• Summary of current service performance
  Since fiscal year 1990, DPB has experienced a significant reduction in resources (both dollars and personnel) while the statutory responsibilities and duties assigned to DPB have grown significantly. New statutory responsibilities added since 1990 in the Code of Virginia include the following:
  
  Code Section - Chapter No. - Description
  
  1992
  § 2.2-1501 Duties of DPB - Chapters 270 and 711 - Review and verify the accuracy of agency nongeneral fund estimates.
  § 2.2-1509 Budget Bill - Chapter 582 - Change date of budget submission to “On or before December 20” in lieu of “five days after the beginning of each regular session.”
  § 2.2-1510 Budget Highlights - Chapter 582- Requires that the Governor submit highlights in the Budget Bill to newspapers in certain areas.
  § 2.2-1508 Budget Document - Chapter 582 - Revises content of the Budget Document to identify common programs and services performed by state agencies, the general purpose of programs, and measures for monitoring and evaluating services.
  
  1993
  § 2.2-1504 Budget Estimates by State Agencies - Chapter 724 - Requires that agency budget estimates for the upcoming biennium also include estimates for the subsequent biennium.
  
  1994
  § 2.2-4007.04 Regulations - Chapters 938 and 873 (2007) - Requires DPB to prepare an economic analysis for proposed regulations within 45 days from receipt of the proposed regulations.
  
  1995
  § 2.2-1501 Duties of DPB - Chapter 219 - Requires that the Budget Document include a report from each agency as to the dollar amount and percentage of its budget from federal funds.
  § 2.2-1501 Duties of DPB - Chapters 152 and 811 - Make reductions in appropriations and employment due to Workforce Transition Act.
  
  1998
  § 2.2-1509 Budget Bill - Chapters 118 and 591 - Requires debt authorization bills for capital projects to be submitted concurrently with the Budget Bill.
  
  2000
  § 2.2-1501 Duties of DPB - Chapter 424 - Requires development of performance management system involving strategic planning, performance measurement and performance budgeting.
  
  2001
  § 2.2-1501 Chapter 43 - Requires DPB to submit annually before the second Tuesday in January to the money committee chairmen a report on agency strategic planning information and performance measurement results (http://www.dpb.state.va.us/VAResults/Index.cfm).
  § 2.2-2625 Duties of DPB - Chapter 844 - Requires DPB to adjust an agency’s appropriation when all/a portion of their functions are privatized according to the recommendations of the Competition Council. DPB must also staff the Competition Council and ensure that all reporting requirements are met.
  
  2002
  § 2.2-1503.1 6-Year Financial Outline - Chapters 480 and 486 - Requires that the Governor submit to the General Assembly in each even-numbered year a six-year financial plan.
  § 2.2-1503.2 6-Year Capital Improvement Plan - Chapters 839 and 888 - Requires that the Governor submit to the General Assembly in each even-numbered year a six-year capital improvement plan.
  
  2003
  § 2.2-2686 - Chapter 900 - Requires DPB to staff the Council on Virginia’s Future to establish long term statewide objectives and a scorecard to measure progress against those objectives.
  § 2.2-1501 and Others (Gov’t Performance and Results Act) - Chapter 900 - Requires DPB to establish a performance management system which includes a revised (three-year) strategic planning process for state agencies to articulate goals and objectives, identify program outputs and determine performance measures.
  § 2.2-1503 Revenue Projections Chapter 612 - Governor to include anticipated transportation fund revenues in the six-year nongeneral fund revenue projection.
  § 2.2-1503.3 6-year revenue Forecast - Chapter 14 - Governor to re-estimate general fund revenue based on Comptroller’s preliminary close if the close shows that actual general fund revenue is 1% or more below the original estimate.
  § 2.2-1508 Budget Document - Chapter 190 - Requires cross-referencing between budget items in the Budget Document and the Budget Bill and listing of performance standards and evaluations.
  § 2.2-1508 Budget Document - Chapter 888 - Requires a listing in the Budget Document of schedules and descriptions of certain data processing projects and other projects with certain payment requirements.
  § 2.2-1509.2 Repayment Plan - Chapter 970 - Requires the Governor to submit a plan for repayment within three years of money diverted from the Highway Maintenance and Operation Fund or the Transportation Trust Fund.
  
  2005
  § 23-9.2:3.03. Higher Ed 6-Year Plan - Chapters 933 and 945 - Requires DPB, in consultation with the Secretary of Finance, to prescribe a form and manner for the six-year plan for all public institutions of higher education.
  
  2006
  § 2.2-1502.1 School Efficiency Reviews - Chapter 596 - Requires DPB to initiate reviews of school divisions’ central operations (upon written request by a local school board or division superintendent).
  
