1
Workshop:Development and Use of
Outcome-based Measures in Government Planning & Reporting
May 24th, 2006, Union Centre, Winnipeg, Manitoba
Presented by:
Manitoba Treasury Board Secretariat ,Office of the Provincial Comptroller of Manitoba, and
The International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
2
AgendaI. The Context in Manitoba [30 minutes]
• Introductions and overview• Performance Measurement in Manitoba• Role of performance measures in annual reporting
II. Trends in Planning, Reporting and Performance measures [45 minutes]• Why are outcome-based measures important?• Innovative examples and trends in reporting
III. Sharing of Manitoba Examples [45 minutes]• Plenary discussions based on Pre-work assignment
IV. Developing and Using Outcome-based Measures [105 minutes]• Key steps in development, use and analysis of outcome-based
measures• Group work on key steps
V. Reporting Outcome-based Measures [75 minutes]• Completing a narrative table for performance indicators
Closing Remarks
3
Objectives of Workshop
• Intro to developing performance measures linked to organizational goals
• Overview of current practice elsewhere
• Understanding/discussion of issues related to government performance measurement reporting
• Context for new Annual Report requirements (looking back) and new PSO requirements (looking ahead)
4
Part I. The Big Picture
• Performance Measurement in Manitoba Drew Perry (Treasury Board Secretariat)
• Role of performance measures in annual reporting
Betty-Anne Pratt (Provincial Comptroller)
I. The Big Picture
5
Trends and context
Trend toward reporting on changes in socio-economic and environmental conditions that matter to Manitobans
I. The Big Picture
6
2005 Discussion Document examples: Economy
I. The Big Picture
7
2005 Discussion Document examples: People
I. The Big Picture
8
2005 Discussion Document examples: Community
I. The Big Picture
9
2005 Discussion Document examples: Environment
I. The Big Picture
10
The Planning and Reporting context
• Performance Measurement is not done in isolation
• Identified as part of Priorities & Strategies Overview (PSO)
• reported upon in Annual reports
• Performance Measures show whether our plans are working
I. The Big Picture
11
Full cycle view
PSO (plan) for following
fiscal
New initiatives
for following
fiscal
Estimates for
following fiscal Budget
announcedEstimates
supplementExecution of plans during fiscal year
Annual Report
Spring Yr1 Fall Yr1 Spring Yr2 Fall Yr3Spring Yr3
I. The Big Picture
12
Full cycle view
PSO (plan) for following
fiscal
New initiatives
for following
fiscal
Estimates for
following fiscal Budget
announcedEstimates
supplementExecution of plans during fiscal year
Annual Report
Spring Yr1 Fall Yr1 Spring Yr2 Fall Yr3Spring Yr3
I. The Big Picture
13
Multiple cycles in play
BudgetEstimates
supplement
Annual Report
Spring 04 Fall 04 Spring 05 Fall 06Spring 06Fall 05
PSO (plan)
New initiatives
Estimates
Budget
Estimates supplement
Annual Report
PSO (plan)
New initiatives
Estimates
Budget
Estimates supplement
PSO (plan)
New initiatives
Estimates
04/
05
07/
08
05/
06
06/
07
I. The Big Picture
14
Issues/Opportunities re Annual Reports
• Previous guidelines did not request measures of progress or performance
• No specific requirement to link annual reports to larger process (Estimates Supplement or plans)
• No specific requirement for Department annual reports to be placed online
• New direction set in 2005 through Reporting to Manitobans on Performance
I. The Big Picture
15
Trends and issuesin government annual reporting
• Accountability• Who uses annual reports? (internet)• Public expectations (of results, of reporting)• Limited resources, demographic trends
(retirements)… • …governments need to do “more with less”• Trend to shared, horizontal efforts• Important to agree on how to assess, report and
use results
16
Recap: Full cycle view
PSO (plan) for following
fiscal
New initiatives
for following
fiscal
Estimates for
following fiscal Budget
announcedEstimates
supplementExecution of plans during fiscal year
Annual Report
Spring Yr1 Fall Yr1 Spring Yr2 Fall Yr3Spring Yr3
Annual Reports, including measures, are connected back
to plans…
I. The Big Picture
17
Part II. Trends in Government Planning and Reporting
A. What are outcome measures and why are they important
Concepts and vocabulary
B. Who is doing this really well? Oregon: Results-oriented Strategic Planning
C. What are Alberta and Saskatchewan doing? Alberta: Goal-based Budgeting Sask. Government Accountability Framework
II. Trends in Reporting
18
A. What are outcome measures and why are they important?
Our People
Our Economy
Our Environment
de•vel•op (di•vel′əp) v.t. 1. To expand or bring out the potentialities, capabilities, etc.
