|
There was a recognized
need for more accountability, and performance-based
budgeting was initiated by the Legislature,
rather than a blue ribbon study committee.
Legislators lacked confidence that the
spending priorities established during
adoption of the state budget were being
implemented by the executive agencies
during the year.
In selection of key performance measures,
consensus was sought among legislative
staff, the Governor's budget and planning
staff, and executive agency personnel.
We used the existing framework,
and all agencies started at the same time
under the same conditions.
Performance data had been included in
the executive budget for many years, but
was of inconsistent quality since it did
not play a significant role in decision-making.
The new initiative placed key performance
data in the General Appropriation Bill,
directly linking it to funding. This,
and the quarterly reporting requirement,
prompted substantial revision of the performance
data.
Applying the requirements uniformly to
all agencies discouraged efforts to delay
implementation or obtain exemptions.
A substantial effort has been made by
both the legislative and executive branch
staff to inform agency personnel of the
new requirements and expectations and
to encourage compliance.
The value of development and reporting
of appropriate performance data as a management
tool for agency heads is emphasized.
|