baby steps: building a performance mentality in city government

Baby Steps: Baby Steps: Building aBuilding a Performance Mentality in Performance Mentality in

City GovernmentCity Government

Or:Or:One city’s reflections on One city’s reflections on

our trail to improved our trail to improved performanceperformance

September 13, 2005

Tom Nosack, Performance Analyst Tom Nosack, Performance Analyst City of Vancouver, WACity of Vancouver, WA

22

Vancouver’s Performance HistoryVancouver’s Performance History

1996: Council identifies need for a 1996: Council identifies need for a performance analyst (PA) and a performance analyst (PA) and a performance management focusperformance management focus

• 1997: First PA lasts 3 months1997: First PA lasts 3 months

• 97-98: Second PA lasts 8 months97-98: Second PA lasts 8 months

• 99-00: Third PA lasts 17 months99-00: Third PA lasts 17 months

• 01-present: So far so good….01-present: So far so good….


33

Maybe obvious yet helpful stuff…Maybe obvious yet helpful stuff… Know who is it Know who is it forfor – and adjust – and adjust Get Get sponsorshipsponsorship & visibility & visibility ““Do it Do it forfor me” vs “Do it me” vs “Do it withwith me” me” Have a Have a planplan and report progress and report progress Choose a Choose a levellevel and focus your efforts and focus your efforts Decide early who will Decide early who will ownown the the

measuresmeasures Define Define successsuccess in small bites in small bites


44

as of: August 23, 2005

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009+

Manager development

eAppraisal for Managers (Phase 1) Competencies only + goal training

eAppraisal full year competencies + goals and modify based on feedback

eAppraisal second full year program with modifications

eAppraisal full program evaluate 360 degree feedback module

eAppraisal program continuation

Non-manager development

eAppraisal for non-represented employees (NRE) initial form testing

eAppraisal NRE small group testing

eAppraisal NRE initial group with competencies

eAppraisal NRE full year competencies + goals and modify based on feedback

eAppraisal NRE full year program with modifications; available for represented

HR Implementation

Initial manager training for performance goals

Advanced manager training for performance goals

Initial "M" series pay for performance + non-manager goal training

Full "M" series pay for Performance + non-manager goal training

Review possible pay for performance program expansion

Departmental Business Plans

2 Newly completed business plans in 2005 (Airport plus Trans or Public Works)

1 Newly completed business plan in 2006 (Transportation)

1 Newly completed business plan (Public Works)

1 Newly completed business plan (TBA)

1 Newly completed business plan (TBA)

Sustained Business Planning

Police (begin) Police complete; Fire & Parks begin plus one enterprise

Fire & Parks complete plus two enterprise funds

2 more enterprise funds update business plans

Transportation update

Performance Snapshots

1st year goals all departments; 2004 data for at least 25% of goals

2nd year goals; 2005 data for over 75% of all goals; Add all enterprise fund snapshots

Next level outcomes for all snapshots; full 2006 data; data for enterprise fund snapshots

2nd year next level outcomes for all snapshots;full 2007 data

City Goals & Outcome Measures

Develop 2-3 annual City goals to focus efforts

Focused City goals & draft Integrated City Snapshot of draft City Outcomes

City Snapshot & goals complete

City Snapshot & goals full year data

Work on representative performance measures derived from the City's strategic initiatives

Continue work on performance measures derived from the City's strategic initiatives

City Level Outcomes adopted consistent with strategic plan

City Level Performance Measures adopted

City Level Performance Measures reported

Begin efforts to update City's Strategic Plan

Strategic Plan update Strategic Plan update Strategic Plan complete

External Benchmarking

ICMA benchmarking fifth year(national)

Reduced ICMA benchmarking (national)

Further focused ICMA benchmarking (national)

Focused ICMA benchmarking (national)

Focused ICMA benchmarking (national)

Puget Sound ICMA Consortium (regional)

Initial measures to track regionally

Reevaluation of regional measurement program

Continued use of regional measures

Continued use of regional measures

Financial Integration

Improve existing budget software (Forecasting & performance measures); GFOA Award applications

Initial training and first annual cycle new budget software

Budget/PM integration - level 1 with new biannual budget process

Budget/PM integration - level 2

Performance Auditing

Internal Auditor (IA) and Performance Analyst (PM) operate separately but coordinate activities

