Clues to future "performance measurements"

Remember back in the Clinton Administration when it was Andrew Cuomo applying the pressure to design quantitative "performance measurements" for federal programs? Well, now it's the Bush Administration's OMB pushing the quantification of everything for "PART Analysis" purposes. Anyway, as before, it's not enough to do the work. The work has to be done in a way that allows its effect to be measured in units that current officials are willing to recognize as valid.

In view of which, federal housing grantees may want to take a look at a recently posted HUD study, "Promising Practices in Grantee Performance Measurement." This is a best-practices review of some local jurisdictions: "...Five communities with emerging reputations for carrying out effective performance measurement in one or more community development programs were studied: Charlotte, North Carolina; Austin, Texas; King County, Washington; Minneapolis, Minnesota; and Burlington, Vermont."

That's the second HUD honor in a row for King County, Washington. The county containing Seattle is also part of a regional planning effort for CPD programs that was just held up as an example in the final rule on local Consolidated Plans. Not that all has been sweetness and light between HUD and King County: last spring the same jurisdiction's housing authority had an especially hard time with cuts in Sec. 8 voucher funding.