Mecklenburg County, North Carolina has a long history of strategic planning efforts to address community needs and respond to population growth. In 2014, the county appointed a new manager and launched a new strategic planning framework involving 3-year strategic business plans for all county departments and key partners. Over 100 individuals developed plans with goals, objectives, strategies, costs and measures. The plans were approved in late 2015 and informed the county's FY2017-2019 budget to ensure resources are aligned with strategic priorities and community needs.

1. 12 PUBLIC MANAGEMENT | JULY 2016 icma.org/pm
T
oday’s government organiza-
tions should have a spirit of
accountability and transparency
with residents, visitors, stake-
holders, and elected officials
when it comes to strategic planning. The
days are long gone when government
spent resources without first determin-
ing community needs and subsequently
identifying the organizational goals and
objectives aligned to those needs.
For more than a decade, Mecklenburg
County, North Carolina, has embraced
strategic planning and performance
management practices. With an average
population growth rate of 3 percent
annually since the late 1990s, county
leaders have continuously faced the
challenge of how best to respond to the
growth, as well as address short-term
and long-term needs of the community.
Early Planning Efforts
Strategic planning began in 2001 when
the Board of County Commissioners
adopted the county’s managing for
results (M4R) philosophy (see Figure
1), together with a community and
corporate scorecard performance
management framework (see Figure
2), which was based on the balanced
scorecard model.
Between 2001 and 2011, the county
successfully implemented the com-
munity and corporate scorecard, which
included desired results and goals
along with strategies and measures
aligned to four focus areas.
Many of the scorecard measures cas-
caded down to all county departments to
include but not be limited to increased
service value that measured customer
satisfaction with programs and services.
Employee motivation and satisfaction
were also measured.
Both the county manager and
department directors were held account-
able annually for meeting many of the
scorecard’s desired results.
At the height of the Great Recession,
however, the county realized that while
the M4R results philosophy was still
relevant, there was an even greater need
to revamp strategic planning practices
and reassess the county’s focus.
In response to the recession-inspired
lull, Mecklenburg County delayed
development in 2010 of a three-year
strategic business plan, but did establish
target areas to use as the basis for mak-
ing numerous budget decisions in the
post-recession period.
In reality, the county’s response
to an increased demand for services,
How Mecklenburg County Got On the Road to Strategic Business Planning
By Monica Allen
A PLANNiNG EVOLUTiON

2. icma.org/pm: online and mobile accessible JULY 2016 | PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 13
a decline in property tax and sales
tax revenue, and a reduction in force
required a different way of thinking
about the provision of government
services to meet residents’ needs.
In January 2014, Mecklenburg
County appointed Dena Diorio,
formerly the county’s chief financial
officer, as county manager, which set
the stage for a new chapter in the
county’s planning evolution.
A New Strategic Framework
Within the first month of her new
position, Manager Diorio realized she
wanted to make some changes while
building on the successes of the previous
administration. She reinforced the notion
that government should be transparent
and accountable.
One of her first initiatives was
to discuss with staff a new strategic
framework. Although the county
already had a history of strategic
planning efforts, the county took an
unprecedented approach by focusing
on developing and implementing
three-year (FY2017–2019) strategic
business plans for all county depart-
ments and two of its non-county gov-
ernment business partners: Charlotte
Mecklenburg Library and Mecklenburg
EMS Agency, a.k.a., MEDIC.
These strategic business plans reflect
the priorities of departments and focus on
areas of improvement. They include goals
and objectives, strategies and actions for
each objective, and associated costs to
execute the actions on an annual basis.
The costs require organizations to be
more intentionally focused, with greater
levels of accountability for spending on
programs and services.
Gaining Buy-In
To ensure that department directors and
business partner executives were on-
board with the model once the strategic
planning framework was established, a
series of communications were provided
to department heads, strategic busi-
ness planning teams, including fiscal
administrators, management analysts,
and senior staff within departments,
and county commissioners.
In late 2014, the county manager’s
strategic planning and evaluation team
met with directors and shared this vision
for a three- to four-year body of work:
preplanning phase (FY2015) to planning
(FY2016) to post-planning and imple-
mentation (FY2017).
In April 2015, team members
shared the strategic business plan-
ning framework with commissioners,
because gaining their buy-in was
important given that budget-funding
decisions for fiscal years 2017 through
2019 would tie to the business plans.
The framework was well received.
In June 2015, the planning teams
received an overview of the scope of
work and the timeline of work to be
performed. This kickoff was followed
by a two-day, train-the-facilitator ses-
sion that provided the basics of strategic
planning, as well as tips on facilitating
groups of individuals through the
strategic planning process.
