U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

68–241 cc WASHINGTON : 2000

S. Hrg. 106–835

ASSESSING THE PROGRESS OF PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

HEARING

BEFORE THE

OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,

RESTRUCTURING AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SUBCOMMITTEE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

OCTOBER 3, 2000

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

(

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee, Chairman

WILLIAM V. ROTH, Jr., Delaware

TED STEVENS, Alaska

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania

JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

CARL LEVIN, Michigan

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois

ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey

MAX CLELAND, Georgia

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina

HANNAH S. SISTARE, Staff Director and Counsel

JOYCE A. RECHTSCHAFFEN, Minority Staff Director and Counsel

DARLA D. CASSELL, Chief Clerk

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,

RESTRUCTURING, AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio, Chairman

WILLIAM V. ROTH, Jr., Delaware

JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois

ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey

Kristine I. Simmons, Staff Director

Marianne Clifford Upton, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel

Julie L. Vincent, Chief Clerk

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Opening statements: Page

Senator Voinovich ............................................................................................. 1

WITNESSES

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2000

J. Christopher Mihm, Director, Strategic Issues, U.S. General Accounting

Office ..................................................................................................................... 3

Hon. Anthony A. Williams, Mayor, District of Columbia, accompanied by

John Koskinen, Deputy Mayor and City Administrator ................................... 6

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Mihm, J. Christopher:

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15

Williams, Hon. Anthony A.:

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 6

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 36

(1)

ASSESSING THE PROGRESS OF PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF

COLUMBIA

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2000

U.S. SENATE,

OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, RESTRUCTURING,

AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE,

OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in room

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. George V. Voinovich

presiding.

Present: Senator Voinovich.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH

Senator VOINOVICH. Good morning. I am going to try to roll along

here because we have been told we have a vote at 10:30. So, I will

try to move it along as fast as we can. I would like to thank the

Mayor and Mr. Mihm for being here today. Today we are discussing the progress of performance management in the District of

Columbia. Again, Mayor, welcome. Christopher, nice that you are

here.

I think you all know that the Subcommittee held a hearing 5

months ago to discuss the results of the fiscal year 1999 performance accountability report and to discuss the performance goals

laid out for this year. Today we have invited the Mayor back to report on the progress made by the District in achieving its performance goals for this year. It is interesting that the District’s fiscal

year just ended on September 31, so it is the second-year over with

for you, Mayor.

The General Accounting Office was tasked with auditing a sample of the city’s performance goals to evaluate the city’s progress,

and Chris Mihm of GAO is here today to report the results and to

submit any recommendations GAO may have to improve how the

city measures its performance and, more importantly, how the city

uses performance information to improve services for the District

residents.

Since our previous visit with the Mayor, there has been a number of improvements made in the Nation’s capital. The D.C. Financial Control Board recently announced that the city is able to meet

short-term and long-term borrowing needs. In June, the District

voted to change the structure of the D.C. Board of Education in

2

order to make the city’s education system more accountable to the

Mayor.

The Metropolitan Police Department has shifted its manpower in

order to get more officers on the street. The D.C. Tuition Assistance program received thousands of applications from students now

eligible to take advantage of the educational opportunities throughout the country. And that program, Mayor, has had a dramatic impact on the number of youngsters wanting to go on to college in the

District and it really makes me feel very good and I am sure that

it makes you feel very good, also.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office is diligently working to promote cooperation between the various law-enforcement agencies in the District and we are making some real progress on that. I am anxious

to get a report back on how that is finally going to be worked out.

Most recently, the Mayor has hired John Koskinen, who we welcome today, to concentrate on the day-to-day operations of the city.

And I think the Mayor understands that you are only as good as

your team and the better your team, the better job that you do. We

welcome the addition of Mr. Koskinen to your management team.

Despite these signs of progress, the troublesome headlines persist. Among them: Court Takeover of D.C. School Busing Possible;

District Audit Finds Illegal, Wasteful Contracting; 12 D.C. Schools

Lack Certified Food Workers; DPW Takes Years to Start Road

Projects; City Fails to Get Paychecks to 150 Teens; A Year After

Promises, Parks in Disarray; Prisoners Languish as Backlogs Get

Worse; and GAO Study Faults D.C. Child Care.

