risk assessment, policy planning, the departmental budget cycle, the program budget cycle, stakeholder engagement, regular spending reviews, and performance audits should be integrated more closely to address the long‐term fiscal challenges faced by many governments and to respond to the public pressure on agencies to do more with less.     

To PPB or Not PPB – Budgeting in Victorian Local Government

Budgeting is an important element in a public sector organisation's accounting control system. There are a number of budgetary methods that could be used, each with an explicitly different focus. This article investigates possible reasons for Victorian local government selecting line item budgeting, planning programming budgeting (PPB) or a combination of the two. While program budgeting arguably failed in the USA, research shows it was adopted by local government. Australian researchers report similar findings, yet the introduction of program budgeting into local government has not been explored. Four reasons are postulated: (1) PPB will be adopted because of the complexity of the organisation; (2) PPB will be adopted because it is perceived as an aid to planning; (3) line item budgeting will continue to be used because users are familiar with this type of budgeting; and (4) management's support for the adoption of PPB will be a significant factor in its introduction. A questionnaire was distributed to all the local governments in Victoria and 60 percent were returned. The findings reported in this article confirm the reasons postulated.     

Performance Measurement in State Budgeting: Advancement and Backsliding from 1990 to 1995

Performance measurement has been one of the dominant themes of budget reform in the 1990s and has been prevalent in the mainstream of budgeting since the 1950s. Given the attention that performance measurement has had nationally, states might be expected to have made major strides in this arena in recent years. The article considers the current status of performance measurement practices, and identifies both advancement and backsliding made by states between 1990 and 1995. The discussion is based on data obtained from surveys of state budget offices in those two years. Indexes of performance measurement were constructed, and these became the bases of regression analyses using independent variables pertaining to state characteristics. Generally, these analyses were unsuccessful in explaining the variations among the states. The findings underscore the diversity among the states in their budgetary practices and the fact that budget reform, in the sense of increased use of performance measurement, is not necessarily achieved in a straight line of progression. The article considers possible explanations for the changes.     

The Ups and Downs of State Budget Process Reform: Experience of Three Decades

From zero-base budgeting to the Government Performance and Results Act, state budgeting systems have been synonymous with budgeting reform for over 30 years. This article examines the trends, both long-term and short-term, which have been identified through analysis of state budgeting office practices. Particular emphasis has been placed on understanding the changes in performance measurement over the period of 1970 to 2000. The findings reveal trends such as changes in the makeup of budget office personnel, a lack of budget offices in moving toward cost accounting, and trends in budget preparation and budget documents. Some budget reforms seem to have plateaued, beginning in the mid-1990s, while other reforms have exhibited "backsliding." It is clear that the states are not all marching in unison in reforming their budget systems. As with earlier phases of this study, the 2000 data raise many questions that will be explored in future research.     

The Professional Researcher as Change Agent in the Government–Performance Movement

Although academic and professional publications give the impression that performance measurement is a growing government practice, in actuality the use of this technology is not as deep or as widespread as it may appear. Even when performance measures are used, governments rarely integrate them into planning, budget, personnel, and other management processes. Most professional researchers located primarily in academic institutions, but also in research and government organizations, approach performance measurement as though governmental officials, elected or otherwise, are already sold on its usefulness. Instead, they need to function as "change agents," using a variety of strategies to gain acceptance and understanding of the strengths and limitations of performance measurement. This article draws on the authors' experiences with the Community Benchmarks Program of the Maxwell School in Onondaga County and a review of the current literature. It suggests guidelines for professional researchers who want to increase the use of performance measures by governments at all levels.     

State Performance‐Based Budgeting in Boom and Bust Years: An Analytical Framework and Survey of the States

The authors examine the track record of applying performance‐based budgeting (PBB) across three time periods within a sample of U.S. state governments: (1) throughout the 1990s, (2) in the early 2000s, and (3) during the Great Recession. State‐level PBB is analyzed according to four elements: (1) the development of performance measures, (2) its applicability to budgeting and management processes, (3) its utility across the business cycle, and (4) its usefulness for budget players. An analytical framework is devised that highlights the “publicness” of American government, draws on the principal–agent model, and considers incentive mechanisms theory. Findings confirm that a good performance measurement system takes time to develop and operate well and that PBB functions more effectively for executive management than legislative purposes. PBB is used more by the states during strong economic times as opposed to during economic downturns. More importantly, PBB is only selectively applied by legislators in most states, whereas top executive policy makers, middle managers, and staff embrace and utilize PBB systems more extensively.     

Managing Performance at Local Government Level: The Cases of the City of Brisbane and the City of Melbourne

Local governments have been involved in a continuous reform process during recent decades. In many cases, this process has focused on the introduction of performance measurement and management. Reforms have evolved from the mere use of indicators to integrated management systems. In this article, the Balanced Scorecard, a system designed to answer the need for integrated management systems, is used as the framework to analyse how local governments have managed the use of performance management systems. The demands for better public performance, for greater customer focus, for enhanced decision-making and for increased responsiveness have an important role in the design of performance management systems. In addition, a perceived crisis in the area of management can act as catalyst for the implementation.     

