From: Subject: 106146 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:41:13 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2C235.137D01D0"; type="text/html" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2C235.137D01D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\staylor\DESKTOP\IQ%20Docs.%20Pending%20Entry\Best%20practice%20review.htm 106146            =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;           &nb= sp;           &nbs= p;           =20 January 1996

Best=20 Practices Reviews for Local Government:
Identifying and Sharing = Better Ideas=20 on Public Services


Lyle D. Wray and Jody A.=20 = Hauer

What is the most effective way to repair a road or to conduct a child = protection investigation? Even in this age of "reinventing government," = when=20 many in government are trying to find a better way to provide services, = it is=20 not easy to identify and share better ideas for providing services to = citizens.=20 The business sector is making progress through the practice of = benchmarking=20 particular functions=97whether materials handling or delivering = packages. With=20 benchmarking, agencies analyze important functions and compare a given = agency=20 with a "best-in-class" performer for those functions. According to a = U.S.=20 Department of Labor report (see reference list at end of article), = computerized=20 databases of information for comparing organizations' performance in key = areas=20 are becoming available.

There is a lot going on at national, state, and local levels to = improve=20 accountability for public programs. The National Performance Review, the = Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) passed by the U.S. = Congress in=20 1993, and the Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) initiative of = the=20 Governmental Accounting Standards Board are but some of the = national-level=20 efforts going on in the field of performance measurement. All are = attempts to=20 measure the actual impacts of public programs.

At the state level, a number of states, including Oregon, Minnesota, = and=20 Florida, have articulated state-level visions for their economic and = social=20 futures and set up systems to track performance toward their goals. At = the local=20 level, the International City/County Management Association and the = Urban=20 Institute have published a manual on measuring the effectiveness of = local=20 government community services, coauthored by Harry Hatry and others. =

The purpose of this article is to describe another emerging = accountability=20 tool for public services, the best practices review, and to suggest some = benefits of this approach.

History and=20 Background
Once we have ensured that public money is being = spent=20 on the services that it was intended to fund=97a core purpose of = traditional=20 financial audits=97the next accountability question is how much value = are we=20 receiving for that expenditure. Best practices reviews are one way to = answer=20 this question by looking at the outcomes or results of public services.

What is a best practices review? According to a report from the = Office of the=20 Legislative Auditor, State of Minnesota, it involves "a systematic study = of=20 variations in service level and design, work processes, and products = among=20 similar organizations in order to identify practices that are = cost-effective and=20 that might be adopted by other organizations." And according to a = General=20 Accounting Office publication, such "practices refer to the processes,=20 practices, and systems identified in public and private organizations = that=20 performed exceptionally well and are widely recognized as improving an=20 organization's performance and efficiency in specific areas." At their = core,=20 best practices reviews involve examining the performance of a program or = function in an organization, identifying practices associated with = higher levels=20 of performance, and sharing those practices with their potential = adopters.

A British Model. In the public sector, one of the largest and=20 longest-standing "best practices reviews" can be found in the work of = the Audit=20 Commission for Local Authorities and the National Health Service in = England and=20 Wales, as reported on in 1989. The commission was established in 1982 to = review=20 both the financial and program performance of local government programs = in=20 England and Wales.

Since then, "value-for-money audits," as the British call their best=20 practices reviews, have been performed across a wide variety of local=20 governmental functions, from trash collection to school lunch programs. = The=20 commission, through staff or contracted auditors, conducts = value-for-money=20 studies of local government practices and shares its findings on good = practices=20 through publications and information campaigns.

In Minnesota, visits by representatives of the British Audit = Commission,=20 together with a 1992 Citizens League report on local government service=20 delivery, have sparked regional interest in the Audit Commission's=20 value-for-money audits. After studying the British model, the Citizens = League, a=20 nonprofit, public affairs research and education organization in the = Twin=20 Cities, recommended that local governments base their service-delivery = systems=20 on performance standards and results. Recognizing the right of citizens = and=20 elected officials to know how public dollars are spent, the league = recommended=20 changes that would provide information about which services are = provided, the=20 costs of these services, and the quality of the outcomes.

The Minnesota Experience. Following the Citizens League = report, the=20 Metropolitan Council, the long-range planning and research agency for = the Twin=20 Cities' seven-county metropolitan area, conducted a demonstration = project to=20 identify best practices in street sweeping. In spring 1994, the Metro = Council=20 issued a report listing 66 practices used by cities in the region to = improve=20 their street-sweeping services. These "best practices" affected many = facets of=20 street sweeping, including personnel, equipment, maintenance, and = operations.=20 All were methods that varied from standard practice and resulted in = improved=20 service quality or reduced costs.

