ࡱ> cebf%(  / 0DTimes New Roman6bb0bWo 0DArialNew Roman6bb0bWo 0G" DWingdingsRoman6bb0bWo 0G ` .  @n?" dd@  @@``_@,whoosh.wav.WAV 10103RIFFWAVEfmt ++data~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|||~~~~~zvtvxz|~zvrnlrv||vtrpptz~|xvtv|~~zxvvvz|~xrlhntzzvrrpprrx~|j[QU_|bICCYn[ICY~zlnh]_r|]SUSSjz|x__l~v_]drnUb|nfd_]d]5=rrnj]jz~lMldrx[[_f|YQfWK_xh[zx[CIjzxxdSQz|_fI9WӹM;QnvK;OUx~xj]]YS~ɵlM?plM;CGpٵ[)Kh|% %;xtKQS]ɖbGr|lSnvz~nfS[nëx;Az=+AYݻ|=/1r_ ?|潄W5/Czãf)/pvbMQr|O=OtjdhjlG?G_ɊK3לdQCMppW;1SŷAMz/#?bx͖SAM[hvhYp~~zrvt[]ptWOUtxxd]v~vvxzd_xzh_nrSQltbdp~_lrQ_l][tf]W]~hWfp|fWhnhbU[hzlSCWbYbnxpdhjvjM9Ot]GQ[dpp~hhhdpx~xh]Yntnrp]dlvjQMb|vdjpzxzztljr||_[r~~jb_j|z|xpp~~v]Wh||zx|x|zzndhpxr]Yfntzjl|z||~vppnrzphrxz|~|xtrjjtv~~vz|z||xrrv~xrprtz|||vzxvx|xtx~~~~~~~zxxxx|zxz~~~rrz~|xz~~|vtx|zxz|~~~||zx|||~~zz|zz~~~~|~~||~~||zz|~||z~~~~zxzz|~~~~|~~~|~||~~~~~~~~~~~~~|||~~~~~~~~~~~~~||~~||~||~~~~|||~~~~||||~~~~~~||||~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~|zz~~~~~~~||||~~||~~~~~|||~~~~~|||~|~|~~~~|z|~~~~~~~|||~~~~~~~~||~~~~~~~~T @ GY  DH #& pn    $c 1? 3f@8+ uʚ;2Nʚ;g4LdLd0b$ppp@ <4!d!d 0b7b<4dddd 0b7b<4BdBd 0b7b___PPT9zn$? ,O ='The Best States on Performance Measures((0kPresentation to the Performance Measures Advisory Group November 29, 2001 Rita Conrad Oregon Progress Board8l$" Six Best Practice States5Iowa Texas Virginia Washington Missouri Florida (B+)6 6 Six questions< Does each state& 6  +Have high-level outcomes like Oregon Benchmarks? Advocate that performance measures be in the context of a strategic plan? Link performance measures to high-level outcomes? Link performance measures to budgeting and resource allocation? Stick to GASB definitions and language? Share lessons learned?H ld2 ld2Good news and bad newsLots of state examples on using: Strategic planning as context for performance measures Basic GASB terms But little guidance on linking performance measures to: High-level measures like Oregon Benchmarks Budgeting and resource allocation ! H8 M!H7MBQuestion #1 States with high-level outcomes like Oregon Benchmarks C (8(J1-Yes, 5-No Only Missouri -  Show Me Results are similar to Oregon Benchmarks Other states have explored high-level outcome measures, but have not implemented them.  FQuestion #2 States linking strategic planning to performance measures(G (:(6-Yes, 0-No All six states link performance measures with strategic planning Planning models and guidelines differ significantly across states Missouri uses a model similar to that used by the Progress Board  GQuestion #3 States linking performance measures to high-level measures H (=(G1-Yes, 5-No Only Missouri has statewide, high-level measures to link to H  < <Question #4 States linking performance