This document outlines the agenda and topics for the 2013 annual conference of the Center for Priority Based Budgeting. The conference will focus on bringing a new "lens" of priority based budgeting to government budgeting and resource allocation. Priority based budgeting uses data and performance metrics to identify priority programs and allocate funding accordingly. The conference will discuss tools and strategies for identifying priority programs, measuring results, and aligning resources and budgets with community priorities.

1. Jon Johnson & Chris Fabian
July 9, 2013
Center for Priority Based Budgeting
2013 ANNUAL CONFERENCE
“A SUMMIT of LEADING PRACTICES”
1

2. 2

3. BRINGING VISION INTO FOCUS
WITH A NEW “LENS”
3

4. 4
Fiscal
Wellness
Achieve
Fiscal Health
Value Programs
Based on Evidence
of their Influence
on Results
Support Resource
Allocation Decision
Making with Prioritization
of Programs
Identify, Define and
Value the Results
of Government
Identify Programs
and Services
ACHIEVING LONG-TERM FISCAL WELLNESS

5. Identify and Define Results
5
Stewardship of the
Environment
Encourages energy
conservation and
efficiency through
education, incentives and
the provision of alternative
solutions
Provides for the
renewal of the
environment through
recycling and reuse
Manages and mitigates factors
that impact environmental
quality and sustainability
Promotes and regulates
a clean, orderly and
ecologically balanced
community
Controls and abates
threats to the
environment caused by
nature

6. Strategic Questions
1. What are we in “business” to do?
2. What exactly do we do?
3. How do we figure out what is “core” OR What is of
the highest importance?
4. How do we know we are successful?
5. How do we ask “better” questions that
lead to “better” decisions about “what we
do” and “why we do it”?
6

7. PRIORITY BASED BUDGETING -
(A “GIS” Approach to the Budget)
Example of an “information
system” we’re already
familiar with: GIS
 Far better understanding
of the budget when we
can aggregate &
disaggregate information
7

8. PBB as “BIG DATA”?
What is the promise of Big Data?
 Different systems store data in different formats, even within the same
organization, making it difficult to aggregate data for
analysis
 As a result, an organization’s investment in data, one of
its most highly valued assets, goes underutilized
 Increased awareness of the value gained by analyzing data in context
drives desire for the ability to discover patterns and relationships to
enable improved decision making for better
outcomes
8
Gartner Press Release, “Gartner Says Solving ‘Big Data’ Challenge
Involves More Than Just Managing Volumes of Data”, June 27, 2011.

9. PBB – RELEVANCE FIRST!
9
• Relevance is the
foundational assumption
of Priority Based
Budgeting
• Program relevance is the
“base layer” of
information on which to
base your discussions
• All other conversations
are much more powerful
within the context of
whether a program is
relevant or not

10. IncreasingRelevance
What can be done
to ensure this
program continues
to remain relevant
in the future?
What can be done
to increase the
relevance of this
program?
Has this program
lost it’s relevance?
Is there any chance
it will regain
relevance in the
future?
Is this highly-
relevant program
performing at its
highest possible
potential?
Are the key
indicators that
demonstrate this
program is solidly
achieving results?
Would improved
performance
increase the
relevance of this
program?
If this program is
continued, what is
the minimum level
of acceptable
performance?
How can this
highly-relevant
program be
provided more
efficiently ?
What is the lowest
investment of
resources needed to
provide this
program?
If this program is
continued, what is
the bare minimum
level of resources
needed?
Would a change in
service level impact
this program’s
ability to achieve
Results?
Can we lessen the
level of service for
this
program, engage a
partner or find an
alternative
provider?
If this program is
continued, what is
the lowest level of
service that can be
offered?
Quartile
1
Quartile
2
Quartile
3
Quartile
4
DecreasingRelevance
Can anything be
done to change the
way this program is
offered to make it
more relevant?
10
EFFICIENCY
SERVICE
DELIVERYPERFORMANCERELEVANCE
Is this program
being provided as
efficiently as
possible?
What is the optimal
level of service
required for this
program ?

