3. #FUELGOOD18
1. Public Sector Budgeting Methodologies
• Pros and Cons
2. Performance-based Budgeting (PBB)
• Pros and Cons
• Performance Indicators
• Benchmarking and Examples
3. Bringing it all Together
• Transitioning
• Key Considerations
• How Questica Can Help
4. Q&A
AGENDA
7. #FUELGOOD18
Incremental or Baseline Budgeting
Pros
• Easy to implement
• Less prep time
• Budget stability
Cons
• Lack of previous year budget
review
• Limited in vision of value
• No incentive to reduce costs
9. #FUELGOOD18
Zero-based Budgeting
Pros
• Challenges the status quo
• Adapts to changing circumstances
and priorities
• Detects over budgeting
Cons
• Difficult and time consuming
• Requires expertise
• Creates a sense of uncertainty
10. #FUELGOOD18
Participatory Budgeting
• Community members identify spending priorities
for the organization
• Organization provides stakeholders with as much
influence as possible
• Community votes on proposals to fund
11. #FUELGOOD18
Participatory Budgeting
Pros
• Democratic
• Strengthen relationship between
community and governing body
• Transparency and accountability
Cons
• Time for participation
• Biased to more articulate
groups
• Areas of high level diversity
• Lack of control
12. #FUELGOOD18
Activity-based Budgeting
• Allocate financial resources to activities that
see the greatest return (in the form of
increased revenues)
• Identify and fund high value activities, cut
back on low value activities
• Revenues generated are allocated directly to
the unit responsible for the activity
13. #FUELGOOD18
Activity-Based Budgeting
Pros
• Units have direct control of
activities
• Creates incentives
• Continued increase in revenue
Cons
• Requires time and resources
• Logistically difficult for
cross-department programs
• Neglects non-revenue
generating activities
14. #FUELGOOD18
Budgeting for Outcomes
• Budgeting at the organization is based on
prioritizing programs and services that are most
important to the public
• Uses performance measurement to evaluate if a
program is producing results
• Form of Performance-based Budgeting
• Considered a best practice by GFOA
15. #FUELGOOD18
Budgeting for Outcomes
Pros
• Reflects stakeholder priorities
• Efficient, transparent and
innovative
• Collaboration between
departments
Cons
• Requires a lot of effort and
time
• Organization must undergo
substantial change
17. #FUELGOOD18
Performance-based Budgeting
• PBB’s goal is to improve efficiency and
effectiveness of public expenditure, by linking
the funding of public sector organizations to the
results they deliver. Can also improve
prioritization of expenditures.
• Uses systematic performance information (i.e.,
indicators, evaluations, program costings, etc.)
to make this connection.
• PBB cannot begin until a system of performance
measurement has been instituted.
18. #FUELGOOD18
PBB is a Management Tool
• Performance budgets focus on missions, goals,
and objectives to explain why money is being
spent and provide a way to allocate resources
to achieve specific results
• PBB is intended to be a management tool for
program improvement, not a “carrot and stick”
methodology used to “punish” departments for
not meeting goals
19. #FUELGOOD18
Performance-Based Budgeting
Pros
• Cost alignment to strategic
objectives
• Greater accountability and
comprehensive view of each dept
• Classification consistency
• Increased transparency
Cons
• Requires specificity to
operate efficiently
• Time consuming to review and
discuss
• Assumes accurate and valid
performance data
• Different views of what’s
important
20. #FUELGOOD18
Principles for PBB
1. Establish broad goals to guide government decision-making
2. Develop approaches to achieve goals
3. Develop a budget with approaches to achieve goals
4. Evaluate performance and make adjustments
21. #FUELGOOD18
Performance Indicators
Be SMART
• Specific
• Measurable
• Attainable
• Relevant
• Trackable
Measurement Indicators
• Inputs
• Outputs
• Efficiency
• Service quality
• Outcomes
22. #FUELGOOD18
Input Indicators
• Cost (budgeted or actual)
• Staff-year equivalents (SYE)
• Full-time equivalents (FTE)
• Direct labor hours (DLH)
• Direct costs plus fringe
benefits
• Direct costs are those
devoted to a particular service
and include:
o Personnel services
o Operating expenses
o Recovered costs
o Capital equipment
23. #FUELGOOD18
Output Indicators
• What was produced and/or
provided
• What services were
delivered?
• What volume was provided?
• How many units of service?
• Fire Dept.
o Incidents responded to
• Human Resources
o Vacancies filled
• School
o # of enrollments
• Library
o New materials circulated
o Charity
o # of new donors
24. #FUELGOOD18
Efficiency Indicators
• Inputs used per unit of
output
• Cost per unit where the input
is money/dollars
• Productivity where the input
is staff hours
• Fire Dept.
o Cost per incident
• School
o Cost per student
• Senior-based Services
o Cost per client
• Human Resources
o Cost per vacancy filled
o Association
o Cost per member
25. #FUELGOOD18
Service Quality Indicators
• Measures customer satisfaction,
timeliness, and/or accuracy of a
service
o Customer surveys
o Response logs
o Error rates
o Engagement rates
o Attendance rates
• Fire Dept.
o Average response time
• School
o Parent satisfaction/engagement
o Student attendance
• Senior-based Services
o Percent of clients satisfied with services
provided
• Human Resources
o Satisfaction rate with vacancy
processing
• Association
o Member satisfaction with service
offerings
26. #FUELGOOD18
Outcome Indicators
• Describe the benefit of the service to the
customer
• Describe what was changed or
accomplished as a result of the service
• How has the customer benefited?
