Results Leadership Group

As printed in the New London Day on 6/7/2009

For a very long time Connecticut has done a poor job of deciding how much tax money to spend on state programs. Typically the General Assembly renews programs each year without any objective review of how effective they are.

In good times, the legislature increases spending to pay for raises and provide for inflation. When professional staff identify unmet needs or problems, the automatic response is to throw more money at the issue. But there is usually no follow-up to determine whether the increased spending is effective.

In hard times, when spending cuts are required, they are equally ill informed. With no good measure as to which programs are effective and which are not, the governor and legislature base cuts on their political priorities, missing the opportunity to eliminate wasteful operations and maintain funding for quality ones.

Rep. Diana Urban, a Democrat representing North Stonington and Stonington, has for several years been the leader of a once small but now growing number of legislators willing to try a fundamentally different approach - results-based accountability (RBA). The concept is to base budget decisions on tangible results.
This newspaper has consistently supported RBA. Up until now, however, the Connecticut legislature has experimented with RBA only on a very small scale. That is about to change.

Confronted with unprecedented budget deficit projections, the General Assembly approved a bill that requires the Program Review and Investigations (PRI) Committee to assess human services programs, which account for among the largest expenditures in the budget, using the RBA method. By January the committee must report to the Appropriations Committee with recommendations on whether to modify or terminate programs and with an evaluation of the results-based method. The state agencies are required to cooperate with the review.

We strongly urge and expect Gov. M. Jodi Rell to sign this pilot program into law. If successful it could radically change the budget process for the better. It won’t solve the current budget crisis, but it could help avert future ones.

Rep. Urban expects the Department of Children and Families will undergo the first review. The DCF mission statement sums up the result the state expects from the money it invests in the department: ?To protect children, improve child and family well-being and support and preserve families.?
Did the $935.4 million invested in the department this year effectively further that mission? If so, what is the evidence? Did the $5.5 million spent on ?Family Preservation Services? really preserve families? Is spending $4.65 million on child abuse and neglect intervention sufficient, effectual or properly targeted? Are other state agencies supporting the work of the DCF, duplicating it or working at cross purposes?

The legislature needs such answers to make the right spending decisions. And when confronted with the facts, lawmakers need the political will to cut ineffective programs and shift spending to successful ones without regard for the cry of the special interests.

RBA is no panacea. Debates will continue, and should, on what is the proper role of government. And determining the effectiveness of social programs will always be more challenging than assessing success in the private sector, where the bottom line is sales and revenue generation.
But if not perfect, it is far better than the thoughtless ritual taxpayers now witness each session. It is time for a change.

As printed in the New London Day on 6/5/2009 by Diana Urban

As Gov. M. Jodi Rell continues to throw barbs at those of us in the legislature, I can’t help but be reminded of the magician admonishing us to ?watch the bouncing ball? in order to perform the sleight of hand necessary to complete the trick.

This continual brouhaha distracts us from the real issues of the budget; specifically the most recent iteration of the governor’s plan to balance it. We can argue endlessly about whether this budget is actually balanced.

Rectifying numbers is particularly elusive in Connecticut because we don’t practice Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP.) We ceased using GAAP in the early 1990s and switched to modified accrual accounting as a way to, quite frankly, fudge the numbers. Not exactly responsible, but nevertheless true.

But given a closer look, the governor’s latest budget is very revealing. There are huge cuts in help for seniors, providers of health care and people trying to get off state assistance and back on the job rolls. Even coverage for eyeglasses is cut. And yet there is $10 million in grant money for our long-suffering farmers. You would think that I, being a longtime advocate for our farmers, would be ecstatic.

Well, I am not, as it is a symptom of all that is wrong. Simply giving these grants to farmers is a short-term fix when what we need is a long-term policy that recognizes the importance of farming to the future of our state. Sure, grants will help some farmers get over the hump and continue to limp along trying to make a living, but it won’t solve the problem.

Getting a foothold in Connecticut

As many know I have been pushing the model of Results Based Accountability (RBA) and have finally gotten a foothold in the General Assembly. If we look at this particular issue from an RBA perspective, the result we would want to achieve with farm-relief funding would be: ?Safe, nutritious food for the people of Connecticut through a network of small economically viable farms.?

Yet I faced fights from the administration as I worked to save 14 raw-milk farmers, representing 5,000 acres of farmland, from going out of business because of suggested new regulations from the Department of Agriculture. I also had to fight them on my bill to allow farmers to produce acidified products such as pickles and salsa in farm kitchens for sale at farmers markets. So the administration is recommending $10 million in grants for farmers, while fighting me as I try to help the farmers stay economically viable.