11. New Layers – New Perspectives
• Workforce Data
• Vacant Positions
• Retirement Eligible
Positions
• Nearing Retirement
Eligible Positions

12. 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0
1
4
7
10
13
16
19
22
25
28
31
34
37
40
43
46
49
52
55
58
61
64
67
70
73
76
79
82
85
88
91
94
97
100
103
Total Score for Community Oriented Programs
TotalNumberofPrograms
Quartile 1
Quartile 2
Quartile 3
Quartile 4
Quartile 1:
79 Programs
Quartile 2:
103 Programs
Quartile 3:
103 Programs
Quartile 4:
58 Programs
City of Boulder, Colorado
Defining Quartile Groupings
Key:
Programs are grouped into
Quartiles (not ranked, one
versus the other)
12

13. $85,915,772
$51,726,155
$21,505,297
$7,498,842
$- $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 $90,000,000 $100,000,000
1
2
3
4
QuartileRanking
(Quartile1:HighestRatedPrograms;
Quartile4:LowestRatedPrograms)
Prioritization Array:Combined City-wide Programs
Step 5: Allocate Resources Based on Prioritization
13
79 Programs
103 Programs
103Programs
58 Programs
City of Boulder, Colorado

14. 14
“Resource Alignment Diagnostic Tool”
City of Boulder, CO
Quartile Ranking Programs in Array
Qrt 1 88
Qrt 2 116
Qrt 3 1102-10%
Qrt 4 54
TOTALS 368
October 30, 2012
Community-Oriented
Programs
All Departments
Funding Source:
(Est. Budget, Gen Gov Revenue,
Program Revenues)
Total Estimated BudgetCity-wide
Prioritization Perspective:
(City-wide, Fund, Funds)
Choose Department:
(All Departments, Specific)
ProgramType:
(All Programs, Governance,
Community-oriented)
$00.00%
0.00%
$0
$0
$85,915,772
$21,505,297
$51,726,155
0.00%
$0
$0
$0 $85,915,772
$51,726,155 0.00%
$0 $166,646,067 0.00% $0 $166,646,067
2012-13Proposed Budget Increase(Reduce) % Impact 2012-13TargetBudget
$0
$0
2011Budget
$7,498,842
$21,505,297
$7,498,842
$85,915,772
$51,726,155
$21,505,297
$7,498,842
$- $10,000,000 $20,000,000 $30,000,000 $40,000,000 $50,000,000 $60,000,000 $70,000,000 $80,000,000 $90,000,000 $100,000,000
1
2
3
4
QuartileRanking
(Quartile1:HighestRatedPrograms;
Quartile4:LowestRatedPrograms)
Priority Based Budgeting: Spending Array Perspectives
Applying Prioritization to
Frame A New Conversation

15. 15

16. NEW “Program Filtering Tool”
16

17. Role of the Council/Board
 Engage in the discussions by looking through this “new lens.”
 Be guided to ask the “right” questions – focused on POLICY rather
than OPERATIONS.
 Allocated resources based on priorities of the community
 Make better decisions that you can easily communicate to your
citizens.
Role of the Citizens
 See through the “new lens” how decision-makers are more
objectively allocating resources to achieve the community’s
priorities
 Better understand the budget “choices” that need to be made and
the impacts of those choices on the community
17

18. Thank You !
Jon Johnson, Co-Founder Chris Fabian, Co-Founder
303-756-9090, ext. 326 303-756-9090, ext. 325
303-909-9052 (cell) 303-520-1356 (cell)
jjohnson@pbbcenter.org cfabian@pbbcenter.org
www.pbbcenter.org
Copyright ©2009 by Chris Fabian and Jon Johnson d/b/a the Center for Priority Based Budgeting,
Denver, Colorado.
18