  2007
  § 2.2-2530 Commission on Immigration - Chapter 849 - Requires DPB to provide technical assistance to the Virginia Commission on Immigration.
  §§ 2.2-4006 through 2.2-4015 of Code, also known as Article 2 on “Regulations” of the Administrative Process Act - Chapters 316,561,873, and 916 - Requires the DPB-managed Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website (www.townhall.virginia.gov) to publish, as well as provide online public comment forums for all (non-exempt) regulatory stages. Requires DPB to complete its economic impact analysis (EIA) of a fast-track regulation within 30 days (reduced from 45 days). Requires DPB to include costs of developing real estate for commercial or residential purposes in its EIAs of proposed regulations. Requires DPB to provide a copy of an EIA to the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules (JCAR), as well as to each member of the General Assembly.
  § 30-58.4 JLARC Pilot Program - Chapter 803 - Requires DPB to provide technical assistance to Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission in their development of a pilot program to analyze and evaluate the accuracy of estimates submitted by state agencies.
• Summary of current productivity
  The fact that DPB continues to meet all of its responsibilities despite a 34.6 percent reduction in staff since 1990 and the addition of 26 new statutory responsibilities—some of which are significant new initiatives requiring considerable resources in terms of personnel and costs—attests to a high level of productivity. DPB has been able to use technology effectively to develop web-based applications for budget and regulatory submissions as well as off-the-shelf and in-house systems for analysis and financial transactions. DPB also provides a formal training program for staff, using in-house resources.

• Summary of Major Initiatives and Related Progress
  DPB’s accomplishments in the past year include the following:
  
  Maintained the state’s AAA bond rating. Despite the most serious fiscal downturn in recent history and a cumulative budget shortfall of more than $6 billion, Virginia maintained its AAA bond rating.
  
  Developed a Six-Year Financial Plan. DPB continues to prepare the long-term financial plans to examine the impact of budgetary decisions over a multi-year period. These plans show major spending items and initiatives by secretarial area. These plans were designed to ensure that spending growth was in line with projected revenues and that structural balance was maintained in the budget during budget development.
  
  Implemented School Efficiency Reviews. In FY 2007, private consulting firms conducted reviews of nine school divisions: Petersburg City, Alleghany County, Covington City, Montgomery County, Roanoke City, Mecklenburg County, Prince William County, Alexandria City, and Prince Edward County. The total annual recommended savings for these nine reviews was $8.85 million. That brings the total recommended annual savings for all reviews conducted to $24.2 million.
  
  Updated Key Business Recovery Plan. DPB updated its key business recovery documents – Risk Assessment, Business Impact Analysis, and Continuity of Operation Plan (COOP).
  
  Provided Advanced Performance Management Training and Guidance. DPB provided three days of extensive training to assist state agencies with the development of their strategic plans and service area plans.
  
  Re-tooled Virginia Performs web site. DPB implemented a number of significant enhancements to Virginia Performs, a statewide web-based performance management system.
  
  Contributed to the Development of VEAP. DPB staff, along with subject matter experts from other state agencies, participated in the development of the Virginia Enterprise Applications Program (VEAP) Future State Environment Definition Document for Performance Budgeting. This document, along with related functional and technical requirements, is the "blueprint" for performance budgeting in the future. It sets out a number of process changes to take advantage of the new systems and technology that will be available in the coming years.
  
  Implemented Revenue / Spending Reduction Plans. Implemented revenue / spending reduction plans resulting from the August 20, 2007 announcement that there would be a $641 million revenue shortfall in the 2006-08 biennium. The first step was the formulation of five percent reduction plans by each of the Secretaries to be submitted to DPB by September 13, 2007. The Governor reviewed the plans and on October 2, 2007, over $300 million in general fund savings were announced. DPB then began immediate implementation of the approved reduction plans.
  
  Launched Upgraded Virginia Regulatory Town Hall Web Site (townhall.virginia.gov). Since its launch in 1999, the award-winning Town Hall has given citizens instant and wide ranging access to information about regulatory changes under consideration in Virginia. Citizens can comment on regulatory proposals via on-line forums, as well as view minutes from regulatory board meetings across the Commonwealth. The Town Hall’s highly-customized e-mail notification service sends registered users the latest information about regulations and regulatory meetings in which they are interested. Town Hall 2.0 includes many new features, such as greatly improved search capabilities, enhanced public comment forums, and a sleek new user interface. This interface allows citizens to access the information they seek as quickly and efficiently as possible. Town Hall 2.0 also features the Virginia Registrar of Regulations’ newly developed Regulation Information System (RIS). The RIS is a web-enabled application that allows state agencies to electronically file regulations and related items for publication in the Virginia Register. The synergy between Town Hall 2.0 and RIS streamlines a cumbersome, paper-driven process and makes it faster and more efficient.
  
  Completed Stage One of the Agency Risk Management and Internal Control Standards (ARMICS). DPB certified to the state comptroller that it had completed stage one of ARMICS, Agency-level Assessment of Internal Control.
  
  Developed DPB (ERAD) Operations Manual. Developed a new on-line operations manual for the staff of the Economic and Regulatory Analysis Division (ERAD). This 100+ page manual is designed to cover everything an ERAD staff member needs to know about the regulatory analysis, rulemaking management, and forecasting services provided by the division. The manual covers specific topics such ERAD responsibilities, forecasting, rulemaking, the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website, economic impact analyses, policy analyses, training, guidance documents, legislative branch interactions, and gubernatorial transition task lists.
  