II. Trends in Reporting
19
A. What are outcome measures and why are they important?
Our People
Our Economy
Our Environment
de•vel•op (di•vel′əp) v.t. 1. To expand or bring out the potentialities, capabilities, etc.
Experience has shown that a pathway to sustainability cannot be charted in advance. Rather, the pathway must be navigated through processes of learning and adaptation.
National Academy of Science 1999. Our Common Journey: A Transition Toward Sustainability.
II. Trends in Reporting
20
IISD International and National-Level Perspective
• Nations starting to develop information systems to gauge societal wellbeing and sustainability
The UK– “Securing the Future” Strategy– UK National Framework Indicators– Departmental strategies– Independent review by sustainable
development commission
• Norway– National strategy and indicators– Led by Prime Minister’s office and
chaired by Finance Ministry
II. Trends in Reporting
21
• Provinces and states using societal goal and outcome-based planning and budgeting systems
Oregon– Oregon Shines state-wide vision – Oregon Benchmarks to gauge progress – State departments to link performance
measures to Oregon Benchmarks– Independent review
• Alberta– 12 provincial goals and 60+ indicators– Departmental business plans and annual
reporting linking to provincial indicators
IISD Provincial and State Level Perspective
II. Trends in Reporting
22
IISD Community-level Perspective
• Communities creating new forms of social infrastructure to navigate quality of life and sustainability
Orlando– Healthy Community Indicators Initiative
of Greater Orlando
• Winnipeg– Quality of Life Indicators System concept
being proposed by range of community stakeholders
II. Trends in Reporting
23
Output The result of an activity
IntermediateOutcome
Short to medium-term consequence of an output
High-levelOutcome
ActivityProcesses and Inputs of a policy, program, or project
Hybrid from three different logic models (Canadian International Development Agency, Province of Alberta, State of Oregon)
Contributing to society’s wellbeing and
sustainability objectives
External influences
Feedback
Change in wellbeing conditions (economic, social and environmental)
accountability
Key Priority Areas
Logic Model
High-level Objectives
Actions
24
OutputThe result of an activity
IntermediateOutcome
Short to medium-term consequence of an output
High-levelObjectives
Change in well-being conditions (economic, social and environmental)
ActionsProcesses and Inputs of a policy, program or project
Stream water quality
(turbidity)
Rate of soil erosion by
water
Kilometers of river bank with
vegetation
% of re-vegetation programs completed
Environmental Social Economic
Key Priority Areas Prosperous Economy
Healthy, sustainable
surroundings
Quality Jobs
Example MeasuresUnderstanding Linkages
Gross Domestic Product
Share of GDP in manufacturing, business and
commercial services
Implement Economic Development and
Innovation Initiative and participate in other cross-
ministry initiatives that influence the province's
prosperity
Economic Development and
Innovation Initiative completed
Children entering school ready to learn
% children enrolled in Pre-K
program
Demographic surveys for Head-
start program completed
Head-start program
implemented
25
What are the benefits?
• What are the benefits?
• What are the risks?
• What are the constraints?
II. Trends in Reporting
26
Climbing the Steps toward Performance Management
Mission/GoalsObjectives
PerformanceMeasures
Analysis for Continuous
Improvement
Mission statements declare the agency’s long-range intent; its purpose. Although the goals expressed in a mission statement may help shape the agency’s values and its organizational culture, they often are imprecise and sometimes even a bit vague.
Objectives are unambiguous statements of the agency’s performance intentions, expressed in measurable terms, usually with an implied or explicit timeframe.
Performance measures indicate how much or how well the agency is doing. Ideally, they track the agency’s progress toward achieving its objectives.
Many agencies compare this month’s or this year’s performance measures to those of the past. Some are beginning to make comparisons with other agencies and to begin the process of benchmarking.
(From Gov. of Alberta 1996)
II. Trends in Reporting
27
Who does this really well?The Oregon Shines Case Study
Oregon Shines Case Study
28
Vision – “Oregon Shines II”
Economy: Quality jobs for all Oregonians
People: Safe, caring andengaged communities
Environment: Healthy, sustainable surroundings
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
29
Oregon Shines
Oregon's Strategic Plan- Oregon Shines (1989)- Updated every eight years
- Encompasses the entire stateOregon Progress Board
- independent agency created to be the steward of Oregon Shines
- law mandates Board to report biennially
- chaired by governor
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
30
Oregon BenchmarksMeasures for how Oregon as a whole is doing.
