Dallas County utilizes a five-volume set of Management Reports (in addition to accounting data) to continually evaluate outcomes and incorporate this information into resource allocation decisions. The attachment to this budget document is devoted to this performance-based budgeting approach. This section summarizes these reports.

Volume I - Management Overview - this report is produced by the Office of Budget and Evaluation and is organized by the functional categories of County departments. All large departments have one or more workload trend indicators included in the report. The Budget Analyst assigned to each department produces a narrative that focuses on data that departs from historical trends or budgetary expectations.

Volume II - Judicial System Workload and Effective Measures - this report is a comparative study of the County’s courts - an $84 million operation under the control of 75 Elected Officials (Judges, District Attorney, County and District Clerks). Both workload and outcome indicators are provided, emphasizing the controllable portion of the expenditures, such as court-appointed counsel and the use of visiting judges. The primary performance measure used is the “cost per disposition” of a case, measured consistently. Trends in these costs may reflect the efficiency of the judge or may reflect unavoidable expenses such as a high number of (expensive) capital murder cases. The narrative is expected to reasonably explore these nuances and explain a complex phenomenon.

Volume III - Performance Indicators - beginning with the FY99 budget, departments were expected to accompany any request for new resources with performance measures that could be used to judge the success of the newly funded operations. The FY2000 budget process required all departments to develop performance measures and targets to request new or expanded programs. Performance measures are usually a combination of output measures, efficiency measures, and outcome measures. The quarterly Performance Measure Report provides the Court with opportunities to track the progress of the performance measures. The Commissioners Court recognized that accumulating and reporting data on outcomes is simply the first (and perhaps easiest) step in accomplishing an actual Performance-Based Budget. Accordingly, the system in use makes use of the following additional steps in integrating outcome data into decision-making:

• Each outcome and efficiency measure is assigned a negotiated target for the forthcoming fiscal year;
• Each quarterly report contains a narrative discussion of each indicator prepared jointly by the department and the Office of Budget and Evaluation.
• Each performance indicator is “graded” against its target by the Office of Budget and Evaluation, with due regard for seasonal effects and other measures that illuminate the underlying causes of good or bad performance
• Performance indicators that fail to meet their targets are subject to progressively meaningful corrective steps, such as inclusion on a “watch” list, written requests to a department head to explain substandard performance, assignment of a member of Commissioners Court to investigate the data on behalf of the entire court, and an invitation to appear at a Performance Forum.
• Typically, these steps are sequential and result in reversal of the negative trend, program cancellation, or other corrective action.
• Performance indicators that consistently meet targets are formally recognized.
• Performance indicators related to recently added resources are given additional visibility to check the “promises” made during resource requests.
• Performance indicators are discussed monthly at the Performance Forum and the beginning of each annual budget hearing.

Volume IV - Juvenile Recidivism Measures - the Juvenile Recidivism Report was the recipient of the 1996 National Association of County’s “Achievement Award” and is arguably the most comprehensive examination of outcomes in a juvenile department available in the nation. The County spends millions of taxpayer dollars to rehabilitate youthful offenders by providing them therapeutic residential environments and community-based aftercare, often at costs of $80 to $120 per day of treatment. The Juvenile Recidivism Report tracks the juveniles at various times after the juvenile system has done its best to transform the child into a productive, rule-following society member.

Volume V - Major Projects and Major Technology Review - this bi-monthly report is accompanied by a special session of the Commissioners Court to review the progress of each large construction or technology development program currently planned or underway. The staff typically calls attention to projects with potential funding, scheduling, or design problems so that that management can focus on these problems. Senior managers from involved departments draft the report and the review session.

Other Methods - in addition to these formal reports, performance goals may be assigned per project due to the approved new program. In addition, annual performance reviews with each appointed Department Head offer an opportunity for the Commissioners Court to express their policy direction related to performance targets for the upcoming fiscal year.

Summary - Dallas County’s commitment to accountability through performance reporting is deep-rooted. The performance reports are constantly reevaluated, and departmental targets are often revised when new information is presented.