King County’s Evolving Performance Management Program - June 2009

Last Updated: Monday, 24 August 2009

King County, Washington State's Performance Management Journey – First Installment

King County has been working for many years on developing a strong performance management system. However, 2008 was a watershed year in that the county formally codified a strategic planning and performance management framework that applies to all branches of county government. In addition, the County Executive created a new Office of Strategic Planning and Performance Management that will oversee the coordination of the new system.  

Through leadership from both the elected County Executive and the nine-member Metropolitan King County Council, King County has been making major strides in developing a performance management system. Since 2006, the Executive branch has put in place:

•    a county version of CitiStat, called KingStat, that focuses on key agency outcomes,

•    a public performance Web site, AIMS High: Annual Indicators and Measures, that integrates community-level indicators with agency performance measures

•    a four-page Performance Scorecard, developed with the assistance of public focus groups, highlights performance measures most of interest to the general public, and

•    two classes for all county employees on how to develop and use performance measures and create a performance oriented culture.

The county’s public reporting efforts have twice won the Association of Government Accountants' "Certificate of Achievement on Service Efforts and Accomplishments" and the Web site has been called "best in class" by researchers from the IBM Center for the Business of Government. King County was also selected by the National Center for Civic Innovation’s Trailblazer grant program.

With the adoption of the Performance and Accountability Ordinance (Ordinance 16202) and the related public reporting and transparency motion (Motion 12791), the Metropolitan King County Council established for the first time a countywide performance management expectation. In addition to codifying many existing reports and best practices (such as public reporting, public engagement, and the county’s KingStat process), the new ordinance and motion call for some significant additions to the county's strategic planning efforts. The new ordinance and motion requires:

•    a countywide strategic plan,

•    citizen engagement to support the countywide planning effort,

•    all agencies and departments to develop five year strategic plans, and

•    the publication of a short and easy to read financial report.

The ordinance and motion reflect the culmination of work by elected leaders and senior staff in all branches of King County government and is based on the recommendations of an advisory Performance Measurement Work Group. The Work Group, started in 2003 and led by the King County Auditor, was developed to promote effective performance measurement and management throughout the county.

The Work Group now includes all three branches of county government, as well as the independently elected county officials, such as the Assessor, the Prosecuting Attorney, the Sheriff, and the District and Supreme Courts. An early outcome of the Work Group's efforts was a set of guidelines for strategic planning and performance measurement, which are used by agencies and departments to develop annual business plans.

However, don’t let all of this organizational progress make it sound like it was a linear or straightforward pathway to success. Back in 2002, King County received a “C” rating from Governing’s “Grading the Counties” evaluation.  There were competing visions for what an appropriate performance management framework should be and to whom it should apply.

This story is really about initially separate efforts by different branches of government working toward a similar vision and working simultaneously on both the structural and operational levels to make the performance system a reality. The Auditor’s Work Group has played the role of laying the groundwork for adoption of the county ordinance through its products and active participation by Council staff and all branches of government. The Work Group provided a common space for all agencies and departments to share their work on performance measurement and management. The Executive played the role of implementing programs that other branches could see as “do-able” once they were put in place. For example, once AIMs High was built or the first four-page scorecard produced it was easier for non-Executive branch agencies to see what all of the theory was about and what role they could play. In addition, outside validation of the AIMS High Web site by AGA’s SEA program helped raise visibility of the public performance reporting piece.

To read the second installment visit: http://www.ppmrn.net/resources/articles/5479.