• Quality Jobs for All Oregonians– Economy (#1-17)– Education (#18-29)
• Engaged, Safe & Caring Communities– Civic Engagement (#29-38)– Social Support (#39-60)– Public Safety (#60-67)
• Healthy, Sustainable Surroundings– Community Development (#68-74)– Environment (#75-90)
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
High-levelObjectives
Key Priority Areas
31
Quality JobsEconomy Benchmarks
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
Indicator
Data Target
Source
Comparison
32
Engaged, Safe and Caring CommunitiesSocial Support Benchmarks
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
33
Healthy, Sustainable SurroundingsEnvironment Benchmarks
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
34
High Level Outcomes
(Benchmarks)
Is work happening? Outputs
Is society benefiting?
IntermediateOutcomes
Are strategies working?
Linking Government to the Benchmarks
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
35
Linking Government to the Benchmarks
Benchmarks
Organization’s Progress
Performance Measures
Oregon’s
Progress
External Influences
Oregon Shines Case StudyFrom Conrad (2005)
36
ODA addresses soil erosion from agriculture through a partnership that
includes the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service,
USDA Farm Service Agency, OSU Extension Service, and Soil and
Water Conservation Districts (SWCDs). ODA coordinates with
these agencies and is specifically responsible for implementing a
regulatory program for nonpoint source
High-level Objectives
IntermediateOutcome
Output
Oregon Shines Case Study
Healthy, Sustainable Surroundings
Key Priority Areas
37 Oregon Shines Case Study
Aligning Departmental Performance Measures with Oregon Benchmarks
38 Sask. Case StudyI. The Big Picture
Saskatchewan Government
39
Goal Objective Performance Measure 1) A sustainable transportation infrastructure
Preserved principal highway network to meet the future economic needs of the Province
Per cent of the principal highway network in “good” condition
Amount of principal pavements beyond their service life
Transformed regional transportation network to meet the future needs of rural Saskatchewan
Per cent of regional highway network in “good” condition by surface type: Pavement; Thin Membrane Surface (TMS); Gravel
Reduced damage on the highway system caused by overweight vehicles
Per cent of overweight trucks on the highway system
Increased funding from additional sources
Additional funding from non-provincial government sources
Ratio of road operations to overhead 2) The transportation system strengthens economic development and serves social needs
Reduced cost of moving goods and people by road, rail and air
Value of economic development generated by the Department’s trucking programs
Per cent of principal highway network available at primary weights on an annual basis
Targeted infrastructure investment for economic growth and social utility
Cumulative per cent of twinned highway opened to traffic
Improved connections in the North
Cumulative per cent of improved northern community access roads
3) Safe movement of people and goods
Reduced collisions on the road Per cent of collisions involving an injury or fatality Ratio of partnership trucking fleet collision rate
compared to Canadian commercial trucking fleet collision rate Per cent of commercial vehicles inspected that are not
mechanically fit and placed out of service Number of Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance
(CVSA) inspections conducted per year Per cent of provincial railway operators with approved
safety management plans Increased workplace safety Number and severity of at-work injuries
Key Priority
Area
High-level Objectives
Which of these are outcome based?