  Provided Training to Agencies. Developed a new and regularized system of training to agencies on the rulemaking process in Virginia and on how to use the Town Hall website.
• Summary of Virginia's Ranking
  Virginia has been named the best managed state in the nation by the Government Performance Project, sponsored by Governing magazine. Virginia’s financial strength is also indicated by its AAA bond rating. Virginia is one of only six states to have been given this highest rating by all three national rating agencies. In addition, Virginia consistently ranks in the top in the United States in categories that impact successful economic development. One award includes Forbes.com “Best State for Business” designation for two years in a row, 2006 and 2007. This award reviewed business cost, regulatory climate, quality of the workforce, and economic growth. Pollina Real Estate, Inc, a top U.S. corporate site relocation expert, ranked Virginia in 2007 as the top-rated business-friendly state in the nation. CNBC in 2007 designated Virginia as its “Top State for Business” based on factors that include cost of living, business friendliness, and access to capital.
• Summary of Customer Trends and Coverage
  DPB anticipates no further changes in its customer base or coverage in the near future.

• Summary of Future Direction and Expectations
  DPB expects to continue to play an integral part and lead role in the development and rollout of the Commonwealth’s enhanced integrated strategic planning and budget process. In terms of the overall financial health of the Commonwealth, DPB’s six-year financial plan indicates that maintaining necessary funding for the core service of state government will be increasingly challenging in the years ahead. DPB will experience increased pressure to remain vigilant in maintaining financial responsibility and a structural balance in the state’s budget.
• Summary of Potential Impediments to Achievement
  DPB is seriously challenged by a continuously increasing demand for services with a limited number of staff. Since 1990, there has actually been a reduction in staff while 26 new statutory responsibilities have been placed on the agency. Moreover, during this time, no responsibilities were eliminated from DPB’s mission. Without additional resources, it will be difficult for DPB to meet its basic responsibilities and address such increasing demands.
  
  Despite enhancements to DPB’s automated systems, challenges remain as the operating and central systems have not been significantly updated in many years and are being taxed due to demands for the storage and retrieval of additional information.

• Description of the Agency's Products and/or Services:
  § Budget bill
  § Budget document
  § Governor’s budget press package
  § Budget development and execution instructions for state agencies
  § Analysis of budget proposals and development of recommendations for the Governor
  § Year-end close and new-year start-up instructions for state agencies
  § Procedures for monitoring agency expenditures
  § Decision briefs for budget execution decisions
  § Instructions for agencies regarding development of legislative proposals
  § Recommendations to the Governor on agency legislative proposals
  § Fiscal impact statements on bills introduced in the General Assembly
  § Planning and performance measure instructions, handbook and training for state agencies
  § Tracking of agency performance measures
  § Economic impact statements and policy analyses on proposed regulations
  § Maintenance of the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website
  § Coordination of the rulemaking process across state agencies
  § Training on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website and state rulemaking process
  § Forecasts of major budget items such as Medicaid expenditures; prison, jail, and juvenile correctional center populations; TANF caseloads; FAMIS expenditures; and Supreme Court trial expenditures.
  § Analyses of federal budget proposals and actions that may affect Virginia
  § Executive Order assistance
  § Detailed assessments of programs and services to achieve a more efficient and cost-effective state government
  § School efficiency reports
  § Best management practices reports
  § Staff assistance to the Council on Virginia’s Future
  § Staff assistance to the Commonwealth Competition Council
  § Serve on legislative and executive task forces
  § Advisory assistance to various panels, committees and commissions
  § Presentations on fiscal and budgetary policy
• Factors Impacting Agency Products and/or Services:
  Requirements associated with Agency Risk Management and Internal Control Standards (ARMICS) will increase DPB’s documentation and processing workload to some extent. However, DPB will strive to ensure that work associated with ARMICS does not hinder the delivery of products and services to its customers.
  
  The possibility of a new statewide performance budgeting system should provide DPB with a better and faster analytical tool, thus enhancing the products and services provided by the agency. It should also improve the quality of budget work from agencies to DPB, thus reducing time spent by DPB staff in correcting errors. However, it is possible that staffing requirements for the implementation of a new system may temporarily affect service levels.
• Anticipated Changes in Products or Services:
  Although changes to the Code of Virginia or new Executive Orders can affect DPB’s products and services at any time, changes are not anticipated at this time. However, it is expected that continued emphasis would be placed on improving government performance in the Commonwealth, which is a primary function of DPB.
  
  DPB is currently fast-tracking regulations; therefore, any increase in workload associated with this service should be minimal.

• Financial Overview:
  Over 77 percent of the Department’s general fund budget supports personnel costs - salaries, wages, and fringe benefits. The remaining budget supports day-to-day operations. Included in this percentage is funding for rent, information technology needs, the School Efficiency Reviews Program, the Council on Virginia’s Future, insurances, training, office supplies, and other miscellaneous costs.
  
  The Department also has an additional $250,000 of nongeneral fund base budget appropriation dedicated to the Commonwealth Competition Council in each year of the biennium. This appropriation, when backed by savings generated through the Council, would support both personal and nonpersonal service costs.
• Financial Breakdown:

  	FY 2009			FY 2010
  	General Fund	Nongeneral Fund		General Fund	Nongeneral Fund
  Base Budget	$8,330,623	$250,000		$8,330,623	$250,000
  Change To Base	$0	$0		$0	$0
  Agency Total	$8,330,623	$250,000		$8,330,623	$250,000

  This financial summary is computed from information entered in the service area plans.