You have those kinds of headlines—there are still some things

that need to be done. I think it is clear to all of us that we have

an interest in the revitalization of the District of Columbia that

Mayor Williams has made. And I think it is very important for everyone to realize that Mayor Williams has made significant improvement in the health of the city and its image. But there remains a long road ahead and I would like to again say that this

Subcommittee is committed to helping the Mayor make Washington the ‘‘shining city on the hill’’ that all Americans want it to

be.

Just last week in our Governmental Affairs Committee, Mayor,

we reported out a number of bills that will assist you in improving

the health of our Nation’s capital. The Southeast Federal Center

Public-Private Development Act will allow the city to begin the

long-awaited effort to revitalize the Anacostia waterfront, located

less than a mile from the U.S. Capitol. The D.C. Receivership Accountability Act will establish lines of communication between the

Mayor and the receivers and subject the receivers to an independent annual audit.

The D.C. Performance Accountability Plan Amendments Act that

Senator Durbin and I introduced at the request of the Mayor will

improve upon the District’s process for measuring and reporting on

its performance. Mayor, we think those things are going to get

done by unanimous consent. So, they will go into operation. The

full Committee also approved the nominations of two D.C. Superior

Court associate judges to fill vacancies on a bench that is in desperate need of assistance. The District’s fiscal year 2001 appropriaVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:19 Jan 17, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 68241.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: SAFFAIRS
3

1The prepared statement of Mr. Mihm appears in the Appendix on page 15.

tion has been approved by both the Senate and House and is currently in conference committee.

In addition to providing any assistance the Mayor may need to

improve the services of the District, the role of the Subcommittee

is to oversee the Mayor’s progress in implementing the various programs developed to improve the city’s performance. In that regard,

I am interested to hear today how the Mayor plans to integrate the

numerous performance documents he introduced at the hearing

last May so that, first of all, the citizens are satisfied; second, the

agency managers know exactly what is expected of them; third, reform is accomplished; and finally, congressional standards are met.

At the May hearing, Mayor, you made it clear that your citywide

strategic plan would be the focal point of the District’s performance

management system, the source of all other performance documents. However, after reviewing the city’s current system, GAO

found the citywide strategic plan is better suited as a broad, longrange plan for directing the city, especially given the fact that the

citywide strategic plan is evaluated only on a biannual basis. GAO

found that the annual performance accountability plan is a superior guide regarding day-to-day, month-to-month, and year-to-year

performance since it is subject to continual oversight and is updated on an annual basis.

The General Accounting Office will make more observations and

recommendations and raise a number of concerns this morning and

I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Mayor to respond

to the GAO testimony point-by-point as a follow-up to this hearing.

You do not necessarily have to do it today, but I would like to have

you look at those recommendations that they make and get back

to us on how legitimate and fair you think they are and how you

intend to respond to them. I think they made some insightful observations and I want to make sure that your office has acknowledged their findings and recommendations and will consider integrating them into your own performance management system.

I close my opening statement by noting that I think the Mayor

has done a great job of getting this beautiful city back on its feet

and I commend him on his progress so far. However, it is time for

Congress to start seeing more positive results and it is time that

we begin to see a local government that is capable of managing

itself without the constant meddling of this Congress. The District’s

past message of ‘‘change has been slow so far, but big things are

expected in the near future’’ must yield some clear, verifiable results.

On that note, I look forward to your testimony to hear what the

District has accomplished since our last meeting.

I now would like to call on Christopher Mihm from the General

Accounting Office for his opening statement.

STATEMENT OF J. CHRISTOPHER MIHM,1 DIRECTOR,

STRATEGIC ISSUES, U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE

Mr. MIHM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is, of course, a great

pleasure and an honor to be here today to discuss performance

management in the District of Columbia. We share certainly the

4

sentiments that you stated in your opening statement; that after

nearly 2 years in office, Mayor Williams’ administration has made

considerable progress in making the management of the District

Government more results-oriented. The Mayor has clearly demonstrated his personal commitment to transforming the culture of

the District Government.

However, cultural transformations do not come quickly or easily.

Thus, as is to be entirely expected, improvements in the management and performance of the District Government are still very

much a work in progress. In the interest of brevity, I will hit the

highlights of my written statement by covering three general points

this morning. First, in comparing the management practices used

by the District to those of high performing organizations, it is clear

that the Mayor’s performance management system contains many,

but not all, of the elements used by those organizations.