measures to budgeting = (1(5-Yes, 1-No All but Iowa attempt to connect performance measures and budgeting However, that connection varies across states in definition and consistency   6Question #5 States using GASB definitions and language 7 (,(4-Yes, 2-Partially General acceptance of basic GASB concepts in all states Missouri and Florida use only basic GASB terms Iowa, Texas and Virginia use a broader range of GASB terms  Question #6 Lessons learned  ((Critical distinction: program (lower level) measures societal (higher level) measures like Oregon Benchmarks Executive support is critical at agency level A governor can motivate executive support   accountability moments d Xs 0s#Question #6 Lessons learned, cont.$ (Legislative involvement varies dramatically from state to state. Legislators may: Use performance measures as context for political allocation decisions Change agency performance measures Adjust funding levels depending on performance data6R`KR  ConclusionspLead states: Incorporate performance measurement into larger strategic planning processes. Have not attempted to integrate high level outcomes into their performance measurement systems (exception: Missouri). Are trying different approaches to linking budgets to performance, but no preferred model has emerged. Have leaders who demonstrate commitment to the process.\ %pZ-d$pZ- RecommendationscThe Guidelines should: Support strategic planning as the basis for performance measurement. Distinguish between societal level indicators and program/agency performance measures. Be realistic about how closely performance measurement can be directly linked to budget allocations. Provide opportunities for leaders to demonstrate commitment to the process.D%M$L,  ` f3f3` ff̙` ___` ff` 3ff3f>?" dd@,?lPd@   Z l<@ d`"  n?" dd@   @@``PR    @ ` ` p>> 0  (  ^T y  "yZ  S B7 C DEHFPv @?q 6 6 n(dx  G b q %(@"B y2  ZG1?"  TLngֳgֳ ?"P  T Click to edit Master title style! !  Trgֳgֳ ?"``  X*  T4wgֳgֳ ?"`   Z*  Tzgֳgֳ ?"`   Z*$  0~ "  RClick to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level!     S`  Hd޽h? ? f3f3 SoaringS   @ K(  T t  "tZ  S BsC5 DEHFPv @?3 r4 rv$[I_l3HxF 3 %(@" 2  3 CRENGCJRQ1? `TO`TR`TO`TRR`TRR"t  T`<gֳgֳ ?"/O  T Click to edit Master title style! !  T?gֳgֳ ?"pp   W#Click to edit Master subtitle style$ $  TBgֳgֳ ?"``  X*  TGgֳgֳ ?"`   Z*  TKgֳgֳ ?"`   Z*`  Hd޽h? ? f3f3 0 (    Nl,f,f     n*  B!!BBbb  Ns,f,f    p*  B!!BBbbd  c $ ?D 4  N- $*44*:- $4>>48- $>HH>4- $HRRH0- $R\\R.- $\ff\*- $fppf&- $pzzp#- $zz- $- $- $- $ - $- $- "--&&&&W&--&&/v- $WaaW/w- $akka/x- $kuuk0y- $uu0z- $1{- $1}- $2- $3- $4- $4- $5- $6- $7- $9- $:- $;- $<- $  =- $  ?