• Overview
  In fiscal year 2008, the Department of Planning and Budget had 68 authorized general fund positions, with 57 of those positions filled on July 1, 2007. DPB consists of eight divisions and is located in Richmond, Virginia.
• Human Resource Levels

  Effective Date	7/1/2007
  Total Authorized Position level	100
  Vacant Positions	-195
  Current Employment Level	-95.0
  Non-Classified (Filled)	1
  Full-Time Classified (Filled)	2		breakout of Current Employment Level
  Part-Time Classified (Filled)	3
  Faculty (Filled)	50
  Wage	9
  Contract Employees	0
  Total Human Resource Level	-86.0		= Current Employment Level + Wage and Contract Employees

• Factors Impacting HR
  DPB’s staff is aging. Data show that 33.4 percent of DPB’s employees are age 50 and over, with another 24.6 percent between the ages of 40 and 49. A significant percentage (14.1 percent) of these employees is either at or will be eligible for retirement in the next five years. Clearly, retirements will likely have a significant impact on DPB in future years.
  
  During the period from July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007, turnover for DPB was 15.8 percent (nine positions). How DPB addresses turnover and anticipated retirements will certainly impact long-term operational stability. Given these workforce trends, new training and cross training for existing staff should receive elevated importance in order to support DPB’s mission.
• Anticipated HR Changes
  With DPB facing significant retirements and high turnover, management must assess all staffing levels and assignments to determine where existing resources can best benefit the agency. Funding may be needed to support changes coming out of the management assessment. An example where additional funds might be needed is in the training arena, especially if retirements occur earlier than projected. Extra training opportunities will have to be offered to augment new staff’s knowledge of various programs and processes. Also, funding to support associated retirement costs (annual, compensatory, and sick leave payouts) could become necessary should a retirement spike occur in a given year.
  
  Moving to a human resources administrative service center outside of DPB was identified as a cost-saving strategy for the next biennium. It is expected that this strategy will generate permanent savings; however, there could be unidentified transition costs to bridge the current environment to the future state.

• Narrative overview of the current state of IT in the agency:
  The Commonwealth of Virginia has consistently received the highest bond ratings and rankings for government performance and is recognized nationally as a leader in strategic planning and performance budgeting. In an effort to continue this level of management excellence, the Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) recognizes the need to replace its aging legacy systems that support strategic planning and budgeting with a modern, fully integrated performance budgeting system.
  
  Today the Commonwealth’s strategic planning and budget development processes use a wide variety of disparate systems. These systems have limited integration and interfacing capabilities. A common problem shared throughout the enterprise is the need for essentially the same budget data to be entered multiple times. Because of this, a significant amount of time and effort is spent double-checking and verifying data to ensure that it is “in balance.” In addition to DPB’s systems, the Commonwealth has a collection of agency systems that are used in the strategic planning and budget processes. These systems lack integration, and significant manual processing is necessary.
  
  DPB, in partnership with the Virginia Enterprise Applications Program and the Virginia Information Technologies Agency, developed and released a request for proposals for the procurement and implementation of a performance budgeting system. The goal is to replace the variety of systems, databases, spreadsheets, and documents that currently support strategic planning and budgeting with a modern, Web-based, integrated, user-friendly system. This system will also move the Commonwealth forward by providing additional performance budgeting functionality.
• Narrative description of the factors impacting agency IT:
  The Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA) in partnership with Northrop Grumman Corporation has responsibility for the Department’s network and hardware. Since transformation to this work environment has not been completed, uncertainty exists with regard to what the transformation will finally look like.
• Describe any anticipated or desired changes to agency IT:
  The enterprise application Public-Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) project for performance budgeting continues to move forward through the Virginia Enterprise Applications Program (VEAP). VEAP anticipates that a new budgeting system could be operational in FY 2011.
  
  Agency IT Investments: Because the Virginia Information Technologies Agency (VITA) now owns and controls DPB’s network hardware and software, it is difficult to project significant technology procurements for the next biennium. Until VITA directs otherwise, DPB will continue to use Novell Netware 6.5 as its network operation system, Microsoft Outlook for email, and Microsoft XP as its desktop operating system.
• IT Current Services:

  	Cost - Year 1		Cost - Year 2
  	General Fund	Non-general Fund	General Fund	Non-general Fund
  Projected FY2010 VITA Service Fees	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Changes (+/-) to VITA Infrastructure	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Estimated VITA Infrastruture	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Specialized Infrastructure	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Agency IT Staff	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Non-agency IT Staff	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Other Application Costs	$188,952	$0	$188,952	$0
  Agency IT Current Services	$188,952	$0	$188,952	$0

  Comments:
  [Nothing entered]
• Proposed IT Investments

  	Cost - Year 1		Cost - Year 2
  	General Fund	Non-general Fund	General Fund	Non-general Fund
  Major IT Projects	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Non-major IT Projects From $100,000 - $1 Milliona Total Cost	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Non-major IT Projects Below $100,000 Total Cost	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Major IT Procurements - Stand-alone	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Non-major IT Procurements - Stand-alone	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Total Proposed IT Investments	$0	$0	$0	$0

• Projected Total IT Budget

  	Cost - Year 1		Cost - Year 2
  	General Fund	Non-general Fund	General Fund	Non-general Fund
  Agency IT Current Services	$188,952	$0	$188,952	$0
  Total Proposed IT Investments	$0	$0	$0	$0
  Agency Projected Total IT Budget	$188,952	$0	$188,952	$0

• Current State of Capital Investments:
  Not applicable.
• Factors Impacting Capital Investments:
  Not applicable.
• Capital Investments Alignment:
  Not applicable.