On a positive note, the city has a strategic planning effort that

has generated largely results-oriented goals and measures that

show what the District wants to achieve. However, the District

needs to create processes for ensuring that the performance information it generates is credible for decisionmaking and accountability. Without these processes, neither the Mayor nor other key

decisionmakers can know for certain whether existing goals were

met and, if not, how performance can be improved.

Second, the District has opportunities to better align its efforts

to ensure that it is sending District employees, managers, citizens,

Congress, and others, consistent messages about the results the

District wants to achieve, how it will be done and how progress will

be measured. High-performing organizations know how the services

they produce contribute to achieving results. In fact, this explicit

alignment between day-to-day activities and broader results to be

achieved is one of the defining features of a high-performing organization.

This alignment is important to ensuring that the services that

government provides contribute to results that citizens need and

care about. It is also important to show front-line employees the

vital role they have in achieving the broader organizational results

that the District is trying to achieve.

In that regard, we found that a more complete integration of the

goals in the Mayor’s strategic plan, scorecards and performance

contracts with the annual performance plans and reports provided

to Congress is important to ensuring both the Congress and the

District have a common understanding of the results that the District wants to achieve, how it plans to achieve those results and the

status of its efforts. In the absence of this common understanding,

Congress is hard-pressed to conduct oversight and determine how

it can best help the District.

Third, the District could improve the usefulness of the information it provides to Congress by better ensuring that it’s most significant performance goals are included in both the annual plans

and reports that the Mayor is to send to Congress each year. As

you know, the Mayor is only required to report on the goals that

were in the performance plan that was originally sent to Congress.

However, after the 2000 plan was sent to Congress, the Mayor upVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:19 Jan 17, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 68241.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: SAFFAIRS
5

dated it to include new and modified goals. This is typical of the

way performance measurement efforts work.

As a result, though, the next performance report is not required

to show progress toward the new or updated goals. We therefore

suggest that the District consider the approach that many Federal

agencies used in reporting on their performance. Like the District,

Federal agencies found that they needed to change their performance goals as they gained experience and understanding and new

problems arose during the early years of their performance measurement efforts.

In reviewing the performance reports that Federal agencies

issued under GPRA this last March, we saw examples where agencies noted that a goal had been changed from one in the original

plan and reported progress in meeting the new goal. The advantage

to this approach is that it helped to ensure that the performance

reports, by reporting on the agency’s actual as opposed to discarded

goals, were actually providing useful and relevant information for

congressional and other decisionmakers. So, again that is something we think the District ought to consider in modeling the Federal approach.

In summary, Mr. Chairman, the District continues to make

progress in implementing a more results-oriented approach to management accountability throughout the District. Making the necessary changes and instilling the new culture requires sustained

commitment and effort, as the Mayor and other District leaders

clearly understand. Thus, despite the important progress that has

been and is being made, ample opportunities exist for the District

as it moves forward. Perhaps foremost among these are: First, continuing to model the management practices of high-performing organizations; second, ensuring that its daily activities are aligned

with its goal-setting and performance measurement efforts; third,

generating performance data that are credible for decisionmaking;

and fourth, using its performance plans and reports to provide Congress with the information and perspective Congress needs for effective oversight and decisionmaking.

We look forward to continuing what is already a very constructive working relationship that we have with the District and we

look forward to supporting the District, this Subcommittee and others in Congress as we jointly seek to ensure that the residents of

the District have the world-class products and services they so richly deserve.

I would be happy to answer any questions you may have, sir.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thank you, Mr. Mihm. As I mentioned to

you earlier, I really appreciate GAO helping us in this regard and

the quick response that you gave to our request to look over and

give us some information on how you think the District is doing on

those goals.

Mr. MIHM. Thank you, sir.

Senator VOINOVICH. Mayor Williams.

6

1The prepared statement of Mayor Williams appears in the Appendix on page 36.

STATEMENT OF HON. ANTHONY A. WILLIAMS,1 MAYOR, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN KOSKINEN,

DEPUTY MAYOR AND CITY ADMINISTRATOR

Mayor WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today on performance management in the District of Columbia. I am glad to have this opportunity to detail the

progress we are making in the District—progress in improving service delivery, accountability and, very importantly, the confidence of our citizens.

