Performance management and measurement at the LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority developed a balanced scorecard system that automatically pulls data from the financial, risk management, and fleet management systems and makes performance data available to all stakeholders

Government Finance Review, Feb, 2006 by Steven R. Kreklow

In the December Solutions article we discussed strategies for using performance measurement to actually improve organizational performance through better planning, budgeting, managing, and communicating. Much like a well-coached basketball team, government agencies can use performance measures to define goals, set targets, communicate expectations, and establish accountability. The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority is one organization that is successfully using performance measurement to improve performance.

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AT THE LA MTA

With an annual budget of $2.9 billion, the Los Angeles County Mass Transit Authority is the second largest mass transit authority in the United States, trailing only New York City. LAC MTA provides 1.3 million bus and train rides each weekday to a service area that includes more than 10 million residents.

Meeting the demand for services within available revenue streams is a continuous challenge for the employees of the LAC MTA. They must constantly search for ways to reduce costs and improve customer services. Management has found the agency's performance measurement system to be one of the most effective tools for meeting these challenges.

The LAC MTA has had a performance measurement program for years. The Federal Transit Administration requires local transportation authorities to collect and report a wide variety of performance data, and the LAC MTA had formed a performance measures group of operating department representatives to collect and use service data. Unfortunately, efforts to utilize this data for management purposes were often frustrated by the fragmentation of data sources and the time it took to collect and analyze performance data. Information included in performance measurement reports was frequently more than 90 days old--too old to assist management in the day-to-day decision-making process.

THE BALANCED SCORECARD

In 2002, the LAC MTA chief executive officer directed staff to implement the balanced scorecard module in its business system in an effort to improve the integration and speed of performance measure reporting. The balanced scorecard system was intended to automatically collect data from the financial system as well as other important computerized databases such as the risk management system and the M3 fleet management system.

Aware of the scope and complexity of the effort they were undertaking, the LAC MTA took an incremental approach to the project. The authority initially focused on implementing a handful of key performance indicators and then gradually built on its successes over time. At first, the process of defining a new performance indicator, identifying a data source, and mapping the data transfer process took up to two months; now the process can be completed in a month or less.

Three years after project kickoff, the LAC MTA has been able to develop a balanced scorecard system that automatically pulls data from the financial, risk management, and fleet management systems and makes performance data available to the Board of Directors, the CEO, auditors, analysts, and department managers. The balanced scorecard is constantly evolving and expanding to include new measures (there are now more than 15 key performance indicators) and data sources. The transportation authority is hoping to include customer satisfaction data and expanded budget-to-actual financial data in the near future.

The balance scorecard is accessible to board members and is the focus of a performance report at the monthly board meetings that provides board members with the information they need to define the long-term strategic direction for Los Angeles' mass transit system. The LAC MTA's executive director uses the balanced scorecard for monthly leadership meetings with department beads. Key performance indicators are tracked and department managers are expected to explain improvements or declines in performance with data-based analysis.

While department heads initially viewed the balanced scorecard system with skepticism, many are now embracing it and even using it as a tool to improve accountability within their departments. "There's no question the balanced scorecard has increased the use of data in the decision making process," says the scorecard manager.

Risk management is one area in which the authority has seen quantifiable results from measuring performance. Since the costs of accidents and workers' compensation claims were budgeted centrally, department managers often did not feel accountable for holding down such costs. Now because each department's claims are reported on the balanced scorecard, the CEO is able to identify problems early in the year and take corrective action. As a result, the LAC MTA has been able to reduce its claims budget by 10 percent.

WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THE LAC MTA?

Whether a government agency serves 1,000 people or a 1 million people, whether the service is transportation, education, social services, or law enforcement, performance measurement is a useful tool for meeting the challenges of the 21st century. To a great extent, the LAC MTA's success with its balanced scorecard system can be attributed to its patience and persistence. Some government agencies underestimate the complexity of developing usable performance measurement systems, plunging in headfirst only to see the initial enthusiasm fizzle amidst problems with defining quality measures and collecting data in an efficient manner. To succeed, performance measurement initiatives need to be well-planned, long-term efforts with the full support of upper management and adequate resources.