13. Results-Focused Budget Process

The 2013 Colorado State Measurement for Accountable, Responsive, and Transparent Government (SMART) Act required all Colorado state agencies to submit annual performance reports to the state legislature as part of the state’s budget process. These reports include: (1) performance measures for the major functions of the department; (2) performance goals for at least the following three years; (3) a description of the strategies necessary to achieve those goals; and (4) a summary of the department’s most recent performance evaluation.

The Colorado Governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting (OSPB) and the Colorado state legislature passed legislation that aligned evidence definitions, the five-step evidence continuum, that informs budget and spending decisions. OSPB requires agencies to identify the level of evidence and the results of any evaluations of programs as a part of the budget proposal process, “based on the evidence and body of research supporting the program’s effect on desired outcomes and proposed implementation plan.” This guidance is provided in the governor’s budget instructions via an assessment of the data and evidence associated with the requests. The FY21-22 Governor’s budget included 53 requests assessed on the evidence continuum, representing 33% of all requests and an increase from FY20-21 in the number and kind of requests assessed on the continuum.

The Colorado Governor also directed OSPB to evaluate the impact of all budget requests on equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) with a goal of advancing equity statewide. In 2021, OSPB has created an EDI team to undertake this work and is working with state departments to incorporate EDI considerations into the state’s budget process.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Equity, Health, Workforce

The Illinois Budgeting for Results (BFR) Commission is the state’s performance-based budgeting initiative. The commission’s annual report summarizes the state’s performance improvement efforts across seven statewide results areas (p. 9): education, economic development, public safety, human services, healthcare, environment and culture, and government services. In 2021, BFR reported that it had transferred The Pew Results First cost-benefit model to the BFR unit to assume day-to-day operation and use. Additionally, BFR, in partnership with the state legislature, effectively repealed Blighted Areas Redevelopment Act of 1947, an outdated, discriminatory mandate housing policy. According to BFR, “the repeal of this Act redresses historical injustices in the use of state eminent domain authorities to remove affordable housing in predominantly African-American neighborhoods without commensurate affordable housing to replace the demolished dwellings.” The Commission also recommended updating program evaluation methods, integrating diversity, equity, and inclusion analysis into the unit’s work in 2022 among other evidence-building activities supported by the Commission.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Equity, Health, Workforce

A 2013 Maryland law requires the Maryland Department of Budget and Management to submit an annual Managing for Results performance report to the state legislature as part of the budget process. This report contains the following information for each state agency: (1) the outcomes or results that have been achieved towards annual performance measures; (2) a three-year review of performance for each of the indicators; and (3) an estimate of expected program outcomes over the subsequent two years.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

A 2017 Minnesota law required state agencies to include performance data in their biennial budget documents. This performance data is frequently disaggregated to highlight disparities. FY22-23 budget instructions direct agencies to include information about the evidence base for their budget proposals and provide a supplemental form that documents the summary of evidence, citations, and amount to be spent on the activity. Agencies describe their proposed approach’s desired outcome measures, strategies for evaluation, support for effective implementation, implementation considerations, and context, including modifications that differ from the research. Each of those components is scored and assessed based on a rubric by Minnesota Management and Budget. In addition, the state used evidence to inform funding decisions that resulted in $87 million in new or expanded evidence-based programming in the FY20-21 budget.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Equity, Health, Workforce

A 2019 amendment to Mississippi’s 2014 performance-based budgeting law provided stronger, more rigorous evidence definitions for identifying intervention programs as evidence-based, research-based, promising, or other with no evidence of effectiveness. While the law continued to require the Mississippi Department of Corrections, Department of Health, Department of Education, and Department of Transportation to report during the annual budget cycle on their programs’ performance and cost-benefit ratio, the amendment authorized the Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review to designate additional agencies to comply with the law. Additional agency inventories include the Department of Revenue and Division of Medicaid. The Mississippi Joint Legislative Committee on Performance Evaluation and Expenditure Review (PEER) released a 2018 Results First Mississippi analysis on juvenile justice programs at a residential facility to help the state to invest more resources in high-quality interventions and ensure implementation fidelity.

