1. Results-based Planning in Ontario Financial Management Institute - Ontario Chapter October 21, 2009 Carlene Jackson, Director General Government, Planning and Resources Branch

2. 1 Overview  Ontario’s approach to business planning  What is results-based planning?  Key components of good plans  Performance measures in business planning What should measures do? What is needed to support effective results-based planning?  Results-based planning and the strategic fiscal cycle

3. 2  New results-based planning framework introduced in 2003 to guide public sector management in Ontario  Drivers for change included:  Ongoing fiscal challenges to do more with less  Rising public expectations for government relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and transparency  Most service delivery by transfer payment recipients  Changing accountability relationships with other levels of government, service delivery agents  Influenced by experience of other jurisdictions (the federal government, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Washington State, Oregon, British Columbia and Alberta) Context: Results-based Planning in Ontario

4. 3 What is Results-based Planning?  Comprehensive, government-wide approach to resource allocation and accountability ensuring that government-funded activities are aligned with key government priorities  Policy direction and key priorities are set by Cabinet  Completed annually on a multi-year basis  Supports the Budget and fiscal plan  Process designed to promote:  Results delivery  Value for money  Accountability and transparency  Quality service (internal and external)  Flexibility to respond to changing conditions  Treasury Board Office (TBO) provides guidance and direction to Ministries on the annual RbP process  Ministry-submitted Results-based Plans (RbPs) are reviewed and presented to Treasury Board/Management Board of Cabinet (TB/MBC) for decision-making

5. 4 Managing for Results in Ontario  Integrate planning, budgeting and measuring performance, aligned with priorities, results  Responsibility for delivering on priorities and commitments is shared, horizontal  Between/among ministries  Between ministries & broader public sector providers  Accountability for results is shared, horizontal – performance measurement the key tool Priorities & Results Results-based Plans Implementation Plan Performance Plans Measures / Targets Service Agreements Memorandum of Understanding Contracts Strategic Direction Leadership Premier / Ministers Ministries Service Providers / Agencies The current economic context requires hard choices and discipline

6. 5 Why Are Plans Needed?  A Ministry’s RbP articulates its plans for achieving government priorities and ministry mandate commitments within its minuted multi-year allocation  The government articulated its priorities to Ontarians in the Speech from the Throne and its five-point economic plan for growth and job creation.  As part of the government’s plan for implementation, a number of priority commitments have been established for Ministries.  Resource requirements for new or changed funding commitments  Current and out-year risks to the fiscal plan  Ministry RbPs form the building blocks of a multi-year process designed to provide decision-makers with enterprise-wide information to review government activities related to Ministries’ minuted multi-year expense limits using a risk based approach  Facilitates government choices about ongoing implementation of priorities and areas for potential trade-off  Ensure that service delivery is efficient and effective and all programs, services, initiatives, policies, etc. are focused on implementation to ensure results for the four- year multi-year period supporting the Government’s plan

7. 6 Components of a Good Plan  Provides TB/MBC with a strategic over-arching outline of the ministry’s multi-year plan to achieve priorities/results and mandate commitments  Risk Management - identifies any key issues facing the ministry and demonstrates that it is managing new and updated financial and non- financial risks within its existing multi-year minuted allocation  Performance information – demonstrates progress towards achieving targeted outcomes; value for money (efficiency and effectiveness); and as evidence to support any change requests.

8. 7 Performance Measure Requirements for RbP  Performance measurement information is integral to decision-making in the Results-based Planning process.  Ministries are asked to support their RbP submissions with key performance measures (public and internal)  Key performance measures should demonstrate progress towards achieving government priorities/results, key mandate letter commitments/deliverables and ministries’ strategic objectives, or track other large or high-risk programs of interest to the Board.  Key measures should include numeric targets for 2010-11 and three out-years  To provide meaningful information for effective decision-making, key measures should cover major expenditure areas including transfer payments  To demonstrate accountability, key measures should focus on value for money  Any requests for changes in funding should be supported by meaningful program-level performance measures (i,e., that relate to program objectives) to support business cases in activity notes.

9. 8 What Should Performance Measures Do?  Provide good information:  Are we doing the right thing? (effectiveness)  Are we doing things right? (efficiency)  Are our clients satisfied? (customer satisfaction – internal & external)  Aid in good decision making, to:  Manage programs and services to inform results based planning  Determine whether program, service and strategy objectives are being met  Ensure accountability  Drive continuous improvement  Signal the need for action

10. 9 SMART Rule  Specific: clearly and concisely state what will be measured  Measurable: Performance measures should be quantified – even if based on qualitative data  Achievable and Attributable: relate to things that the ministry can influence or achieve  Realistic: based on reliable, verifiable data that reflects the ministry’s contribution to achieving government priorities  Timely: data can be collected, processed and distributed within a useful timeframe and at a reasonable cost S M A R T To test the strength of a performance measure:

11. 10 Results-based Planning - Strategic Fiscal Cycle  Ontario’s strategic fiscal cycle facilitates government decision-making processes including resource planning, management and risk reporting, to deliver priorities and results within the context of the fiscal plan.  The Results-based Planning (RbP) process provides integrated and strategic decision-making that ensures the government is positioned to meet its key objectives while delivering balanced budgets  Government committed to delivering on priorities of Ontarians while ensuring value for money and restoring fiscal balance by 2015-16  The RbP process is a key element of the co-ordinated strategic fiscal/ resource planning and reporting cycle.  The annual RbP process is influenced by a variety of factors:  key policy objectives/commitments the government set out in its election document;  the evolving status of the fiscal plan and state of the economy; and  feedback on the previous year's process

12. 11 Ontario’s Strategic Fiscal Cycle Other activities include: - Monitoring of FTE caps - Corporate Overviews/Expenditure Updates for TB/MBC - In-year Investments can occur through the Fall Economic Outlook and Fiscal Review and Ontario Budget processes During the current fiscal year there are concurrent activities/processes relating to the prior and the next fiscal year.

13. 12 Integrating Performance Measurement Throughout the Fiscal Cycle  Internal Management  Support Treasury Board/Management Board of Cabinet (TB/MBC) in-year requests  Year-end report to TB/MBC on Key Performance Measure (PM) results achieved ensures ministry accountability for key results  PMs are required in agreements with all transfer payment (TP) recipients to ensure value for money for Transfer Payments (> 80% of government spending)  PMs are integrated in quarterly reporting for early monitoring and mitigation of performance risk  Support for PM and continuous improvement of the quality of PM information increasing in ministries (e.g., dashboards, etc.)  Support program evaluation to improve efficiency and effectiveness of program management and service delivery

14. 13 Integrating Performance Measurement Throughout the Fiscal Cycle continued....  External Reporting  PMs support government transparency and accountability  Annually through the Premier’s Progress Report  All ministries publish on-line results-based plans and annual reports that include reporting of performance progress and achievements  Performance results are integrated into materials provided to Standing Committee on Estimates  Results-based performance reporting included in Public Accounts (Annual Report)

15. 14 Support for Performance Measurement in Multi- year Planning Tools  Performance Measurement Guide  Pocket Guide to Performance Measurement  Measurement and Progress System (MAPS) & Guide  Program Evaluation Reference and Resource Guide  Vendor of Record for Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement Services  RbP Briefing Book Guideline and Style Guide  Guidelines for annual multi-year planning, quarterly reporting Learning and Development  Encourage and support ministries in their capacity building:  Performance Measurement/Program Evaluation (PM/PE) Network  PM Community of Practice  PM e-learning initiative  Transfer Payment Forum and relevant resources