When we met in May, I described the components of the perform- ance management system that the District implemented during the

first year and 4 months of my administration, and these components included: (1) a citywide strategic plan crafted by our citizens

to reflect their priorities; (2) scorecards that present clear goals and

deadlines to the public; and (3) agency-specific strategic plans that

outline fundamental changes in the way each of our agencies would

conduct business. And individual performance contracts that translate our larger citywide plans into tangible personal commitments,

measures by which I can judge the success of each of my cabinet

members.

By utilizing this system of performance management, I believe we can make three important changes in the way our government

operates, changes that will make our government more efficient, effective and responsive. Our goals are to instill: (1) the values of

performance and accountability in the minds and day-to-day habits

of our employees; (2) improve the quality and credibility of our reports and performance data to clearly communicate our progress to

District Government managers or Council, this Congress and, most

importantly, the public; and (3) incorporate these components into

our budget so we allocate resources wisely based on our known

prior results and clear future goals.

Now, shortly before we met last spring, the U.S. General Accounting Office issued its report that assessed our initial performance accountability report. The GAO report raised several concerns

about our system of performance management and data tracking.

Specifically, those concerns were that the District did not: (1) identify managers most directly responsible for achieving performance

or their immediate supervisors; (2) specify two levels of performance for each goal; and finally, (3) describe the status of District

Government activity subject to a court order or the requirements

placed on the District by the courts.

Now, during the course of my testimony, I would like to address

each of these concerns and describe what we are doing to improve

for the future. The GAO’s primary concern was the extent to which

we complied with congressional reporting requirements and we addressed their concern, I believe, through four measures: One, identify managers and supervisors responsible for achieving each goal

in fiscal year 2001; two, collaborating with your staff to draft legislation to reconcile all congressional and District deadlines; third,

eliminating the provisions for two levels of performance for each

goal; and finally, agreeing upon a set of major equity cases that the

District will include in future performance accountability reports

7

until or unless those cases are resolved. And as you know, I think,

we are in the process of working with plaintiff groups, stakeholders

and the judges, through our Special Counsel to the Mayor for Receivers, to move out of these receiverships. So, we are in the process of doing that.

Now that this system of checks and balances is in place, our future performance plans and reports will comply with congressional

guidelines and will be submitted by the deadlines. Now, during the

summer we had many conversations with officials from the GAO,

conversations that proved informative and instructive for both parties. Together we have addressed the substance of the District’s

performance management system. We have discussed the components we have in place, the need for continuous review, the alignment of our citywide strategic plan with our individual agency

plans, and the critical need to improve the quality and credibility

of our performance data.

I am pleased to report that we have made important progress in

each of these areas and, as you suggested, we will be providing you

further written documentation of what is happening. But I would

like to briefly say first, in terms of components in place, we have

created written agency strategic plans and performance contracts

for agency directors on my cabinet. Second, our agency directors

have adopted the citywide strategic plan as their unifying vision

and we are working together on cost-cutting initiatives. And third,

our agency directors will review their strategic plans this fall to

identify priorities that have changed over the last year to extend

those plans into fiscal year 2002.

Our challenge now is to explicitly align these agency plans with

the citywide strategic plans so each city employee understands his

or her role in achieving his or her agency’s objectives in supporting

the plan. We have to ensure that all District employees, regardless

of position, understand that they are the people who can improve

our government. We also must demonstrate to our citizens how

day-to-day operations of our agencies support the overall plan.

The GAO’s findings during the sampling of our fiscal year 2000

measures indicate that variations still remain in our data and I

concur. I am concerned that few agencies provided summaries of

their own internal data collection and management practices regarding the 31 measures the GAO sampled. I also know that while

many of our agencies have their own internal standards, they are

not sufficient to pass independent review.

Now, we are already working to correct this problem. When we

unveiled our scorecards last spring, I asked publicly for the Inspector General to begin to audit selected scorecard and performance

contract measures for fiscal year 2000. I wanted to determine the

most common problems, proposed means to address them, and ensure that agencies have sufficient internal quality controls for success in fiscal year 2001. To ensure we are making progress, the Inspector General will audit selected performance data prior to the

submission of the District’s fiscal year 2000 performance accountability report to Congress in March 2001.