- $@- $)) B- $)33)!C- $3==3"D- $=GG="F- $GQQG#G- $Q[[Q$H- $[ee[%J- $eooe%L- $oyyo&M- $yy'N- $'P- $(Q- $)R- $)T- $*U- $+V- $+W- $,Y- $,Z- $-[- $-\- $.]- $.^- $/^- $/_- $##0`- $#--#0`- $-77-0a- $7AA71b- $AKKA1b- $KUUK1c- $U__U1c- $_ii_1c- $issi2d- $s}}s2d- $}}2d- $2e- $ $2e- $ $3f- $&&& "- &($UWr0AVm&5(AJIfPSU&tb&-&& &&-&&($UWr0AVm&5(AJIfPSU&&/v- $WaaW/w- $akka/x- $kuuk0y- $uu0z- $1{- $1}- $2- $3- $4- $4- $5- $6- $7- $9- $:- $;- $<- $  =- $  ?- $@- $)) B- $)33)!C- $3==3"D- $=GG="F- $GQQG#G- $Q[[Q$H- $[ee[%J- $eooe%L- $oyyo&M- $yy'N- $'P- $(Q- $)R- $)T- $*U- $+V- $+W- $,Y- $,Z- $-[- $-\- $.]- $.^- $/^- $/_- $##0`- $#--#0`- $-77-0a- $7AA71b- $AKKA1b- $KUUK1c- $U__U1c- $_ii_1c- $issi2d- $s}}s2d- $}}2d- $2e- $ $2e- $ $3f- $&- --&&&X 3f"--:%4Sp/^!Bfy* 4$<<DSJlORTU--&&--}-- - @"Arial- .$2 yThe Best States on (#$+$+$$ $$. f.$2 wThe Best States on (#$+$+$$ $$. .%2 Performance Measures+$$6$$ $5#$ $$ . f.%2 Performance Measures+$$6$$ $5#$ $$ .--x0-- f@Times New Roman- .$2 Presentation to the     .@Times New Roman- f.'2 HPerformance Measures   $ . f.2 ~Advisory Group  .@Times New Roman- .!2 3November 29, 2001 .@Times New Roman- .2 X Rita Conrad   . .'2 uOregon Progress Board     .--"System-&TNPP & ՜.+,D՜.+,p,    On-screen ShowConrad & ConradM Times New RomanArial WingdingsSoaring(The Best States on Performance MeasuresSix Best Practice StatesSix questionsPowerPoint PresentationGood news and bad newsCQuestion #1 States with high-level outcomes like Oregon BenchmarksGQuestion #2 States linking strategic planning to performance measuresHQuestion #3 States linking performance measures to high-level measures=Question #4 States linking performance measures to budgeting7Question #5 States using GASB definitions and languageQuestion #6 Lessons learned$Question #6 Lessons learned, cont. ConclusionsRecommendationsPowerPoint Presentation  Fonts UsedDesign Template Slide Titles 8@ _PID_HLINKSAx http://www.econ.state.or.us/opb#_g Rita ConradRita Conrad  !"#$%&'()*+,-./012356789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQdhijklmnopqrstuvwxyz{|}~Root EntrydO);QvCurrent UserASummaryInformation(4:PowerPoint Document(4DocumentSummaryInformation80Picturesg1 F1cZ-۔+☃dGhsJFIF,,C     C   u" }!1AQa"q2#BR$3br %&'()*456789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz w!1AQaq"2B #3Rbr $4%&'()*56789:CDEFGHIJSTUVWXYZcdefghijstuvwxyz ?Pl$s[Bce {?!@.#m6$Kf#?ZN1a8$<8$g=zd4n]:Fdq}fϡ&xav (T6!r99=MMEUb߾dZtsժ((((((([]K %ޫn qʅIÎ=h-IC,LO 8 s[NJj2{.'FTdw~$ji09"2,ş`;Am~6NSVb+@@ϐ9k?w>-xwwElDn J +c>ghEmB f0$d;aۏ:!esfҺWfveD.+YbrU3ӏ׀b6X!~JC&ǍiOEbo s`txk6?bGKo@L5w ӹ+Rmg$ *ӭMc9@b0:EW5:t6-#&xE aw(Os٩S/Mf_&ߡGto~;?2Kg%hϽgA>S/My@:Gƻ/upMoF+  t9Ժ)Ec{(΃}Ч}_>/MfH? ~+NU _w0ۓikxJG p2{Wag%k/cme5ۆ^lN=AwvZtTW3^~0xRKnHԮʡ|X2Ԛπ>kXmĶxu$h巹ޞ?z23ocOx+֮ѵ/Pg/8pݭv]JQx8yysReQ|>S(խ,=XޞnZޫAgM:ݣV[=>X!