Legislating for Results

This page excerpts the full text of Legislating for Results, which is available to NCSL constituents in its entirety in pdf.

How Using Performance Information Can Help You

Performance information, especially outcome information, provides information about the results the state is obtaining for the activities it undertakes and for the funds it spends. The information provides a major accountability tool. Perhaps even more important, it provides basic information to help improve what the state is doing for its citizens.

More specifically, here is what legislating for results can do for you:

In Hearings:

Enable legislators to ask state agencies the right questions about their responsibilities--about both past performance and expected future results.
Encourage program management to recognize the need to focus on results and the program's accountability for results.
Indicate that the legislature is serious about considering service outcomes.
Provide useful information about state programs that can be communicated easily and clearly to constituents.
Enable legislators to ask meaningful questions about politically sensitive programs without being misinterpreted as opposition. For example, a legislator might ask, "Has the domestic violence program actually helped reduce domestic violence? From what level to what improved level?" rather than simply asking whether the program's provision of shelter to victimized women is less important than direct prevention activities.

To Help Make Appropriation and Policy Decisions:

Help identify areas for potential budget reductions, increases or reallocations, including identifying the estimated consequences of such changes.
Provide a clearer link between appropriations and actual services provided.
Identify programs and agencies that are seeking similar outcomes, thereby drawing such inter-relationships to the legislature's attention. Such situations create a need for coordination and sorting out the activities and responsibilities. Common goals and responsibilities then can be addressed.
Improve oversight of state programs and policies.

To Provide Knowledge to Inform Policy Development and Improve Communication with Constituents:

Provide objective evidence on outcomes of agency activities that inform the political debate.
Assist legislators to develop policies by providing objective information about current conditions.
Enhance state strategic planning efforts by encouraging a long-term focus on results (i.e., outcomes of government efforts).
Provide legislators with objective information with which to address constituents' questions and concerns.
Provide information directly related to constituent concerns (citizen-focused outcomes), enabling improved constituent service and increasing citizen confidence that the legislature is addressing citizen concerns.

To Change the Approach to Service Delivery:

Push state employees to focus on the goals and desired outcomes of their programs.
Make clear which programs work and which ones do not.
Improve decisions about whether to "privatize" a service or return a privatized service to state administration by providing information about both the past quality and the costs of the service.

What Performance Information Cannot Do:

Tell you exactly the contribution of the state agency activity to the outcomes that occur. Legislative actions such as those described in briefs 7, 9 and 10 can provide explanations (reasons) for high or low levels of performance. However, performance information by itself cannot identify which factors caused the outcomes that occurred and to what extent each factor contributed.
Similarly, performance information seldom identifies specific actions that are needed to correct problems. The performance information, however, can provide useful clues about what needs to be done and where.

Using These Materials

Each brief is intended to stand on its own. A brief can be used alone or in combination with other briefs. Attachments to each brief are numbered sequentially, with the brief number as prefix (e.g., attachment 2-1).

The briefs can be separately copied and transmitted to appropriate legislators and legislative staff as desired.

Most briefs contain attachments that expand on some of the issues raised in the briefs.

Accompanying the briefs is an audio cd-rom. It provides excerpts from actual state hearings that illustrate key points of the briefs. A full transcript of the audio material also is provided.

The briefs and audio material can be used to train legislators or legislative staff. The audio material can be particularly helpful in training sessions. Trainers can use the points made at the end of each segment to guide discussion.

Appendices are included that define special terms used in legislating for results (appendix A); provide examples of performance indicators (appendix B); present a composite example of a performance framework--for corrections (appendix C); and provide a list of sources for obtaining further information about legislating for results (appendix D). The final section of the appendices contains the full transcript of the audio material.

Summary of Key Legislative Actions

All the actions suggested in this series of briefs aim at improving the effectiveness of the state's services to its citizens. This brief singles out a number of the principal actions legislators can take. More details about each are provided in the brief identified after each action.

The first group of legislative actions seeks to achieve the best and most useful outcome information. The second group identifies actions for effectively using the outcome information.

Key Legislative Actions for Obtaining Useful Outcome Information

Legislate a process for regular reporting of results-based information to the legislature by each major state program. This information should identify clearly what the program has accomplished for the state's citizens, not merely activities the program has undertaken. Many states have already done this to some extent. (Briefs 2, 3 and 5)
Provide training in legislating for results for legislators and legislative staffs. (Brief 4)
Ask legislative staffs to review in advance the performance information provided by agencies to identify issues for legislator follow-up during hearings and other legislative sessions. This may be the most critical step in obtaining reliable and understandable information. (Brief 6)
Seek explanations from agencies for unexpectedly poor or good outcomes. This step is vital before deciding on possible legislative actions. (Brief 7)
Establish a formal process for review of quality of the outcome data. As the data become used for making major funding and programmatic decisions, it is necessary for the legislature to have confidence in that data. (Brief 8)