Plans, goals, and measures alone cannot succeed. For our city

government to become more self-reliant and self-sufficient, we have

to really change behaviors and beliefs at all levels of our governVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:19 Jan 17, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 68241.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: SAFFAIRS
8

ment. I have a commitment to create accountability among my cabinet and our most senior deputies. We need to grow that commitment now among middle managers, program managers, and frontline service employees throughout the District Government. That is

a goal of our newly-launched Management Supervisory Service, to

provide performance incentives to senior and middle managers.

Through the D.C. Office of Personnel Performance Management

Program, we are establishing individual performance plans with

goals and objectives for our agency middle managers and Excepted

Service personnel throughout our government.

Among our most critical alignments of all these alignments is the

alignment of performance goals and agency budget submissions.

For our performance management system to work, there must be

a clear link between performance goals and budget allocations, between expenditures and end results.

Each consecutive District budget has improved the relationship

between resources and results, but we have substantial work remaining in this area, as well. Our new deputy mayor and city administrator, John Koskinen, and our new chief financial officer, Dr.

Natwar Gandhi, are working closely to ensure that the program

and financial staffs are integrating performance goals into our

agency budget submissions. First, our fiscal year 2002 budget instructions will clearly define how agencies should relate their goals

and measures to resources. Second, Mr. Koskinen’s experience in

general and in particular as deputy director for management at

OMB will enhance, I think, our ability to achieve this goal. While

we are making progress, I anticipate that it will take another two

full budget cycles before we have established a lasting and durable

relationship between financial and performance measures.

Finally, in the area of streamlining agency goals, the GAO’s review of our 1999 year-end report noted 542 goals in the District of

Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance

Authority’s fiscal year 1999 performance accountability plan. GAO

and the District both felt that was an excessive number of goals to

effectively manage and track. Yet, GAO notes that our fiscal year

2000 plan has 417 and our fiscal year 2001 plan may have more.

I think it is important to note that agencies need to identify and

focus on core strategic goals. Each agency will maintain an internal

set of operating measures that support strategic goals and many of

these will be reflected in the directors’ performance contracts. However, for the fiscal year 2002 performance accountability plans, our

agencies will be more selective in establishing critical goals and

measures.

Now, if I can briefly turn to some of our accomplishments on the

District’s scorecard goals, I would like to highlight a few. We set

a goal to resurface 150 blocks of streets and alleys by August. Not

only did we meet that goal, due to some contracts we recently put

in place with the help of this Congress, we expect to add to this

accomplishment by resurfacing an additional 400 blocks of streets

by the end of this year.

We are meeting our commitment to e-government by launching

five new information and service delivery features on the District’s

web site, which we have also streamlined with a new, easier to remember address, WashingtonDC.gov.

9

I think you will appreciate this goal, Mr. Chairman, a proud citizen of Ohio—we set a goal to replace the lions on the Taft Bridge.

The lions, which were removed in 1993, held great historical significance for the citizens of our city and we committed to returning

the lions by this July and they were indeed returned this summer.

Their return, I think, is symbolic of a government that is making

commitments and keeping commitments to our citizens.

We set a goal of putting 200 more officers on the streets by September. We achieved this goal through a number of different redeployment and recruitment strategies. Mr. Chairman, you already

mentioned our redeployment of officers. Nearly 1,000 officers assigned to administrative and investigative duties are newly assigned to patrol streets in uniform one week a month. From the

residents’ perspective, this means more than 150 officers in the

neighborhoods across the city every day. In addition, we have graduated 84 lateral hires from other jurisdictions and 107 new hires,

all of whom have been assigned to street duty. We also instituted

a ‘‘power shift’’ to put officers on the street during evening and

nighttime hours and our Mobile Force responds to areas experiencing increases in crime.

In addition to the timely completion of these goals, we are also

pleased to report that the Department of Motor Vehicles has

reached one of its performance targets ahead of schedule. We made

a goal at the beginning of the year that we would reduce the time

that customers wait in line to 30 minutes or less for 80 percent of

the driver’s license and registration transactions by October.

To show you how these performance goals work, a couple of

months into the year there were a lot of stories and there was a

lot of controversy about how the lines were long. We knew the lines

were long, which is why we made the goal to reduce the lines. Well,

the fact of the matter is we actually exceeded that performance

level in May, as 82 percent of wait times were less than 30 minutes. But we fell below the 80 percent target, and I think part of

this performance management system working well is fessing up

when you have not met a target. We fell below that target in the

months of June and July as we introduced new digital photography

technology which, in the long run, will pay dividends for our city,

as it has for many States, by providing more and more online service.

