This first appeared as a PATImes column in December 2006.
Apple State
Creates Core Measures
by John M.
Kamensky
Newly minted Maryland governor Martin O’Malley campaigned on his award-winning “CitiStat” management approach used when he was Baltimore’s mayor. He promises to bring this approach to state government. But the Crab State has competition from the Apple State. Last year, Washington State’s then-new governor, Christine Gregoire, cloned Baltimore’s CitiStat process for her state. She calls it “Government Management Accountability and Performance,” or GMAP. Up to that point, CitiStat was a process designed and used in cities. How well did it translate to the state-level?
The National Governor’s Association (NGA) had the same question and visited Washington State to find out. They came away impressed and drafted a guide for new governors who might be inspired to use this approach. NGA observed: “Greater gubernatorial attention to the management of state government . . . can pay dividends in terms of better outcomes and a more positive view of state government.”
Governor Gregoire had piloted her management approach while serving as the state’s attorney general, so it was a natural transition when she became governor in January 2005 to ratchet up her management approach to the state level. At a recent conference in Austin she said it wasn’t easy. She said the political elite tried to tell her that “the governor doesn’t have time to run the state.” But she said she just “jumped in because that’s exactly what citizens think the governor should be [doing].” She recognized it was high-risk. Transparency in government performance is important to citizens, but there can be failures that can be embarrassing to political leaders. Nevertheless, she said: “how can we talk about transparency, how do we talk about accountability . . . behind closed doors?” As a result, all of her management problem solving sessions with agency heads are open to the public.
How Does It Work?
Gregoire announced her management framework via an Executive Order when she took office. She thought this would help managers across state government understand her expectations for excellent performance. The Order required each of the state’s 140 agencies to develop “clear, relevant and easy-to-understand measures that show whether or not programs were successful” and to “hold regular problem-solving sessions” to improve performance, and report regularly to the governor. After a year in place, the governor reports that state workers are responding to reports of child abuse 15% faster, error rates on tax returns and food stamps are among the lowest in the nation, several hundred middle management positions have been eliminated or redirected to the field; job placement rates in some unemployment offices that have almost doubled, and fewer workplace injuries and claims have contributed to a reduction in workers compensation premium rates. Meanwhile, agency directors report improved cooperation between agencies, a more disciplined and data-driven approach to day-to-day decision making, increased clarity of mission, and a renewed sense of confidence in telling the story of government to customers, clients, and the public
The centerpiece, like CitiStat in Baltimore, is periodic review sessions she personally conducts with agency heads. However, unlike Baltimore, instead of conducting reviews agency-by-agency, they are done around a set of seven priorities she established for her administration (see accompanying table). These priorities were set via a series of town meetings and focus groups with citizens from around the state. The reviews, as a result, involve multiple agencies in each session, which are held quarterly. The seven priorities do not attempt to comprehensively cover all state government activities, just those highlighted by the governor.
These GMAP sessions are “hands on” interactive and focus on action items organized largely around the strategies agencies are using to accomplish objectives in the priority areas. NGA says “At these sessions, managers report in person, reports are data-driven, dialogue is honest, questions are direct and challenging, and leaders and managers hold each other accountable by following-up.” Measures are used to track progress, and the discussion focuses on whether the strategies need to be changed to better achieve targeted goals, or to identify and resolve barriers. For example, the governor was concerned that the state’s Child Protective Services agency was not responding to reports of abused children quickly enough. The goal by statute was to respond within ten working days. Governor Gregoire set a new target of responding within 24 hours. The agency restructured its staffing to meet that goal, using the same level of resources, and within six months they went from getting there in 24 hours 70 percent of the time to more than 90 percent of the time. They’ve sustained this level of performance for almost a year since, and the child protective services program is now beginning to show evidence that getting there faster is resulting in lower rates of re-victimization for children
The governor says she “interested in honesty, not a blame game – the focus is how do we help you out of your problem.” She sees the GMAP sessions as a way for her to teach teamwork:“The [GMAP] system doesn’t hold us accountable, [but rather] we hold each other accountable.”
How Is GMAP Organized?
To support this new management process, Governor Gregoire created the Governor’s Office of Government Management Accountability and Performance. It started with a small 3-person staff in the pilot phase. They now have a dozen staffers – about the same size as a fully operational CitiStat program. The staff developed guidelines for agencies, with sample performance measures, analyzed the reports, and developed briefing materials. They also developed a series of training workshop on topics such as collecting data, and using charts and graphs to communicate performance. Agency deputies also meet on a monthly basis to share lessons learned with each other about the process.
In addition to the state-wide GMAP, agencies are expected to develop parallel processes within their own agencies, with an emphasis on the use of logic models to develop their action plans, so they can see how specific activities contribute to an ultimate outcome. Logic models are typically diagrams that show the relationship between activities, programs, and intended outcomes of multiple activities and programs. The intent is to not create a separate reporting structure but to change the way agencies manage themselves.
Also, the GMAP staff emphasizes the importance of communicating with the public by selecting performance measures that can be understood by – and are meaningful to – the general public as well as stakeholders. As a result, the governor not only maintains a website on agency performance but also issues an annual progress report.
Key Elements of Success
In a self- assessment of progress, the GMAP staff identified seven “keys to success:”
NGA observed that the real key seems to be top leadership commitment. It says that successful implementation “requires a significant commitment of time on behalf of the governor. . . without this commitment and the active and personal involvement of the governor, the initiative becomes yet another management fad. . . “
Lessons for Others
In addition to O’Malley, there are 10 other new governors. Can GMAP or CitiStat be a useful approach for them? It depends. It seems that, in addition to leadership commitment, implementing an approach like GMAP presumes a certain level of “measurement maturity.” To implement this kind of approach effectively, it probably helps if a state government – like Washington did -- has some history of developing strategic plans, developing and reporting performance measures, and making some links between performance and budget information. It also helps at the agency level if there is a certain level of familiarity with performance tools such as quality management, balanced scorecard, process improvement, etc. Governor Gregoire’s success in GMAP’s initial implementation benefited from a baseline of previous performance improvement efforts initiated by her predecessors. As new governors may find, looking back at what their predecessors (hopefully) put in place can be helpful in their ability to look forward.
Washington State’s Seven Key Results Areas