PA does internal process audits w/orgs;IA does them externally and owns auditing process

IA does some audits in conjunction with business planning work and verifies some snapshot measures

IA and PA verify effectiveness, efficiency and economy plus achievement of goals

City Level Performance

City of Vancouver: Development Plan for a High Performance Organization

Individual Performance

Department Level Performance


55

Choosing the Level Choosing the Level

Individual PerformanceIndividual Performance

Department and OrganizationalDepartment and Organizational

CityCity

Vision/result format follows…Vision/result format follows…


66

Individual PerformanceIndividual Performance Vision: Our employee performance Vision: Our employee performance

management system is effectivemanagement system is effective• Joint goal setting processJoint goal setting process• Defined success for goalsDefined success for goals• Subjective & objective measuresSubjective & objective measures• Inexpensive automated system with workflowInexpensive automated system with workflow• Provide for future performance pay systemProvide for future performance pay system• Phased acceptancePhased acceptance

ManagersManagers Non-represented non-managersNon-represented non-managers OthersOthers


77

Individual PerformanceIndividual Performance Current Result: On trackCurrent Result: On track

• First year: values & competencies onlyFirst year: values & competencies only• Second year: goal based results addedSecond year: goal based results added• Requires training on setting goals Requires training on setting goals • Integrate feedback from usersIntegrate feedback from users• Begin non-manager test groupBegin non-manager test group


88

Department PerformanceDepartment Performance Vision: All departments begin using Vision: All departments begin using

some performance measures by 2006some performance measures by 2006• Introduced in 2002 for Fire, Police & Parks & Introduced in 2002 for Fire, Police & Parks &

RecreationRecreation• Short version (“Snapshot”) of what is important Short version (“Snapshot”) of what is important

to the department: past performance, current to the department: past performance, current issues, future plansissues, future plans

• Standard layout for enhanced communication Standard layout for enhanced communication with the publicwith the public


99

Department PerformanceDepartment Performance Current Result: On trackCurrent Result: On track

• In place for Fire, Police and Parks & RecreationIn place for Fire, Police and Parks & Recreation• Other departments submitted first draft Other departments submitted first draft

measures for 2005measures for 2005• Data sources and collection tools being Data sources and collection tools being

establishedestablished• Some outcomes and goals will change from Some outcomes and goals will change from

first effortsfirst efforts• Expect 80% to 95% completion for 2006Expect 80% to 95% completion for 2006• Published in Budget Book & on webPublished in Budget Book & on web

http://www.ci.vancouver.wa.us/budget.asp?menuID=10462&submenuID=10476&itemid=15745http://www.ci.vancouver.wa.us/budget.asp?menuID=10462&submenuID=10476&itemid=15745Click on “Performance Measures”Click on “Performance Measures”


1010

2004 Fire Department Performance Snapshot Chief: Don Bivins

1. Synopsis of 2004 Performance Four years after completion of the business planning process, VFD has updated the data, assumptions and progress to reflect our current reality. In 2005, we expect to: Finalize the update to the Business Plan to reflect changes in the department as well as our

successes, progress, and areas that have not improved as needed Substantially complete our Standards of Coverage, or department risk assessment of the community Re-examine existing performance measures for continued relevance to ensure that those areas

which should be measured, are being measured.

2. Key Performance Measures

Outcomes & Performance Measures Standard or Goal

2003 Actual

2004 Actual

2005 Goal

Current Year Notes & Remarks

Quickly respond to the community

Urban\City response (79% of call volume) arrive within 5 minutes: 90% 62% 65% Missed goal but 3% faster than

2003

Suburban response (5.6% of call volume) arrive within 6 minutes: 90% 54% 51% Missed goal and 3% slower than

2003

Rural response (1.3% of call volume) arrive within 8 minutes 90% 61% 61% Missed goal – no change from 2003

Alarms – False alarms as percent of total fire/EMS calls

Under 10% NA 5.1%

Met goal - 1,003 actual false alarms recorded during 2004; 19,616 total calls

*Includes Vancouver Fire Dept & Fire District 5 **Does not include Commercial responses, 14.1%

Prevent fires

Determine cause of fires 80% 70% 91% Met goal 21% increase

Conduct safety presentations 200+ 233 245 Met goal

Effective fire inspection program 6000 3471 4346 25% more inspections; missed goal