Now that our DMV personnel are comfortable with the new

equipment, they met the 80-percent target again in August and I

anticipate that our DMV will sustain and improve their scorecard

performance through October and beyond.

Well, finally, in future revisions to the citywide plan, in my

staff’s discussion with GAO, the evaluators noted that we had not

directly engaged all the relevant stakeholders in reviewing and refining the Citywide Strategic Plan. In developing our first citywide

plan, we focused our outreach efforts on residents of the District.

We brought together more than 3,000 citizens in November 1999

to share my cabinet’s draft plan with them. Based on their input,

we significantly redrafted the plan, allowing citizens of our city to

reorient our plans and priorities.

During 2000, however, we will expand our outreach. First, we

will engage more than 4,000 residents in neighborhood planning foVerDate 11-MAY-2000 12:19 Jan 17, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 68241.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: SAFFAIRS
10

rums to identify priorities unique to their neighborhoods and communities. Second, as we prepare to update our citywide plan in the

fall of 2001, we will engage a wider range of stakeholders in the

review process for the strategic plan. In addition to our residents,

we recognize the role of local businesses, our Council, and this Congress in helping the District identify and realize its goals.

Finally, I want to thank the Subcommittee and you, Mr. Chairman, in particular, for your support with the Southeast Federal

Center, with the receivership bill, with performance accountability

legislation and with the judicial appointments. They are all important components of our relationship and, more importantly, important components of our bringing the city where we all want it to

be.

That concludes my testimony and I would be happy to answer

any questions you may have.

Senator VOINOVICH. Thanks very much. I have just been informed that we have got about 10 minutes. And I would rather not

leave here and then have you waiting for me. You are all very busy

people. I think there is some good news and bad news. Mayor, I

think we are impressed with the progress you have made. I think

that one focal point of this hearing, as far as I am concerned, is

that in your May 9 testimony, you state that among your goals for

the year was sustaining progress, ensuring valid and reliable data,

unifying different plans and bench-marking progress against other

jurisdictions. That is a quote from your May 9 testimony.

Along those lines, the integration of the multiple performance

documents was one of my primary concerns at that hearing. Simply

put, there were too many performance documents that we were

having to contend with. GAO went out again and did another study

and you heard the testimony. And the District still has multiple

performance documents that show alarmingly little overlap or continuity. There is no system in place to measure or verify performance measurement data and the District does not yet possess a

comprehensive strategic plan that meets GAO’s standards. They

made some recommendations. The Mayor should produce one comprehensive, fully-integrated performance plan. The city was unable

to verify the data used to report on the fiscal year performance

measures and the District’s performance plan must provide a sufficient amount of data for Congress to conduct adequate oversight.

I guess what I would like to suggest today is that the District

sit down with GAO and try to sift through some of this information, to see if between now and the end of this year, Mayor, some

of these concerns that I have and the Subcommittee has can be

taken care of, so that when you come back again in May or thereabouts, that will be something that we will not be talking about.

Frankly, I do not think I need another hearing, but I would like

to meet with you and the GAO and your management team, to get

a report back from you before the end of the year, to talk about

the stuff that has been brought up and how we are going to try to

get these things smoothed over so that everything is understandable.

And I think that is really important for your well-being and also

for our well-being, because if we have another hearing next year

and we still have four or five different plans and the same report

11

back from GAO, it is not going to be good for you and, quite frankly, I think this Subcommittee will be little bit frustrated. I understand that you have not been on the job that long and I know that

it takes 3 to 4 years for you to make some positive results. On the

other hand, I think that if you have a clearly defined set of performance goals, where it can be—just maybe be one set of them,

where you understand them, we understand them, your directors

understand them, your middle managers understand them, and the

folks on the street understand them, that it will be good for the

District and good for Congress.

So, I would respectfully request that you do that. The other thing

that I would like to suggest to you today—I have been through this

and first of all I know how you must feel. You come in here and

you have all kinds of problems and people to report to and you

have to come back to Congress and go through this. I recall when

I was mayor of Cleveland we had the Financial Supervisory Commission. I used to dread to a certain degree those 6-month meetings with my Financial Supervisory Commission because they had

me on the firing line. That was the bad news.