Which are more output based?Example –
Sask. Dept. of Highways and
Transportation
40
Example Indicator
Sask. Case Study
Source: http://www.highways.gov.sk.ca/docs/reports_manuals/reports/annual_05.pdf
41
Towards Goal-based Budgeting in Alberta
Alberta Case Study
42
43
44 Alberta Case Study
45 Alberta Case Study
46
47 Alberta Case Study
Government Goal 7: Alberta will have a prosperous economy
Core Government Measures (Measuring Up):
Goal 7 Budget and Actuals (2004-05)
$2,519 million $3,206 million
Goal 7 Government Strategies/Actions• Securing Tomorrow’s Prosperity value-added strategy• Agri-Food Discovery Place (AFDP) construction• Agrivalue Processing Business Incubator• Cottage Winery Policy• Promoting tourism
Ministry of Economic Development
• 3-year Business plan
• goals and performance measures
Alberta’s 20-year Strategic Plan: Today's Opportunities, Tomorrow's Promise: A Strategic Plan for the Government of Alberta
• Tourism industry revenues• Barriers to trade • Business connectiveness• Sponsored research at University of
Alberta• Industrial disposition planning• Biodiversity monitoring system• Oil Sands production
* Gross Domestic Product (GDP)• Job growth• Labour force participation rate• Labour productivity• Personal disposable income• Value-added industries• Export trade
48 Alberta Case Study
Ministry of Economic Development Goal(s) (that supports Government Goal 7):
Goal 1: Economic growth and diversification through collaborative
strategic planning and policy development
Ministry Measures• Share of GDP in manufacturing, business and
commercial services
Goal 7 Budget and Actuals (2004-05)
Ministry Strategies/Actions1.1. Lead the implementation of the Economic Development and Innovation Initiative and participate in
other cross-ministry initiatives that influence the province's prosperity.1.2 Lead the implementation of Securing Tomorrow's Prosperity with other participating ministries to
support the development of competitive value-added goods and services industries.1.3 Provide longer-term strategic input to the development of policy to support a sustainable and
diversified economy in Alberta.1.4 Collaborate with the Alberta Economic Development Authority to set out the key directions where
targeted actions and strategies can produce the best return for Albertans.1.5 Provide the skills, processes, and technology to enhance information collection and analysis,
management and sharing of knowledge within the Ministry, and to support strategic consultation with our clients.
Opportunities and Challenges
• importance of innovation
• skilled labour shortage
• benchmarking Alberta’s performance
49
Alberta Goal-based Budgeting: Recent advances and lessons
1. Business planning and performance measurement system in place since 1990s
2. Early focus on a few core indicators (23 in Measuring Up)
3. The Government Accountability Act to ensure ministries maintained their business planning and performance reporting system over time.
4. Several improvements in Alberta’s accountability system has occurred in the past 3 years including:
• 20-year Government Strategic Business Plan• Goal-based budgeting and performance reporting• Strategic priorities and cross-ministerial initiatives (involving more
than one ministry) budgeting and performance reporting.• High-level Societal Indicators reintroduced
50
Part III. Manitoba Examples
• Sharing of Manitoba examples in the use of outcome-based measures
III. Manitoba Examples
51
Manitoba Examples:Pre-Work Discussion
• Review your pre-workshop assignment
• Brief presentations[5 minutes + 5 min questions]
• General discussion of issues
III. Manitoba Examples
52
Part IV: Development and Use of Outcome-based Measures
A. Overview of key steps in the development and use of outcome-based measures
B. Working through an example• Groups of at least two (per
department if possible)
IV. Outcome-based Measures
53
Output The result of an activity
IntermediateOutcome
Short to medium-term consequence of an output
High-levelOutcome
ActivityProcesses and Inputs of a policy, program, or project
Hybrid from three different logic models (Canadian International Development Agency, Province of Alberta, State of Oregon)
Contributing to society’s wellbeing and
sustainability objectives
External influences
Feedback
Change in wellbeing conditions (economic, social and environmental)
accountability
Key Priority Areas
Logic Model
High-level Objectives
Actions
54
Key Steps
1. Frame the logic model for your issue
2. Identify SMART measures for the logic model
3. Understand and articulate key external influences
4. Analyze feedback based on the SMART measures and external influences
IV. Outcome-based Measures
55
Output:
________________
Intermediate Outcome:
_________________
High-level Objective:
_______________
Actions
________________
2. Measures and Targets
Indicator:
Indicator:
Indicator:
1. Logic Model3. External Influences
Influences:
Influences:
Influences:
4. Analysis & Feedback
Indicator:
Analysis:
Analysis:
Analysis:
Key Priority Areas
IV. Outcome-based Measures
56 Hybrid from three different logic models (Canadian International Development Agency, Province of Alberta, State of Oregon)
Output:
River bank re-vegetation
Intermediate Outcome:
Reduced soil erosion
High-level Objective:
Improved stream Water quality
Actions:River bank re-vegetation
program
1. Logic ModelKey Priority Area
Safe drinking water, enjoyable recreation
57
2. Identify SMART Measures
• Specific
• Measurable
• Aggressive, yet achievable targets
• Relevant
• Time-bound
IV. Outcome-based Measures
58
Anatomy of an measure
From Conrad (2005)
Indicator
Data Target
Source
IV. Outcome-based Measures
59
Types of Targets
Type ExamplePolicy-specific targets
Determined in a political and/or technical process taking past performance and desirable outcomes into account.
