11

The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation’s Program to Make Municipal Governments More Responsive to Their CitizensAt the Sloan Foundation, we think of governmentperformance measurement and reporting as a pyra-mid. At the base is a government measuring its ownperformance, using whatever measures its managersthink are proper, and reporting the results onlywithin the government. The most common mode of performance measurement today, this approach ispreferable to not measuring performance at all.

Performance measurement in this form can be veryuseful for managing the operations of the govern-ment. It yields information on inputs, outputs, and atits best outcomes that government managers need fordelivering services effectively and using resources effi-ciently. When outcomes are included, this mode ofperformance measurement can serve as the basis forwhat is sometimes called “management by results.”

There are disadvantages in using this method. Oneshould always be suspicious of any organization’smeasuring its own performance using rules that itestablishes and operating under its own authority.Those doing or controlling the measurement andreporting the results have incentives to make theresults come out in a way that makes them lookgood. There are unlimited opportunities to manipu-late data to serve political or organizational inter-ests. This includes falsifying the data, but one neednot go that far. One can influence the message trans-mitted and how it is received simply by decidingwhat to measure and how to report it, when andhow to change definitions, whether to discontinuesome time series and begin new ones, or how to dis-play data on a chart or graph. Moreover, any per-formance measurement initiated purely by and onthe authority of the government, whether the citymanager, the mayor, or a legislative body, can bestopped by that same authority or transformed toserve their organizational or political interests.

Performance measurement done in this mode has noinformational value to the citizens. Local govern-ments, fearing (understandably) misinterpretationand preferring not to supply ammunition to critics,usually choose not to publish or disseminate outsidegovernment the results of their performance mea-sures. Thus citizens are not even made aware thatperformance measurement is happening.

The next level of the performance measurementpyramid is performance measurement done by thegovernment but reported to the citizenry. When alocal government follows the suggested criteriapromulgated by the Governmental AccountingStandards Board (GASB) in the United States or therecommended principles of the CCAF-FCVI inCanada, for example, citizens are assured that regu-lar reports will be issued about how their govern-ment is doing. Public reporting makes it moredifficult, but not impossible, for governments tostop engaging in performance measurement or stopreporting the results. Public reporting makes it moredifficult, but not impossible, for government man-agers or politicians to use performance measurementto strengthen their organizational or political posi-tion. The major additional deficiency at this level isthat the measures being used are still those of inter-est to the government managers (or politicians) andoften do not reflect the kinds of concerns that ordi-nary citizens care about.

At the next level of the pyramid of performance mea-surement is performance measurement done by thegovernment and reported to the citizenry where the decisions about what measures to use and howto report them include input from the public. Thisapproach encourages, but does not guarantee, thatwhat is measured and reported serves the interests ofthe citizenry as well as the interests of government

B Y T E D G R E E N W O O D

© 2008 Wi ley Per iodicals , Inc .Publ ished onl ine in Wi ley InterScience (www.interscience.wi ley.com)

Nat ional Civ ic Review • DOI : 10.1002/ncr.199 • Spr ing 2008

12

managers and politicians. This approach also pro-motes civic engagement of the citizenry and can cre-ate new means of communication and possibly trustbetween the government and citizens. The practicedoes not fully solve the problems inherent in an or-ganization evaluating itself, but depending on howinvolved the citizens are and to what extent the gov-ernment is willing to listen to them and considertheir views, it can mitigate them. We supported twogrant programs run by the National Center for CivicInnovation that are encouraging more than fortygovernments to adopt this approach to performancemeasurement. Other governments throughout thecountry are also adopting or considering adoptingcitizen-informed performance measurement andperforming, though not yet in large numbers.

At the apex of the pyramid of performance mea-surement is measurement done or overseen by anindependent governmental body or by a nongovern-mental entity, preferably with the cooperation of thegovernment whose performance is being measured.The United Kingdom has an independent govern-mental body that measures and reports on the per-formance of municipal governments around thecountry. To my knowledge, the closest counterpartin the United States or Canada is performance mea-surement and reporting done by government audi-

tors. The role of auditors in performance measure-ment is sometimes quite significant and could bemuch more so, although, depending on the govern-mental structures, political factors may severelyaffect the objectivity of auditors’ findings.

The Sloan Foundation has funded projects in per-haps a dozen cities around the country, starting withthe Fund for the City of New York in New YorkCity, enabling nongovernment organizations, usu-ally working with local government and citizens, todecide what should be measured, to measure it(often using government-collected data), and toreport it to the public. This approach can be effec-tive but has the disadvantage that getting money tosustain such an effort is usually difficult.

At the Sloan Foundation, we are committed to pro-moting performance measurement and reportingthat is as close to the apex of this pyramid as is prac-tical. We promote citizen-based performance mea-surement and reporting from outside the governmentwhose performance is being measured, when that ispossible, and otherwise, citizen-informed perfor-mance measurement and reporting from inside thegovernment using arrangements that include citizensin deciding what is measured, how it is measured,and how it is reported.

Ted Greenwood is program director at the Alfred P. SloanFoundation, with responsibilities for several programs there,including Making Municipal Governments More Responsiveto their Citizens. Prior to joining the Sloan Foundation in1992, he was director of the International Security PolicyProgram of Columbia University’s School of Internationaland Public Affairs. He has written widely on national secu-rity and energy policies.

National Civ ic Review DOI : 10.1002/ncr Spr ing 2008

At the Sloan Foundation, we think of govern-ment performance measurement and reportingas a pyramid. At the base is a governmentmeasuring its own performance. This approachis preferable to not measuring performance atall.