What can it do for you?
Transform Your Government - When you change the budget
debate from cutting or adding to discussing outcomes, you
change the entire focus of government. As a result, governments
that utilize BFO transform the very nature of their work.
They embrace continuous improvement because managers are accountable
for results and programs must deliver the results citizens
want most from their tax dollars.
“By and large, most people distrust the traditional
budget process, so people distrust the final product. BFO
moves us from arguing about the validity of the budget to
talking about priorities…The nature of our budget debate changed
to outcomes.”
- Roger Neumaier, Snohomish County, Washington
Engage Your Citizens - Governments that align their
budgets directly with citizen priorities experience a renaissance
in their relationship with the public. Because the budget
process is transparent and more understandable, citizens can
be engaged as partners. Here’s what local governments report:
“As an elected official, I have something to talk
about to the public: results which reinforces trust in government.”
- Serena Cruz Walsh, Commissioner, Multnomah County,
Oregon
Engage Your Employees - Governments that utilize BFO
report a “cultural revolution” that develops leaders, improves
communication, cultivates new talent, and unifies the entire
organization around focused goals. BFO is an inclusive endeavor
that leverages ideas from a much broader pool of individuals.
“BFO opens up the organization and opens up lines
of communication. It’s an opportunity to educate everyone
from line staff personnel to the CEO…It also forces difficult
conversations that incremental budgeting doesn’t.”
- Stefani Conley, Mesa County, Colorado
Bring Common Sense to Your Budget - While the BFO
process isn’t traditional, the focus on purchasing results
citizens value -- instead of just adding or cutting last year’s
budget -- is surprisingly intuitive.
“It required us to stop doing things the old way. The old way had a lot of pitfalls and was a stale model that wasn’t working.”
- Dave Cook, City of Dallas, Texas
How They Stack Up:
Traditional Budgeting vs. Budgeting for Outcomes
| Traditional Budgeting |
Budgeting for Outcomes |
| Start with last year as the base “entitlement” |
Start by determining the price of government
-- how much citizens are willing to spend for services |
| Focus on adding/subtracting from base entitlement |
Focus on buying results that matter to
citizens from competing offers |
| Autopilot increase = new base |
Since there is no base, there is no adding
and subtracting |
| “Cut” from new base |
Since there is no base, there is no adding
and subtracting |
| Justification for needs and costs, plus
extra |
Offer to deliver results at the set price |
| Incentive to build up costs and make cuts
hard |
Incentive to produce the most results that
matter, at a set price |
| Find hidden/unnecessary costs |
Validate offers or find better choices |
| Choose to cut services or raise taxes,
and get blamed (or blame someone else) |
Choose the best offers, to get the most
results for citizens at the price they will pay |
| Debate what to cut, what to tax |
Debate how to get even better results |
|