Example: official development assistance shall be 0.4 percent of national GNP.
Standards Nationally and/or internationally accepted properties for procedures or environmental qualities.
Example: water quality standards for a variety of uses.
Thresholds The value of a key variable that will elicit a fundamental and irreversible change in the behaviour of the system.
Example: maximum sustainable yield of a fishery.
Benchmark Comparison with a documented best-case performance related to the same variable within another entity or jurisdiction.
Example: highest percentage of households connected to sewage system in a comparable jurisdiction.
Principle A broadly defined and often formally accepted rule.
Example: the policy should contribute to the increase of environmental literacy.
60
Output:
River bank re-vegetation
Intermediate Outcome:
Reduced soil erosion
High-level Objective:
Improved stream Water quality
Actions:River bank re-vegetation
program
2. Measures and Targets
River water quality (turbidity, nitrogen
concentration)
Rate of soil and rill erosion on farmland
Kilometers of river bank
with vegetation
1. Logic Model
% of re-vegetationPrograms complete
Key Priority Area
Safe drinking water, enjoyable recreation
IV. Outcome-based Measures
61
STEP 3: External Influences
• Your policies, programs and projects are not the only influence on the desired outcomes and outputs
• Direct influences• Other department activities, businesses, NGOs, civil society• Other jurisdictions (provinces, countries)• Nature (e.g., weather)
• Indirect influences• Broader societal driving forces (e.g., demographics, markets,
consumption patterns)
IV. Outcome-based Measures
62
Output:
River bank re-vegetation
Intermediate Outcome:
Reduced soil erosion
High-level Objective:
Improved stream Water quality
Actions:River bank re-vegetation
program
2. Measures and Targets
River water quality (turbidity, nitrogen
concentration)
Rate of soil and rill Erosion on farmland
Kilometers of river bank
with vegetation
1. Logic Model
% of re-vegetationPrograms complete
3. External Influences
• Quality of water flowing into MB• Treatment plant effectiveness
Zero till practices,weather, crop type
• Independent actionsfarmers• Natural growth
Key Priority Area
Safe drinking water, enjoyable recreation
IV. Outcome-based Measures
63
4. Analysis and Feedback
• What do the measures tell you about your activities?– Output level analysis– Intermediate outcome level analysis– High-level outcome analysis
• How does your understanding of external influences help your analysis?
IV. Outcome-based Measures
64
Output:
River bank re-vegetation
Intermediate Outcome:
Reduced soil erosion
High-level Objectives:
Improved stream Water quality
Actions:River bank re-vegetation
program
2. Measures and Targets
River water quality (turbidity, nitrogen
concentration)
Rate of soil and rill Erosion on farmland
Kilometers of river bank
with vegetation
1. Logic Model
% of re-vegetationPrograms complete
3. External Influences
Zero till practices,weather, crop type
• Independent actionsof farmers• Natural growth/disease
4. Analysis & Feedback
Analysis: Water quality improving. Quality of water flowing into province has improved significantly.
Analysis: Could be due to less bank vegetation, change in crop or extreme series of extreme rainfall events
Analysis: Cropland expansion could be reason or natural disease. Need to research further
95%
Feedback: Water quality improving but not due to program. Other factors counteracted program such as expanded cropland and reduced zero tillage
• Quality of water flowing into MB• Treatment plant effectiveness
Key Priority Area
Safe drinking water, enjoyable recreation
65
Exercise 1: Development of an Outcome-based Measure
• Forming your work group [5 min]– Find your working partner (your departmental colleague if
possible)• Select indicator to focus on [10 min]
– With your partner select a measure from your department to focus on for the exercise (from your workshop pre-assignment, or something else of mutual interest and value for your reporting cycle)
• Working with your Colleague [45 min]– Use the attached template as a guideline to carry out the 4
analysis steps for developing and/or using outcome-based measures
• Summarize your analysis on an overhead sheet• Plenary [30 minutes]
– Two groups will be asked to share their results, each followed by a plenary discussion
66
Output:
________________
Intermediate Outcome:
_________________
High-level Objective:
_______________
Action:
________________
2. Measures and Targets
Indicator:
Indicator:
Indicator:
1. Logic Model3. External Influences
Influences:
Influences:
Influences:
4. Analysis & Feedback
Indicator:
Analysis:
Analysis:
Analysis:
Key Priority area
67
Part V: Requirement for Departmental Annual Reporting
• Overview of instructions for current round of departmental annual reporting
Dave Hill, Policy, Communication & Training
Office of the Provincial Comptroller
Preparing the narrative• Groups of at least two (per department if
possible)• Fill out a narrative table
V. Prepare Narrative
68
Expectations for this round of Department Annual Reports (2005-06)
New: Section featuring department performance reporting
New: Central review of the new section
New: Annual Reports to be consistently available online
I. The Big Picture
69
What is required for the new section of the Report?
