Reforming Budget ritual and Budget practice: The Case of Performance Management Implementation in Virginia

Abstract

Virginia is accepted as one of the leading examples of performance-based reform among US states. This article reports on some of the key factors that have helped to ensure that these reforms have established performance as a basis for both budget ritual and budget practice. Virginia's strong record of implementation is explained as the result of a consistent legislative basis for reform, effective reform leadership by a core agency, the integration of results-oriented activities into all facets of the financial management process, a focus on high levels of citizen engagement, and an emphasis on ensuring that performance management systems are tailored to be useful.

The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or perspectives of the Virginia Department of Planning and Budget or the World Bank.

Notes

The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or perspectives of the Virginia Department of Planning and Budget or the World Bank.

1. For the purposes of this article, performance management systems are defined as organizational structures and processes that systematically use some combination of strategic planning, performance measurement, program evaluation, and performance budgeting processes. Performance information, therefore, is any information that a performance management system generates.

5. Central agencies that regularly conduct performance evaluations and audits include the Department of Planning and Budget, the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, Department of the State Internal Auditor, Auditor of Public Accounts, Department of Accounts, and the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia.

6. General Accounting Office. Creating Value Through World-class Financial Management. Executive Guide 00-134, April 2000, 11.

9. See, for example, Andrews, M.; Hill, H. The Impact of Traditional Budgeting Systems on the Effectiveness of Performance-Based Budgeting: A Different Viewpoint on Recent Findings. International Journal of Public Administration, 2003, 26(2).

10. Documents are available at http://www.dpb.state.va.us.

See http://www.dpb.state.va.us/VAResults/VRHome.html

13. Sostek, A. Supra note 12.

14. Some of these tensions are discussed in the GPP report on Virginia in 2001. It is interesting to note that the report does not talk at all about reform derailment because of these tensions. See Governing. The Government Performance Project Report Card for Virginia. 2001. Available at: http://www.governing.com/gpp/2001/gp1va.htm

15. National Partnership for Reinventing Government. Balancing Measures: Best Practices in Performance Management. August 1999. Available at: http://www.orau.gov/pbm/links/npr1.html

16. National Partnership for Reinventing Government, Supra note 15.

17. Virginia Results, Supra note 11.

18. General Accounting Office, Supra note 6; 1.

19. Taylor, Ellen. Seven Years of GPRA: Has the Results Act Provided Results? OMB Watch, July 20, 2000. Available at http://www.ombwatch.org/article/ articleview/851/1190.