Accomplishment of this goal will protect the state’s fiscal reputation and its AAA bond rating as well as maintain the Commonwealth’s standing as the best-managed state in the nation.

• Be recognized as the best-managed state in the nation.

Accomplishment of this goal will protect the state’s fiscal reputation and its AAA bond rating as well as maintain the Commonwealth’s standing as the best-managed state in the nation.

• Be recognized as the best-managed state in the nation.

• We will maintain a high level of satisfaction from the Governor’s Policy Office and the Cabinet regarding information and analysis provided to them by DPB.
  Objective Strategies

  • Keep Cabinet officials informed on upcoming changes and issues.
  • Facilitate the development and improvement of agency performance measures reported in Virginia Performs, ensuring appropriate linkage to the budget.
  • Conduct a survey of the Governor’s Office and Cabinet to assess their rating of the timeliness and quality of DPB’s analysis with respect to budget issues, proposed legislation, economic forecasting, regulatory review and evaluation.
  • Analyze survey feedback and communicate results to DPB staff. Develop and implement improvements to address less-than-satisfactory ratings.

  Objective Measures

  • Average rating of survey respondents’ satisfaction with the timeliness and quality of DPB’s analyses.
    Measure Class:

    Governor's Key

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Key Summary: We will achieve a satisfaction rating of 4.5 or more (on a good-to-excellent scale of 1 to 5) from the Governor and the Governor’s policy staff and Cabinet by June 30, 2010.

    Measure Target Value:

    4.5

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: Average rating of 4.5 or more (Good to excellent on a scale of 1 to 5) by June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Annual survey of the Governor, Governor’s policy staff, and the Governor’s Cabinet. Calculation: Sum of ratings divided by the number of ratings.

Accomplishment of this goal will protect the state’s fiscal reputation and its AAA bond rating as well as maintain the Commonwealth’s standing as the best-managed state in the nation.

• Be recognized as the best-managed state in the nation.

Accomplishment of this goal will protect the state’s fiscal reputation and its AAA bond rating as well as maintain the Commonwealth’s standing as the best-managed state in the nation.

• Be recognized as the best-managed state in the nation.

This goal ensures compliance with federal and state regulations, polices and procedures for Commonwealth preparedness, as well as guidelines promulgated by the Assistant to the Governor for Commonwealth Preparedness, in collaboration with the Governor’s Cabinet, the Commonwealth Preparedness Working Group, the Department of Planning and Budget and the Council on Virginia’s Future. This goal supports achievement of the Commonwealth’s statewide goal of protecting the public's safety and security, ensuring a fair and effective system of justice and providing a prepared response to emergencies and disasters of all kinds.

• Protect the public’s safety and security, ensuring a fair and effective system of justice and providing a prepared response to emergencies and disasters of all kinds.

• We will be prepared to act in the interest of the citizens of the Commonwealth and its infrastructure during emergency situations by actively planning and training both as an agency and as individuals.
  Objective Strategies

  • The agency Emergency Coordination Officer will stay in continuous communication with the Office of Commonwealth Preparedness and the Virginia Department of Emergency Management.

  Objective Measures

  • Agency Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP) Assessment Score
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Baseline Value:

    Date:

    Measure Baseline Description: .94 - 2007 COOP Assessment Results (45 of 48 points)

    Measure Target Value:

    Date:

    Measure Target Description: .99

    Data Source and Calculation: The COOP Assessment Review is a 24-component assessment tool that helps measure the viability of a COOP plan.

• Factors Impacting the Products and/or Services:
  There are no known factors that would adversely impact the delivery of products and services in this service area.
• Anticipated Changes to the Products and/or Services
  No anticipated changes are expected in this service area.
• Listing of Products and/or Services
  • Budget bill
  • Budget document
  • Governor’s budget press package
  • Budget development and execution instructions for state agencies
  • Analysis of budget proposals and development of recommendations for the Governor
  • Year-end close & new-year start-up instructions for state agencies
  • Procedures for monitoring agency expenditures
  • Decision briefs for budget execution decisions
  • Planning and performance measure instructions, handbook and training for state agencies
  • Tracking of agency performance measures
  • Analyses of federal budget proposals and actions that may affect Virginia
  • Serve on legislative and executive task forces
  • Advisory assistance to various panels, committees, and commissions
  • Presentations on fiscal and budgetary policy

• We will develop a financially sound budget in which proposed recurring spending can be maintained by recurring revenue over time.
  Objective Description
  Achievement of this objective assures fiscal integrity in the Commonwealth’s budget by avoiding the use of short-term or “one-time” monies for ongoing or long-term commitments.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  Objective Strategies
  • Submit a budget to the General Assembly that manages the available general fund resources resulting from one-time revenues and savings actions.
  • Submit a budget to the General Assembly that has clear performance measures for budget actions involving new initiatives.
  • Continue development of a new performance budgeting system for the Commonwealth.
  Objective Measures
  • Ratio of recurring general fund revenue to recurring general fund spending
    Measure Class:

    Governor's Key

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Key Summary: We will achieve a ratio of recurring general fund revenue to recurring general fund spending in the introduced budget that is equal to or greater than 1 by June 30, 2010.

