The document discusses the journey of implementing performance-based budgeting in Rockingham County, focusing on aligning staff actions with elected leaders' interests through performance measures and assessments. It outlines current and future state processes, highlighting significant improvements in lead time for permitting and potential cost savings. The initiative aims to enhance client efficiency, satisfaction, and the county's reputation in land development while fostering continuous improvement.

1. Performance Based Budgeting -
Where are you in your journey?
Adam Lindsay
Director of Strategic Management
Rockingham County
July 11, 2013
alindsay@co.rockingham.nc.us

2. Elevating Performance Measures to
Performance Management
1. Mission
2. Assessment
3. Performance

4. Mission

6. Goal Setting and
Performance
Measurement
Alignment and
Integration
Office of Budget Evaluation
& Development

7. Why do this?
Communicate alignment of staff
actions & plans with expressed
interests of elected leaders
Provide focus to achieve results

8. Introducing the process
Citywide Goals
(Council & Staff)
Department Goals
Division
Objectives
Performance
Measures

9. Assessment

10. Dashboards
• Catawba County
• Rock Hill, SC - performance
• Rock Hill, SC – financial
• NC Water & Wastewater Rates
• SOG Fiscal Condition
• Wayne County, MI

11. Scorecards/Reports

13. Citizen
Report

17. Video Reports
• Rock Hill, SC
• Charlotte Performance Video

18. Internal
Report

21. Performance

22. CitiStat Models
Baltimore, MD
Winston-Salem
Somerville, MA

27. Balanced Scorecard

30. Other Initiatives
Rockingham County – Commissioner Goals
Cary – Priority Based Budgeting
Rockingham County – Lean Management
Rockingham County – Strategic Business
Portfolios

34. Current State Map

35. Future State Map

36. Data Summary
 Current state process data (hours):
▫ Delays = 14.5 days
▫ Cycle time = 4.3 days
▫ Total Lead time = 18.8 days
 Future state process data (hours):
▫ Delays = 8.0 days
▫ Cycle time = 3.8 days
▫ Total Lead time = 11.8 days
37% Potential Improvement in Lead Time

37. Savings from Central
Permitting
•Eliminate 2.75 Positions = $52,023 (Env Hlth Spec) + $31,317 (Perm Tech) +
$35,594 (Perm Tech) - $6,500 (Prog Assist) = $112,434 Annual Savings
•Increased Efficiencies for Clients & Staff
•Reduced Frequency of Gov Center Visits
•Reduced Overall Time Spent with Staff
•Reduced Time To Issue Land Development Permits

38. Opportunity Costs
• High Client Satisfaction Levels
• County Land Development Process Reputation
for Excellence
• High Level of Coordination Between Land
Development Departments
• Agility to Continuously Improve Land
Development Process