Key Legislative Actions For Effectively Using Outcome Information

Examine outcome information as part of the review of budget requests. This can be of considerable help in making resource allocation decisions to provide resources where they are most likely to achieve the most benefits to citizens. (Briefs 9 and 11)
Periodically review state programs, outside the budget process, to identify which services have had strong outcomes and which have had poor or weak results--and why. This will provide evidence to agencies and their programs that the legislature is interested in results, not only in activities and outputs. This, in turn, will encourage agencies and their programs to focus on results and how best to deliver their services. (Brief 10)
When developing policies and new authorizations, review the latest outcome information relating to current key issues--as a basic starting point (i.e., baseline). (Brief 12)
Require that outcome information be included as a major criterion when establishing performance incentives for agencies and state employees. This will increase accountability of the agencies and employees and encourage them to focus on important service outcomes. (Brief 13)
Support and encourage agencies to include outcome targets in service contracts and grants (including those to local governments). This will increase accountability of contractors and grantees and encourage them to focus on important service outcomes. (Brief 14)
Include outcome information when communicating with constituents to help send the message that the state is focused on citizen concerns. Preferably, obtain from agencies, and provide citizens with, service outcomes information relating to constituents' own county or city. (Briefs 15 and 16)

Sources of Further Information on Legislating for Results

Chi, Keon S.; Kelley A. Arnold; and Heather M. Perkins. "Trends in State Government Management: Budget Reduction, Restructuring, Privatization and Performance Budgeting," The Book of the States. 2003 Edition, Volume 35. Lexington, Kentucky: Council of State Governments, 2003.
General Accounting Office and the National Academies. Forum on Key National Indicators: Assessing the Nation's Position and Progress. 2003.
Governing magazine: http://www.governing.com
Hatry, Harry; Judy Zelio; and Katharine Mark. "Governing for Results in the States," The Book of the States, 2003 Edition, Volume 35. Lexington, Kentucky: Council of State Governments, 2003.
Liner, Blaine, et al. (The Urban Institute), and Ron Snell (National Conference of State Legislatures). Making Results-Based State Government Work. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute, 2001.
National Conference of State Legislatures (for links to individual states):
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/fiscal/perfbudg/index.htm

State Internet Links

Arkansas

Statutory Requirements: http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/acts/1999/htm/act222.pdf

Florida

Reports on Performance Based Budgeting (PB2) prepared by the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA):
http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/budget/pb2publications.html and
Performance-Based Program Budgeting Legal Requirements http://www.oppaga.state.fl.us/budget/legalreq.html

Louisiana

House Fiscal Division, Performance-Based Budgeting: http://house.legis.state.la.us/housefiscal/pbb/pbb.htm
Louisiana Performance-Based Budgeting Law: http://house.legis.state.la.us/housefiscal/pbb/statutes.htm
Accountability in Government Statute: http://house.legis.state.la.us/housefiscal/pbb/pbb.htm

Maine

Establishment of Commission on Performance Budgeting
Chapter 151-C: Commission on Performance Budgeting (Heading: PL 1995, c. 395, Pt. B, @1 (new)) §1710-K. Performance budgeting; definitions (contains text with varying effective dates): http://janus.state.me.us/legis/statutes/5/title5ch151-C.pdf

Performance Budgeting and Strategic Planning. "State of Maine Performance Budgeting Web Page: A Policy Framework"
http://www.state.me.us/spo/sp/stratplan/strategicplanning.php

Maryland

Maryland's Department of Human Resources. "Managing for Results": http://www.dhr.state.md.us/mfr/mfraba.htm.

Minnesota

Office of the Legislative Auditor: http://www.auditor.leg.state.mn.us/

New Mexico

Legislative Finance Committee: Performance-based Budgeting. http://legis.state.nm.us/lcs/lfc/lfcperfbdg.asp

Department of Finance and Administration's Article 3A: Accountability in Government.
http://www.state.nm.us/clients/dfa/pdf/aga.pdf

An Act Relating to Government Accountability; Amending and Enacting Sections of the Accountability in Government:
http://legis.state.nm.us/Sessions/04%20Regular/final/SB0561.pdf

http://results.gpponline.org/StateCategoryCriteria.aspx?id=123&relatedid=5

Oregon

Oregon Progress Board. "Performance Reports": http://www.econ.state.or.us/opb/

Texas

Texas General Appropriations Act for 2008-2009 Biennium

Texas Guide to Performance Measure Management

State Auditor's Office. "Guide to Performance Measure Management."
The 2006 edition: http://www.sao.state.tx.us/Resources/Manuals/prfmguide/guide2006.pdf.
The 2000 edition: http://www.sao.state.tx.us/Resources/Manuals/prfmguide/.

Virginia

Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission: http://jlarc.state.va.us

"Virginia Results": http://www.dpb.virginia.gov/VAResults/

Washington

Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission: http://jlarc.leg.wa.gov