    Measure Target Value:

    1

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: Equal to or greater than one through June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: The introduced budget bill is the analysis source for calculating this measure. Calculation: Recurring general fund revenue divided by recurring general fund spending

  • Percent of new budget initiatives in the introduced budget bill with specified performance measures or outcomes.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    100

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 100 percent as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: The introduced budget bill is the analysis source for calculating this measure.

• Ensure accurate actions in executing the state budget.
  Objective Description
  A focus on accuracy ensures that DPB’s work is reliable and efficient. In addition, accuracy ensures that monies allocated to agencies are available when needed to service their customers.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  • Agency Goal: Continue to strengthen communication and relationships with customers.
  Objective Strategies
  • Educate DPB analysts on appropriateness of changes to special fund operating appropriations.
  • Supplement the DPB operations manual with additional explanatory information on how to address special fund operating appropriations.
  • Provide additional training to DPB analysts on budget execution and on the FATS manual and guidelines for processing FATS transactions.
  Objective Measures
  • FATS transaction error rate
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Target Value:

    5

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 5 or fewer per 1,000 transactions as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Source: Probud; Calculation: Number of Probud Services FATS transactions per 1,000 transactions that hit the error file

  • Administratively approved special fund and dedicated special fund operating appropriations as a percentage of the total special fund and dedicated special fund operating appropriations in the Appropriation Act each year
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Target Value:

    5

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 5 percent or less as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Source: Probud; Calculation: Amounts appropriated by FATS transactions for special funds and dedicated special funds during a fiscal year divided by special fund/dedicated special fund appropriations in the Appropriation Act for that year

• Conduct timely and comprehensive analyses of the federal budget.
  Objective Description
  Changes in the federal budget can have direct impacts on the Commonwealth’s budget. Thus, timely and comprehensive analyses of federal budget changes helps to ensure that agencies are aware of both positive and negative changes in the availability of federal funds (e.g., availability of grant monies for current or proposed agency programs; reduction in funding for specified programs).
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Continue to strengthen communication and relationships with customers.
  Objective Strategies
  • Maintain ongoing communications with the Liaison Office.
  • Review NASBO information on federal funds.
  • Conduct a survey of the Governor’s Office, Cabinet and Liaison Office to assess their rating of the timeliness and comprehensiveness of DPB’s analyses of the federal budget.
  • Assign resources for analyses.
  • Monitor the federal budget.
  Objective Measures
  • Average rating of survey respondents’ satisfaction with respect to timeliness and comprehensiveness of DPB’s federal budget analyses.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    4.5

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 4.5 (Good to excellent on a scale of 1 to 5) as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Annual survey of the Governor, Liaison Office and Cabinet. Calculation: Sum of ratings divided by the number of ratings.

• Factors Impacting the Products and/or Services:
  There are no known factors that would adversely impact the delivery of products and services in this service area.
• Anticipated Changes to the Products and/or Services
  No anticipated changes are expected in this service area.
• Listing of Products and/or Services
  • Instructions for agencies regarding development of legislative proposals
  • Recommendations to the Governor on agency legislative proposals
  • Fiscal impact statements on bills introduced in the General Assembly
  • Executive order assistance

• Provide accurate, timely analysis of the fiscal and related impacts of legislation.
  Objective Description
  DPB provides the General Assembly and Governor with analyses of how constituents and the Commonwealth’s budget, policies and service levels may be impacted by legislation.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  • Agency Goal: Continue to strengthen communication and relationships with customers.
  Objective Strategies
  • Triage bills as they are introduced to determine which have fiscal impacts and need fiscal analysis, giving high priority to bills that go to money committees.
  • Do formal, fiscal impact analyses on all enrolled bills.
  • Review all legislation being submitted at the request of the Governor for fiscal, policy and regulatory impacts.
  Objective Measures
  • Percentage of all versions of bills assigned to DPB (excluding those marked “no review”) for which fiscal impact statements were issued
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Output

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Baseline Value:

    .685

    Date:

    Measure Baseline Description: .685 (Results from the 2007 General Assembly Session)

    Measure Target Value:

    .70

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description:

    Data Source and Calculation: 1. Copy the “Main.mdb” Access table from EFIS into Excel. Sort on only the bills assigned to DPB. 2. Sort the DPB bills into four categories: No Review, Superseded, Dead, and Competed. 3. Divide the number of bills with fiscal impact statements issued by the number of bills (minus No Reviews) assigned to DPB.