^#\ w#_>%CBOȒٻLF!\֟o:ڋ??ٖ$[{W5kOӯ繑u9@?/B"rJ3"7__5c?< {I+v]bcit'˽Q8iagR/v ;} COfYsm؃,?aW>=UkzE|s ko}_:In9`ƅm\/>;Zk7eWd(yDQm įaE]<#K9o~ỲGzW?wƋn_햣СIuWh~n8wp K>*Z/gZɮii:.r "U Y=F%uV6~?73FDw?7^kɰ.[/4kJ77y_ymi "R :d)'9"1}ko,!Or?O6=W<# ki^Wִ{Oih?{qA r27 g?g) Ķ:ķ6w8MV{f $]%?{(_!OFa:0}ק`9~[kB ?p o4=\'|9k\У 7jZ'`1H-N:r9㯋?j/?[x|W,_\XK4o vG$ב6 9|aiuktȱWfHXd(gsv~PxU7ŧՏh׉uMF8ewko5PCHՈX +MyR.;k4 ]SU!P>l%&,%Oqiz|5 ϩxv&rmu9|VD_%>(G;j~,~׋ixkrIdxq, 2Ϳ#eiֽ)$kD4@~:|Cqi,IZl2"r3d1_|w|qJwp eXn.죨?1#4!қñ韼Z&b@vʅ/wWg+-'u\#VӵYbiEUEૹo#V|A ?W_/٪xi7 |ߵA̱H?sQ*_ſ?o'"WS QӨ$g!eAX'/-q`:o3߇o x]jZ&-am.GhPpU~`+ᅣ | 'Bյ{QWjzܳ;1w]*\fJP7@j;?ڏpٗFܣBF.23eA"Ծq_ʹ{eI扲 ~䊼FΝ 'wړ⍍Q4֠9̆?re]4=1ʑx3FvOyeT .!IW݌Qw.bhNϧ9ӑm+ ̿I\cTС E4dԎ?՘Wq_W)?G5"}Uylg*]+_|7sˣ%nX^-I+/kP?pdbgB(G&?iNM|<6K7$/YUU袼މ}|Oԭg [ϗ%o~*A}r_OĚw'VZw]̋,_;U+6N{pߑHSPi,c>M-okvG!|] ¿Ρ2i7zlO"(9uٷƺ<~ռum#Pާ O P`pU?c۱~?r=TЮn>!ic70#oPBG8+o R-6 tZ=馰@/<LAx_߲8wź$Mԣ9;." "qJ~e49V;y8ֺ~FK ^x[m1w ut}JmNgӮt {1;?Zdh߅jw4մBL\[KDۇIubT~Yq_@&+wbN T7a5ʒ>~ȗ-xcnڎߴjVK+D:0Y~dEl/%_]%4-[ᶿޙ .MsngEPzIpQن ƿF+篋??:mt+uMg:{ƃ81Ҝ1k[+u&~l> լֶYD<֧|UWlT/~? OڇxӴ׷ד2"K;,;$ tW.&6clmny$@+~OXks&3:"['#^6^'K)º]5& c #C /:mG ;q (@QZXw-EBdéep _=S{HdPIVX G"FiwoûGt4RiI/ Y׫v_ʜ]ox/ rGhA*-"w Kd_+ōK@?]j@"F@A=x0 ]d G   HmI0j%n&/ e[k;_O o⇂u kOj֯kr2 ÆC=>?jO 4 ?PKmZwAY:43,R3e\)Go۪?4oFZMPIv܎8ce\Ж|? |B׍?ehz厧%u*AAF~+Xמ+/"++ګW^,H+KBoh̗)xU7( ֏/ɯh^ Mq7R$PI/#ܓ t*PUuKA' "sZϏmƏ:ҿe4u k[TfRPs}YGzF7߉!䭸bFy‚{xW5Ess3s4|Fk[<7%*Jz}#O|Nx躽ŭiM/\+id68`FTe|G}2O>tK;Ysά d}Nv=k+Mҫ(oxc l5ﷹM!GEaNIm3K̠s`] IQG -Gy/5 Nsu6d* ,1qId++¦&"nzW7ě[n4"X- 0 @ _v"?e az|_xzfL3I ȷ&s1co+^bmg9hl>xּf%9yunۜd8vn+xľV ð\w ~Β|<#TkGPP'}|kOQ!|r=;-btVתO`c^X6W7:C%Z5fVH>ŜyQ^9]_|N~1C~ɫƢ;!y*9lhR4fPqFoac)JJ},t*+13׊4zL-}[ ̄ș>[1wu| 7l&k^ 4F%oKˣA03Tk)pbF}CJmjSǩF*Tl;?S>kUBoFfBA>cn a\O%o]GXç6v#%s4kY}?:u5ȷ@PW_o|],bյazC#jj B0]rxg7oKM 꺅sC3i^b[uH_,vy<4i>i{+qsYThS̚7Fw`[1Jk7-״-rOcB8P\lBUO|0AO g<X6ϫC3"6Qd1֟Oj/cYƁNIonw*K,hXD\-䁌e3UXKgFai4ɠC=ۤ*8*heZIs{O`"k;=FO,G%Ȏd|o :/>5M ~b{iDcpyD eW7BrU/ke':/5mNNAGVzM-Cbuׯ|S#Ҧ0j? 9XT+i Rp2 ~a:x/ɠ5T͌'@̊F̭2q__;ox[? K I%Ѓ\*ׅ4z&Q_(xlx/_TiH2Bb7IFp(9zWG&i"WWJ]jDab~V|gě4O#W:s1wXP%Q d 21_Oߊ tioklLmPYβ9!NJ>t?e7E,wL+shNfTER?{ZEQZ<jH,鶌6X@-9O߲wٿit;]m.MBKYVhB݀sW˿5x?"PҴ{ S{D apCF'QxY+ͱܭ |۲?a:LLaVeNVvxfF5\mw Vtb|0&sWFOt9ҾmOس'v'~q%o?Ky松r 8r\k'VveеHnt%ڠ $wr3_C>=M xWv|r:sҭhIq׍Ojk_˰)8~;]'t#M7k,3BHB)MHcU?|!wi?iR3Nҳ]0yXj/!rGZwGZ]Tqhkw+wcER+M/-b'_co9z~_vWdz4=1]\7frAv9r ^Ž( ^’+8ђeV^R|C?kKa]+^d@|-mL&Ƈcо~0ƥum6M}F{kI9!1Π3f +3G-xs ;@G-xs K@>\Ww>y,d_#i2ޡ3Ico鿹BCI(c O?kßR\b|^MM3++OxGĚgurfNfGwBPq7l7Z*7wY;hP+;}W59% WEϩ˧j7;k;G9SiՕ S| H[q^y$I,OrIPXǏom-ٿJ(H+IOP?u|?ƶ.g,8(?"36b?Үk|s( WN϶I1x'(b?ZU(((((((((D0www.econ.state.or.us/opb/ 0DTimes New Roman6bb0bWo 0 DArialNew Roman6bb0bWo 0 " DWingdingsRoman6bb0bWo 0  ` .  @n?" dd@  @@``_@,whoosh.wav.WAV 10103RIFFWAVEfmt ++data~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|||~~~~~zvtvxz|~zvrnlrv||vtrpptz~|xvtv|~~zxvvvz|~xrlhntzzvrrpprrx~|j[QU_|bICCYn[ICY~zlnh]_r|]SUSSjz|x__l~v_]drnUb|nfd_]d]5=rrnj]jz~lMldrx[[_f|YQfWK_xh[zx[CIjzxxdSQz|_fI9WӹM;QnvK;OUx~xj]]YS~ɵlM?plM;CGpٵ[)Kh|% %;xtKQS]ɖbGr|lSnvz~nfS[nëx;Az=+AYݻ|=/1r_ ?|潄W5/Czãf)/pvbMQr|O=OtjdhjlG?G_ɊK3לdQCMppW;1SŷAMz/#?bx͖SAM[hvhYp~~zrvt[]ptWOUtxxd]v~vvxzd_xzh_nrSQltbdp~_lrQ_l][tf]W]~hWfp|fWhnhbU[hzlSCWbYbnxpdhjvjM9Ot]GQ[dpp~hhhdpx~xh]Yntnrp]dlvjQMb|vdjpzxzztljr||_[r~~jb_j|z|xpp~~v]Wh||zx|x|zzndhpxr]Yfntzjl|z||~vppnrzphrxz|~|xtrjjtv~~vz|z||xrrv~xrprtz|||vzxvx|xtx~~~~~~~zxxxx|zxz~~~rrz~|xz~~|vtx|zxz|~~~||zx|||~~zz|zz~~~~|~~||~~||zz|~||z~~~~zxzz|~~~~|~~~|~||~~~~~~~~~~~~~|||~~~~~~~~~~~~~||~~||~||~~~~|||~~~~||||~~~~~~||||~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~|zz~~~~~~~||||~~||~~~~~|||~~~~~|||~|~|~~~~|z|~~~~~~~|||~~~~~~~~||~~~~~~~~T @8H H\  DH #& pn    $,R$cZ-۔+☃dGhs1c 1? 3f@8+ uʚ;2Nʚ;g4LdLd0b$ppp@ <4!d!d 0b7b<4dddd 0b7b<4BdBd 0b7b___PPT9zn$? ,O ='The Best States on Performance Measures((0kPresentation to the Performance Measures Advisory Group November 29, 2001 Rita Conrad Oregon Progress Board8l$" Six Best Practice States5Iowa Texas Virginia Washington Missouri Florida (B+)6 6 Six questions< Does each state& 6  +Have high-level outcomes like Oregon Benchmarks? Advocate that performance measures be in the context of a strategic plan? Link performance measures to high-level outcomes? Link performance measures to budgeting and resource allocation? Stick to GASB definitions and language? Share lessons learned?H ld2 ld2Good news and bad newsLots of state examples on using: Strategic planning as context for performance measures Basic GASB terms But little guidance on linking performance measures to: High-level measures like Oregon Benchmarks Budgeting and resource allocation ! H8 M!H7MBQuestion #1 States with high-level outcomes like Oregon Benchmarks C (8(J1-Yes, 5-No Only Missouri -  Show Me Results are similar to Oregon Benchmarks Other states have explored high-level outcome measures, but have not implemented them.  FQuestion #2 States linking strategic planning to performance measures(G (:(6-Yes, 0-No All six states link performance measures with strategic planning Planning models and guidelines differ significantly across states Missouri uses a model similar to that used by the Progress Board  GQuestion #3 States linking performance measures to high-level measures H (=(G1-Yes, 5-No Only Missouri has statewide, high-level measures to link to H  < <Question #4 States linking performance measures to budgeting = (1(5-Yes, 1-No All but Iowa attempt to connect performance measures and budgeting However, that connection varies