Improve Training

Multi-company drills, excluding FOTEP 2 per shift 0 0 Missed goal; third year -- reevaluating

Improve FOTEP training completion for all of the force (attend 1 per quarter)

100% trained 48% 97%

4qtr 2004 Missed goal -- Restructured program delivery; 97% attendance last quarter

Fiscally Responsible Organization Overtime as a percent of basic salary 5% 6.5% 4.8% Met goal (includes military) Reduce overtime – dollars of overtime Reduced $779,685 $643,211 $136,474 reduction from 2003

Provide Quality Emergency Care Percent of residential fires confined to room of origin

NA NA New for 2005; other measures being considered

Cardiac survival rate NA NA New for 2005; other measured being considered

3. Cost to provide services (estimate, 2004 data based on actual response, not dispatch activity) Average cost per Fire/EMS response*: $1,061.87 * Total expenditures / total calls Average cost for hazardous material response team**: $ 981.42 ** Three team members, one unit, 3 hours on scene

4. Major issues to address 2005-2007 1. Slow response times. VFD does not meet response standards for fire or EMS calls. Incremental improvements in response times in the central area are attributed to the introduction of the first flexible rescue vehicle. The second vehicle and crew, planned during 2004, has been delayed until 2006. Additional vehicles and staff are still projected to be needed to meet the response time standards throughout the service area. Construction work has begun on the Fire District 5 Fire Station (Station 87), with a creative staffing scheme of career Captains (paid for by Fire District #5) supervising volunteer firefighters serving the north end of our service area. 2. Insufficient technical and safety training. Call volume is continuing to create logistical difficulties in meeting team training and individual training. The addition of a ½ time Cadet Coordinator (paid for by school district funds) provides some relief to the Training Division. This eliminates a .5 FTE from the business plan recommendations. Add safety and training staff = 4 FTE and equipment

3. Limited planning & analysis capability. VFD does not have the staff needed to adequately conduct the emergency planning or data analysis needed to operate in an effective manner. The addition of an Emergency Management Coordinator provides some relief in planning, but the demands of the position make this relief difficult to quantify. Add planning & analysis staff 2 FTE and equipment (subject to further evaluation and possible adjustment downward) 4. East County growth. Rapid eastside growth signals the need for implementing the development phase for the construction and staffing of Station 810 at Pacific Park. What was proposed in 2001? Approximately $5.3m/year additional funding for three years was requested to bring VFD to a staffing and equipment level needed to meet performance goals before 2005. What has been done through 2004? By mid-year the one funded and staffed rescue vehicle was operational. Data collection about its effectiveness has indicated a 39 second improvement in response times for the areas served, and smaller but measurable improvements in adjacent response areas. Agreements between FD5 and VFD have helped accelerate construction and innovative staffing (Full time Fire Captains, volunteer force) for the new station in that area. It is expected to reach initial operational status sometime in 2006. What is planned for 2005? Two additional rescue vehicles and staff were requested for the 2005-2006 budget cycle. One unit has been funded for 2006. Standards of Coverage analysis will begin to determine even more specific performance standards and goals for the department based on scientific analysis of our entire range of risks and required responses. Overtime controls will be refined and ways to improve training attendance will be explored. The business plan has undergone a major review, to be published by mid-2005. Development should begin for Station 810.


1111

Department PerformanceDepartment Performance Vision: All departments complete Vision: All departments complete

business planning process by 2008business planning process by 2008• Introduced in 2000 Introduced in 2000 • Department head is CEODepartment head is CEO• How their business works, what they are How their business works, what they are

doing, and what they should be doing doing, and what they should be doing • Uses a five year planning horizonUses a five year planning horizon• Cost of doing business and projection for Cost of doing business and projection for

two yearstwo years• Long process that involves multiple layers Long process that involves multiple layers

of the organizationof the organization


1212

Department PerformanceDepartment Performance Current Result: Slow progressCurrent Result: Slow progress

• Fire, Police, Parks & Recreation completed Fire, Police, Parks & Recreation completed by 2002by 2002

• Multiple enterprise funds completed in Multiple enterprise funds completed in 2003-20042003-2004

• Transportation to be completed in 2005Transportation to be completed in 2005• Public Works projected completion in 2006Public Works projected completion in 2006


1313

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Vision: We will develop City level Vision: We will develop City level

outcomes and goals, then report them outcomes and goals, then report them to the public regularlyto the public regularly• 2-3 City level goals to be published annually2-3 City level goals to be published annually

Define success for the goalsDefine success for the goalsUse to develop departmental goalsUse to develop departmental goalsRoll into department head performance Roll into department head performance

appraisalappraisal

• City level performance “Snapshot”City level performance “Snapshot”• Strategic Plan updatedStrategic Plan updated


1414

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Current Result: Decision expected Current Result: Decision expected

this fall, stay tuned….this fall, stay tuned….