Issue Areas: Criminal Justice, Education, Health

North Carolina requires budget requests for new and expanded programs and services to include evidence and research supporting the programs’ goals, as well as the Governor’s strategic priorities. For the FY21-23 budget development process, Office of State Budget and Management (OSBM) increased its focus on evidence-based budgeting, data-driven decisions, and strategic management of the state’s resources. North Carolina continued to use the two-step budget submission process where agency and budget office staff work collaboratively to develop evidence-based approaches before submitting their final budget requests. Agencies who opted-in were given additional time to work with a diverse set of state stakeholders to develop evidence-based approaches before submitting their final budget requests.

The North Carolina Governor’s American Rescue Plan budget recommendations included justification narratives for each of the main budget recommendation categories. Each justification narrative included data and evidence to support why the funding was needed and the expected impact it would have on the state.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

A 2016 Oregon law requires all state agencies to develop and implement performance measures. The agencies must also submit to the Oregon Legislative Fiscal Office an Annual Performance Progress Report detailing the agency’s programmatic outcomes, which are reviewed during the state’s budget process.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

A 1996 Rhode Island law requires state agencies to submit performance information as part of the state’s budget process. The State’s Office of Management and Budget collects this performance data and works with agencies to achieve performance goals. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rolled out a new process for FY22 requiring agencies to report on program evidence and performance when submitting budget requests, utilizing a new three-tier evidence scale (proven effective, promising, and theory-based). This was accompanied by a new process to integrate evidence more fully into the OMB’s and the Governor Office’s materials used to make budgetary decisions.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

Beginning in FY20-21, the Tennessee budget instructions aligned the governor’s priorities with agency strategic plans. The instructions also encouraged agencies to invest in programs that were supported by research and evidence. The Cost Increase Request Form invited agencies to highlight their programs’ level of evidence based on the five evidence steps defined by the state’s Office of Evidence and Impact (OEI).

OEI reviews each submission and provides the Budget Office and Governor’s Office with a summary report for use in the budget process. The summary report objectively presents the evidentiary information and any available data for each programmatic budget request to inform the governor’s decisions regarding those requests. Departments may choose to leverage this information in presentations to the legislature.

While Tennessee does not have a statewide policy that governs evaluations and evaluation-related activities, Tennessee’s evidence framework and evidence-based budgeting process outline the steps agencies use to build evidence in support of decision-making. The framework includes a multi-tiered definition of evidence that captures program logic, performance data, and rigorous evaluation.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

A 2021 Utah law requires agencies to set at least one performance measure for passed and approved budget requests of more than $10,000. These performance measures were reported to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget (GOPB) and to the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst (LFA) within 60 days following the passage of the law. Annually, agencies are required to report performance measures identified in the appropriations bills prior to October 1 to support preparation for the next budget cycle. All measures and their data will be published prior to the 2022 General Legislative Session on performance.utah.gov.

Furthermore, in the FY22-23 budget guidance, GOPB recommended and encouraged agencies to develop measures, in partnership with GOPB and LFA, that are focused on resident and customer-focused outcomes, rather than outputs or activities. Additionally, for FY22-23, GOPB’s budget request form asks agencies to provide details and sources on any research or analysis that supports the evidence base for their request or the associated program.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Health, Workforce

A 2021 Washington law includes funding for the Office of Financial Management (OFM) to provide recommendations for equity impact statements for legislative proposals. The operating budget passed the legislature during the 2021 legislative session. Washington agencies and departments are currently making progress to implementing the requirement, including determining how to measure outcomes in the future. This requirement will then inform equity in legislative proposals.

Issue Areas: Child Welfare, Criminal Justice, Economic Mobility, Education, Equity, Health, Workforce