Lawmakers are test-driving a new government accountability tool this summer and fall before they shift the model into high gear for the coming legislative session.
House and Senate committees will use Results Based Accountability as a way to evaluate the effectiveness of government programs.
Lawmakers are hopeful that RBA will help them make better decisions as they grapple with an ongoing pattern of spending that has outpaced tax receipts. Over the last five years, the Shumlin administration and the Legislature have used one-time monies to fill gaps of $50 million to $70 million.
Last week, the Shumlin administration and lawmakers cut $31 million out of the fiscal year 2015 budget in order to address a revenue downgrade for fiscal year 2015.
The shortfall and cuts in the current fiscal year put the state in a difficult position for next year. There could be a gap of $40 million or more.
The joint Government Accountability Committee is overseeing implementation of RBA, which is replacing earlier versions of accountability strategies, like Challenges for Change, that waned or faltered before getting off the ground.
The Results Based Accountability program was signed into law in June. It sets eight goals for the state’s population based on data-driven indicators that measure whether those goals have been achieved and whether Vermonters are better off for it.
All the state’s major programs are expected to be onboard with the initiative in three to five years, according to Sue Zeller, the state’s chief performance officer. So far 13 programs across 11 departments are engaged. Another 17 programs will be added this fall.
It’s not clear what will qualify as a “major” program. An inventory of state programs does not exist. Zeller said she is hoping an upgrade of the state’s budget software will enable her to better track program spending, which is now virtually impossible to pin down.
On Monday, Zeller presented the committee with a baseline report of roughly three years of data.
The data in the report are not new. Zeller is using existing metrics and selecting the most meaningful numbers from a sea of available data.
“It’s a different way of looking at the result, instead of just saying, ‘Here’s our caseload,’” Zeller told lawmakers. “The people who are going through (a) smoking cessation program. Do they actually quit smoking?” She said lawmakers can add RBA results to the other information they gather in the process of setting policy and budgets.
State officials are looking for eight population-level outcomes:
- A prosperous economy
- Healthy population
- A clean environment
- Safe and supportive communities
- Nurturing, stable and supported families
- Children and young people achieving potential
- Elders and people with disabilities and people with mental conditions live with dignity and independence in settings they prefer
- Government at state and local levels is open, effective and inclusive
Agencies responded to specific data requests that show how Vermont is progressing toward those goals. As lawmakers reviewed the answers they realized they need to ask better questions.
The Department of Public Service, for example, reported statewide coverage “by state-of-the-art telecommunications infrastructure” has been 100 percent since fiscal year 2013.
In a narrative with the report, the department qualified that claim: All E-911 locations in Vermont can get landline telephone service, 99.3 percent are covered by “high speed Internet infrastructure,” 75.8 percent are covered with infrastructure offering an Internet speed of at least 4 Mbps download and 1 Mbps upload speeds, and 91.2 percent have access to mobile wireless service.
Sen. Diane Snelling, R-Chittenden, said: “I don’t want to begin with a process that tells us something’s 100 percent if something really isn’t.”
Discussion ensued about whether the committee should be more clear about what it means by “state-of-the-art.”
For example, should they change their request from unemployment rates per 1,000 residents to unemployment per 1,000 working age residents? The answer to the first question was 2.4 percent in 2013, while the more relevant second answer — suggested by the Department of Labor — was an annualized average of 4.4 percent for the same period.
Another example was crime rates: If lawmakers ask for the rate of violent crimes as a percent of all crimes, the statistic may be obscured by a rise in the incidence of petty crimes. In that case, the percentage of violent crimes could go down, even though the number could go up.
“Any administration worth its salt is going to give you the number that’s most attractive,” said Rep. Dave Sharpe, D-Bristol.
Some numbers, however, can’t be massaged. Lawmakers were struck by the data showing 32 percent of Vermonters are living at or below 200 percent of the poverty level.
“This is great what we’re doing,” Sharpe said. “It’s unfortunate so many of the indicators are going in the wrong direction. But it shows the … work we have to do.”
Once the baseline statistics are finalized and comparative benchmarks identified, RBA reports will be used to set targets for participating programs.
Click here for a complete preliminary report and explanatory materials.
