1. In one (unnamed) state, the executive branch did not
involve the legislature in development of results and indicators. The work was unnecessarily
adversarial and was not sustained past the next gubernatorial election.
2. The Vermont legislature authorized 10 results in law in the 1998 session.
3. The Oregon legislature established the Oregon Progress Board and has endorsed
the Benchmarks for successive biennial sessions since 1988.
Tips
Advice from:
Organizational Resources
References
The Short Answer
1. The best work is a partnership between the executive and
legislative branches. A results framework which starts with the well-being of
children and families can provide common ground for political players and make
executive and legislative partnerships easier to create.
2. Executive branch roles can include: Creation of a children's
cabinet, creation of a children's report card or budget, sponsorship of a
"turn the curve" table and use of client results (performance
measures) in budgeting.
3. Legislative branch roles can include: Authorization of state
and local children's collaboratives, children's report cards and children's
budgets, holding results hearings, and using results for all children and client
results for programs in budget hearings.
Full Answer
(1) The best work on Results-Based Accountability is in fact a
cooperative effort between the executive and legislative branches of government.
It is normal for there to be an adversarial relationship between the executive
and legislative branches. Even where that is a deeply entrenched part of the
culture, it is possible for the two branches to create the infrastructure
necessary to establish state and local partnerships, to establish children's report cards and children's budgets, and to cooperate on
developing strategies to measurably improve the well-being of children and
families. (In one state,
the work on results was seen as an exclusively executive branch enterprise.
The legislature decided to undertake its own version of results. The two
efforts diverged. Neither took hold and lasted.)
(2) In states and counties
where issues of child and family well-being are addressed in a non-partisan or
bi-partisan manner, executive and legislative branch partnerships are easier to
create and sustain. Results for children and families (like "all children
ready for school," "all children succeeding in school,"
"stable and self sufficient families") are statements of ends, not
means. And using a results framework allows political players to find common
ground in a set of results statements, even where they continue to disagree
about means.
(3) The relative roles and power
relationships between the executive and legislative branches vary from state
to state, county to county and city to city. So a simple summary is not
possible. Following are some examples of executive and legislative branch
roles:
(4) The executive branch role
is usually one of convenor, sponsor and co-producer of the work. Executive
Branch functions might include:
- Children's cabinet - Children's Report Card
- Children's Budget
- Production of state and local indicator data for use in planning
- "Turn the curve" teams for a given result or indicator
- Development and use of performance measures for management and budgeting
(5) The legislative branch most often plays the role of
authorizing
and reviewing the work. Legislative branch functions might include:
- Authorize the creation of state and local children's collaboratives
- Hold results budget hearings
- Authorize/require the creation of a children's report card, children's
budget and cost of bad results analysis
- Independent analysis of the Executive branch children's budget
- Use performance measures in budget review