At about the same time that the Metro Council was finishing its = street=20 sweeping study, the Minnesota legislature established a best practices = reviews=20 program in 1994. Created to "identify practices to save money or provide = more=20 effective service delivery" (Minnesota Statutes SS3.971, Subdivision = 4.), the=20 program focuses on services provided by counties, cities, and townships = in the=20 state. The legislature lodged responsibility for best practices reviews = with the=20 legislative auditor's office, a nonpartisan state office that until then = had=20 worked on financial audits and program evaluations of state = agencies.

A local government advisory council was established in the statute = and was=20 charged with identifying which local services ought to be reviewed. On = the=20 recommendation of this advisory group, the legislative auditor chose = first to=20 review snow and ice control on local roads. This initial best practices = review=20 concludes that effective winter maintenance shops typically embrace 12 = actions,=20 including everything from adopting written snow policies to storing road = sand in=20 appropriate facilities. The review describes more than 80 examples in = Minnesota=20 local government that illustrate the value of the 12 recommended = actions. For=20 each example, the review explains what the practice is, describes the=20 circumstances under which it works best, and lists the names and = telephone=20 numbers of resource people whom other local governments can contact to = learn=20 more about the effective practice.

The second review recommended by the local government advisory = council, which=20 deals with assessing property values for taxation purposes, now is under = way.=20 This study is reviewing how assessment services are organized from = county to=20 county, as well as the effectiveness of the processes for contesting = property=20 valuations, and is scheduled for completion in early 1996. The local = government=20 advisory council is recommending that the third review look at how the=20 prosecution of misdemeanor offenses is organized in Minnesota counties = and=20 cities.

Legislative auditor staff trained in public policy analysis conduct = the=20 reviews. The auditor relies heavily on advice and feedback from = technical panels=20 composed of persons with expertise in the topic at hand. For instance, = in the=20 current review, the technical panel consists of county and local = assessors and=20 an academician who works with agricultural land values. The legislative = auditor=20 also employs a consultant, in this case a former city assessor, who can = provide=20 insight into the strengths and weaknesses of assessment practices and = can answer=20 technical questions.

The legislative auditor plans to evaluate the impacts of the reviews. = The=20 office has set goals that it hopes the reviews will achieve in terms of=20 encouraging shared communications among local governments, improving = local=20 services, and increasing the efficient use of public resources. By = surveying=20 those agencies that have received and consulted the reports, the auditor = will=20 try to measure the effect of the reviews.

In addition to the efforts described above, other Minnesota agencies = have=20 embarked on initiatives that involve best management practices, = particularly=20 those related to such natural resource management topics as groundwater=20 protection. State agencies currently are using these best practices as=20 alternatives to government regulation of private businesses. For = instance, the=20 Minnesota Department of Agriculture has developed and promotes best = practices=20 for managing the use of such plant nutrients as nitrogen, on = croplands.

Similarly, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has = developed=20 best management practices for logging sites. In this case, the DNR = visits and=20 evaluates logging sites to determine how well the owners have applied = best=20 practices and how effectively the groundwater is being protected. = Generally,=20 site owners comply with the recommended best practices because they = realize that=20 the alternative means state regulation of their businesses.

Benefits of the Review Approach
Although = experience=20 with best practices reviews of local government services is relatively = recent,=20 it is possible to point to several potential benefits that should prove=20 important.

Systematic Analysis of Service Delivery. First, best practices = reviews=20 provide a systematic study of the design and methods of service delivery = across=20 multiple jurisdictions. Many staff employed by local governments already = have=20 interactions with their counterparts in other localities through = meetings and=20 conferences. When they want to learn how others are doing things, = however, or=20 what the latest technological advances are, they often lack the time or=20 resources to follow up on these questions on their own. They typically = must=20 focus on the day-to-day mechanics of getting the job done, at the = expense of=20 gathering comprehensive information. The best practices reviews program = collects=20 comprehensive data on particular services and analyzes them to determine = what=20 the effective practices are and the circumstances under which they are = best=20 implemented.

Improving the Understanding of Measuring Performance. Second, = best=20 practices reviews provide a richer context within which to understand=20 performance information, that is, the outcomes, efficiencies, and=20 cost-effectiveness of public services. Performance measurement began = with=20 efforts to measure public programs in terms of the services delivered, = the costs=20 of the services, and the outcomes or results actually obtained. Best = practices=20 reviews can provide systematic comparisons of a given program's = performance with=20 that of other organizations that have demonstrated their effectiveness. = It is=20 one thing to know how much a course of alcohol or drug abuse treatment = costs,=20 but it is quite another to know the cost and outcomes of the most = effective=20 programs and how those programs actually achieve their results.

