• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
We analyze four (4) frameworks for assessing the success of government reforms of accounting and budgeting systems and apply our analysis to performance budgeting reforms in U.S. states. We conclude that performance measures are not useful for the legislative problem of allocating resources among disparate goals, but they are useful for improving the quality and reducing the cost of providing services. Two of the frameworks come from the budgetary literature and focus on allocations (Outcomes view and Process view). The other two come from the accounting literature and focus on incentives among key actors (Monitoring view and Signaling view). The actors considered in this study are Voters, Legislators, Government Managers and the Media. Our theoretical analysis suggests that the four frameworks are often complementary rather than mutually exclusive; however, the Signaling view may provide the best framework for two reasons: 1) it provides insights into the net costs and benefits of adopting a reform and 2) it provides insights into policy suggestions that are likely to increase the adoption of beneficial reforms. Three policy suggestions are given: 1) Legislators should focus on incentives for managers to report performance measures, 2) Performance budgeting should be done on a comparable basis across states, and 3) Influential actors such as legislators and the media should be studied in greater detail.

Performance measure, Performance budget

Abstract:
Performance reporting continues to receive considerable attention from standard setters, professional organizations and academia. The issue is complex, given the importance of accountability to government agencies and the many competing demands placed on government managers. Using the Certificate of Excellence for Service Efforts and Accomplishments (COE - SEA) criteria, we analyze the level of quality in the performance reporting process of 200 state agencies, representing four departments in each of the 50 states. The purpose of this article is to provide a benchmark of current performance reporting and to offer guidelines that could assist agencies to prepare quality reports that meet the COA criteria.

performance measures, state government, accounting, service efforts

Abstract:
Performance activities, including external reporting, remain a hot topic among policy-makers, standard-setters, government managers and citizens. While there is still a long way to go, the quality and quantity of city performance reporting has improved substantially over the past 10 years. We compare the reports of 121 large cities to a study of 200 state agencies. The quality of the city and state reports are very similar with about 1% of the reports reaching high quality and over 30% of the reports making notable progress. The quantity of city reports is much lower with less than 40% of city departments reporting online vs. over 90% of state departments. We discuss four recent developments with the potential to increase reporting quality and quantity: 1) expanded recognition of quality reports, 2) a new "preparer-friendly" website, 3) initiatives by several national associations, and 4) ongoing guidance and support from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board.

Performance Reporting, Accountability, GASB, Government, City, Service Efforts and Accomplishments

Abstract:
Performance measure reforms have greatly influenced the operations of government entities over the past two decades. This case study investigates the impact of these reforms on nonprofit human service organizations in Oregon, a state with a long history of performance activities. We pursue two research questions: (1) what impact did these reforms have upon the performance and capacity of the nonprofit entities; and (2) what is the impact of the reported performance on the funding decisions made by the state legislature. We observe substantial improvement in the performance of the nonprofit organizations as well as increased capacity for their future performance. Somewhat surprising, we also observe that funding for programs with common performance measures received large increases in funding while programs with unique measures were cut dramatically. We compare outcomes measurement from performance measurement, accounting, and evaluation perspectives and conclude with several suggestions for future research.

government; performance measurement; accounting; evaluation; Oregon; human services