  • Percentage of enrolled bills in the House and Senate for which there was a fiscal impact statement prepared by DPB but no fiscal impact statement was prepared for a prior version.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Baseline Value:

    .102

    Date:

    Measure Baseline Description: .102 (Results from the 2007 General Assembly Session)

    Measure Target Value:

    .102

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description:

    Data Source and Calculation: 1. In EFIS’s “Master.mdb” database, identify all versions of enrolled bills that had FISs prepared by DPB. This can be done by sorting on the Assignee. 2. For the records identified in step 1, make identification of the enrolled bills easier by highlighting the word, “Enrolled” by using global replace to increase font size, make bold, etc. 3. Sort on the range in step 1 by bill number. 4. Count how many of the enrolled bill FISs that did not have a FIS issued in a prior version. Also count how many enrolled FISs were completed. 5. For the bills with no prior FISs, check in the LIS history to determine if the Criminal Sentencing Commission or The Department of Taxation issue a FIS. 6. Divide the number of enrolled bill FISs that did not have a prior version by the total number of enrolled bill FISs to get the percentage.

  • Average satisfaction rating of the Governor’s policy staff with the quality and timeliness of the impact analyses
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    4.5

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 4.5 (Good to excellent on a scale of 1 to 5) as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Annual survey of the Governor’s policy staff; Calculation: Sum of ratings divided by the number of ratings.

• Factors Impacting the Products and/or Services:
  There are no known factors that would adversely impact the delivery of products and services in this service area.
• Anticipated Changes to the Products and/or Services
  No anticipated changes are expected in this service area.
• Listing of Products and/or Services
  • Economic impact statements and policy analyses on proposed regulations
  • Maintenance of the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website
  • Coordination of the rulemaking process across state agencies
  • Training on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website and state rulemaking process
  • Forecasts of major budget items such as Medicaid expenditures; prison, jail, and juvenile correctional center populations; TANF caseloads; FAMIS expenditures; and Supreme Court trial expenditures.

• Provide timely analysis of the economic impact of proposed regulations, with the objective of designing regulations in the most efficient, effective, and least intrusive manner.
  Objective Description
  Section 2.2-4007.04 of the Code requires that DPB prepare an economic impact analysis (EIA) for all non-exempt proposed regulations within 45 days of receipt. An EIA typically clearly and concisely describes the expected economic impact of a regulatory proposal on Virginians. An EIA may produce significant value added for (1) the Governor when deciding whether or not to approve proposed regulations, (2) legislators in learning about the benefits and costs of regulations, and (3) the regulated community and other members of the public who may be directly or indirectly affected by the proposed regulations. An EIA is a public document and may be viewed on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  Objective Strategies
  • Provide economic impact analysis reports that correctly indicate economic costs and benefits of proposed regulatory change, using, where feasible, existing reference and high-quality research.
  • Provide review within the statutory deadlines that adds positively to public discourse.
  • Verify and improve the design of proposed (stage) regulations to maximize economic benefits and minimize economic costs.
  • Make implementable recommendations that result in design improvements and that advance the Governor’s public policy goals.
  Objective Measures
  • The percentage of economic impact analyses that are completed within 45 calendar days from receipt of proposed (stage) regulation.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    90

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 90 percent or more completed within the 45 calendar day standard as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Deadlines for the completion of economic impact analyses are statutory and are explicitly stated on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website. Also explicitly stated is the date that any given regulatory action is completed and uploaded onto the website. A comparison of these two dates will indicate whether the regulatory review was completed on or before the stated deadline.

• Develop timely and accurate forecasts for major state programs for planning and budgeting purposes.
  Objective Description
  The Department produces annual forecasts for the following significant state programs, which are provided to decision makers as key input for each year’s budget decisions as well as for longer range policy and planning for key budget drivers: Medicaid Expenditures (DPB has statutory authority for this forecast.); Public Safety Admissions and Inmate Population forecasts for state prisons, local jails, state juvenile correctional facilities, and detention homes; Criminal Fund forecast.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  Objective Strategies
  • Maintain expertise on relevant forecasting techniques and models to maintain quality.
  • Manage forecast production to optimize usefulness to decision makers.
  • Assure forecast results are communicated effectively.
  • Perform other economic analyses and projections, upon request.
  Objective Measures
  • Accuracy of the official forecast for total Medicaid expenditures.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Target Value:

    3

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 3 percent (Actual Medicaid expenditures will fall within +/-3% of the prior fiscal year’s official forecast of Medicaid expenditures.)

    Data Source and Calculation: For this forecast, the division will calculate the percentage difference between the forecasted value and actual value.

  • Accuracy of DPB’s forecast for total state responsible inmate population.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Down

    Measure Baseline Value:

    .0022

    Date:

    Measure Baseline Description: .0022 (FY 2007)

    Measure Target Value:

    .03

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 3 percent (Actual state responsible inmate population will fall within +/-3% of the prior fiscal year’s forecast of state responsible inmate population.)

    Data Source and Calculation: For this forecast, the division will calculate the average monthly percentage difference between the forecasted value and actual value.