• Five progress or performance measures• The few critical indicators that illustrate
progress against desired outcomes• Ideally, those that support key Department
priorities• Can be drawn from previous PSOs,
Reporting to Manitobans on Performance document, or other sources
I. The Big Picture
70
Next steps
• Instructions for new section were issued week of March 27th by Provincial Comptroller
• New performance reporting section due back for review at Treasury Board Secretariat June 1st
• Review by TBS and Comptroller’s Office
• Response back to Departments within 3 weeks
• Remainder of annual report can be completed as per usual process
• Support from TBS and Comptroller’s office
I. The Big Picture
71
Overview of Key Questions That Need to Be Addressed
V. Prepare Narrative
What is Being Measured and
How? (A)
Why is it Important to Measure? (B)
What is the most Recent Available
Value for this Indicator? (C)
What is the Trend over
time for this Indicator? (D)
Comments/Recent
Actions/Report Links (E)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
72
Illustrative ExampleWhat is being
Measured and How?
Why is it Important
to Measure this?
What is the Most Recent Available
Value for this Indicator?
What is the Trend over time
for this Indicator?
Comments / recent actions /
report links
We are measuring access to health services by looking at the percentage of Manitobans reporting “no difficulty” in accessing health services.
One key determinant of population health is its access to quality health services. This measure assesses access only.
For 2003 (most recent survey data), % of Manitobans who reported “no difficulty” accessing: Health information or advice: 82% Immediate care: 75% Routine care: 81%
ImprovingWait times for key procedures have reduced significantly over the last five years. See page X of the report for details.The source of these data is the Statistics Canada Health Access Survey. There is no directly comparable study prior to 2003. The study will be repeated in 20xx.
See page X of the report for a discussion of recent actions addressing access to health services.
NOTE: All information below is adapted from Reporting to Manitobans on Performance 2005 Discussion Document, and is meant for illustrative purposes only.
73
Exercise 2: Prepare Narrative
• Work with partner(s) from previous exercise• Fill out narrative table
– For the high-level objectives measure you worked with in previous exercise complete the narrative table provided
– Use the paper copy of the table to draft your narrative. – Transfer your key points on to an overhead transparency
• Plenary Presentation and Discussion– Two or three groups will be asked to present their work– Plenary discussion on narratives and questions regarding
current annual reporting requirements
V. Prepare Narrative
74
Narrative Worksheet
A. What are we measuring and how?
B. Why is it important to measure this?
C. What is the most recent available data value for this indicator?
D. What is the trend over time for this indicator?
E. Comments/ recent actions / report links
V. Prepare Narrative
75
Closing Statements and Next Steps
• Workshop evaluation process
• First thoughts from the group on further capacity building?
76
ReferencesAnielski, M. (2006). Alberta examples and observations are based on reflections on
Alberta’s Government Performance Measurement and Accountability system (Measuring Up) based on conversations with Murray Lyle, head of Alberta Finance’s Performance Measurement team on March 2, 2006.
Government of Alberta 2004-05 Annual Report – Measuring Up. [http://www.finance.gov.ab.ca/publications/measuring/measup05/index.html]
Government of Saskatchewan. Government Accountability Framework. [http://www.gov.sk.ca/finance/accountability/default.htm]
Manitoba Provincial Sustainability Report. Government of Manitoba [http://www.gov.mb.ca/conservation/sustainabilityreport/]
Oregon Progress Board: www.oregon.gov/DAS/OPB
Rita Conrad 2005. Results Oriented Strategic Planning: A Framework for Developing Effective Performance Measurement. Presentation to the Botswana Delegation, Salem, Oregon, September 29, 2005.
Rita Conrad 2005. Oregon’s Experience with Performance Reporting. AGA’s First National Performance Management Conference. Oregon Progress Board, November 14 2005.
Reporting to Manitoba on Performance: 2005 Discussion Report. [http://www.gov.mb.ca/finance/mbperformance/index.html]