After the Policy is Written: Citizen Involvement in Municipal Performance Measurement

1. After the Policy is Written:Citizen Involvement in Municipal Performance Measurement By Alicia Schatteman alicias@pegasus.rutgers.edu Doctoral Student School of Public Affairs and Administration Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey Newark, NJ Paper presented at the Annual ASPPA Conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, September 17, 2006

2. Research Question How can citizen involvement strengthen the impact of performance measurement on both civic participation and local governance?

3. History of Performance Measurement in Ontario • Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing [MMAH] created the Municipal Services Performance Measures Project in 1996 • MMAH implemented the Ontario Municipal Performance Measures Program in 2000, the first of its kind in Canada. • The goals were to improve delivery of municipal services, strengthen accountability to citizens and enhance the capacity of municipalities to improve and benchmark performance. • Although this program is not tied specifically to provincial funding or transfer payments, the province encourages municipalities to use their results in their annual business plans and budget reviews for setting new targets and measuring achievements. • The municipalities began reporting in 2001.

4. Ontario’s Performance Measurement System 3 Parts

5. Each municipality must collect data on 40 different measures in 10 service areas. Municipalities submit their results to the Province by June each year for review and analysis. By September, they must report to citizens. In terms of which method or methods they use, municipalities are encouraged to report to taxpayers in a simple and accessible manner. Although this program is not tied specifically to provincial funding or transfer payments, the province encourages municipalities to use their results in their annual business plans and budget reviews for setting new targets and measuring achievements The municipalities began reporting in 2001. Program is to help municipalities increase efficiency and effectiveness, for use in budgeting and by management. Part 1: Municipal Performance Measures Program

6. Part 2: Ontario Municipal CAO Benchmarking Initiative • A collaboration between the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and regional chief administrative officers and 15 municipalities. • Because the province’s performance measurement program does not take into account variables among municipalities to explain why some municipalities appears to be doing better, OMBI is developing a complementary performance measurement program

7. Part 3: Centre for Municipal Best Practices • Centre is a resource for municipalities. • The Centre is directed by a Steering Committee of 19 volunteer representatives. • Best practices are focused on four key areas of municipal services, which are waste management, roads, transit and water and sewer.

8. Do citizens care about performance measurement? “Ajax Mayor Steve Parish says the whole exercise [of performance measurement] is a waste of staff’s time and serves no useful purpose. Since the program started in 1999, he says he has never received a call from a resident regarding the published information” Mike Ruta, Durham Region Regional News, September 13, 2005

9. Should citizens care about PM? “The cost and effort to collect and report data on measurable indicators of results is of little value if the information is not used in an effort to improve the community”. Epstein, Coats and Wray, 2006, 6

10. Citizen Engagement/Governance Models • Citizen Engagement Model: Centre for Public Dialogue 2000 • Effective Community Governance Model: Epstein, Coats and Wray, 2006 • Citizen Governance Model: Phillips 2006 • Performance Management System: Plant 2006 • Deliberative Democracy Model: Weeks 2000 • Citizen Initiative Performance Assessment Model: Ho 2005/Center for Urban Policy and the Environment • Civic Voluntarism Model: Burns, Schlozman and Verba, 2001 • Civic Literacy Model: Milner, 2002 • Comparative Performance Measurement Model: Morley, Bryant and Hatry 2001 • Citizen Services Capability Model: U.S. General Services Administration, 2005

11. Why aren’t citizens involved in PM? • Not required by Province • Financial and time constraints • Public manager’s reluctance to involve citizenry • Citizen’s perception they can’t make a difference (decreasing voter turnout, lowest at the municipal level) • Ontarians trusted their local officials the most (70%) over other levels of government (CRIC 2003) • Citizens aren’t aware of measurement program, don’t see value to them or use in local decision-making • Media apathy: don’t report on it locally

12. Case Examples • City of Calgary, Alberta (initiated by city) • Iowa (state university as partner) • Seattle, Washington and New York City (initiated by nonprofit) • AmericaSpeaks and E-Town Panel (not city specific, nonprofit)

13. Possible Solutions • Citizen Surveys: quality of life issues, government priorities • Citizen feedback of results • Citizen input as to performance measures and indicators • Community responsibility for community issues • Civic education • Access to performance measurement programs in Canada and the United States • Increased use of technology to engage citizens on a regular basis beyond election day

14. “What government needs are performance measures that have political credibility, and policymakers, managers and citizens who will use the information in decision-making to improve service delivery and resource allocation” Center for Urban Policy and the Environment, 2004