Goals and Key Themes
During summer 2015, the planning
teams worked to develop three to five
goals for their departments. So that
all county departments and business
partner executives were informed of the
goals, Manager Diorio held a one-day
strategic planning retreat with cabinet
members and included department
directors and executives for the business
partner organizations.
At that point, the directors shared
goals and gave rationales for their
significance, provided key demo-
graphic and economic data as context,
and highlighted barriers to achiev-
ing goals. Barriers included, among
others, resource availability, potential
instability in the market due to
changes in North Carolina and federal
legislation, and unanticipated changes
in customer demands.
Within the community support
services department business plan, for
example, is a goal to strengthen inter-
vention to meet the needs of veterans.
This goal includes decreasing domestic
violence, community violence, and
substance use by 2019 and maintain-
ing and improving service delivery for
veterans and their families.
The rationale for this objective is
that the community’s veteran popula-
tion—57,194 in 2014—is growing.
Federal projections from the Department
of Veterans Affairs forecast that Meck-
lenburg County will add 3,000 veterans
through 2016, and members of this
group will need more comprehensive
services and require more assistance
as they age and face healthcare and
disability changes. Survivor benefits
for veterans’ spouses as well as burial
benefits will play a major role in the
workloads of county staff.
Accountability
Corporate
Strategies
Program
Alignment
Budget for
Results
Goals
Performance
Management
FIGURE 1. Managing 4 Results.

3. 14 PUBLIC MANAGEMENT | JULY 2016 icma.org/pm
The department has identified two
barriers to meeting the objective, one
being a limited number of veteran
services officers who can provide
assistance to individuals filing claims.
According to the department, the
average client load per service officer is
expected to be some $1,630.
Over the next three years of the
department’s business plan, it anticipates
hiring three additional staff positions
to redistribute the workload. A second
barrier is the changes in VA claim-pro-
cessing software that could extend the
time needed to process benefits before a
desired outcome is achieved.
Based on the department’s estimates
to achieve the goal during fiscal years
2017 to 2019, the total spend, including
new and ongoing funding each year, is
approximately $2-$3.2 million each year.
By sharing the barriers, county leaders
were made aware of potential issues
with trying to meet established goals.
The retreat identified two theme
categories that reflected subthemes from
65 department-business partner identified
goals and grouped here by similar focus:
Organization-Focused Themes:
• Key Theme 1: Talent Management
(acquisition, development, retention).
• Key Theme 2: Internal Communication
and Public Awareness.
• Key Theme 3: Leverage Financial
Resources.
• Key Theme 4: Leverage Technology to
Optimize Service Delivery.
Community-Focused Themes:
• Key Theme 5: Optimize Investments in
Criminal Justice.
• Key Theme 6: Strengthen Families.
• Key Theme 7: Economic Development.
• Key Theme 8: Greater Economic
Independence for Residents.
• Key Theme 9: Aging with Dignity.
• Key Theme 10: Community Health and
Wellness.
• Key Theme 11: Environmental
Stewardship.
Development, Approval, and Sharing
After the retreat, the departments and
the business partners were given a
green light to continue to build out their
strategic business plans.
Over the course of four months,
departments and business partners
developed plans that included envi-
ronmental scan findings (internal and
external data collection and analysis);
new or modified existing vision and
mission statements; strategic measurable
goals and objectives; strategies; action
items for each fiscal year; costs for the
action items needed to achieve the goals
and objectives for each fiscal year; and
key performance measures.
FIGURE 2. Community & Corporate Scorecard.
Social, Education,
& Economic Opportunity
Community Health
& Safety
Effective & Efficient
Government
Growth Management
& Environment
Financial
Reduced/
Avoided
Costs
Improved
Financial
Management
Maintained
Triple-A
Bond Rating
Maintained
Affordable &
Competitive
Tax Rate
Employee &
Organizational
Capacity
Increased
Employee
Motivation &
Satisfaction
Enhanced
Workforce
Retention & Recruit-
ment
Increased
Employee
Knowledge, Skills
& Abilities
Improved
Technology-Related
Capacities
Increased
Literacy
& Workforce
PreparednessCustomer/
Stakeholder
Increased
Citizen
Self-Sufficiency
Increased
Service
Value
Increased
Awareness
of County
Responsibilities,
Services & Results
Reduced
Preventable/
Communicable
Diseases & Other
Health Problems
Reduced Violence,
Injury &
Emotional
Harm
Increased
Efficiency
& Cost
Accountability
of Justice Services
Improved/
Expanded Parks,
Open Space, Green-
ways & Recreational
Opportunities
Preserved
Historic
Sites &
Landmarks
Improved
Air, Water,
& Land Quality
Improved
Access
to Public
Facilities
Increased
Ergonomic
Development & Job
Opportunities
Increased Respect/
Appreciation
of Ethnic &
Cultural Diversity
Internal
Business
Process
Enhanced
Citizen
Involvement
Improved
Employee
Efficiency
Improved
Communication &
Information
Management

4. icma.org/pm: online and mobile accessible JULY 2016 | PUBLIC MANAGEMENT 15
Costs included human capital
expenses, information technology
expenses, communications expenses,
and assets and facilities expenses for
each of the three years.
