Download to read offline
Uploaded byResults Leadership Group, LLC
Cutting budgets with results based accountability
This document discusses traditional and Results Based Accountability (RBA) methods for cutting budgets. Traditional methods include across-the-board cuts, program-by-program cuts, and targeting non-mandated programs with low impacts. RBA methods involve analyzing impacts on population quality of life indicators and program performance measures, and making decisions based on minimizing harm to these outcomes. The document advocates using RBA methods to make budget cut decisions that consider public good over political interests and have greater transparency and accountability.
More Related Content
Similar to Cutting budgets with results based accountability
Cutting budgets with results based accountability
- 1. CUTTING BUDGETS withRBA Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence. The Fiscal Policy Studies Institute Websites raguide.org resultsaccountability.com Book - DVD Orders amazon.com resultsleadership.org GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE
- 2. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA GENERATE: Traditional Methods 2. Across the board x% GF cut (w buy-back?)* 3. Program by program & line by line: admin - new/not started - reduce # served - reduce quality – cut provider(s) – cut entire service 5. Targeting matrix: non-mandated programs, low impact on life, health and safety 1. Darts Mandated Non-Mandated LowMediumHigh LIfe–Health-Safety Protect Deep end Cut Prevention Infrastructure 4. Revenue and restructuring: taxes – fees – reserves - incentives - investments Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence. *GF means General or Discretionary Funds. Buy-back means cutting more than needed and inviting re-application for over-cut funding.
- 3. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA GENERATE: Traditional Methods 2. Across the board x% GF cut (w buy-back?) 3. Program by program – reduce # served – reduce quality – cut provider(s) – cut service entirely 5. Targeting matrix: non-mandated programs, low impact on life, health and safety 1. Darts 6. Least harm: to quality of life and service performance Plus RBA Methods 4. Revenue and restructuring: taxes – fees – incentives - investments Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence. Quality of Life As measured by results & indicators Program Performance How much did we do? How well did we do it? Is anyone better off?
- 4. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA ANALYZE: Traditional Methods 1. Triage: a. Politically feasible (winners-losers, press, geography) b. Administratively feasible (legal, implementable) 2. Impact: a. Financial Impact GF Fund savings, Loss of matching funds (if any) Cost shifting / offsetting costs (if any) b. People Impact Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence.
- 5. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA ANALYZE: Traditional Methods 1. Triage: a. Politically feasible (winners-losers, press, geography) b. Administratively feasible 2. Impact: a. Financial Impact Disc. Fund savings, Loss of matching funds (if any) Cost shifting / offsetting costs (if any) Plus RBA Methods b. Population Quality of Life Impact: on key indicators c. Performance Impact: on How much did we do? How well did we do it? Is anyone better off? measures Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence.
- 6. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA DECIDE: Traditional Methods 1. Darts 2. Political self interest 3. Public good Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence.
- 7. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA DECIDE: Traditional Methods 1. Darts 2. Political self interest 3. Public good Plus RBA Methods a. Impact on quality of life b. Impact on the performance of key services Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence.
- 8. GENERATE ANALYZE DECIDE CUTTINGBUDGETS with RBA 6. Least harm: to quality of life and service performance 2. Impact b. Population Quality of Life Impact: on key indicators c. Performance Impact: on How much did we do? How well did we do it? Is anyone better off? measures Better Decision-making. Greater Public Confidence. 3. Public good a. Impact on quality of life b. Impact on the performance of key services What’s different?
- 9. The Fiscal PolicyStudies Institute Websites raguide.org resultsaccountability.com Book - DVD Orders amazon.com resultsleadership.org THANKS ! And Good Luck !
- 10. The Fiscal PolicyStudies Institute Websites raguide.org resultsaccountability.com Book - DVD Orders amazon.com resultsleadership.org THANKS ! And Good Luck !