across states in definition and consistency   6Question #5 States using GASB definitions and language 7 (,(4-Yes, 2-Partially General acceptance of basic GASB concepts in all states Missouri and Florida use only basic GASB terms Iowa, Texas and Virginia use a broader range of GASB terms  Question #6 Lessons learned  ((Critical distinction: program (lower level) measures societal (higher level) measures like Oregon Benchmarks Executive support is critical at agency level A governor can motivate executive support   accountability moments d Xs 0s#Question #6 Lessons learned, cont.$ (Legislative involvement varies dramatically from state to state. Legislators may: Use performance measures as context for political allocation decisions Change agency performance measures Adjust funding levels depending on performance data6R`KR  ConclusionspLead states: Incorporate performance measurement into larger strategic planning processes. Have not attempted to integrate high level outcomes into their performance measurement systems (exception: Missouri). Are trying different approaches to linking budgets to performance, but no preferred model has emerged. Have leaders who demonstrate commitment to the process.\ %pZ-d$pZ- RecommendationscThe Guidelines should: Support strategic planning as the basis for performance measurement. Distinguish between societal level indicators and program/agency performance measures. Be realistic about how closely performance measurement can be directly linked to budget allocations. Provide opportunities for leaders to demonstrate commitment to the process.D%M$L! 0d0(  dx d c $8S/O  x d c $S  `  H d 0޽h ? f̙33 og0(    S A(\\OEDDWEB\SYS\Novonyx\suitespot\docs\intranet\opbwebsiteMirror\Shows\logomini.jpgProgress Board Logo    f&1?  OREGON PROGRESS BOARD 775 Summer Street, Suite 330 Salem, Oregon 97301-1283 (503) 986-0039 www.econ.state.or.us/opb Jeffrey L. Tryens Executive Director  (2 0[sZ  Bd޽h ? f3f3rg!g! ՜.+,D՜.+,p,    On-screen ShowConrad & ConradM Times New RomanArial WingdingsSoaring(The Best States on Performance MeasuresSix Best Practice StatesSix questionsPowerPoint PresentationGood news and bad newsCQuestion #1 States with high-level outcomes like Oregon BenchmarksGQuestion #2 States linking strategic planning to performance measuresHQuestion #3 States linking performance measures to high-level measures=Question #4 States linking performance measures to budgeting7Question #5 States using GASB definitions and languageQuestion #6 Lessons learned$Question #6 Lessons learned, cont. ConclusionsRecommendationsPowerPoint Presentation  Fonts UsedDesign Template Slide Titles 8@ _PID_HLINKSAx http://www.econ.state.or.us/opb#_ Rita ConradRita Conrad