Collectively, more than 100 indi-
viduals across 21 departments and two
business partners were involved in the
development of strategic business plans.
In December 2015, the department
and business partner strategic plans were
reviewed and approved by the county
manager and executive team members.
In January 2016, during the county com-
missioners’ annual retreat, key theme
presentations on goals and objectives,
plus executive summaries for each of the
strategic business plans, were shared.
The summaries contained an over-
view of the department and business
partner mission and vision statements;
environmental context (i.e., economic
and social trends, demographic and
social changes, and more); a director’s
message; and a summary of the goals,
objectives, and costs to achieve the
goals and objectives.
Budget Informed by Goals
The board’s annual retreat serves as
the kickoff for budget development.
Each department receives an overview
from the county’s budget director on
revenue estimates and forecast, expec-
tations for development of department
budget requests, and a timeline for key
meeting dates to discuss the budget.
During budget development, in
addition to adjustments to department
start points like removal of one-time
funding for fleet and technology pur-
chases, departments were instructed to
submit two types of budget requests to
the Office of Management and Budget.
These included non-strategic
business plan requests that maintain
contractual increases and operational
costs tied to capital projects as well as
requests that align specifically to the
three-year business plans.
Requests that aligned to the
strategic business plans were identified
in the budget submission forms with
a unique code that included the goal,
objective, associated strategy, request
(i.e., human capital, technology, com-
munications, and facilities), and the
costs to execute the strategy.
By having costs aligned to business
plans, the county was able to easily
identify its specific investment in each
department and for each goal to be
achieved over the three-year period.
The greater value with aligning
costs is that the budget mirrors the
strategic priorities across the organiza-
tion and creates a long-term approach
to budgeting. This not only enhances
the annual budget process beyond the
typical incremental approach most
organizations have, but it also recog-
nizes the resource needs throughout a
three-year period.
A New and Fresh Beginning…Again
For the county, the strategic business
plans were a critical component to
ensuring the county aligns its resources
with the needs of the community.
While no strategic business plans are
perfect, county leaders have more clar-
ity as to what are the true needs of the
departments and business partners.
Ultimately, many of the goals
identified at the department and
business partner level will be incorpo-
rated into the county’s FY2017–2019
strategic business plan. Plan imple-
mentation and quarterly reporting will
begin on July 1, 2016.
STRATEGiC PLAN iMPLEMENTATiON
INFORMATION SUMMARIZED HERE is based on a
2014 study of 218 strategic initiatives from 44 randomly-
selected U.S. local governments and presented at the 2015
ICMA Annual Conference. In the study conducted by the
University of Central Florida, high-priority projects were de-
fined as those that were mentioned in a local government’s
annual budget message. The results showed:
• Dedicating funds upfront to strategic plan imple-
mentation is the strongest predictor of implementation
success, improving project completion rates by 22%.
Dedicated implementation funding is provided approxi-
mately only 33% of the time.
• The context of the strategic projects matters, in terms
of project priority and complexity. Aligning implementation
approach to project context can increase the chances of
implementation success by approximately 12%.
• City and county managers should be selective about
which projects to get personally involved in implementation.
Project completion rates decrease by 16% when the man-
ager is involved in low-complexity projects. Still, managers
are involved in about 25% to 30% of these projects.
• Performance measurement can assist in the imple-
mentation of high-priority projects. The mere statement
that the implementation outcome will be tracked on an
ongoing basis can increase the completion rate of high-
priority projects by 20% to 30%. Only approximately 20%
of local governments integrate these strategic projects
into their performance measurement systems.
—David Mitchell, Assistant Professor of Public Admin-
istration, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida
(david.mitchell@ucf.edu).
MONICA ALLEN, Ph.D., is strategic
planning and evaluation director,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
(monica.allen@mecklenburgcountync.
gov).