Models of Performance-Measurement Use in Local Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and Lasting Effects

While attention has been paid to a few cities and counties exhibiting effective performance measurement systems, most U.S. local governments have been active in the development and use of performance measurement for several decades. This research examines the effects of performance-measurement information on budgetary decision making, communication, and other operations of U.S. local governments. Data are drawn from a national survey of city and county administrators and budgeters that included nearly 300 governments. Findings indicate the use of performance measurement by local departments is pervasive, although survey respondents are less enthusiastic about measurement effectiveness. Study results show subtle distinctions between city and county officials in their use of performance measurement for budgetary purposes and processes. Research findings indicate the consistent, active integration of measures throughout the budget process is important in determining real budget and communication effects in local governments.     

Use of Capital Budgeting Techniques and an Analytic Approach to Capital Investment Decisions in Canadian Municipal Governments

Capital budgeting techniques are useful tools to municipal administrators in managing organizational resources. A survey of capital budgeting practices of Canadian municipal governments reveals that a minority used capital budgeting techniques; payback period dominates over discounted cash flow analysis in evaluating capital investments; and pitfalls are common in its application. More specifically, there is an emphasis of quantitative/financial items over qualitative/intangible factors. In this study, the analytic hierarchy process, a multi-attribute decision model that accounts for both tangibles and intangibles, is presented as a tool for capital budgeting decisions such that resource allocation becomes more effective in municipal governments.     

Individual Engagement to Collective Participation: The Dynamics of Participation Pattern in Performance Budgeting

Active participation from all stakeholders in the budget process is one of the key issues to the integration of performance information with budgeting. While individual stakeholders' participation is cited as important by various studies, participation pattern, that is, how they engage relative to each other in performance measurement, is less known. Empirical studies on participation patterns and their collective impact on performance budgeting are scarce. Using the survey data collected in Georgia, this study conducted a cluster analysis in order to further provide a dynamic understanding of the mechanism and structure of a participative process in performance budgeting. The findings suggest that participation pattern is a different construct than individual participation and that the effective patterns vary by the purpose for which performance information is used. In addition, the patterns that are open to external professionals and citizens, with shared responsibilities among the agencies, executive offices and the legislative branch, and tailored to various purposes are more likely to be effective in integrating performance information with management and budgeting.     

Budgeting and Rebudgeting in Local Governments: Siamese Twins?

The literature on budgeting in the public sector has traditionally focused on the annual budgetary process. Much less attention has been paid to rebudgeting—that is, what governments do to revise and update their budgets during the fiscal year. Because of its potentially large impact on appropriations, rebudgeting seemingly deserves more attention than it has been granted so far. This article uses data from a sample of Italian municipalities to test hypotheses on the main drivers of budget revisions. According to the results, rebudgeting is strongly affected by the degree of incrementalism in the initial budgeting process, as well as by several internal and external determinants, such as political variables, organizational features, financial conditions, and the local socioeconomic environment.     

Implementing the Chief Financial Officers Act and the Government Performance and Results Act in the Federal Government

The Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 and the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, along with other legislation passed by Congress, are stimulating major financial management reform in the federal government. This article evaluates reform implementation against nine criteria developed in previous research on this topic. The criteria are accounting system adequacy, congressional intent, ability of Congress to use financial statement data, executive branch implementation incentives, capability of the Office of Management and Budget, utility of financial statements for decision making, use of performance measures in budgeting, coordination of federal organizations charged with implementation responsibility, and executive and congressional support for reform.     

Implementing Performance-Based Program Budgeting: A System-Dynamics Perspective

The article proposes a model for evaluating budget reforms that combines insights from budgeting, policy implementation, and system-dynamics literatures. System-dynamics modeling combines both quantitative and qualitative research techniques to provide a new framework for applied research; its use is illustrated using performance budgeting as an example. Applied to the implementation of Florida's performance-based program budget, the model identifies actions in the short run that will increase the reform's likelihood of success: providing clear communications; facilitative budget and accounting routines; reliable performance information. The model also identifies critical legislative behaviors that influence executive implementation: how the legislature in the long-run uses performance information to inform resource allocation and how it applies incentives or sanctions to programs that achieve or fail to achieve their performance standards. The legislature has the opportunity to use program reviews prepared by legislative staff to invigorate the executive branch's resolve to continue implementing the reform.     

Performance Budgeting and Performance Funding in the States: A States Assessment

For a variety of reasons, performance budgeting has gained new life in the 1990s. Initially introduced in the 1950s by the Hoover Commission and others, performance budgeting efforts, in the 1990s, go beyond the workload productivity and efficiency focus of earlier phases and place greater emphasis on outcomes and accountability. This study reports on a survey of state executive-branch budget officers designed to determine the current status of state performance budgeting efforts including performance budgeting processes used by the states, their perceived impacts on budget decision making, and their probable future use. In addition, the study assessed the emerging role of performance funding as a further extension of performance budgeting processes. The linking of performance to the allocation or distribution of appropriated funds may be emerging as the next iteration of performance budgeting in the states. In addition to reporting on the survey, relationships between performance budgeting and various aspects of state budgeting practices are analyzed through crosstabulations, and regression analysis is employed to examine the states' organization, fiscal, and political capacity to implement performance budgeting and funding.     

Factors Influencing the Use of Performance Data to Improve Municipal Services: Evidence from the North Carolina Benchmarking Project

Many local governments measure and report their performance, but the record of these governments in actually using performance measures to improve services is more modest. The authors of this study examine patterns of performance measurement use among a set of North Carolina cities and conclude that the types of measures on which officials rely, the willingness of officials to embrace comparison, and the degree to which measures are incorporated into key management systems distinguish cities that are more likely to use performance measures for service improvement from those less likely to do so.