Skip to main content

District of Columbia: Comments on Fiscal Year 2000 Performance Report

GAO-01-804 Published: Jun 08, 2001. Publicly Released: Jun 08, 2001.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

The District of Columbia's fiscal year 2000 performance report is an improvement in that it meets some of the statutory requirements that the previous year's report did not. However, the extensive changes that the District made to its fiscal year 2000 performance goals during the fiscal year undermine the report's usefulness because the District did not include critical information needed by Congress and other stakeholders. Such information, identifying how, when, and why specific goals were altered and the decision-making and accountability implications of those changes, is important to Congress and others so that they can have confidence in the validity and completeness of the reported performance data. Also, the report does not cover all significant activities of the District government. Sustained progress is needed to address the critical performance and other management challenges that the District faces. The District recognizes the shortcomings with its performance management efforts and has stated a commitment to addressing them. The effective implementation of the various initiatives underway in the District is vital to the success of the District's efforts to create a more focused, results-oriented approach to management and decision-making--an approach that is based on clear goals, sound performance and cost information, and a budget process that uses this information in allocating resources.

Recommendations

Recommendations for Executive Action

Agency Affected Recommendation Status
District of Columbia To further strengthen the District's performance management process and provide more useful information to its citizens and Congress, the Mayor of the District of Columbia should accelerate efforts to settle upon a set of results-oriented goals that are more consistently reflected in its various planning, reporting, and accountability efforts.
Closed – Implemented
According to a District official in the City's Administrator's office, DC has fully implemented its performance budgeting system (PBS), which is now stable, as no more major changes are planned for it. The only changes to PBS that now occur are as new agencies are added or reorganizations take place. For example, at this time all 76 established agencies have performance goals, measures, and targets and all are included in the PBS. Only 2 major agencies--the Office of Unified Communications (the "911" agency) and Environmental Affairs are being assimilated into PBS because they are newly created. That assimilation effort should be completed by FY 2007.
District of Columbia To further strengthen the District's performance management process and provide more useful information to its citizens and Congress, the Mayor of the District of Columbia should provide specific information in its performance reports for each goal that changed, including a description of how, when, and why the change occurred. In addition, the District should identify the impact of the change on the performance assessment itself, including data collection and measurement for the reporting period.
Closed – Not Implemented
In March 2007, DC issued a new Performance Accountability Report for FY2006. Based on a visual inspection of the city's 2006 budget, the city notes in the budget that changes made to performance goals and indicators have been made and the date they were made, but it does not indicate the reasons.
District of Columbia To further strengthen the District's performance management process and provide more useful information to its citizens and Congress, the Mayor of the District of Columbia should include in each year's accountability report the performance of all significant activities of the District.
Closed – Not Implemented
In March 2007, DC issued a new Performance Accountability Report for FY2006. Early in the report, a table, FY2006 Performance Accountability Reports' Status, contains several enterprises or activities that are still not included in the Performance Accountability Report. Hence, this recommendation should be closed as not implemented.

Full Report

Office of Public Affairs

Topics

Internal controlsMunicipal governmentsPerformance measuresPerformance managementReporting requirementsStrategic planningContract performanceD.C. GovernmentPerformance goalsFinancial accountability