USING PERFORMANCE DATA TO WIN SUPPORT

BARBARA EMERSON, FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIASEPTEMBER 2004

To Sum it Up

If you don’t measure results, you can’t tell success from failure.If you can’t see success, you can’t reward it.If you can’t reward success, you’re probably rewarding failure.If you can’t see success, you can’t learn from it.If you can’t recognize failure, you can’t correct it.If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support.

Reinventing GovernmentOsborne and Gaebler

Fairfax County ProgramSince 1997, all agencies have been required to

follow a consistent Countywide methodology that includes:

Quantified objectives of what specifically will be accomplished during the fiscal year

A “Family of Measures” to present a balanced picture of performance. This includes:

• Output – quantity of units produced• Efficiency – ratio of inputs to outputs• Service Quality – customer satisfaction,

accuracy or timeliness of service

• Outcome – qualitative results of service

Fairfax County Program Performance measures are shown in

the annual budget document.

• Three prior years of actual data• Current year estimates• Budget year estimates

Since 2000, all non-public safety employees (approximately 8,000 of 11,000) have been on the Pay for Performance system.

The County Executive conducts annual meetings with agencies to discuss their level of performance.

Fairfax County ProgramObjective: To obtain a Public Housing

Assessment System (PHAS) rating of 85% or better in the categories of vacant unit turnaround time, capital fund administration, work order completion, security, unit inspections, self-sufficiency, and resident satisfaction.

Output: Clients housedEfficiency: Cost per clientService Quality: Occupancy rateOutcome: HUD’s PHAS rating

Considerations Fairfax County’s Department of

Housing and Community Development did not want to collect two different sets of data – one for the local PM effort and a separate one for the feds.

They selected measures that were meaningful for them, would enable them to strive for improvement, and satisfy federal requirements.

How PM Data are Used

To assist in funding decisions

To communicate program effectiveness to elected officials, County management and the public

To hold employees accountable for achieving results

How Do We Compare?

HOUSING:

Rehabilitation of Low-to-Moderate-Income Housing:Number of Units Rehabilitated per $100,000 of

Public Financial Assistance

1.8

2.8

3.8

15.1

25.0

0 30

Portland, OR

San Francisco, CA

San Jose, CA

Fairfax County, VA

Austin, TX

Source: ICMA FY 2002 Data

How Do We Compare?

HOUSING:

Low-to-Moderate-Income Home Ownership Assistance: Number of Households Assisted per $100,000 of

Public Financial Assistance

1.5

1.8

1.9

10.7

12.5

19.5

21.1

22.2

25.7

50.6

0 60

Phoenix, AZ

Miami-Dade County, FL

San Jose, CA

Austin, TX

San Antonio, TX

Virginia Beach, VA

Fairfax County, VA

Las Vegas, NV

Long Beach, CA

Oklahoma City, OK

Source: ICMA FY 2002 Data

Observations It takes time

It cannot be a sporadic activity

You have to use the data if you want people to take it seriously

Always look for opportunities to improve!