1 / 23

Key National Indicator Systems: A U.S. Perspective

Key National Indicator Systems: A U.S. Perspective. Bernice Steinhardt Director, Strategic Issues U.S. Government Accountability Office. Presentation Overview. The context for indicators: why measure U.S. experience with indicators Current developments and GAO’s role

aretha-anthony
Download Presentation

Key National Indicator Systems: A U.S. Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Key National Indicator Systems: A U.S. Perspective Bernice Steinhardt Director, Strategic Issues U.S. Government Accountability Office

  2. Presentation Overview • The context for indicators: why measure • U.S. experience with indicators • Current developments and GAO’s role • Indicators and the international government audit community

  3. The 21st Century: A Period of Profound Transition • Changing security threats • Long-term fiscal and environmental sustainability • Economic recovery and restored growth • Global interdependency • Demographic and other social change • Advancements in science and technology • Public expectations of government

  4. Implications for U.S. Government • Many of the current policies, programs, functions, and activities are based on conditions that existed decades ago and are not well aligned with 21st century realities. • We cannot afford to continue to do business as usual. • Accomplishing U.S. government goals will increasingly rely on strengthened mechanisms for collaboration.

  5. Key National Indicators and Governance in the 21st Century • U.S. government increasingly has to partner with other governments, other levels of government, private and not-for-profit sectors, to achieve results. Examples: • Disaster planning, response and recovery • Environmental protection • Public health • Need tools and metrics to link efforts

  6. Role of Key National Indicator System • Inform strategic planning (link shared purposes) • Enhance performance and accountability • Inform congressional oversight and decision making • Facilitate oversight, and stimulate greater citizen engagement

  7. History of Key National Indicators in the United States • Numerous sets of national-level indicators in response to changing needs and conditions: • Economic indicators developed during the Great Depression of the 1930s • Growth in social programs in the 1960s drove need for social indicators (e.g., education, health) • Concern for environmental protection led to interest in developing environmental data

  8. Subnational Indicator Systems in U.S. • While lacking a national indicator system, considerable interest and activity at the city, state and regional levels during last 20 years • Learning-oriented: information about social, cultural, economic, environmental conditions, presented with little or no commentary or analysis, for educational purposes • Outcome-oriented: indicators used to monitor and encourage progress toward goals • About 150 community, state or regional indicator projects across the U.S.

  9. Efforts to Develop National Indicator System for U.S. • GAO, in cooperation with National Academy of Sciences, convened forum in 2003 to discuss whether and how to create key national indicator system for U.S. • About 60 leaders in accountability, business, education, NGO, government, labor, media, minority, scientific, and statistics communities • Efforts continued over next several years under leadership of National Academy • Independent non-profit organization created in 2007: State of the USA

  10. State of the USA (www.stateoftheusa.org) • Seeks to provide decisionmakers and the public information needed to • measure national progress • evaluate policies and strategies • permit comparisons to other nations • Designed to be a Web-based system

  11. State of the USA(www.stateoftheusa.org) • Envisioned as public-private partnership, supported by government and non-government sectors • All sectors involved in achieving national goals have a stake in outcomes • Vital to have shared understanding in order to link efforts towards common goal • Expect to develop about 300 key indicators, including some number of composite indicators in 12 core domains (e.g., environment) and 12 cross-cutting domains (e.g, competitiveness) • Created 20 key health indicators in 2009

  12. Congressional Action to Develop a KNI System • In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148) included a provision mandating • the National Academy to establish a U.S. key national indicator system through its own institutional capability or in partnership with an independent, private, nonprofit organization; and • creation of a bipartisan Commission on Key National Indicators composed of eight members, appointed by congressional leadership, to provide oversight of such a system, among other responsibilities.

  13. GAO Role in Legislation • Act also directed GAO to study previous work conducted by public agencies, private organizations, or foreign countries with respect to best practices for a key national indicator system. • GAO study also subject of a request from Senate committee chairman to examine other KNI systems and their implications for federal government.

  14. Research Objectives for GAO Study • Examine trends in development and maintenance of indicator systems and experiences of key stakeholders • Identify how indicator systems have been used by governments and stakeholders in policy and management decisions • Identify factors affecting development and use of indicator systems and their potential implications for (a) the organization responsible for developing and overseeing a key national indicator system and (b) the federal government as data provider and user • Report to be issued March 2011

  15. Scope of GAO Study: Case Study Selection Criteria • Comprehensiveness - a mixture of economic, environmental, and social and cultural indicators. • Longevity - in existence for at least 5 years and currently in operation. • Outcome-oriented – measures of progress towards achievement of stated goals or outcomes. • Connection with a governmental entity that uses the system to establish or modify programmatic priorities or to gauge progress in priority areas.

  16. Indicator Systems Selected as Case Studies • National: Australia, Switzerland, United Kingdom • State: Virginia; Victoria, Australia or South Australia • Local: Boston, MA; King County, WA • Focused reviews of other indicator systems: • Albuquerque, NM; Jacksonville, FL;Truckee, CA; Oregon; the European Union, Lisbon Indicators; Finland; Latvia.

  17. Potential Roles for GAO in Future • Assess development of indicators or system • Audit quality of information, including validity and reliability • Audit effectiveness of KNI system in achieving objectives • Use indicator data to help target improvement opportunities

  18. International Audit Community Interest in Key National Indicators • In 2007, International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI) agreed that KNIs could be an important tool to align government programs and policies with results that citizens care about.

  19. Opportunities that Indicator Systems Can Provide for SAIs • Relevant audit work that can inform public discourse and decision making • Ability to learn from other organizations and countries that have national indicator systems • Better understanding of government agencies’ contributions to national outcomes • Increase transparency and accountability

  20. Role of National Audit Offices in National Indicator Systems • Nearly all (23 of 27) responding SAIs indicated they performed at least one role vis-à-vis indicator systems: • Identifying the need for key national indicator systems • Contributing to system design and implementation • Assessing the indicators/systems • Auditing quality, validity, reliability of indicator information • Using indicators to assess, report on national progress • Others: publishing guides, convening discussions, informing audit work, influencing public discourse

  21. INTOSAI Working Group on Key National Indicators • Goals: • To support SAIs’ ability to use KNIs in auditing government performance • To promote exchange of best practices in development and use of KNIs • To support INTOSAI’s role in promoting development and use of KNIs

  22. KNI Working Group Activities • Memorandum of Understanding with OECD • Participation in OECD World Forum on Measuring Progress • Collaboration on Guide to KNI Terms and Concepts • Principles and guidelines for use of KNIs in performance audits • Survey of international experience in KNI development and use

  23. For Further Information • About GAO—www.gao.gov • Prior GAO work on Key National Indicators • Informing Our Nation: Improving How to Understand and Assess the USA’s Position and Progresswww.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-1 • Controller General Forum on Key National Indicators www.gao.gov/products/GAO-03-672SP • Key National Indicators Mandate • H.R. 3590, Public Law 111-148, Title V, Subtitle G, Section 5605 • Available at www.thomas.loc.gov

More Related