Creating a Database of Effective Services. Third, local = government=20 officials benefit from access to an evolving and growing database of = best=20 practices used by others operating similar services. Individuals wishing = to=20 improve the performance of a public program or function can review = detailed=20 suggestions on how to reach higher levels of performance through design, = management, or equipment strategies. This library of ideas may provide = some good=20 "first drafts" for a lot of innovative developments.

Enhancing Communication. One of the downsides to the United = States's=20 radically decentralized system of delivering public services is the = significant=20 challenge, posed by the large number of service providers, to effective=20 communication about innovations. Such lateral communication often is = hindered by=20 a lack of available time or of appropriate forums for discussing = effective=20 practices. Best practices reviews offer the opportunity to improve=20 intergovernmental communication of effective management practices and=20 problem-solving strategies. Such reviews put this information into a = concise and=20 usable form that should ease local government interactions.

Linking Up with Other Management Tools. Finally, best = practices=20 reviews may complement other tools for measuring performance and = enhancing=20 accountability. Managers can link such initiatives as outcomes = measurement,=20 performance budgeting, and benchmarking with best practices reviews to = provide=20 detailed information on public service performance and improvement.

Aside from these reviews' current benefits, there are two primary = potential=20 benefits for the future of best practices reviews: their use as tools to = involve=20 citizens further in the performance measurement process, and their use = in=20 reshaping intergovernmental aid to states and localities.

Engaging Citizens in Government Performance. David Ammons, = senior=20 associate of the Carl Vinson Institute of Government, University of = Georgia, has=20 suggested that governments at the local level should involve citizens in = performance measurement activities to provide long-term support for the=20 performance measurement process. Officials should consider bringing the = citizen=20 more completely "into the loop" on performance measurement information.=20 Selecting topics relevant to public needs and using best practices = review=20 information in the public budget deliberations can provide citizens with = a much=20 clearer picture of the performance of local or state agencies.

The challenge, in short, is to broaden the degree of involvement and = concern=20 about performance measurement, so that this subject goes from being an = insiders'=20 game played only by senior government officials and elected leaders, to = being a=20 commonly shared concern of citizens.

Transacting Intergovernmental Finance. Best practices reviews = also=20 might have implications for intergovernmental financial transfers. For = example,=20 a case could be made that national or state governments should provide=20 intergovernmental financial transfers to local jurisdictions in amounts = that=20 would fund all or part of their operations at a "best practice" level, = rather=20 than at a less efficient one.

States also could use information about best practices to channel aid = in a=20 way that rewards local governments that embrace practices with = demonstrated=20 cost-effectiveness. If used judiciously, this incentive could be a = powerful=20 inducement to enhance local efficiency and effectiveness. Best practices = reviews=20 hold substantial promise for providing more complete information with = which=20 elected officials, managers, and the public can judge the effectiveness = of=20 public programs. Reviews also suggest levels of performance to which = local=20 governments can aspire and strategies that likely will produce these = higher=20 performance levels.=20

References
Ammons, D. N. 1995. = Overcoming the=20 Inadequacies of Performance Measurement in Local Government: The Case of = Libraries and Leisure Services. Public Administration Review = 55(1).

The Audit Commission for Local Authorities and the National Health = Service in=20 England and Wales. 1989. Management papers: Managing Services = Effectively:=20 Performance Review. Number 5. London: Her Majesty's Stationery = Office.

Florida Commission on Government Accountability to the People. 1995. = The=20 Florida Benchmarks Report. Tallahassee, Florida: Executive Office of = the=20 Governor.

Gore, Albert. 1994. Creating a Government That Works Better and = Costs=20 Less: Status Report of the National Performance Review. Washington, = D.C.:=20 U.S. Government Printing Office.

Hatry, H. P., Fountain, J. R., Sullivan, J. M., and Kremer, L., eds. = 1990.=20 Research Report: Service Efforts and Accomplishment Reporting: Its = Time Has=20 Come. An overview. Norwalk, Conn.: Governmental Accounting Standards = Board.

Minnesota Statutes SS3.971, Subdivision 4.

The National Academy of Public Administration in Washington, D.C. = Public=20 Innovator. Monthly newsletter. 1120 G Street, N.W., Suite 850, = Washington,=20 D.C. 20005.

Office of the Legislative Auditor, State of Minnesota. 1995. Snow = and Ice=20 Control: A Best Practices Review. St. Paul, Minnesota.

United States Department of Labor. 1995. Best Practices = Clearinghouse.=20 Office of the American Workplace. World Wide Web address:=20 http://athena.itl.saic.com:80/fed/uscompanies/labor/

United States General Accounting Office. 1994. Managing for = Results: State=20 Experiences Provide Insights for Federal Management Reforms. = Washington,=20 D.C. Report GAO/GGD-95-22.

