Performance measure certification in Maricopa County.

• Author: Tate, Ross L.

A key component of Maricopa County's managing for results initiative, performance measure certification is inspiring confidence in the reliability of reported performance information.

Editor's note: Each year, GFOA bestows its prestigious Awards for Excellence to recognize outstanding contributions to the practice of government finance. This article describes the 2002 winning entry in the Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting category.

Citizens have come to expect current, reliable information on the performance of their governments. At the same time, public managers have come to recognize the value of knowing the extent to which their organizations are achieving desired results. In response to these demands, more and more governments are experimenting with performance measurement reporting. Shrinking revenues and strained budgets have only heightened interest in performance measurement. What is often overlooked in the push to implement performance measurement, however, is a practical method for ensuring the reliability of performance information. Once a performance measurement system is in place, it is not unusual to detect undercurrents of uncertainty about the accuracy, or even the truthfulness, of reported performance measures.

Although governments are now coming to understand the importance of certifying the accuracy of performance data, few have actually developed programs for doing so. About two years ago, Maricopa County, Arizona, developed a performance measure certification program modeled after the state of Texas' pioneering efforts. Since that time, the county has made significant progress in enhancing the effectiveness of its performance measurement system through data certification. In this article, we describe Maricopa County's approach to performance measure certification in an effort to provide helpful guidance to governments developing their own certification programs.

Managing for Results

In fiscal 2001, the Board of Supervisors adopted a managing for results policy requiring all county departments and agencies to develop strategic plans and performance measures. In Internal Audit, our first reaction to the new policy was to squirm. We understood the value of performance measurement as a tool for evaluating the extent to which programs, services, and activities are aligned with the county's mission and goals. But we also knew that performance information would be worthless unless decision makers could trust the accuracy of the numbers. The Board and county management also recognized this fact, and they responded by directing Internal Audit to certify reported performance measures. After contemplating the weight of this new responsibility, the anticipation of a new challenge began to take life in our department. Changes began immediately. Implementation ideas and suggestions flowed freely from our staff, and county management gave us an additional employee to support our new workload.

The performance measure certification program was created to enhance the credibility of the county's fledgling performance measurement system. Performance measurement focuses individual employees and the entire organizational culture on achieving results for internal customers and citizens. The county revamped its strategic planning, budgeting, and accounting systems to accommodate this new way of doing business. Our view of auditing also was transformed as we began to focus more sharply on results. The county was able to tackle this formidable task thanks to a profound financial turnaround documented in a November 2001 cover story in Governing magazine.

Exhibit 1 illustrates the interrelationships among the five components of Maricopa County's managing for results system: (1) planning for results, (5) budgeting for results, (3) reporting results, (4) evaluating results, and (5) decision making. Departments quantify inputs, outputs, efficiency, and progress toward their outcome goals in specific terms (i.e., What is the true benefit to the public?). Internal Audit's role is part of the "evaluating results"...