Witness our dairy farms trying to stay afloat when the consumer is paying on average $3.83 per gallon and the farmer is receiving $1.04 per gallon for milk it cost them $1.60 per gallon to produce. What Connecticut needs is a comprehensive long-term policy that includes fighting for our own marketing order instead of the federal marketing order.

The story of Connecticut?s use of results-based accountability to ensure better outcomes for young children. Features Rep. Diana Urban, Janice Gruendel, the governor?s senior policy advisor on early childhood, and David Nee, Executive Director of the William Caspar Graustein Memorial Fund.

Thank you for taking a look at the opening introduction to the “Results Accountability Workshop DVD” presented by Mark Friedman. The DVD includes a guide to keep notes, participate in activities and receive the most out of the workshop at your pace. You can get a copy of the “Results Accountability DVD” at http://resultsleadership.org/purchase-rba-products/.

May 8th, 2009

$100 Billion Dollars, from $787 Billion Dollar stimulus package, of funding has been directed to education for all ages and is considered a “down payment” on many expansions to come. The press has posted many plans from states like Maryland focusing on special needs programs and cushion the $120 Million dollar reduction to only $21.4 Million in cuts. Atlanta Public School Administration will use a portion to repay the teachers who worked one day pay-free to raise funds in education materials.

There has been a sense of relief nation-wide as funding is now being sent to the States and Education systems to start utilizing immediately. Since the funding is considered a “down payment” forecasting more funding dedicated to early childhood programs and education systems, a concern for lack of strategic management tools or planning are not included or mentioned with all of these plans.

Results Leadership Group has released the “Results Scorecard Software” and is focusing on early childhood programs implementing the strategic management tool to maximize the current funding and prepare planning in future funding. All though there is no guaranteed amount of future funding, the Results Based Accountability method and software improves communication of any current strategies, measures progress from “turning the curve” and stimulates long term strategic planning and organization.

Montgomery County in Maryland has been utilizing the Results Based Accountability methodology, one of many initiatives is focusing on Montgomery County Education and Improvements. View the Results Scorecard Demo, “Results Scorecard Improves stimulus funding uses for Early Childhood Funding” see how the Results Scorecard software can improve the utilization of stimulus funding and future executions.

May 5th, 2009

Results Based Accountability is about starting with Ends and working backwards to a Means. The Video gives the PowerPoint video explains all of the directions for the activity created by Mark Friedman.

To learn more about Results Based Accountability, get the latest Results Accountability DVD by Mark Friedman.

This is one of ten questions that Mark Friedman personally answers from the exclusive interview conducted for Results Accountability Workshop DVD.

The interview is just one of many features in understanding the Results Accountability Framework and applying it to the everyday operations. The Results Accountability Workshop DVD is conveniently available for purchase at http://resultsleadership.org/purchase-rba-products/

We are excited to announce the creation of the Results Scorecard, web-based software for Results Based Accountability (RBA). Please join us as we launch the Results Scorecard with a Webinar demonstration on Tuesday, April 14, 2009 at 12pm EST.

With the Results Scorecard, leaders in the public and nonprofit sectors will accelerate the improvement of the quality of life in their communities and the performance of their agencies and programs. Importantly, the Results Scorecard aligns indicators of community well-being with organizational performance measures. A web-based tool, the Results Scorecard is easy to use and implement — and affordable.

The Results Scorecard is the only decision software designed specifically to support the RBA methodology, described by Mark Friedman in Trying Hard is Not Good Enough (Trafford 2005). The Results Scorecard’s architecture, with built-in tools and templates, is particularly useful for efficient and collaborative decision making on an ongoing basis at both the community and program levels.

Feel free to contact us at 301-907-7541 with any questions or to schedule a private demo if you can’t make the Webinar on April 14, 2009.

–The Results Leadership Group

WASHINGTON, D.C. - A group of leading nonprofit organizations has launched a new website that gives state and local policymakers valuable information about proven strategies to overcome a range of problems affecting American children, families and communities.

The site, PolicyForResults.org, offers innovative and effective approaches states and localities can take to help families increase their employment, acquire and retain assets (savings, homes and cars), and ensure that their children are reading well by third grade. For families in crisis, the site focuses on how more children can stay safely at home and not in foster care, and how to reduce the unnecessary and costly detention of juveniles in trouble with the law.

The website also provides up-to-date national data so that state officials and advocates can assess how their state is faring in vital areas such as child poverty rates, third and fourth grade reading achievement levels, and incidence of foster care and juvenile detention rates, when compared to national norms.

“This website will help governors, state legislators, mayors, county commissioners and other public officials make wiser investments to safeguard the future of their state’s children and families,” said Doug Nelson, president of the Annie E. Casey Foundation.