United States General Accounting Office. 1995. Best Practices = Methodology:=20 A New Approach for Improving Government Operations. Washington, D.C. = Report=20 GAO/NSIAD-95-154.

Lyle D. Wray serves as executive director of the Citizens League, = a=20 nonprofit, citizen-based public policy research organization based in=20 Minneapolis, Minnesota. Jody A. Hauer coordinates the best practices = reviews for=20 the Office of the Minnesota Legislative Auditor.

Copyright =A9 1996 by the International City/County Management = Association=20 (ICMA)
------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2C235.137D01D0 Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/staylor/DESKTOP/IQ%20Docs.%20Pending%20Entry/PMlogo.gif R0lGODlhYwAxAPYCAAAAAP///////xERESIRESIiIjMiIjMiMzMzM0QzM0RERFVERFVVVWZVZmZm ZndmZnd3d4h3iIiIiJmIiJmZmaqqqruqqru7u8y7u8zMzN3dzN3d3e7u7v/u/////wAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACH+ ACwAAAAAYwAxAAAH/4ABgoOEhYaHiImKi4yNiRmQkZKTlJWTGxyPlpuRixycnBUBFAkJDaCTDQkO FKgamYUZpQmokhCLGrWQFbMJCrG6sgEdGRa1G5q6FMjJtRQSzagJhBu6iMGQEYnVwc/RoNODn7qw hNgZD9+g3tfB4YPBFR3AF7oXF4fj3dDtuu+C2CgAgxDslqFq9ZTxO4TtXwBsE8o9zKAgmIR5sTAQ VKhuk0NsGBZOVMANFQaBhD5JcLCvo6WP2BiYo6gPlcgAuRK04tivFsxgMuFRnFhrArMAny4YqLnu 5kx/wIIdmPmrJKoJg6o5gMCUEzuG7qLqMkAVoK50Zgtw6Lrpq6GGYv9RVfgllG6uWveQZpjwi60l t3HBBebkQCQkun4r3arGQFRiSoCf+hxsCcMAiYeF1pLwCQOBeY8nRdY8WTKoBg6A0Q1gldPJDCsF hZY02ixUcbokfFaNG9uBDLJb9pRG6C4o3UfrmgaltLczp6SJC2pdCYMCA8mVO0fVYOHsSLWJ1qqw gTqlCg0GQMD4dujyTZe3N3V5rgIFCAwKIKAgsf3q6UUFFRxPYPmjwIEIJiiBBBmwp0hmKdWigCjy eQWdbaU5sgiE703iWSHfQRIeXBpu6B41oECQWoQEtndbiZr8Fx0lBWQXYgYjhgVjjIcYdx4ChtyY 44s7+pfPJgygxOL/c/RR4lCR2rlIyQAODsjkcIJBaeQh5kkg4JKoDJmhllGCWIkC+AQpXIFjkjnR imxCcgEBiAh5oXjSuWnWAttMslWda0qZp5vjfCmoWoC2SNlLetpWT58iApnoleKsZd4mnK3VnyNr UYLJpvo0FqSlwVxQgaZ6nVMJnJyGQuFMllV54ya3ONDLrbjmWsoAO9qq6wFObZDAAawO4quuyPYi Y6PMNuvss9A+i8C0DmQyLQX7BTAtAtVqK6m3SCkwLXDwULsBtYKIu+K0EGArCLYIAMcBA9OKAm+8 8OI47r0U5Mutt9cGAAAAAwBwy8AQGCwwwQoPPIjDDDDM6yAXDIxA/8UASDowAIIMrB7HAUQMgCgS MMxxwgPEm7DBCgx8Acr7rZwwkAgMXIBACDdssM4JHwzywtoCgDEhGANQcsYBFN3xwA6AXADCAfTs cM+CyFyz0FRHPXDLktac5sAR+0y1xyMDvXTQ96QpSNFNI03BxvgA8HTNHRcsU895rYy13DUX/PLG EKxccNdCLz0wcDn7XDDOPzvsdV4UZ2wz0k0/LQoAInOcgdxI631yxhBskLACc++NAAR/X0341wCQ u/DYO/v8MMdeOxy5yDXTDLjAEBTMcQUb8zrz1AprvXLTfxskNdJonz17yz5Dv/CjjgPQ9MRr77wz kHI3nRrLxB+ttUXI41/AQcJv7/w3AxeIPrLFgnjtvCCZI7Nx6wsj7TDwA4tUMQRPexv30KS/wDms ZRwo2AaK9jmXJaxip9sbwh44uPgVLhAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C2C235.137D01D0--