• Goals: Goals: To be based on City Manager To be based on City Manager discussion with Councildiscussion with Council

• Snapshots: Snapshots: Owners may discuss with council, Owners may discuss with council, a few each montha few each month

• Strategic Plan update: Strategic Plan update: Due to begin in 2006Due to begin in 2006


1515

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Vision: We will benchmark our Vision: We will benchmark our

performance externallyperformance externally

• National measures (ICMA)National measures (ICMA)Participate fully to develop expertiseParticipate fully to develop expertiseAgree to pull back from measures that are not Agree to pull back from measures that are not

helpful after 3 yearshelpful after 3 yearsReport results to CouncilReport results to Council

• Regional measuresRegional measuresUse other “comparable” citiesUse other “comparable” cities


1616

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Current Result: Good ProgressCurrent Result: Good Progress

• National ComparisonsNational ComparisonsFive years of ICMA national participationFive years of ICMA national participationCouncil wants to see comparisonsCouncil wants to see comparisonsUse to draw “part of the picture”Use to draw “part of the picture”

• Regional ComparisonsRegional Comparisons Informally with other citiesInformally with other citiesRegional ICMA consortiums in planningRegional ICMA consortiums in planning


1717

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Vision: We will report on the city’s Vision: We will report on the city’s

performance regularly to the publicperformance regularly to the public

• Community survey resultsCommunity survey resultsBiannual SurveyBiannual Survey

• Business Planning Business Planning New PlansNew PlansUpdates to existingUpdates to existing

• Departmental Performance ReportingDepartmental Performance Reporting SnapshotsSnapshots


1818

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Current Result: Mixed ProgressCurrent Result: Mixed Progress

• Community Survey Community Survey conducted and conducted and communicated biannually (Success)communicated biannually (Success)

• Business Planning updates Business Planning updates communicated communicated as they occur (Moderate Success)as they occur (Moderate Success)

• Department Performance Snapshots Department Performance Snapshots in in draft, not communicated yet (Pending)draft, not communicated yet (Pending)


1919

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Vision: We will integrate performance Vision: We will integrate performance

measures with the budgetmeasures with the budget

• After council acceptance After council acceptance of business of business plan, departments are expected to follow plan, departments are expected to follow what they say are prioritieswhat they say are priorities

• Streamlined approval Streamlined approval for items identified for items identified in the business planin the business plan

• Establishes credibility Establishes credibility if the projected if the projected performance is achievedperformance is achieved


2020

City Level PerformanceCity Level Performance Current Result: Mixed ProgressCurrent Result: Mixed Progress

• Community Survey Community Survey conducted and conducted and communicated biannually (Success!)communicated biannually (Success!)

• Business Plan updates Business Plan updates communicated as communicated as they occur (Moderate Success)they occur (Moderate Success)

• Department Performance Snapshots Department Performance Snapshots in in draft, not communicated yet (Pending)draft, not communicated yet (Pending)


2121

What we have done What we have done WrongWrong

Diverting limited key resourcesDiverting limited key resources Allowing process bypassAllowing process bypass Weak update processWeak update process


2222

What we have done What we have done RightRight

Council involvementCouncil involvement Small piecesSmall pieces Gradual programsGradual programs Reward successReward success


2323

SummarySummary

Not there yet but making progressNot there yet but making progress

• Individual performance: 2-3 yearsIndividual performance: 2-3 years

• Department level: 2 years Department level: 2 years

• City level: 2-4 yearsCity level: 2-4 years


2424

Questions?Questions?