• Facilitate public awareness and participation in the development of state government regulations.
  Objective Description
  The Department is required to maintain a web-based system for managing the regulatory process and for providing public access to regulatory information as it becomes available. The Virginia Regulatory Town Hall web application uses advanced web and database technology to allow agencies and members of the public to learn about Virginia regulations, track regulatory activity, and offer public comments. The web site also allows agencies to post the minutes of any meetings concerning regulatory matters. In addition, DPB issues instructions and conducts training for agency regulatory coordinators and the public.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Continue to strengthen communication and relationships with customers.
  Objective Strategies
  • Train agency users and executive branch reviewers on the rulemaking process and how to use the Town Hall website.
  • Develop ways to promote public participation in the regulatory process.
  • Track legislative proposals that may result in or have an impact on rulemaking activity.
  • Formulate legislative proposals to improve regulatory processes.
  Objective Measures
  • The number of times files from the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall are downloaded by the public.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    300822

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: Reflects a two percent increase over 2006

    Data Source and Calculation: Number of file downloads by the public on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website.

• Factors Impacting the Products and/or Services:
  There are no known factors that would adversely impact the delivery of products and services in this service area.
• Anticipated Changes to the Products and/or Services
  No anticipated changes are expected in this service area.
• Listing of Products and/or Services
  • Detailed assessments of programs and services to achieve a more efficient and cost-effective state government
  • School efficiency reports
  • Best management practices reports
  • Staff assistance to the Council on Virginia's Future
  • Staff assistance to the Commonwealth Competition Council

• Facilitate improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of executive branch agency operations.
  Objective Description
  Best management practices conducts studies to identify opportunities to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of programs under review.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  • Agency Goal: Provide objective, accurate, and timely information with respect to planning and evaluation of fiscal, legislative and regulatory activities, in order to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of state government.
  Objective Strategies
  • Set up a methodology to monitor project timeliness and acceptance of recommendations.
  • Conduct objective evaluations of specified programs and processes.
  Objective Measures
  • Percent of evaluation study recommendations accepted
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    97

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: Acceptance of 97 percent of recommendations by the end of the 12 month period following submission of the school review report.

    Data Source and Calculation: A written inquiry of status will be used to calculate the data. The calculation will reflect a rolling average of the most recent three studies.

• Facilitate ways for local school divisions to save money in non-instructional areas.
  Objective Description
  Conduct studies to identify possible areas of savings in local school divisions using established school efficiency assessment protocols.
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  • Agency Goal: Continue to strengthen communication and relationships with customers.
  Objective Strategies
  • Solicit volunteer school divisions for upcoming fiscal years.
  • Identify funds to be used to contract for studies.
  • Conduct objective evaluations of non-instructional areas within specified schools.
  • Manage contracting and performance of private firms.
  • Capture and report savings.
  Objective Measures
  • Percent of school efficiency recommendations implemented
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    95

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 95 percent as of June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Supervisors are queried in follow-ups to studies to determine the extent of implementation. Recommendations that are fully implemented, partially implemented, implemented by substitute, or on track for implementation are included as positives in this calculation. Recommendations that are reported as “considered and rejected” are not.

  • Net savings identified in school efficiency reviews as a percent of total operating budgets in studied divisions.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Up

    Measure Target Value:

    3.0

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: 3.0 Percent by 6/30/2010

    Data Source and Calculation: Final reports indicate net savings. DOE data captures total budgets. Figure reported is the average net savings percentage for studies completed in the fiscal year

• Factors Impacting the Products and/or Services:
  DPB believes that it can continue to provide the services listed. However, the agency's migration to an external administrative services center in the next biennium could change how services are delivered to staff.
• Anticipated Changes to the Products and/or Services
  There are no anticipated changes to products and service in this service area, only the manner in which they may be delivered.
• Listing of Products and/or Services
  • Employee relations services for agency staff members
  • Fiscal services for the agency
  • Facilities management services for the agency

• Ensure that resources are used efficiently and programs are managed effectively, and in a manner consistent with applicable state and federal requirements.
  Objective Description
  This objective, which is shared by all of Virginia’s state agencies, ensures that sound management practices are exercised in several areas: human resource management, government procurement, financial management, technology, performance management and resource stewardship. DPB reports on each area and publishes the results in the Governor’s Management Scorecard, which is available through the Commonwealth’s Virginia Performs website (www.vaperforms.gov).
  Alignment to Agency Goals
  • Agency Goal: Provide the highest quality financial management for the Commonwealth to protect its fiscal integrity.
  Objective Strategies
  • Review scorecard categories each quarter and take timely corrective actions to ensure that scorecard expectations are met or exceeded.
  Objective Measures
  • Percent of Governor's Management Scorecard categories marked as "meets expectations" for the agency.
    Measure Class:

    Other

    Measure Type:

    Outcome

    Measure Frequency:

    Annual

    Preferred Trend:

    Maintain

    Measure Target Value:

    100

    Date:

    6/30/2010

    Measure Target Description: Reach 100 percent by June 30, 2010

    Data Source and Calculation: The Governor’s Management Scorecard grades agencies on six criteria. The percentage is calculated by dividing the total number of meets expectations categories in the criteria by the total number of categories for the four quarters.