The good news is that it was kind of a wake-up call for me and

it was also something I was able to use with my directors and the

middle managers and say, ‘‘Hey, we have got to perform.’’ And it

was also good for our city council because it reminded them of

things they had to do in order for us to get our job done. So, I hope

that you look at this as a positive experience. Last, but not least,

getting people involved in your management team. Have you started any initiatives in the area of quality management?

Mr. KOSKINEN. Well, I think probably the most significant one is

the development of the Management Supervisory Service. We have

slightly more than 900 middle managers in the government who ultimately are directly involved with front-line employees removing

themselves from various employment protections. They really are

now fully accountable and understand that. We are now providing

a wide range of training and support for them so that they, in fact,

will become better managers.

We also are moving aggressively to try to create labor-management partnerships in the agencies. We want to engage managers

and front-line employees in jointly trying to figure out exactly how

to improve the quality of the work place and also the quality of the

work. I think you cannot successfully restructure and re-engineer

an operation from the top down. You have to find out what is going

on in the front lines and engage middle managers in the discussion

so you have a unified approach to improving operations. I think

that those initiatives, combined together, should give us a higher

quality of managers. Many think what we should do is get rid of

everybody and hire new people. There just are not enough new people out there and they need training and support as well.

So, I think we have a good cadre and core of those managers, but

we have got to provide them training. We have to look at the quality of their management, help them look at the quality of their employees and help them improve across the board.

Senator VOINOVICH. Well, I would like to share with you some information. I have been trying this last couple of years to work with

the GAO and some of the Federal agencies in terms of training,

12

empowerment and incentives, but, particularly the issue of quality

management and empowering the employees to participate. We had

a very successful—and still have in Ohio, what we call ‘‘Quality

Services Through Partnership.’’ And the material is really great. I

mean, Xerox came in and did it for us pro bono, and then we built

on that. And we have changed the documentation so that it is very

relevant to governmental employees.

The fact that we have developed in the State 3,000 teams of individuals and departments that are constantly looking at ways they

can work together as a team to improve their performance. So,

often the real success of an organization, governmental organization, is how ignited are the people that are working in these various agencies? My observation has been that too often in government they just come to work every day and nobody pays attention

to what they have to say and they kind of get down on themselves.

And when they realize that they are important and they are being

listened to and they are being challenged to come up with ways,

for example, to do some of the things that you would like them to

do, rather than have somebody come in and say to them, ‘‘This is

what you have to do,’’ and they look at them and say, ‘‘Well, we

have been here 15 years and we think it might be worthwhile to

maybe get our opinion on these things’’—but I think that is an ingredient that you ought to look at in terms of getting this other

stuff done, because those people on the front-line are the ones that

are going to make the difference for you in terms of achieving those

goals that you would like to achieve.

I will be glad to send that stuff over and would be interested in

what you think about it.

Mr. KOSKINEN. I would be delighted to have it. My experience in

the private sector, as well as the public sector, is that the key, critical ingredient in turning organizations around is dealing effectively with front-line employees. As you note, this means involving

them in the discussions and listening to what they have to say. The

people who know best about why an organization doesn’t function,

like the managers, are the people actually doing the work. So, you

are exactly right. We would love to have those materials.

Senator VOINOVICH. Great. What I would like to do is suggest

today that before the end of the year I would like to get together

with you, not at a hearing, but just get together and see what

progress we have made on some of the things. I would like to get

your response back in writing to some of the suggestions that GAO

has made and then come back publicly again, maybe in May, and

not have this as a subject of the discussion. How would that be?

Mayor WILLIAMS. That would be good. I appreciate that.

Senator VOINOVICH. Well, I thank you very much for coming here

this morning and I look forward to continuing to work with you,

Mayor. As I have said to you, if there is anything you need, pick

up the phone and call me. And I know you are moving forward on

that public-private partnership and I am interested in pitching in

and helping you with that. If they can determine some identifiable

goals they are committed to, I promise you, Mayor, I will go out

and try and encourage people from all over the United States to

come in and be supportive of what you are doing, because my goal

is your goal.

13

I would like to leave this Congress, whenever I leave, and be able

to say that we are truly the city on the hill and something that we

can all be proud of. I think that it is not only the responsibility of

the people in the District, but frankly, Mayor, I think it is the responsibility of the citizens around this country to make sure that

happens and come to your help. So, I am here. Thank you very

much.

[Whereupon, at 10:12 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(15)

A P P E N D I X

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

Æ