1 / 13

NASACT Annual Conference Bob Childree August 13, 2012

NASACT Annual Conference Bob Childree August 13, 2012. About the Survey. 4 years ago, NASACT joined AGA and Grant Thornton in an annual survey of financial leaders This is the second year where we are issuing a separate report on state financial leaders

ruby
Download Presentation

NASACT Annual Conference Bob Childree August 13, 2012

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. NASACT Annual ConferenceBob ChildreeAugust 13, 2012

  2. About the Survey • 4 years ago, NASACT joined AGA and Grant Thornton in an annual survey of financial leaders • This is the second year where we are issuing a separate report on state financial leaders • Topics: eliminating waste, measuring performance, elements of high performing organizations, timely CAFRs, and state systems in the Cloud • With NASACT and AGA guidance, Grant Thornton developed the questions • 40 financial leaders from 30 states took the survey (referred to as Executives) • 180 state & 137 local/other financial managers took the survey (referred to as Online)

  3. Inefficiency and Waste • Respondents say that eliminating waste is not new, but only 26% (Exec) & 40% (Online) have had a special campaign • Executives say the most common results of their efforts are audit findings (e.g., fraud) and streamlining work processes • Online respondents say the most common results are staff reductions and work process re-engineering • An Executive said, "We saved over $2 million through restructuring."

  4. Measuring Performance • Most Executives are not responsible for statewide performance management; 47% never or seldom help to set statewide goals • More Online respondents have a role; 54% usually or always help to set organization-wide goals • 38% (Exec) & 38% (Online) were very satisfied or satisfied with their capability to capture performance data • 27% (Exec) & 19% (Online) were very dissatisfied or dissatisfied with their capability • An Online respondent said, "Data is available, automated, valid, and reliable."

  5. Timely Financial Reporting • 43% (Exec) say a CAFR in 6 months is timely; another 43% say either 2/3/4 months is timely. • 45% (Online) say a CAFR in 2/3 months is timely; another 41% say either 4/5/6 months is timely • 72% (Exec) say the impediment to a more timely CAFR is that components cannot provide audited statements faster • 44% (Exec) and 42% (Online) say it is budget cuts and staffing shortages; 44% (Exec) and 49% (Online) say it is completing the audit • An Executive said, "I am not aware of any state managers or legislators who use CAFRs for decision-making."

  6. Timely Financial Reporting (continued) • 67% (Exec) & 63% (Online) say the potential for accounting errors is a risk with a timelier CAFR • 50% (Exec) & 48% (Online) say a timelier CAFR means more estimates, so less accurate data • Both groups say that CAFRs are more important for bond raters than for operational decision-makers • 69% (Exec) say they cannot produce a timely popular financial report and a CAFR later because it would take away effort needed for the CAFR; 41% (Exec) say the data is not available sooner, & 37% (Online) say they lack the staff to do it • An Executive said, "Auditors interpret the standards to mean that CAFRs must be perfect”

  7. State Systems and the Cloud • Despite clamor for the Cloud, most respondents do not manage their financial or other systems there • 81% (Exec) & 72% (Online) do not manage financial systems in the Cloud; 79% (Exec) & 60% (Online) say states do not manage other systems there • 57% (Exec) & 50% (Online) say security is the problem; 29% (Exec) & 28% (Online) say it is the unacceptable level of risk • Other problems scoring high are state IT maturity, implementation costs, and political issues • A respondent said, "There's been a lot of talk but not a lot of action."

  8. Strategy • There are few common threads in either group about results they wanted but that they were not getting • 68% (Exec) & 69& (Online) say their offices are aligned or very aligned in assisting the state to achieve its mission • There is confusion/lack of knowledge about risk management and performance improvement; 60% (Exec) & 36% (Online) selected "Neither satisfied or dissatisfied" for this question. • A respondent said, "We do not effectively have any risk management."

  9. Structure • 67% (Exec) & 49% (Online) say they have the right people in the right jobs • Much like the federal survey, Online respondent comments are quite negative; employees in field locations or outside of headquarters appear to be dissatisfied with management • 33% (Exec) & 49% (Online) say they have high or very high levels of trust and teamwork; but 47% (Exec) & 29% (Online) do not have an opinion • Perhaps it is easier to have trust and teamwork in smaller organizations? • An Executive said, "We have a very capable and dedicated staff."

  10. Culture • Both groups have very positive opinions about their offices' culture; most felt differently about their state or local government cultures • 77% (Exec) & 54% (Online) are very satisfied/ satisfied with their offices' level of staff alignment • 87% (Exec) & 49% (Online) say managers are effective at communicating and building culture • 77% (Exec) & 64% (Online) say their culture is ready for the challenges of the next 2 years; but 38% (Exec) & 33% (Online) had no opinion about their state's or local government's readiness • A respondent said, "It’s very much a family culture, more open, more ‘hair-down.’”

  11. People • Both groups say their offices have the right mix of skills/attitudes to meet the challenges of the next 2 years; Executives are about 20% more positive • Executives manage through a formal process with clear expectations and high standards, recognizing achievements, providing training and professional development, focusing on continuous improvement • Both groups say it is hard to attract good people to government • An Executive said, "Our staff embraces change and enjoys new challenges." • An Online respondent said, "Constant change has taken its toll."

  12. Top Challenges and Responses • Both groups were similar to the federal survey • Executives identify personnel (29%), providing service (24%), budget (21%), and technology (18%) • Online respondents identify personnel (23%), budget (18%), technology (10%), providing service (8%), and training (6%) • Executives respond by downsizing, reducing report content, eliminating activities, implementing alternative ways to pay and file taxes • Online respondents respond by reducing goals, re-engineering processes, reorganizing, reducing staff, and implementing fee-based services

  13. Conclusion State and local finances continue to be pummeled by fierce storms. The storms of the last few years have seasoned today's state and local government financial leaders. They are taking care of their staffs and collaborating with other states and other local governments to share costs and best practices. They have their priorities straight, and they will help guide their governments to a safe harbor. As one executive said, "I'm going to keep trying to do whatever I can."

More Related