• Why is the customer better off?
• What is the impact of the service?
• Fire Dept.
o Fire deaths per 10,000 population
o Fire injuries per 10,000 population
• School
o Increase in graduation rates
o Increase in test scores
• Senior-based Services
o Percent of clients who remain in the
community after one year of service or
information
• Human Resources
o Average recruitment time
• Charity
o Percentage of clients who benefited from
service
o # new research breakthroughs
28. #FUELGOOD18
Performance Management Examples
Goals Inputs Activities Outputs Outcomes Performance
Goals of Program(s) Resources Work Processes Work Produced Results & Impacts Measurement
• Provide quality
services or
offerings
• Maintain or
improve
performance
• Provide cost-
effective services
• Retain members
and donors
• Funding
• Facilities
• Equipment
• Technology
• Supplies
• Staffing
• Maintaining roads
or schools
• Addressing
inquiries
• Performing
inspections
• Aiding emergency
requests
• Courses
developed
• Services
developed
• Statistical
measurements
• Repairs
(amount/type)
• Students enrolled
• Licenses renewed
• Fires suppressed
• Arrests made
• Positions filled
• Courses taken
• Research
completed
• Services provided
• 90% satisfaction
rating
• 95% error free
• 90% engagement
or attendance
rates
• Services delivered
within +/1 2% of
comparable i.e.,
wait time, volume,
etc.
• Surveys, focus
groups, etc.
• Usage, retention,
statistics, rates
and averages for
each specific
activity
• Cost comparisons
• Quarterly, annual
reporting
29. #FUELGOOD18
Types of Benchmarking
Internal External Operational Strategic
Commonly one year compared to a
previous year’s performance
Organization compared to another
similar organization’s performance
Organization’s recent annual or
periodic performance
Long term performance
• Overall spending
• Growth in tax base
• Growth in income
• Growth in funding
• Private sector wages
• Neighboring cities or school
districts
• Similar organizations
• Most common measures
• Current vs past performance
for specific activity/service
• Student graduation rates
• Higher student test scores
• Percentage growth over time
• Member retention
• Spending per $1,000 property
assessment
• Other specific services standards or adjustments for inflation
EXAMPLE
Service Area Objective Input Output Efficiency Service Quality Outcome
School Maintenance 5% $1,374,500 4 4.7% 75% 7%
Capital Facilities
Costs within 5 percent of
budgeted costs
Budget/actual costs
Staff
Projects completed
Engineering design cost as
a percent of total project
cost
Percent of projects
completed on time
Contract cost growth (%)
30. #FUELGOOD18
PBB: Organization Excuses
1. We’re funded by state/federal, so it
doesn’t matter what we do.
2. We don’t know what performance looks
like yet since we just reorganized.
3. We’ve always done it this way,
everything is just fine as it is.
4. We’re too busy getting REAL work
done to bother with this.
5. We need more staff, more money, more
time, more (fill in the blank) to do this.
6. We can’t target outcomes; they’re too
specific.
7. We can’t measure what we do.
8. You’ll misinterpret any information we
give you.
9. We can’t be accountable because we
have no control over anything.
10. We’re different. This shouldn’t apply to
us. We need an exemption.
32. #FUELGOOD18
Transitioning to
Performance-based Budgeting
Until a performance measurement system can be fully implemented, an
interim solution may help set the groundwork:
• An explanation of the department’s overall goals
• An explanation of what the department has accomplished in the past
year
• An explanation of what the department intends to accomplish in the
coming year
• An explanation as to what is different from last year in the proposed
budget and why
• A compliant budget showing past year budget expenditures
33. #FUELGOOD18
Key Considerations
• Manage accuracy by developing meaningful, valid and reliable
performance indicators
• Establish the link between resources and results early and
maintain that link through budget development, appropriation, and
budget control processes
34. #FUELGOOD18
How Questica Can Help
• Comprehensive budgeting and performance software
• Transparency and data visualization software
36. #FUELGOOD18
Questica OpenBook
• Data visualization software is key to building
transparency and trust
• Sharing financial and non-financial data visually with
interactive charts, tables, graphics with descriptive
text and informational pop-ups
• Share with your organization’s internal or external
shareholders with search, sort and filter options
• Integrates seamlessly with Questica Budget
Demo sample visualizations at
questica.com/openbook
There’s an element of performance involved in that you are measuring “cost per activity”.
This is a more conceptual methodology rather than how the budget is structured (for example. Division > Dept > CC or Program > Services).
Activities – departments generating tuition, fees, etc.