Tom NosackPerformance AnalystCity of Vancouver, WAPh. [email protected]


2525

Other ChallengesOther Challenges

SEA (Service Efforts and Accomplishments)SEA (Service Efforts and Accomplishments)• Decision not to support - yetDecision not to support - yet• Want management of measures at organization Want management of measures at organization

levellevel• Want meaningful measures to usersWant meaningful measures to users• Not ready with city level outcomes Not ready with city level outcomes

Performance AuditingPerformance Auditing• Performance analysis + internal auditPerformance analysis + internal audit• Focus on who does the audit for what reasonFocus on who does the audit for what reason• Together meet intent of Washington legislationTogether meet intent of Washington legislation


2626

Performance AuditingPerformance Auditing Planning to “tell our story” to communityPlanning to “tell our story” to community

Performance Management + Internal Audit Performance Management + Internal Audit = effective program= effective program

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------National Association of Local Government National Association of Local Government

Auditors publication:Auditors publication:“So You Think You Might Be Interested In Hiring a

Performance Auditor? A Few Things to Consider” (undated)(undated)

www.nalg.orgwww.nalg.org


2727

Supplemental SlidesSupplemental Slides

Tom NosackPerformance AnalystCity of Vancouver, WAPh. [email protected]


2828

Performance EvaluationsPerformance EvaluationsCore Values/Competency Evaluation

Instructions: Use the following rating scale for evaluation of core values and competencies

5 = Outstanding 4 = Exceeds 3 = Meets Expectations 2 = Developing 1 = Needs Improvement

a. Stewardship & Fiscal Responsibility Rating: 3 Provides a balanced focus on both current and future needs of our community and organization by both responding responsibly to today’s needs but also by planning imaginatively and proactively pursuing opportunities for tomorrow’s needs through early action and intervention. Supports City’s Strategic Commitments. Manages tax dollars wisely. Exercises fiscal accountability in every action, from major expenditures to small transactions. Ensures that financial resources are managed in accordance with legal requirements and sound financial practices. Actively pursues more cost-effective ways to provide services including partnerships, opportunities to leverage other available funds, streamlining, and other innovative approaches to balance resources with community priorities. Comments:

Part 2


2929

Performance EvaluationsPerformance EvaluationsEvaluation of Goal Achievement

Instructions: Use the following rating scale for scoring each goal. Additional goal pages may be added if needed.

5 Exceeded Expectations in Achievement of this Goal 4 Fully Met Expectations in Achievement of this Goal 3 Goal Substantially Met 2 Some Progress Made in Achievement of Goal 1 No Progress Made in Achievement of Goal

Goal Statement 1: Rating: 3

Indicators of Success Results Achieved: Comments:


3030

Core Values and Competencies: Place the rating of each individual value/competency next to the appropriate category. Add the ratings and divide the total by the number of applicable categories. Multiply the overall score by 40% for Core Values/Competencies Overall Rating.

Core Values and Competencies Rating Stewardship & Fiscal Responsibility Integrity Respect Responsibility Cooperation Leadership Customer Service & Reputation Communications Technical Skills/Knowledge/Expert Competence Diversity Total of Core Values/Competency Rating Scores Divide total by 10

Weight

Core Values/Competencies Overall Rating ____ X .40 =

Goal Statements: Place the average rating of each goal category and multiply it by the weighting assigned. (Weightings must add up to 100%.) Total the Goal Category Scores and multiply total by 60% for Goals Overall Rating.

Goal Number/Description Rating Weighting Goal Category Scores Goal 1: X 50% = Goal 2: X 15% = Goal 3: X 15% = Goal 4: X 25% = Goal 5: X 5% = Total of Goal Category Scores

100% total Weight

Goals Overall Rating ____ X .60 =

Overall Performance Rating (Core Values / Competencies Overall+ Goals Overall) Please note; an “outstanding” rating requires pre-approval from City Manager or designee 4.5 to 5.0 = Outstanding 3.5 to 4.4 = Exceeds Expectations 2.5 to 3.4 = Meets Expectations 1.6 to 2.4 = Developing 1.0 to 1.5 = Needs Improvement


3131

Why Business Plans?Why Business Plans? Business plans reflect the department Business plans reflect the department

head’s vision, their analysis of the head’s vision, their analysis of the business, and recommended actions business, and recommended actions based on projected resources and needs:based on projected resources and needs:

• Significant changes in operationsSignificant changes in operations• What change we buy with more resourcesWhat change we buy with more resources• Major equipment replacementMajor equipment replacement• Capital programsCapital programs

Business plan = Service delivery plan with financial Business plan = Service delivery plan with financial analysisanalysis